I wonder if this is a deliberate editorial shift in editorial policy from GMTV? Not to stop having him on but to have someone else on who may challenge the parts of his message that dont stack up (and usually involve selling poorly evidenced supplements). maybe some of the the sensible critique from here and elsewhere is beginning to seep into the conciousness of editors.
I have a nasty suspicion that Patrick will have crossed Sarah off his Xmas card list and will refuse to appear on the show again with her. Who will win? How many doctors and dieticians can GMTV line up?
I’d be willing – and there’s plenty more dietitians out there that will be breathing a collective sigh of relief that GMTV is FINALLY curtailing Patricks unrestricted fatuous and inaccurate comments with a clinician who actually knows what she is talking about…
It will be useful to see if he gains the usual free advertising space from GMTVs website directing interested viewers to his websites..
ker-ching!!
bottom line – Kyla improved DESPITE, not BECAUSE of Patricks supplements……
“I think that it is desperately dangerous that people like Patrick [Holford] with no medical qualifications at all are telling people like Kyra that they have cured their diabetes.“ *Bug-eyed gawk from PH*
The pusillanimous, lily-livered milquetoasts at GMTV have posted material that is taken directly from Patrick Holford’s websites and not included any of Dr. Jarvis’ comments or her objections to the claims that are made for the supplements.
So, yes, UK Dietitian, GMTV has indeed handed over free advertising and reproduced Holford’s claims entirely uncritically.
Dr Sarah Jarvis used to do (maybe still does, I’m not a student anymore) the medical segment of Jeremy Vine (Radio 2).
I’m glad they made what could’ve been a puff piece for Holford’s supplements into a good analysis of what to do. I’ld like to think it was a result of GMTV but they probably just lucked out.
Bizarrely the end of the video says The Seventh Seal is a ‘must-see summer movie’, I have to agree.
Funny how the public perception of chromium changes this article states that “Given the overall greater desire for better amenities rather than remedial action, policy makers and planners should discuss with residents how best to spend resources before instigating expensive cleaning up programmes.“
Some of these areas are still the most deprived in Europe yet they went ahead with huge expensive remediation works (no doubt due to public pressure equating chromium with leukemia. I played football on pitches several miles away from the factory site but a small burn runs between the two. Over the summer of 2003 they spent huge amounts completely stripping and capping up these sports fields. (Admittedly the pitches are first class now, which should encourage greater sport participation)
If Patrick is to be believed, we will all have diabetes soon!!!!
Rumour has it that at Friday’s Allergy Show during his seminar on Hidden Food Allergies, Patrick Holford referred to this GMTV piece which he plainly thought showed him to advantage or was confident that had been seen by few people. He characterised his adversary as a “snotty doctor” – splendid piece of public discourse about the sciences – about as classy as that chromium paper he was touting.
I was talking to some elderly relatives recently and they were talking about how that ‘new’ radiation was originally thought to be good for you. They said that brands of washing powder, shoe polish, toothpaste etc. were rebranded to include some for of ‘rad’ in their names.
Things poison you, are good for you – its seems to be a matter of time and emphasis. As a fascinating oddity, somebody’s post A Therapeutic Guide To Alkaloidal Dosimetric – Medication. The historical uses of mercury are particularly fascinating.
[...] the full story in which Holford and Jarvis discuss diabetes management; read some discussion and analysis, Part 1 and Part2. Plus, the full story of the lack of an [...]
Strange how Holford reversed the woman’s diabetes on national TV and you are all so blinded that you didn’t see it! Even the doctor idiotically carried on about complications! You can’t have complications from something that has been reversed!!!! Poor DIET was the CAUSE of her diabetes and correct diet the CURE. I think the fact she came off her meds has perturbed representatives of a very powerful and unethical industry. Something is VERY wrong here.
Admin edit: wow. You can’t have complications from something that has been reversed? Golly. You have us stumped. Eh, no you don’t. It is entirely possible to have microvascular damage from diabetes that has affected the kidneys, eyes etc. – and this microvascular damage may persist even when somebody gets their blood sugar under control.
If you had read the detail correctly, under the guidance and original eating plan given to her at the diabetes clinic and by her endocrinologist, it seems like she was already reducing her medication.
However, please, please correct your impression that the fact that an illness may be corrected doesn’t mean that some effects don’t persist. It’s entirely possible to have a GI infection that is cured but the damage that it has caused persists.
