Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science

You couldn’t make it up. Sue Foss - a Dore Sales Manager currently before an industrial tribunal - alleges that she was “ordered to go bowling” as part of a Dore team-building exercise, despite the fact that her fingers did not fit into the bowling balls. Because of these difficulties, she was reportedly “given a rosette and a certificate, which she showed the court. It read: ‘This certifies that you have been awarded the title of Mega Flops.’” As the Telegraph reports, “Mrs Foss told the tribunal that she had endured months of cruel jibes referring to her disability as well as lewd comments about her sex life and the size of her breasts.”

I’ve blogged before about how Dore benefits when ‘unlikely miracle cure’ stories are viewed as newsworthy while ‘negative’ stories aren’t and been critical about the lack of reporting of ‘negative’ analyses of research into Dore. So, am I pleased at this more critical coverage? Well, not really. Frankly, it’s all rather messy. While Foss’ allegations are serious and newsworthy, a key issue with Dore - not covered in the Times and Telegraph articles I’ve linked - is whether it’s effective. If parents are deciding whether Dore is right for their children, they need to know if there’s evidence that it works - which is why it is so important for the media to report the science and to report it well.

Anyway, so what about other papers I’ve criticised for not reporting ‘negative’ research on Dore? At the time of writing the Guardian and Manchester Evening News haven’t even covered this tribunal on their websites. The Mail goes one better, though - instead of looking at the tribunal or the critical research, it has reported a mother’s claims that Dore “treatment has made such a difference. The best thing is, it’s treating the cause and not just the symptoms.”

I think I’ll go find a suitable wobble board to bang my head against…