Patrick Holford is a “world famous expert” and part of a:
star-studded cast of guest speakers including Dr John Briffa, The Observer’s health adviser, Professor Jane Plant, M.B.E, biochemist and government advisor on toxicity and Patrick Holford, widely regarded as a leading spokesperson and author on nutrition whose recent TV appearances include This Morning, GMTV and Tonight with Trevor Macdonald.
He is all these things and more to the Northern College of Acupuncture which has an unseemly excitement about its own pioneering nutrition course.
The course uniquely combines the study of Western, naturopathic and traditional medicine approaches to nutrition – the best of East meets West – together with actual clinical practice of nutritional therapy. It covers the nutritional approach to a wide range of ailments, from acne to urinary infections and also incorporates meal planning, health foods, food preparation and nutritional research. The diploma can be taken part-time over one year while those wanting to do nutrition research for their MSc complete an extra year.
Part-time over one year doesn’t sound like much academic content to me but then I neither take fish oil capsules nor follow Patrick Holford’s suggestion that I order *smart drugs over the internet, so I’ve probably never encountered the sort of turbo-charged teaching and learning that these people practise.
Would it be churlish to wish that the curriculum devoted more time to basics such as laboratory nutrient testing and supplement interactions and toxicology rather than:
concepts of nutrition within traditional Chinese, Japanese, Tibetan and Ayurvedic medicine. This means that graduates will gain a comprehensive understanding of both modern scientific knowledge and ancient wisdom concerning nutrition and dietetics.
I can understand how it might be difficult to find an academic institution that is equipped to validate “ancient wisdom” and how it might intersect with the current medical realities of people in the UK. However, the Northern College is hopeful that the course will be accredited by some (as yet un-named) academic institution that will actually mean that people who have paid their money for an MSc will actually be able to claim that they have an MSc after they’ve done the work. I’m a little hazy on whether they will be able to request a refund if the course is not accredited…I would be pretty angry if I had paid for an MSc but couldn’t be awarded one: in fact, I’m not too sure that I would ever sign up for a course if I didn’t know the institution (and whether or not it had a decent reputation) that would validate my qualification.
I’m a little disheartened that the press release for the course styled Prof. Plant as a biochemist when she is a renowned geochemist (not quite the same thing). Drs Jacqueline Young and Ben Goldacre have crossed swords in the past. Come to think of it, Drs John Briffa (“I have never claimed that my work is evidence-based”) and Ben Goldacre have also had a lively time in the past (and here). Holford Watch has devoted an entire blog to the quality of Patrick Holford’s research and teachings, of course, but some of his most striking pieces are…Andrew Wakefield, Part 1 and 2; the hard evidence for a link between MMR and autism; the virtues of homeopathic vaccinations; the value of secretin as a treatment for autism; misinterpreting the NNT for statins…
The last time that Holford Watch ran a price comparison of an Institute for Optimum Nutrition qualification and the training of a dietitian, the latter came out as not only more direct but substantially better value, with an instantly recognised and portable qualification: I hope that the Diploma/MSc in nutrition (subject to validation) is good value for any students who are tempted to purchase it. I’m not at all clear on what it would entitle its graduates to claim or whether it would entitle them to membership of any professional bodies. Or, if the assumption is that it would be used only as an adjunct to somebody’s current work – but that was the pious hope made for the substantially cheaper ION home-study course.
As Shirley Conran remarked so wisely about the idea of suede egg-cosies in the form of gnomes, when you come up with a concept that is strikingly unique (such as the blend of “nutrition within traditional Chinese, Japanese, Tibetan and Ayurvedic medicine”) you have to ask yourself if there is a more sinister reason as to why it is so unique.
*On pg.489 of New Optimum Nutrition for the Mind, Patrick Holford suggests that we might consider the use of smart drugs. He helpfully informs his readers that:
*Smart drugs and nutrients* can be bought by mail order from abroad, shipped to UK customers for personal use. Search the web for US suppliers, most of whom ship to the UK.
Leaving aside the ethics of such advice I’m a tad concerned that people are encouraged to purchase items from the internet when there is little chance of verifying their provenance or contents.
