America’s quack (Dr. Oz), dissected yet again

[SidDithers]

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2015/04/17/americas-quack-dissected-yet-again/

Orac doing what Orac does best - writing a detailed blog post with background and links and all kinds of good information.

I was going to add this to sufrommich's post, but they self-deleted before I could. Orac addresses the letter to Columbia, and why - though it wasn't a bad idea - he believes it was a bad effort and came from questionable signatories.

As usual, with Dr. Gorski, the blog post is long, but well worth the read. The post is filled with hyperlinks to other sites and previous posts by Orac. It would take me an hour to put them into the excerpt below. I'd suggest you go to the link above and read the full entry, if you find the stuff below interesting.

If there’s one doctor who irritates me possibly more than any other, it’s got to be “America’s Doctor,” a.k.a. Dr. Mehmet Oz, thanks to The Dr. Oz Show. He’s been an all too frequent topic on this blog and at my not-so-super-secret other blog. Of course, I refer to him as “America’s quack,” because, well, that’s what he is. Ever since Oprah Winfrey found him and elevated him from a promising young academic cardiothoracic surgeon with a penchant for woo to America’s quack, I’ve been pointing out how much dubious medicine and outright quackery he’s been pushing, including homeopathy, faith healing, dubious unproven (and almost certainly nonexistent) links between cell phones and breast cancer, GMO fear mongering, promotion of the antivaccine views of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and even psychic scammers like John Edward and Theresa Caputo. It’s gotten so bad that Dr. Oz has increasingly faced less than adoring press and even been hauled before Senator Claire McCaskill’s (D-MO) committee for his unscrupulous boosterism for unproven weight loss supplements to be humbled. It got so bad that not long ago Dr. Oz’s social media people tried to do a an “Ask Dr. Oz” segment on Twitter under the hashtag #OzsInbox. Let’s just say that it backfired spectacularly and hilariously.

If there’s one thing that’s also puzzled me about Dr. Oz, it’s how someone who was such a promising young surgeon-scientist back in the early 1990s could have fallen so far—from a scientific standpoint, obviously. He is, after all, making a ton of money and enjoying incredible fame, thanks to his embrace of woo. Even more frustrating, even though Dr. Oz has disgraced himself more times than I can remember, he remains faculty in good standing at Columbia University. Heck, he’s more than faculty in good standing. He’s a full professor in the department of surgery there. Heck, he’s vice-chair! He’s also the director of Columbia’s Cardiovascular Institute and Integrative Medicine Program. In other words, he does hold high ranking positions in Columbia University’s department of surgery and integrative medicine program.

It’s this latter fact that’s irritated me, and I’ve wondered why no one has ever made a stink to his university about this. Then, upon arriving home from New York from NECSS, what to my wondering eyes should appear but one answer to my question in the form of a post on Skepchick by Kavin Senapathy revealing that Dr. Henry Miller had written a letter to Lee Goldman, MD, the Dean of the Faculties of Health Sciences and Medicine at Columbia University complaining that Dr. Oz is faculty at Columbia:

snip

As much as I appreciate the sentiment, I can’t help but see this as a wasted opportunity, something that is unlikely to accomplish anything but brief publicity, with Columbia already having responded with the predictable bromides about “academic freedom.” I hate to be too negative about an effort like this, so I’ll tell you why I am. Think about it. There are only ten signatories. Two are from the Hoover Institution, a conservative think tank based at Stanford University whose fellows tend to be climate change denialists. In other words, it’s an institution whose commitment to science is highly questionable to nonexistent in one area, and it’s attacking Oz for pseudoscience? Two others are affiliated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), a group that is pro-science when that science aligns with industry interests, particularly the pesticide industry. ACSH’s late president Elizabeth Whelan was known for dismissing any concerns about various chemicals as potential health hazards as “chemophobia” and even referring to “chemophobia” as an “emotional, psychiatric problem,” which is not very skeptical at all. Indeed, as I’ve mentioned before, a few years ago, when ACSH invited me to be on its board of advisors, I turned it down because I perceive ACSH as going too far in the other direction (not to mention the problem of its behaving largely like an industry shill) to the point that it takes the germ of a reasonable idea (that there’s too much fear mongering about “chemicals”) and takes a despicable turn with it by implicitly likening concerns about chemical pollutants and other chemicals that might cause health problems to mental illness by labeling them “chemophobia.” Lately, ACSH has been pushing e-cigs as the greatest thing since sliced bread, the answer to tobacco addiction, and attacking anyone who has the temerity to suggest that e-cigs are unproven and should perhaps be regulated.

