In a letter on the Guardian website, Professor Patrick Holford of Teesside University responds to Prof Colquhoun’s article on Endarkenment. Holford states that an example nutritional claim “given [in Colquhoun’s article], apparently made by me, that ‘vitamin C is better than conventional drugs to treat AIDS’ is [Colquhoun’s] own invention”. Strangely, though, in this very letter Holford links to some of his writing on AIDS where he claims that “AZT, the first prescribable anti-HIV drug, is potentially harmful and proving less effective than vitamin C”. I wonder if anyone on the Guardian staff followed this link, to check the accuracy of Holford’s claims prior to publishing the letter?
Now, I’m neither a ‘qualified’ nutritional therapist nor a lawyer – so I will leave readers to judge whether this claim about AZT constitutes a claim from Holford that vitamin C is better than conventional drugs to treat AIDS, and whether it was appropriate for the Guardian to publish Holford’s claim about Colquhoun’s “invention” unchallenged. I will also leave it to Teesside to decide whether it is appropriate for their new Professor of Nutrition and Mental Health to claim that Prof Colquhoun has ‘invented’ parts of his work.