A while back, I asked BANT – which promotes itself as “The Professional Body for Nutritional Therapists”, and has made Holford a Fellow – to see a copy of their ethics code. They refused, citing concerns that people might misquote or steal their ethics code. I was therefore delighted to see that BANT’s ethics code is now available on their website [PDF]. However, I was disappointed to note some of the content of the code: BANT allow members to earn profit and commission from selling products to their clients. This is not appropriate behaviour from want-to-be healthcare professionals.
To quote from the BANT ethics code (p. 9):
7.3 Trade discounts and commission payments.
The main income, generated as members of BANT, should come from consultative, advisory, educational and promotional aspects of Nutritional Therapy. (G).a) In addition to supplying supplements as an integral part of a consultation, the Member may also act as a supplier of laboratory tests, or any other products related to Nutritional Therapy. The member may choose to benefit from trade discounts and commission payments when offered by the supplier on products purchased by him for such use. The member decides whether such payments, in whole or in part, are retained in his Nutritional Therapy business, or passed onto the client. (B).
b) The Member may accept commission directly from the supplier. This can also apply when repeat orders for products prescribed by the Member, are placed directly by a client with the supplier, with the prior agreement of the Member. However, to protect both the Member and the client, both parties must be in a formal client relationship and implementing the prescribed programme of treatment, timings, review meetings and record taking as arranged initially between the parties. (B).
In other words – a BANT-registered nutritional therapist can also sell (either as a retailer, or for commission) all kinds of nutritional pills and tests. This gives them a financial incentive to ‘prescribe’ unnecessary products for their clients.
This type of behaviour – want-to-be healthcare professionals profiting from selling pills and tests to their patients – makes big pharma look positively cuddly. But, according to BANT’s ethics code, it’s perfectly OK for nutritional therapists to earn money this way.
Personally, I think that it is BANT’s ethics that need supplementing.
“Have you asked your self how many GPs receive commission by the pharmaceutical companies, if they push their products?”
A GP would face severe disciplinary action, the results of which would be made public, by the GMC is they were taking commission payments from drug companies.
The (freely available) GMC ‘good medical practice’ paragraph 74 makes the position unequivocal.
“You must act in your patients’ best interests when making referrals and when providing or arranging treatment or care. You must not ask for or accept any inducement, gift or hospitality which may affect or be seen to affect the way you prescribe for, treat or refer patients. You must not offer such inducements to colleagues.
”
http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/good_medical_practice/probity/conflicts_of_interest.asp
It is interesting to compare on contrast the GMCs attitude to publishing its codes of conduct (freely available), the manner in which its hearing are conducted (openly), the stance of accepting financial inducement for offering goods or services (forbidden) with that of BANT.
Yes, there are therapist that don’t prescribe supplements. And believe it or not, many are not interested in making money out of it.
95% is an estimate based on about 50 practitioners I know. Not much of a precise statistic, I know, but I doubt there are also precise statistics out there about how many GPs prescribe antiacids as a first step in differential diagnosis of anyone presenting any abdominal symptoms (too many, trust me)
If BANT accepts this kind of behaviour, it does mean it promotes it…there is difference in this vocabulary.
I am completely familiar with GMC’s code of ethics, but its existance doen’t mean that all members attain to it (experience from colleagues)
I apologize for harshness of my previous post, although I was a bit diasppointed at some comments.
I haven’t said and I’ll never say that Holford is a great nutritionist, to me he is a great businessman although there are many, many nutritional therapists are there that are far more prepared then nutritionists or dieticians…maybe you should get in contact with some of our collagues teaching the MSc in Nutritional Medicine at the University of Surry and ask for feedback on this.
Best of luck
John
Happy Gilmore says – ’95% of therapists don’t prescribe supplements’
Ever?
I have NEVER experienced a patient informing me that they have seen a nutritional therapist and NOT been prescribed supplements. Thats probably around 70+ consultations, and every one on at least one supplement – usually from Solgar (We Reward Therapists Who Recommend Clients To Us) or some Great Smokies Laboratory tests, recently superceded by the ‘need’ for a YorkTest…
your quote ‘many nutritional therapists are there that are far more prepared then nutritionists or dieticians’ defies belief.
But I guess you need to define what nutritionists are ‘better prepared’ to do? If you mean to practice their extended occasional weekend courses (held over 3 years to make sure you are easily confused with the full time BSc Hons Nutrition degrees at Uni’s like Surrey) and ‘practice’ being a pseudo-dietitian then I guess you’re correct – IONutritionists are great at inferring they’re better qualified than they are. Patrick is the epitome of marketing over qualification.
Now, if you are a nutritional therapist yourself – which I presume you are from your comments as you’re unable to match dietitians knowledge so best defence is offense – then the only people you can be referring to at Surrey are Neil Ward (Patricks supervisor for his defunct MSc) or Emeritus Professor of Clinical Biochemistry Vincent Marks, erstwhile lecturer on ION courses which of course means nothing other than – like many of his ilk- are willing to lecture to whoever is happy to pay an appropriate fee… participation does not equate to endorsement.
Will answer this for the last time as, to be honest, I don’t have time to waste on a blog of people ranting at facts they don’t know
1) I, sincerely, didn’t have any intention to offend you as a dietitian
2) 95% nutritional therapist don’t take a percentage out of the supplements they prescribe, basically they don’t make money out of it, I didn’t say 95% of NT don’t prescribe supplements. Many do, and unfortunately some do too much.
3) Solgar is no good, in my own opinion
4) Great Smokies Lab is Genova Diagnostics now, to be precise, and many of their tests are very reliable, you can’t contradict me on that
5) You are implicitly suggesting I support Holford and ION. Well, surprise, I don’t. Also ION people don’t have access to the MSc in Surrey, FYI. I am talking about those out there, including this blogger and the people he links, who are totally disrespectful of those people who gain BSc in NT, where differential diagnosis, pathophysiology, nutritional therapeutics, etc. are thought.
I am a dietician too, but also a nutritional therapist. My experience has thought me that, in certain occasions, I have met nutritional therapists who were definitely more knowledgeable of subject compared to nutritionists and some dieticians.
This is my opinion from direct experience, I accept your opinion on the basis of your experience.
Regards
John
Moved to off-topic by moderator
It is a pity that the medical profession is collaborating with the rich pharmaceutical companies to keep the truth from the general public. The upright and brave physicians who have a conscience are persecuted for their honesty! Shame on the medicaql profession! It is time that everyone be informed that glyconutrients are the newly discovered simple nutritional sugars that support the immune system enabling the body to repair itself! Thousands of people have used glyconutrients to great health benefits!
Susan Bradley, did you realise that the BMJ link posted above was to an item detailing the reprimand given to a locum
Do you have any clinical evidence to support your claim of health benefits or is your assertion based on your own experience/anecdote or those of others?
Pingback: You & Yours on Barbara Nash and the risks of nutritional therapy Updated « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science
Pingback: Dr Ann Walker removed from Register of Nutrionists
Pingback: Alt Med Societies « jdc325’s Weblog
Pingback: A Tale of Two WorkForces in the Same Workplace: Different Rules for Dietitians and Nutritionists in the NHS? « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science
Pingback: BANT: A Profile « Stuff And Nonsense