That’s why ACSH is such a frustrating organization. It’s often right scientifically about issues like vaccines, deconstructing The Food Babe’s nonsense, and attacking quackery, but on issues like the question of health problems related to various chemicals, e-cigs, and taking the food industry to task it’s maddeningly—to me, at least—in the thrall of commercial interests. Or, at least, that’s the way it appears. It also makes some incredibly bad arguments sometimes. In this case, ACSH is right to criticize Dr. Oz, and Dr. Miller is appropriate to question why Columbia retains him in high ranking positions in its department of surgery, cardiac institute, and integrative medicine program. Indeed, I have no problem with what Dr. Miller did, but I really wish he hadn’t done such a half-assed job of it. There are lots of skeptical doctors (like myself) who would have signed the letter if it had been presented to us before sending it to Columbia. I probably would have signed it, even given my reservations about some of the signatories and my doubts that it will do anything other than produce some transient bad publicity for Dr. Oz and Columbia. In actuality, if anyone is going to “bring down Oz,” I think it will be the slow, careful sort of campaign being waged by a medical student named Ben Mazer rather than just a letter to the dean. Mazer has been documenting examples of patient harm that have resulted from Dr. Oz’s bad medical advice, and, I suspect, it is the slow drip-drip-drip of such stories that will ultimately irrevocably tarnish the Oz brand.

Dr. Oz - America's Quack.

Sid

[tridim]

1. This load of crap was just posted and locked. You got duped by wingnuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Council_on_Science_and_Health#Controversies

Big pharma is scared shitless about people who tout and adopt healthy diet and exercise, something you apparently consider quackery.

Why?

[SidDithers]

2. And you didn't read the post...

Sid

[tridim]

3. You read the first post that was deleted, and you knew it was crap.

Why did you post it again?

And why do you think healthy diet and exercise is quackery?

[SidDithers]

4. Where did I say healthy diet and exercise is quackery?...

Your comments show that you still haven't read the blog post linked in my OP.

Sid

[sufrommich]

6. That was my OP and I deleted it.

Not because the argument against Dr.Oz is crap but because the group who wrote the letter is a right wing group.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

8. Are you really defending Dr. Oz?

He gives Mercola time on his show to spout quackery. Fuck Dr. Oz!

[tridim]

11. I defend maximized health via good diet and exercise.

The same thing Dr. Oz apparently supports.

I do NOT support big pharma and their team of shady doctors who have the single-minded goal of keeping people unhealthy and on pharmaceutical drugs their entire lives.

Fuck close minded corporate drones.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

13. Then you're apparently on the wrong thread.

From your argument, you did NOT read the article Sid posted, which had nothing to do with diet or exercise, but with quackery from Dr. Oz. Then, you berated Sid with some anti-big pharma screed. Close minded drones? That's the DEFINITION of Dr. Oz's audience.

Dr. Oz is on the WRONG side of science-based medicine 99% of the time. Herbs and supplements do nothing. Superfood is a made up word. Diet and exercise are important, but they're not the be all end all cure to everything. I'll trust an MD pver a con-artist "naturopath" any day of the week.

[tridim]

17. Okay Dr. Hobbitstein

I don't practice naturopathy or homepathy, nor does Dr. Oz. He touts healthy diet and exercise.

"herbs do nothing" is perhaps the stupidest statement I've ever read on DU. You do realize that herbs are plants, right? Right?

I assume you are one of those doctors who are solidly in the "Cannabis has no medicinal value" camp?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

21. You know what they say about assuming, tridim?

Dr. Oz promotes Joseph Mercola (a prominent anti-vaxxer), and gives him equal time. Dr Oz touts "green tea extract" as being a "miracle cure". It's not. If you get medical advice from daytime TV, you're doing it wrong.

