Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science

Gimpy and Paul Flynn MP on Patrick Holford

September 16, 2008 · 8 Comments

Gimpy has decided to deal with Patrick Holford on his excellent blog, arguing that the poor quality of Holford’s work is

usually covered by the always-admirable Holfordwatch but Patrick does produce a surfeit…so this time round I think I will deal with it.

Writing about Holford, Paul Flynn argues that:

The media appear to uncritically adore him and lavishes ridiculously generous mock-serious attention to him.

Are there any real journalists about who could ask him the odd searching question? Or is this sort of thing now frowned upon on radio and telly?

Indeed. The assistance with dealing with Holford’s claims is most welcome.

Categories: patrick holford

8 responses so far ↓

  • gimpy // September 16, 2008 at 6:43 pm

    Ahem, that quote about the ‘always admirable Holfordwatch’ is taken from my blog. I’m available for public displays of fawning at weddings, bar mitzvahs, birthday parties…….

    It is great that a Member of Parliament takes a keen interest in such things though.

  • jonhw // September 16, 2008 at 6:51 pm

    Sorry, the fish is obviously doing no good at all for my memory… Revised the post to link you’re your blog and Paul Flynn’s.

  • gimpy // September 16, 2008 at 7:26 pm

    you’re?

    Fish pills aren’t curing your dyslexia either!

    Cheers for the acknowledgment but it’s not necessary. I suspect the elbow of Paul Flynn carries a great deal more power than my puny effort.

  • jonhw // September 16, 2008 at 7:33 pm

    You’re welcome. But just think how bad the grammar would be if I went vegetarian ;)

  • Paul Flynn // September 17, 2008 at 10:38 am

    Grovelling apologies Gimpy. Quotation now attributed and link to your splendid site.

  • Bagsus // September 17, 2008 at 4:43 pm

    Holford is a self- publicist making a lot of money.BUT I am afraid he is more often right than wrong.His wrongs however can be terrible!

  • jonhw // September 17, 2008 at 4:50 pm

    Thanks Paul - I should have remembered Gimpy’s post myself, but it’s good to have it linked.

    Bagsus - Holford is wrong often enough that I would not see him as a useful source of nutritional advice. Of course some of what he says is accurate - even a stopped clock is right twice a day - but I don’t see his advice as reliable.

  • Wulfstan // September 18, 2008 at 12:32 pm

    BUT I am afraid he is more often right than wrong.

    What is your evidence for that or is it just your impression?

    Are people genuinely giving props to Holford for saying what generations of grandmothers have done? “Eat your greens. Eat plenty of fruit and vegetables”?

    Can anyone name 10 things/advances for which Holford is unambiguously responsible (rather than claiming credit) over his 30 year career?

    As ever - props to the man for his self-publicity and business acumen.

Leave a Comment