Update: the University of Wales has stepped into the void breech and pluckily offered their validation services for the MSc in Nutrition. Presumably, for a fee.
I can’t tell you what a relief it was for me to learn:
[The Northern College of Acupuncture] are fortunate to have support from leading supplement company, BioCare for an annual Clinical Prize and from leading nutritional laboratory, YorkTest for an annual Research Prize.
That would be Biocare, for which both Holford and Briffa supply formulations. And YorkTest -about which we have written on many occasions. So, that is a fully evidence-based curriculum then with no influences towards unproven supplements or diagnostic tests.
11 Comments
July 1, 2007 at 11:56 pm
hm, the site you link to says students need to be at the college for 39 days per year in the first year… The sounds like very remarkably little contact/lab time for the first year of an MSc (assuming the course gets accredited).
Maybe there’s a lot of homework.
July 2, 2007 at 9:35 am
And – not only is that the lab/contact time, it is also the clinical time…
I’m not sure how you can be assessed for the amount of multi-cultural ancient wisdom that you have acquired.
July 2, 2007 at 11:40 am
I wondered about the inclusion of nutrigenomics in the modules – particularly as it must be covered so superficially. But, courtesy of an item on GMTV and poking around the promoted website, I discover that there is a test! Of course there is…
I wondered why I saw this on the front page – I wonder no longer.
“Based on your individual genetic profile, one of our medical experts will guide you on which lifestyle changes to make as well as which supplementation to take that will improve the quality of your life, extend the active period of your life, and most possibly enable you to live longer.” [My emphasis.]
July 3, 2007 at 11:56 am
Holford is only listed as someone “widely regarded as” an expert.
Hee hee.
July 4, 2007 at 12:54 pm
One suggestion – don’t you think we should know who you are and your qualifications as you’re criticising someone? The anonymity of 3 out of 4 people writing this site does take away from what you’re writing. Just a suggestion, from anonymous!
July 4, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Nope – identities are troll feeding and distract from looking at the sourced issues.
But I’m curious as to why it would matter if the people writing here have Ph.Ds or not so much as a GCSE to their name? You are capable of checking the resources that this people are punctilious in providing – aren’t you? Can you find a single sustainable objection to their criticisms other than you seem to think that you need to know how they are before ignoring their well-researched criticisms?
And I’m curious as to why you have chosen to make that comment on this post. If you check the ones that point out arithmetical or copying errors – (fishy numbers, statins or premature mortality from CVD/CHD) should only people maths or medical informatics backgrounds make those comments?
Plus – Patrick Holford has disdained Dr Ben Goldacre’s qualifications when compared to his own. During a recent seminar, he mentioned his GMTV appearance and referred to Dr Sarah Jarvis as a “snotty doctor”. So, even when Patrick Holford is well and truly out-gunned academically and clinically, he still affects to believe in his own superiority.
Just my opinion, but Patrick Holford could learn a lot from primary schoolchildren about the appropriate way to conduct himself and criticise others…
Maybe you would learn a lot from reading the paper on competence that was mentioned in a post about the BDA – and while you are at it, why don’t you take the opportunity to let the people here know where they are factually wrong.
July 4, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Just a guess here ‘anonymous’, but are you Sue Young? If so I claim my £5. (Which I will of course donate to the upkeep of the BadScience website).
July 4, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Thanks for the comments – anonymous, I’d agree with ‘less supercilious anon’ that our qualifications (or lack thereof) aren’t particularly relevent – or, for that matter, all that interesting re. the content on this blog. You’re quite free to check up on what we write – we’d all welcome discussion of the substance of our posts, and that would be much more interesting than discussing a few humble bloggers.
One more issue re. transparency. We’ve made the decision that Holford Watch won’t accept donations from those with competing interests in the pharmaceutical or supplement industries.
December 9, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Looking to facilitate Patrick Holford Nurtritional course in Cape Town, South Africa.
October 13, 2008 at 6:38 pm
cost on full msc nutritional course and lit
October 14, 2008 at 9:31 pm
[...] July 2007, the glowing press releases for the course had attracted attention from the wonderfully investigative web site HolfordWatch. I see no sign that the validation committee was aware of this. But if not, why not? I would [...]