As for cannabis, I love it. It does have SOME medical value (which has been scientifically proven via study, see: Charlotte's Web). It also gets you high (my favorite part). Most importantly, I'm not a doctor.

Dr. Hobbitstein (a portmanteau of Dr. Frankenstein and Hobbit) is a nickname I ended up with in the local music circuit due to both my ability to quickly diagnose and fix instruments on the fly during shows and my short stature. It later became the name of my small boutique effects pedal and amplifier company.

[tridim]

41. I get my advice from detailed and exhaustive research and listening to my body.

As you know, Cannabis is a medicinal herb (like thousands of others), all of which you dismissed as quackery for some reason. Weird.

I use herbs as food because that's what they are, I buy them fresh at the grocery store or the local farmer's market. They are delicious and good for my health, and none of them are woo despite the bad advice in this thread.

[TheSarcastinator]

16. Yes! You get it!!

Big Pharma doesn't want you to know that green coffee beans cause instant weight loss or that acai berry juice can prevent cancer. Spot on, dude.

[tridim]

18. Are those two things the only two things that Dr. Oz Promotes?

Or does he promote healthy diet and exercise 99% of time?

[SidDithers]

23. No. He does not "promote healthy diet and exercise 99% of time"...

I'm curious why you're spending so much time defending someone you apparently know so little about.



Sid

[840high]

31. +10

[Stuart G]

12. Dr Oz a ..quack, quack??

Oh no..wasn't he promoting a book or something that he had a huge stake in, or something like that?...or some product that he himself had a economic stake in???oh no.................can't be true.......... ...How could he do that????



." Mary Engle of the Federal Trade Commission criticized Oz for calling green coffee extract "magic" and a "miracle", stating that it is difficult for consumers to listen to their inner voices when products are praised by hosts they trust......

"One of the products Oz was promoting, Green Coffee Bean Extract, was found to have no weight loss benefits. Two of the researchers who were paid to write the study admitted that they could not back their data so they retracted their paper. The FTC filed a complaint that the Texas-based company Applied Food Sciences (the promoters of the study) had falsely advertised. The FTC alleged that the study was "so hopelessly flawed that no reliable conclusions could be drawn from it" so Applied Food Sciences agreed to pay a $3.5 million settlement. " ...

last two taken from a post below this one....yellowcanine...post number 9 of this thread...

[REP]

15. You said you were unfamiliar with Oz and what he does

You just assume he promotes healthy diet and exercise. He doesn't. He pushes fraudulent weight-loss supplements,,communication with the dead and other bullshit. Every doctor I've ever seen promotes a healthy diet and exercise. I have no idea why you think a quack on TV has gotten rich with the same advice almost every MD gives.

[tridim]

20. I said I've never seen his show.

I'm as familiar as anyone else is otherwise, and yes he promotes healthy diet and exercise instead of Rx drugs.

[shenmue]

26. You've never seen his show, but you know what he promotes?

[tridim]

40. Yes, that is correct. nt

[phil89]

78. You've been proven wrong, repeatedly.

You should probably quit while you're behind. Dr. Oz promotes woo, nonsense and just enough empirically validated medicine to appear legitimate. You admit to being completely uninformed about him. I wonder if you'll depend on "big pharma" if you got a cancer diagnosis? Unbelievable.

[BeanMusical]

54. This poster is a mind reader, don'tcha know?

[Liberal Veteran]

34. Healthy diet and exercise instead of Rx drugs. Does that work for HIV?

[tridim]

39. Possibly. What's your point?

Nobody is making that claim that I know of.

Healthy diet and exercise have kept me off of Rx drugs for the entire first half of my life. I know, I know, that's just terrible.

[Liberal Veteran]

46. The point is that there are many things that cannot be managed with diet and exercise.

In those cases, pharmaceuticals and/or surgery is the only option.

No one disagrees with the notion of eating well and getting exercise, but it isn't a panacea.

[tridim]

47. Surgery and emergency medications are a completely different topic.

That isn't my point at all.