Point taken regarding the complications, however the patient in question was under diabetes-specific medical supervision, presumably any complications were well monitored for. Instead of launching a tirade would it not have been more professional for Dr Jarvis to state clearly that anyone following a low GL diet should consult their doctor to check for any ongoing complications that may have resulted from their previous diabetic state? Also, Dr Jarvis proceeded to insult the patient by off-handily stating several times that the diet was ‘common sense’ however it was NOT common sense to the subject else she would no doubt have eaten in this way sooner. How many people find it ‘common sense’ to eat a low GL diet to reverse diabetes? How many people even realise that conditions such as diabetes and heart disease can be reversed through diet? How many people even know about Dean Ornish or Caldwell Esselstyn? What IS common sense is that if people listened to what nutritionists (like Holford) are telling us, they would most likely prevent complications such as diabetes 2 arising in the first place.
Admin edit: you did not listen to the interview with full attention. Dr Jarvis was referring to the dietary recommendations that Patrick Holford was trying to pass off as original – she was distinguishing that from the nonsense of the supplements that he was pimping.
You have read through this blog and the earlier links and realise that Holford is not a qualified nutritionist, merely a pundit with a gift for publicity?
Again, once the diseases you mention are established, it is plausible that there is microvascular damage that is i) difficult to identify ii) not available to ‘reversal’.
I understood the intentions of Dr Jarvis. However in her rush to discredit Holford she insulted the patient and the public for whom it may be news that diabetes 2 can be reversed by diet and lifestyle. I didn’t notice that Holford tried to pass it off as original, although his particular meal plan may be, (it certainly seemed to have a high compliance factor; low compliance being ONE reason why doctors don’t tend to stress the importance of nutrition.) but if doctors like Dr. Jarvis don’t take the initiative to inform the public of the emerging high significance of nutrition in disease then it’s going to SEEM original to the public.
I haven’t read through the blog or the links. I was previously aware of Patrick Holford through his appearance in a film made by the actress Margot Kidder about her curing bipolar disorder through orthomolecular medicine. Patrick Holford studied under Carl Pfeiffer and Abram Hoffer for many years in the US. They were the first doctors to prove the link between nutrition and mental illness. Hoffer, of course, was a colleague of double Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling (much derided for many years over his advocacy of vitamin C) It was Linus Pauling who was Founding Patron of Holford’s original Institute for Optimum Nutrition. These are hardly the credentials of someone who is merely a ‘pundit with a gift for publicity.’
Admin edit: you do seem to visit blogs, make assertions, receive information and recommendations for reading which you refuse to take and then carry on commenting from ignorance.
Dr Jarvis is very active in promoting healthful eating – you should check out some of her committee memberships and books. In the interview that you seemed to have watched through blinkers and with ear defenders, she mentions the Portfolio Diet and the Mediterranean Diet and recommends both for appropriate patients.
As for the other points, as Dr Aust points out and as is covered in some detail on this blog, your are in error about Linus Pauling and his early relationship with Patrick Holford and the ION. And, as covered on this blog, there was never any years of study with either Pfeiffer or Hoffer.
The film, by the way, is called ‘Masks of Madness.’ There are clips on YouTube and EVERYONE SHOULD WATCH THIS FILM.
Admin edit: you completely overestimate your personal credibility and ability to influence if you think that making a film recommendation is meaningful after the number of errors you have made watching a short video clip and subsequently in your comments.
Re. Gregg’s rather trusting (or utterly misleading, if you prefer) remarks about Patrick and his “mentors” Carl Pfeiffer and Abram Hoffer, I wrote about these gents in my first ever full-length post on “Patrick Holford’s Mentors and Inspirations – but who are they exactly?”. Short version: both Hoffer and Pfeiffer were long out of the scientific mainstream into fruitcake wacky-private-nutrition-clinic territory by the time Patrick hooked up with them. And he definitely did not”study” with them for “several years” – more likely he visited their private therapy centres briefly – days? weeks? months? – in the late 70s.
As for Linus Pauling’s late career obsession with implausible theories about Vitamin C… I think what I said in the comment here is closer to the view of most scientists, both on him, and on other eminent scientists that made idiots of themselves talking about stuff they knew nothing about.
At the risk of sounding like Arthur Weasley, information on this blog is not intended as a substitute for advice from a qualified medical practitioner. If you have health concerns, see a Dr or dietician (a blog is not the place to diagnose a health problem).
Bad Science Blogs
23 Comments
June 13, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Partial transcript of the video plus some commentary.
June 13, 2007 at 4:03 pm
Brilliant, puts him right in his place, if your not qualified to comment on a serious medical condition, don’t.
June 13, 2007 at 5:27 pm
I wonder if this is a deliberate editorial shift in editorial policy from GMTV? Not to stop having him on but to have someone else on who may challenge the parts of his message that dont stack up (and usually involve selling poorly evidenced supplements). maybe some of the the sensible critique from here and elsewhere is beginning to seep into the conciousness of editors.
