Dear Daily Mail Editors: congratulations on a very dramatic headline. A cancerous conspiracy to poison your faith in organic food: that is pure genius, building nicely on the recent reprimand to ‘the authorities’ for making us Scared to death? The REAL worry is today’s culture of fear. You will understand how many readers chuckled to read that the Daily Mail, of all newspapers, is accusing others of scare-mongering. Continue reading
Tag Archives: Daily Mail
Joanna Blythman: Please Read the Data Appendices About Organic Food Before Conjuring ‘Cancerous Conspiracies’: Part 1
Jerome Burne is co-author of Food Is Better Medicine Than Drugs (FIBMTD) with
Former Visiting Professor Patrick Holford. FIBMTD has a chapter on Balancing Hormones in the Menopause -The HRT scandal vs natural control: there is a brief discussion of “Natural progesterone – a safer way with hormones”.
Progesterone is given in amounts equivalent to that normally produced by a woman who is ovulating (between 20 and 40 mg a day) and, unlike oestrogen or synthetic progestins, it has no known cancer risk – in fact…quite the opposite. [pg. 167, the reference for this bold assertion is a self-help book, not a journal paper or similar, if you were curious. And, no, no specific page reference or indication that this is a study/trial, in vitro, in vivo or animal.]
Mid-May we noticed that Burne had left a long comment, recommending his own research, on a post about The Alternative that Isn’t: Bioidentical Hormones at Science-Based Pharmacy. Gazing into our crystal ball, we anticipated that a Burne special on the topic must be in progress and so were not surprised to read today’s Should middle-aged women be taking natural HRT? in the Daily Mail. The shorthand version of the remainder of this post is:
No. Not if you are relying upon the Holftorf review to provide a comprehensive overview of the relevant evidence on efficacy and safety.
Unhappy with her GP’s suggestion of more, potentially addictive, medication to help ease her dependency, Chris followed a diet and vitamin regime prescribed by holistic doctor Patrick Holford to wean herself off the tablets. [Back-Up URL version in case the Daily Mail alters the text.]
As readers will probably know, Holford is not a doctor, not even a holistic one. But, to be fair, the Daily Mail’s conferment of a medical degree has about as much standing as his own honorary qualification in nutrition awarded to him by the institution he founded. (What a thrilling and unexpected tribute that must have been.) Continue reading
So, what were the Daily Mail and Jerome Burne thinking when they put together this latest compilation of innuendo framed by the emotive photograph of a distressed child who seems trapped between two uncaring, faceless white coats? Continue reading
So far, it contains the usual inaccuracies and reproduces articles that he wrote some time ago and Holford seems to regard it as a way of recycling his usual work.
However, this has been such a remarkable week for exposing the shoddy edifice that supports some of Holford’s cash cows and entrepreneurial enterprises that we had wondered if he would crack and write about them. Continue reading
Holford and Burne’s Food is Better Medicine than Drugs is “packed with sound science and statistics”, according to the Daily Mail
Lydia Slater, writing in the Daily Mail, argues that Burne and Holford’s book Food is Better Medicine than Drugs is one of the “best of the New Year diet books”. It claims that the book is “packed with sound science and statistics” and advises that it is “Great for…people with chronic conditions”.
We would beg to differ, having gone through this book in frankly rather tedious detail but still failed to adequately cover the errors contained within. Continue reading
Daily Mail regularly displays a remarkable similarity to the public writings of
Visiting Professor Patrick Holford. It has taken time out from its usual project of dividing substances into things that will give you cancer or cure it, or similarly for diabetes to digress into the Holford obsession with over-claiming for the significance of homocysteine levels and the outcome of manipulating them. In a recent round-up, Daily Mail declared Vitamin B can beat ‘old age blues’. A little confusingly, the accompanying photograph is that of an attractive, well-turned out woman in her late 20s/early 30s or so. It’s distracting because the study was carried out in men over the age of 70. Continue reading
The People’s Medical Journal carries a new, fabulous, science-defying, weight-loss product story: How three cups of green tea a day can help you lose weight – even if you keep eating junk food.
Research shows the tea helps the pounds melt away, even while still eating junk food.
Daily Mail Continues Its Plan to Bewilder the Nation and Gaslight Us into Believing That We Need Fish Oil Supplements
The Daily Mail is affectionately known as the People’s Medical Journal. Whether we like it or not, now that the Telegraph has effectively withdrawn from any attempt to provide decent medical journalism, the Independent is episodically odd, the Guardian is distressingly full of woo in its lifestyle section, the Times does what it can but is hampered in its editorial tone by the occasional flakiness of Dr Stuttaford and his fondness for supplements and PSA levels, so the Daily Mail is, by default, a high-volume source of medical news for a goodly proportion of the UK public. If anyone had the money to identify the source of newspaper clippings brought into GPs’ surgeries, I would bet good money that a disproportionate number would be from the Daily Mail. Which makes it all the more distressing that the Daily Mail is not only bewildering the nation with the flip-flop of its reporting but possibly trying to gaslight us into believing that we have difficulties with reading comprehension from which only fish oil supplements can save us: Is your Omega-3 fish oil supplement any good – or a load of old codswallop? Continue reading
Back in April you may recall an onslaught of celebrities who gave their spectacularly uninformed assessment of the Cochrane Antioxidants Review with an astonishing retread of former Visiting Professor Patrick Holford’s borrowed criticisms. That star-studded spectacle of misinformed jackdaws was enlivened by Dr Aust’s intervention and his musings on the nature of expertise. We speculated as to what had prompted Carole Caplin’s extraordinarily through-the-looking-glass stance on the issue of sponsorship and conflicts of interest. We highlighted Caplin’s comment that, “It must be obvious to everyone who hasn’t got a vested interest in supplements that [the Cochrane antioxidant] review is absolute rubbish, it contains fundamental flaws” as so strange that it deserves special note. Continue reading