[Logical]

75. LOL, I have never had cancer, I think it is because I never eat bananas. So I must be right! nt

[tridim]

92. It is a fact that good diet and exercise improve general health

I'm sorry you don't subscribe to that reality.

[840high]

29. Thank you.

[Oneironaut]

52. On one side is big pharma, and on the other side are paid shills like Dr. Oz.

I am a health nut, but Dr. Oz is a paid shill. I wouldn't trust him any more than I would Monsanto. Both are profit-motivated, which makes anything they say suspect.

[sabrina 1]

58. Yep, Big pharma HATES Dr Oz!

[zappaman]

62. Big Pharma!

[Logical]

76. Do you suggest we immediately shut down all Pharma companies? nt

[840high]

99. Of course they do.

[sufrommich]

5. Thanks for the much better article,Sid.

[SidDithers]

7. Orac / Dr. David Gorski is my go-to blogger for comments about medical woo...

he's got a long, long history of blogging about Dr. Oz, so when I saw your post I figured I should check to see if Orac has any comments. If you're not familiar with Orac, he's great. His posts are long, so you need to give a bit of time for reading, but they're always well-sourced. And delightfully snarky, to boot.

In this entry, he addresses the issue of the signatories from Hoover and ACSH - noting that he was once invited to be on the Board of Advisors for ACSH, but he turned them down because of their tendency to be industry shills.

It really is a good post - despite the uninformed comments in the first reply to this thread.

Sid

[sufrommich]

10. Yeah,I bookmarked his page. Good stuff. nt

[greatauntoftriplets]

38. I know Dr. Gorski's sister.

She's still technically a member here, though hasn't posted in years.

[SidDithers]

42. Oh cool!! Tell her he's got some huge fans here...

Sid

[greatauntoftriplets]

43. She's also a fan of his.

[840high]

101. see below

David Gorski's Financial Pharma Ties: What He Didn't Tell You
www.ageofautism.com/.../david-gorskis-financial-pharma-ties-what-he-d...
Jun 21, 2010 - Posting under the science fiction name “Orac,” David Gorski has become the most outspoken, self-styled ... “Three years ago in another cancer (melanoma), Dr. Gorski's collaborators found that ...... Shhh, vaccines are a hoax.

[tammywammy]

104. Age of Autism is a bullshit source for anything. n/t

[SidDithers]

106. ageofautism...

Keep trying.

Sid

[yellowcanine]

9. If it quacks like a duck.........

The James Randi Educational Foundation has awarded Oz with their Pigasus Award, an award intended "to expose parapsychological, paranormal or psychic frauds that Randi has noted over the previous year."[36] The award consists of a silver flying pig and refers to claiming something so doubtful that it will only happen "when pigs fly". Oz has been given this award on three separate occasions, more than any other recipient:

In 2009 for the promotion of energy therapies such as Reiki.[37]
In 2010 for support of faith healing and psychic communication with the dead, among other controversial practices. Oz became the first person to receive a Pigasus Award two years in a row.[38]
In 2012, Oz won "The Pigasus Award for Refusal to Face Reality" for his continued promotion of "quack medical practices, paranormal belief, and pseudoscience".[37]
Oz has also been supportive of homeopathy.[39]

During a Senate hearing on consumer protection, Senator Claire McCaskill stated that by airing segments on weight loss products that are later cited in advertisements, Oz plays a role, intentional or not, in perpetuating these scams, and that she is "concerned that you are melding medical advice, news, and entertainment in a way that harms consumers."[41] Mary Engle of the Federal Trade Commission criticized Oz for calling green coffee extract "magic" and a "miracle", stating that it is difficult for consumers to listen to their inner voices when products are praised by hosts they trust.[41]

One of the products Oz was promoting, Green Coffee Bean Extract, was found to have no weight loss benefits. Two of the researchers who were paid to write the study admitted that they could not back their data so they retracted their paper. The FTC filed a complaint that the Texas-based company Applied Food Sciences (the promoters of the study) had falsely advertised. The FTC alleged that the study was "so hopelessly flawed that no reliable conclusions could be drawn from it" so Applied Food Sciences agreed to pay a $3.5 million settlement.[44][45]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmet_Oz

[Stuart G]

14. Thanks for the post yellowcanine

Dr Oz is indeed a ...quack quack....