June 13, 2007 at 5:56 pm
I hope so.
I have a nasty suspicion that Patrick will have crossed Sarah off his Xmas card list and will refuse to appear on the show again with her. Who will win? How many doctors and dieticians can GMTV line up?
June 13, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I’d be willing – and there’s plenty more dietitians out there that will be breathing a collective sigh of relief that GMTV is FINALLY curtailing Patricks unrestricted fatuous and inaccurate comments with a clinician who actually knows what she is talking about…
It will be useful to see if he gains the usual free advertising space from GMTVs website directing interested viewers to his websites..
ker-ching!!
bottom line – Kyla improved DESPITE, not BECAUSE of Patricks supplements……
June 13, 2007 at 7:15 pm
haha, loved it
“I think that it is desperately dangerous that people like Patrick [Holford] with no medical qualifications at all are telling people like Kyra that they have cured their diabetes.“
*Bug-eyed gawk from PH*
Quality.
June 13, 2007 at 8:46 pm
The pusillanimous, lily-livered milquetoasts at GMTV have posted material that is taken directly from Patrick Holford’s websites and not included any of Dr. Jarvis’ comments or her objections to the claims that are made for the supplements.
So, yes, UK Dietitian, GMTV has indeed handed over free advertising and reproduced Holford’s claims entirely uncritically.
June 14, 2007 at 7:50 am
Dr Sarah Jarvis used to do (maybe still does, I’m not a student anymore) the medical segment of Jeremy Vine (Radio 2).
I’m glad they made what could’ve been a puff piece for Holford’s supplements into a good analysis of what to do. I’ld like to think it was a result of GMTV but they probably just lucked out.
Bizarrely the end of the video says The Seventh Seal is a ‘must-see summer movie’, I have to agree.
June 14, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Funny how the public perception of chromium changes this article states that
“Given the overall greater desire for better amenities rather than remedial action, policy makers and planners should discuss with residents how best to spend resources before instigating expensive cleaning up programmes.“
Some of these areas are still the most deprived in Europe yet they went ahead with huge expensive remediation works (no doubt due to public pressure equating chromium with leukemia. I played football on pitches several miles away from the factory site but a small burn runs between the two. Over the summer of 2003 they spent huge amounts completely stripping and capping up these sports fields. (Admittedly the pitches are first class now, which should encourage greater sport participation)
If Patrick is to be believed, we will all have diabetes soon!!!!
June 14, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Well done Dr Jarvis – good to see a well balanced evidence based point of view from a qualified healthcare professional.
June 16, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Rumour has it that at Friday’s Allergy Show during his seminar on Hidden Food Allergies, Patrick Holford referred to this GMTV piece which he plainly thought showed him to advantage or was confident that had been seen by few people. He characterised his adversary as a “snotty doctor” – splendid piece of public discourse about the sciences – about as classy as that chromium paper he was touting.
June 16, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Simon – interesting.
I was talking to some elderly relatives recently and they were talking about how that ‘new’ radiation was originally thought to be good for you. They said that brands of washing powder, shoe polish, toothpaste etc. were rebranded to include some for of ‘rad’ in their names.
Things poison you, are good for you – its seems to be a matter of time and emphasis. As a fascinating oddity, somebody’s post A Therapeutic Guide To Alkaloidal Dosimetric – Medication. The historical uses of mercury are particularly fascinating.
July 26, 2008 at 5:20 pm
[...] the full story in which Holford and Jarvis discuss diabetes management; read some discussion and analysis, Part 1 and Part2. Plus, the full story of the lack of an [...]
January 31, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Strange how Holford reversed the woman’s diabetes on national TV and you are all so blinded that you didn’t see it! Even the doctor idiotically carried on about complications! You can’t have complications from something that has been reversed!!!! Poor DIET was the CAUSE of her diabetes and correct diet the CURE. I think the fact she came off her meds has perturbed representatives of a very powerful and unethical industry. Something is VERY wrong here.
Admin edit: wow. You can’t have complications from something that has been reversed? Golly. You have us stumped. Eh, no you don’t. It is entirely possible to have microvascular damage from diabetes that has affected the kidneys, eyes etc. – and this microvascular damage may persist even when somebody gets their blood sugar under control.
If you had read the detail correctly, under the guidance and original eating plan given to her at the diabetes clinic and by her endocrinologist, it seems like she was already reducing her medication.
However, please, please correct your impression that the fact that an illness may be corrected doesn’t mean that some effects don’t persist. It’s entirely possible to have a GI infection that is cured but the damage that it has caused persists.
