One approach may be to see if you can find the scientific research that some of the hype is extrapolated from, and discuss that. In the case of Bruce Lipton, that may mean finding and discussing scientific papers about epigenetics and about the effects of low-level magnetic fields on biological systems. If you read the actual papers, and understand them enough to explain them to someone with less of a scientific background, then that could be a starting point for discussing the topics with your friends.

I'm not sure if that will help. But many things that look like pseudoscience have something real that is related to them. Talking about the real things can help separate them out from the bullshit.

Science journalism in general is pretty terrible. Someone has to go way beyond what is offered by mainstream media to have any kind of clue. It's a lot of work, and a lot to expect the average person to do, especially when so many scientific journals are paywalled.

Instead of attempting to shatter the illusion, one thing to do may be to demonstrate techniques for dealing with things when they are uncertain, and out of one's control. If it is a psychological crutch, then having techniques to replace it, rather than a new vision of the world, may remove the need for the crutch.

Some people are more open to different points of view than others. I would start with the people who are at least somewhat open to considering other ideas. And also be prepared to listen to them and find out what it is that they think is important about their beliefs. You may share more common ground than you think. Or they may have had personal experiences that are extremely different from yours. You can probably learn something.