[arikara]

25. LOL... James Randi...

Randi is not afraid to attack scientists who take an interest in subjects such as telepathy; for instance, Brian Josephson, a Professor of Physics at Cambridge University. In 2001, on a BBC Radio program about Josephson’s interest in possible connections between quantum physics and consciousness, Randi said, “I think it is the refuge of scoundrels in many aspects for them to turn to something like quantum physics.” Josephson has a Nobel Prize in quantum physics. Randi has no scientific credentials.

Of his current work, Randi writes, “We at the JREF are skilled in two directions: we know how people are fooled by others and we know how people fool themselves. We deal with hard, basic facts.” Yet in a review of his book The Supernatural A-Z: The Truth and the Lies his fellow skeptic Susan Blackmore commented that the book “has too many errors to be recommended.”

Lots more at the link:

http://www.skepticalaboutskeptics.org/investigating-skeptics/whos-who-of-media-skeptics/media-skeptics-m-z/randi-james/

[shenmue]

27. "Skeptical About Skeptics"

Yep, no agenda there.

[sufrommich]

48. I think that website is The Creation Museum

for true woo believers.

[sufrommich]

49. Dupe. nt

[yellowcanine]

32. So are you saying Oz does not promote energy therapies, support homeopathy, etc.?

And is Mary Engle of the FTC wrong for criticizing Dr. Oz for promoting Green Coffee Bean Extract for weight loss and calling it "magic" and a "miracle."?

Why don't you address the issues raised instead of citing a critic of one of the messengers and appealing to authority to refute another claim? Just because someone has a Nobel prize doesn't mean all of their pronouncements are valid, even in their area of expertise. Linus Pauling, an expert in chemical bonds and often cited as the "father of molecular biology" infamously made a fundamental molecular bonding mistake when he published a triple helix model for DNA in the early 50s. Pauling also became somewhat notorious for claiming numerous benefits for Vitamin C therapy, including as a cure for the common cold, which could not be backed up with peer reviewed research.

[840high]

33. The green tea story is

old. You need to watch hiow his show has changed.

[yellowcanine]

35. Really?

The Dr. Oz Show EPISODES RECIPES TOPICS MORE LOGIN MY PROFILE
Dr. Oz’s Complete Guide to Turn Back the Clock MORE OZ R. OZ MAGAZINEOZ BLOG TRUSTED PARTNERS WATCH OZ // CHECK LISTINGS

Dr. Oz’s Rapid Belly Melt Plan
Posted on 5/02/2014 | Comments ()
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Pinterest

START SLIDESHOW

Raise your hand if you’d like a flatter stomach? Okay, everyone put your hands down. Dr. Oz’s Rapid Belly Melt plan could help you fry stubborn belly fat and make that pooch disappear for good so you can finally have show-off abs. Just follow these three simple steps.

[840high]

56. That seems like exercise to me. By

the way - you don't have to watch his show.

[Logical]

77. And you didn't have to read this thread! nt

[grasswire]

44. what is "energy therapies"? nt

[Scootaloo]

51. Who the fuck knows? That's why it's being mocked

[yellowcanine]

53. The one cited was Reiki - description here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiki

Since its beginning in Japan, Reiki has been adapted across varying cultural traditions. It uses a technique commonly called palm healing or hands-on-healing as a form of alternative medicine. Through the use of this technique, practitioners believe that they are transferring "universal energy" (i.e., reiki) in the form of qi (Japanese: ki) through the palms, which they believe allows for self-healing and a "state of equilibrium".[citation needed]

[arikara]

61. I was addressing your post quoting the amazing Randi as some kind of an expert

And other than that, each to their own.

[spanone]

19. k&r...

[geek tragedy]

22. K&R. nt

[PasadenaTrudy]

24. I wish he'd

run off somewhere with that Food Babe, or whatever the hell her name is...

