Today, the ASA have ruled against Health Products for Life (HPFL): a supplement company that Professor Patrick Holford (Head of Science and Education at Biocare) sold to Biocare, and which has a website - and sells pills - with a picture of Holford’s face on. Holford is beginning to amass a collection of ASA rulings both for his own offerings and those for products that he endorses.
Responding to a consumer’s complaint about a Health Products for Life claim that Yorktest food intolerance testing “[p]rovides accurate, reproducible laboratory testing for food intolerance using a pin-prick of blood”, the ASA found that:
HPFL provided research papers to support the claims for the Food Intolerance Test. However, we were concerned that the studies were conducted on people suffering from chronic medical conditions such as Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and migraine and considered that the findings did not support a general claim for diagnosis of food intolerance. We noted one of the studies was published in an academic peer-reviewed journal, but also noted that it did not refer to food intolerance among the general population and also stated that further clinical research was required. We concluded that the evidence submitted was not sufficiently robust to prove the efficacy of the tests for diagnosing food intolerance.
The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 50.1(Health and beauty products).
For more detail, see: Myth: You Can Diagnose Food Intolerance or Allergy with an IgG Blood Test.
Holford has an unfortunate record with ASA rulings: they have ruled against his 100% Health company, Holford and Associates, Yorktest (which Holford endorses, and HPFL sells their products) and Equazen (which gives money to Holford’s Food for the Brain charity).
Making claims that one can’t substantiate or prove to be truthful - and using these claims to sell products - is rather unfortunate behaviour. I wonder how Biocare feel about their Head of Science and education acting in such a way. And I wonder how Teesside feels about offering a Visiting Professorship to a want-to-be researcher who markets his products using such claims. How lenient would they be to a student who makes claims that cannot be supported appropriately?
6 responses so far ↓
Teek // January 30, 2008 at 11:17 am
:-) nice - this sort of thing shows that the ASA is switched on, and that using unsubstantiated innuendo to sell pills won’t wash - the question is, will Holford’s increasing collection of rulings against stop him and his ilk from trying it on in the future? i for one doubt it, not that this should come in the way of us enjoying the moment…!
tifosi246 // January 30, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Whilst individual rulings won’t make a difference, the repeating series of judgements against Prof. Holford from the independent body of the ASA will add to the death of his unjustifiable claims by a thousand cuts.
It’s a shame the ASA has no teeth to ensure no more repeat offences, but as you say, Teek, it is a moment to savour for people who believe in ‘truth in advertising’ or who object to the medicalisation of everyday life.
Claire // January 30, 2008 at 1:59 pm
I see Mr Holford’s own ‘Holford Myths’ site makes no mention at all of the Sept. 2007 House of Lords allergy report, specifically their statements relating to dtc tests for self diagnosis of food allergy/food intolerance and their direction to professionals and charities not to recommend them - http://www.patrickholford.com/content.asp?id_Content=2178
“…True: Patrick Holford considers food intolerance/allergy to be a critical health factor and IgG Food Intolerance/allergy tests to be a useful indicator of potential food intolerance/allergy…”
Claire // January 31, 2008 at 9:53 am
I wonder if this is a consequence of spreading misinformation about food allergy? -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/31/nallergy131.xml .
Given the shortage of paediatric allergy specialists here in the UK and the long waiting times (in most areas) for access to a knowledgeable, properly qualified dietitian, such parents are prey to all kinds of anxieties and vulnerable to putting their very young children on ill-advised exclusion diets.
Counterknowledge.com » Professor Holford and the ASA // February 11, 2008 at 12:36 am
[...] ever-vigilant Holfordwatch wonders: Making claims that one can’t substantiate or prove to be truthful - and using these [...]
Claire // February 12, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Kind of off topic but speaking to my nervousness about asthmatics being encouraged to self-diagnose food allergy, this made my jaw drop when I happened on it several days ago:
http://www.revolutionhealth.com/stories/view/227ace6574914861a533f7b4dbd957ab
“…Furthermore, Carol says, you can actually use your control pause to indicate whether you are allergic to a food. You take your CP, eat the food, and then take your CP again after 10 and 20 minutes. If it drops radically, you may be allergic. No need for an elimination diet. After taking the Buteyko training, I learned that I was allergic to apples. I’d eat an apple, and right away, I’d have trouble breathing. Even dried apples would do it. So, now I know to avoid apples.
The ideal diet, according to Dr. Buteyko, would make a vegan sound indulgent. Of course, no meat, no eggs, no dairy, not even youghurt. But also, no concentrated protein of any kind – no nuts, no soy. And, of course, no caffeine, no chocolate. Even for a vegetarian (which I am), this diet feels claustrophobic. Foods that decrease breathing include garlic, onions, cayenne, black pepper, ginger and horse radish. This is good to know, because with such a limited diet, you’ll need something spicy to distract you from the monotony. …”
Novel ‘diagnosis’ technique apart, the diet sounds extremely restrictive and likely to result in nutritional deficiencies. Food allergy in asthma needs proper, professional care.
Leave a Comment