February 2, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Point taken regarding the complications, however the patient in question was under diabetes-specific medical supervision, presumably any complications were well monitored for. Instead of launching a tirade would it not have been more professional for Dr Jarvis to state clearly that anyone following a low GL diet should consult their doctor to check for any ongoing complications that may have resulted from their previous diabetic state? Also, Dr Jarvis proceeded to insult the patient by off-handily stating several times that the diet was ‘common sense’ however it was NOT common sense to the subject else she would no doubt have eaten in this way sooner. How many people find it ‘common sense’ to eat a low GL diet to reverse diabetes? How many people even realise that conditions such as diabetes and heart disease can be reversed through diet? How many people even know about Dean Ornish or Caldwell Esselstyn? What IS common sense is that if people listened to what nutritionists (like Holford) are telling us, they would most likely prevent complications such as diabetes 2 arising in the first place.
Admin edit: you did not listen to the interview with full attention. Dr Jarvis was referring to the dietary recommendations that Patrick Holford was trying to pass off as original – she was distinguishing that from the nonsense of the supplements that he was pimping.
You have read through this blog and the earlier links and realise that Holford is not a qualified nutritionist, merely a pundit with a gift for publicity?
Again, once the diseases you mention are established, it is plausible that there is microvascular damage that is i) difficult to identify ii) not available to ‘reversal’.
February 3, 2009 at 8:29 pm
I understood the intentions of Dr Jarvis. However in her rush to discredit Holford she insulted the patient and the public for whom it may be news that diabetes 2 can be reversed by diet and lifestyle. I didn’t notice that Holford tried to pass it off as original, although his particular meal plan may be, (it certainly seemed to have a high compliance factor; low compliance being ONE reason why doctors don’t tend to stress the importance of nutrition.) but if doctors like Dr. Jarvis don’t take the initiative to inform the public of the emerging high significance of nutrition in disease then it’s going to SEEM original to the public.
I haven’t read through the blog or the links. I was previously aware of Patrick Holford through his appearance in a film made by the actress Margot Kidder about her curing bipolar disorder through orthomolecular medicine. Patrick Holford studied under Carl Pfeiffer and Abram Hoffer for many years in the US. They were the first doctors to prove the link between nutrition and mental illness. Hoffer, of course, was a colleague of double Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling (much derided for many years over his advocacy of vitamin C) It was Linus Pauling who was Founding Patron of Holford’s original Institute for Optimum Nutrition. These are hardly the credentials of someone who is merely a ‘pundit with a gift for publicity.’
Admin edit: you do seem to visit blogs, make assertions, receive information and recommendations for reading which you refuse to take and then carry on commenting from ignorance.
Dr Jarvis is very active in promoting healthful eating – you should check out some of her committee memberships and books. In the interview that you seemed to have watched through blinkers and with ear defenders, she mentions the Portfolio Diet and the Mediterranean Diet and recommends both for appropriate patients.
As for the other points, as Dr Aust points out and as is covered in some detail on this blog, your are in error about Linus Pauling and his early relationship with Patrick Holford and the ION. And, as covered on this blog, there was never any years of study with either Pfeiffer or Hoffer.
February 3, 2009 at 8:34 pm
The film, by the way, is called ‘Masks of Madness.’ There are clips on YouTube and EVERYONE SHOULD WATCH THIS FILM.
Admin edit: you completely overestimate your personal credibility and ability to influence if you think that making a film recommendation is meaningful after the number of errors you have made watching a short video clip and subsequently in your comments.
February 3, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Re. Gregg’s rather trusting (or utterly misleading, if you prefer) remarks about Patrick and his “mentors” Carl Pfeiffer and Abram Hoffer, I wrote about these gents in my first ever full-length post on “Patrick Holford’s Mentors and Inspirations – but who are they exactly?”. Short version: both Hoffer and Pfeiffer were long out of the scientific mainstream into fruitcake wacky-private-nutrition-clinic territory by the time Patrick hooked up with them. And he definitely did not”study” with them for “several years” – more likely he visited their private therapy centres briefly – days? weeks? months? – in the late 70s.
As for Linus Pauling’s late career obsession with implausible theories about Vitamin C… I think what I said in the comment here is closer to the view of most scientists, both on him, and on other eminent scientists that made idiots of themselves talking about stuff they knew nothing about.
February 4, 2009 at 12:06 am
Admin edit: moved to off-topic.
February 4, 2009 at 9:22 am
Admin edit: off-topic for this post – moved to keep it with Gregg Billingsley.
We refer you to the comments policy.
This is a blog about Patrick Holford and his brand of nutritionism – not other people whom your affect to admire.
Make your other comments at least on-topic for this blog. Read the comments policy.