[fasttense]

28. GMO fear mongering???????

Whoever wrote that blog you posted, his right wing credentials are showing. "GMO fear mongering?"

There is a lot to fear from untested, genetic manipulated, round up and pesticide saturated, artificial fertilizer dependent processed foods. Lets just label the crap and let people decide for themselves.

[jeff47]

64. Let me introduce you to Red Grapefruit.

There's two commercial varieties, Ruby Red and Star Ruby. How'd they come to be? Well, they took regular pink grapefruit and bombarded it with radiation until the mutations they wanted showed up.

GMO? Oh, no. It's not genetically modified. See, the genes were not directly manipulated by people. So it's not a GMO.

How much testing does this pesticide saturated, artificial fertilizer dependent fruit need? None whatsoever. Go ahead and sell the first crop in the supermarket. No testing required.

As an added bonus, it's even certified Organic!

GMOs, on the other hand, require the producer to actually show that the modified plant is "nutritionally identical" to the unmodified plant. Which, in practice, means feeding it to some animals before we give it to humans. This is abhorrent, of course, because the GMO producers are actually testing their crop. Much better to stick the seeds next to some plutonium and just see what happens to the people who eat the new plant.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go use "traditional" techniques to combine Tomatoes and Nightshade. Sure Nightshade's extremely toxic, but I think it might give a nifty tang to the fruit. 100% Organic, locally-grown. Of course I'll bathe it in pesticide like almost all other 100% Organic crops. And instead of that icky ammonium nitrate that can't harbor any pathogens, I'll pick up some nice manure full of all sorts of interesting bacteria and fungi. Will I let it compost so it's safe? Maybe. Maybe not. It does take some time.

Test it? Pfft. I don't need to do that. Literally - I am not required to test a nightshade-tomato hybrid at all before I start selling it.

Now, tell me again just how lax those standards are with those dangerous GMO crops and how my irradiated or traditional hybrids are the safe way to go.

[fasttense]

65. Just because they get away with radiating food

does not make it open season on feeding the American population waste products from some huge corporation. Well, maybe it is.

Corporations do all sorts of awful things. They abuse animals by overcrowding, dehydrating and force feeding them, then pumping everything from steroids, to growth hormones, to sex hormones, to antibiotics into the creatures so they don't die from the abuse that is heaped on them. They found out that if they grind up meat off the floor and add ammonia to it, the FDA will let them feed it to our kids in school and serve it at McDonalds. They saturate everything with chemicals and poisons. They have been doing the poison thing for centuries, before round up and pesticides, we had DDT and arsenic. Whatever a corporation can con and get away with, they will do it because they are NOT in the business of farming, or selling seeds or even selling waste products to use as insecticides, they are in the business of MAKING MONEY.

That "nutritionally identical" scam cooked up by Monsanto and other chemical manufacturers in order to sell their crap to the regulating agency, is silly.

GMO corn is NOT nutritionally identical unless you consider glyphosate and nutrient

Organic corn has 14 ppm of manganese. GMO corn has only 2 ppm.
• Real corn has 7 times more manganese!
• Organic corn has 6130 ppm of calcium. GMO is stripped down to 14 ppm.
• Real corn has 437 times more calcium!
• Organic corn has 113 ppm of magnesium. GMO corn is vacant, with only 2 ppm.
• Real corn has 56 times more magnesium!

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040210_gm_corn_march_against_monsanto_glyphosate.html#ixzz3XfV64vhk

So, I would rather try your tomatoes from the botanical family commonly known as nightshade (as are peppers, potatoes and eggplants) then something cooked up for a corporation like Monsanto.

By the way, I'm a farmer and I do NOT use pesticides. You don't have to if you get your farm land in the right condition. True, there are people who lie about how they farm and there are some really silly rules in the "Organic" label slapped on and approved by the USDA. But I do not consider myself organic (I'm Certified Naturally Grown) and I even avoid those supposed "natural insecticides".

[Dr Hobbitstein]

66. NaturalNews is a RWNJ/woo site.

I HIGHLY suggest against posting that drivel here.

[fasttense]

69. This is the 2nd time I've seen you point out a liberal site as a RW (Right Wing) site

True it is a far, far left liberal site and one I don't normally trust but this time they got it right.

But why are you pointing out far left sites as right? What about this site gives you the impression it is right wing?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

70. Let's see...

Sandy Hook truthers, AIDS denialism, bithers, chemtrails. THAT is the bread and butter of NaturalNews. It is by NO MEANS a left wing sight. It's a RWNJ CT site. Also, what other "liberal" site have you seen me refer to as RWNJ?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/NaturalNews#Non-medical_conspiracy_theories

[fasttense]

71. Ok, you are right it is a crazy RW site

I only go there for the GMO information but I will find a different source from now on, thanks for the info.

I don't remember what the other site was. I'm pretty sure it was about GMOs though.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

72. A LOT of anti-science sites

Are RWNJ sites. Sites denigrating GMOs without sound science are anti-science sites. I won't get into the GMO argument with you, but I really suggest you look into what else a site is pushing, aside from something that conforms with your bias on a single issue (GMO in this case). You'd be surprised.

[fasttense]

73. If I had all the time in the world I might do that.

But as a farmer, I'm in the middle of my planting season. To make it even more busy, I just had 10 baby lambs born here 3 days ago. Moms and lambs are doping fine. All 10 are scampering about, jumping like fleas and I didn't need to pull any of them. Mother nature is amazing.

I don't use GMOs and I never will. My dislike of most GMOs is their dependency on chemicals from fake fertilizers, to Round Up that eats away at your kidneys if you have hard water. When my neighbor quit spraying Round Up on our dividing fence line, my mortality rate for new born lambs went to zero. It was 30%. But of course that just anecdotal evidence.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

74. Just an FYI

RoundUp use is not inclusive to GMOs. And 99% of GMOs will grow in ANY nutrient-rich soil, just like any other plant. Aside from a couple species of RoundUp-ready soy and corn, it's not that prominent. BT corn and BT soy is where it's at. They produce BT naturally, which I'm sure as a non-GMO farmer, you use BT as a pesticide (hell, it's naturally in the soil).

OK, I've said too much. Not wanting to get into an argument. I'm done.

[fasttense]

79. I don't use BT.

The one time I did. Four months after spraying it, I had an infestation of every beetle in the area. From the newly arrived Chinese stink bug along with the American stink bugs, to the Japanese beetle, to the striped cucumber beetle to the Colorado potato beetle to the blister beetle, they came to munch down on my cucurbits and tomatoes and tomatillos. Nothing survived the ravages of those creatures and for over 3 years I couldn't plant on that plot because of it. So did spraying the caterpillar BT do it? I don't know but I'm not messing around with any insecticide sprays again.

I have not sprayed for fleas, ticks or mites in the last 5 years and none of my dogs, sheep or chickens have any of these pests on them. I think I can do the same thing with garden pest.

But what amazes me about you is that you are eager and willing to allow huge corporations, designed to do nothing more than make money for the uber rich, to play around with genetic manipulation of our food source. These corporations have proven time and time again that they care nothing for you and me, they care nothing for the planet we live on, they care nothing for creatures and plants they blissfully manipulate and distort. Why do you trust them to produce our food for us? Why do you trust them with our environment?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

80. I said I didn't want to get into an argument.

I don't like Monsanto. I don't like Dow. But I won't demonize something (GMOs) because of the practices of a few companies that are involved with the science behind it. There are many other companies, some very liberal, who work on the same thing, and yet we hear nothing of them. We demonize a science because of a "big bad wolf".

With that, enjoy the rest of your day!

[SidDithers]

68. By linking to naturalnews, you've let us know that we can now safely ignore...

everything that you'll ever post about science.

Because anyone whose opinion is remotely worth considering, would never use anything from naturalnews to bolster their argument.

Sid

[840high]

30. I watch his show when

I'm home and enjoy it very much. He stresses diet and exercise.

[zappaman]

36. Dr. Phil is the only doctor I trust!

[yellowcanine]

37. I will go with Dr. Hawkeye Pierce

A very dry, arid, barren, desiccated, veritable dustbowl of a martini.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

67. I want it so dry

there's dust on the olive.

[PeaceNikki]

45. Ugh, Dr. (ooo, ooo), Dr. Detroit is my guy

[beam me up scottie]

60. Ahem,

aren't you forgetting someone?




Can you imagine what The Doctor would do to Oz the Quack and Powerful?

[wheniwasincongress]

50. You can tell

who in this thread is hurt that their woo of choice is criticized and discredited

[840high]

57. I'm a nurse so I don't

fall for woo. I enjoy his show as entertainment.

[applegrove]

55. I watched his show once. I took his advice: garlic for

yeast infection. It worked like a charm. I'm so disappointed he's sold out.

[840high]

59. Keep watching. He hasn't sold

out. In fact on all his shows he says he does not endorse anything.

[jeff47]

63. Yes, he just happens to put products in front of a large audience

and then talk about how they have amazing powers.

Nope, no endorsement at all!!

[NCTraveler]

94. "he says he does not endorse anything. "

Unless the money is good.

[840high]

97. He doesn't endorse GMO so I like him.

[SidDithers]

81. Kick...

Sid

[Major Nikon]

82. How Talking to the Dead Can Keep You Healthy

http://www.doctoroz.com/episode/theresa-caputo-how-talking-dead-can-keep-you-healthy

[Major Nikon]

83. Is This Man a Faith Healer?, Pt. 1

http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/man-faith-healer-pt-1

[Major Nikon]

84. Poop Primer

http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/poop-primer

[Major Nikon]

85. 200 orgasms a year will reduce your age by 6 years

http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/The-Dr-Oz-Health-Quiz

[Major Nikon]

86. Using "water memory" to treat pain. It really works, honest.

http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/Alternative-Pain-Treatments-Pt-1

[Major Nikon]

87. How to use the power of the Force to heal yourself

http://www.doctoroz.com/article/alternative-medicine-treatments?page=3

[SidDithers]

88. Awesome. All of them...

and they make a spectacular addition to the thread.

Thanks for posting them.

Sid

[Major Nikon]

89. Joseph Mercola is another quack Republican who makes money from people who pay money for snake oil

People who channel these shitstains really should check their sources. All they are really doing is embarrassing themselves.

[SidDithers]

90. Yup. And Mercola is a freqiuent guest on the Dr. Oz show...

can't wait for someone to pull out a naturalnews link, too.



Sid

[Major Nikon]

91. There's a lot of recurring themes with those nutbaggery sites

AIDS denialism, anti-vax, homeopathy, chemtrails, fluoridation conspiracy theories, vaccine/autism link bullshittery, snake oil dipshittery, and all sorts of other wacked out nonsense. There must be a school somewhere that trains charlatans how to make money from the stupidest pseudoscience imaginable.

[NCTraveler]

93. One of the most common ads on my facebook feed...

is that of Dr. Oz promoting some form of quackery. He is about the money. I do think his intentions were good to start. Money gets the best of many good people in this world.

[840high]

98. I don't call healthy food and

exercise quackery.

[NCTraveler]

103. That makes two of us. nt.

[tammywammy]

105. See posts 82-87 for quackery. n/t

[840high]

107. I watch his show about 2-4 times a week - have not seen that.

[tammywammy]

109. Can you see how people think he's a quack?

Those are on his website.

No one on DU thinks he's a quack for promoting healthy eating and exercise. People think he's a quack for promoting quackery as seen in those links.

[NCTraveler]

95. Seems it is becoming more and more common....

Seems it is becoming more and more common to see members linking to right wing site or republicans to make their point here. Yesterday a poster used an Andrew Malcolm article to attack Hillary. Ratfuckers abound. The attacks always attempt to show themselves as coming from the left of the party.

[William769]

100. Kick & recommended.

[Dr. Strange]

102. Stop hating Michelle Obama!

And leave Kevin Trudeau alone!

And stop bringing up Kevin Trudeau!

[zappaman]

108. Why do you hate democracy!

[beam me up scottie]

110. Hey, Mr I'm A Little Shill for Science!

Why do you hate transparency?

Think of the kittens.