http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy

I would be happy to engage in debate over the validity of randomized and blinded trials and testing of efficacy of supplements, drugs, psychology…..whatever you want. But you must come up with a rationale argument against the criticism made by the site and then we should be prepared to debate it. But here are the facts as I understand them.

Fact, Holford is not a professor, not in any recognised or validated academic institution.

Fact. Holford has no accredited degree-level or postgraduate-level qualifications in nutrition; he has never taken any exams or been subjected to a critical appraisal of his knowledge of the sort one might expect with qualifications.

Fact, Holford pedals myths and pseudoscience babble (e.g Q-Link). I will offer £10,000 to anyone who can demonstrate any electric current of field or noticable physical effect of QLink through recognised trialing or testing procedures.

Fact many papers and research he refers to are either a)Not from recognised peer reviewed journals or b) have been widely disputed and discredited. c) Fact his books refer to work by Ranjit Chandra who has been revealed as faking data and research.

Fact. Many of his claims are completely unsubstantiated by any credible research.

Fact. He has been a professional pharma or supplements salesman since he graduated he clearly has a vested interest in selling supplements.

Fact. Some supplements do have significant health benefits (Folic Acid anyone). However, Holford did not contribute to this in any form of credible research. This site is not against supplements but against pseudo science that can be easily be shown as complete nonsense from which people are making financial gain. This is fraud. This is your money going to make quacks rich. They are stealing from you.

I have (unlike Mr Holford) a bona-fida Ph.D. OK so my Ph.D was not earth shattering and may have been a bit iffy, but a least I submitted it to credible peer review. Also before anyone asks my Ph.D is in earth sciences and not medicine, nutrition. I have no financial interest in any drugs, pharama etc… Unlike Holford I am not a millionaire made wealthy by selling supplements. Vested interest? Ethics anyone.

I was a childhood asthmatic and modern medicine (steroids) saved my life. What would have happened if Holford had treated my serious attacks. This is not funny this is serious! The myths he peddles could kill someone one day who could have been saved by a treatment that has been subject to normal validation and testing. The media has a responsibility to check the credentials and facts behind the so called experts.

I am happy to publish my name and you can sue me in a court of law. Go on find a lawyer who will do it on legal aid!

Nutrition and health is extrememly complex and all the princpals related to it don’t help make things easier. Most suplements are completely useless. A lot of mineral supplements can contain a poorly absorbed form or maybe a particular form which is highly toxic in small doses compared to another. The DL form of vitamin E is almost completely useless. Manufactures can get a away with a hell of a lot with nutritional suplements. Then like all food, suplements slowly loses its values until your left with a pile of cemented dust.

Then you have areas of nutrition such as Synergy, Biochemical Individuality, Lifestyle Dynamics, Physiological Dynamics and Evolutionary Dynamics.

One hot potatoes which is on this site is anti-oxidants. The theory of anti-oxidants tackling free radicals which sounds all fairy dairy at a “health food store” (I hate that sentence with a passion) but its a complex subject. What makes it worse, is the princpals of synergy and biochemical individuality which makes long trails very hard to accomplish and get a good result.

Real scientists and researchers (i mean real) in the field of nutrition do not need Patrick Holford and his hench men hanging around.

I signed up with ION for a year and received their e-newletters and mags. It was the same old recycled stuff over and over again. When that happens then you know business is getting nice and comfortable.

P.s. sorry for any bad grammer

I have heard Holford speak on a trip to New Zealand, and much of what he said sounded credible.

You make a claim above about dowsing and AK and a couple of others modalities that ” given our current understand of the laws of physics – lack any feasible mechanism of action”.

That statement is in fact false.

If you check out http://www.fishnet.co.nz/ted/papers/laserrsn.htm you will see a mechanism that could potentially explain how those modalities work in some situations.
It is possible for associations to be formed as a by-product of storing and retrieving information as interference patterns (analogous to holograms). If that is in fact how the subconscious human mind stores data (as seems probable), then it is potentially possible for subconscious intuitions derived from patterns present in observations, but not consciously recognised, to be driving these processes.

Keep up the skepticism, and keep an open mind.

Do not trust any “science” backed by money (be it direct as employees, or indirect via grants to institutions, or politically driven (via campaign contributions or other doubly indirect funding means). Trust only what you confirm yourself, or is confirmed by someone you know and trust – and even then, be prepared to re-evaluate in the light of fresh information.

Yours in science and skepticism.
Ted

I was given an article of his to base a university project on, part of which was a critical analysis of the credibility of the piece. The result of extensive research has led me to conclude that ANY evidence which even suggests a positive effect of these treatments is limited and insubstantial at best. Conclusive evidence for the effectiveness for the majority, if not all, of these treatments simply does not exist.

As for the debunking of Patrick Holford, is it really so difficult to understand the need to point out that these theories are deeply flawed and misleading. I for one, am disappointed that so many people buy in to such claims so easily, when most people seem to find it harder to simply eat sensibly and exercise regularly, which has proven and obvious benefits.

There are always one or two instances where something may have ‘worked’, but if a hundred people jump off a building and one survives and values their life more afterwards…it still doesn’t make it a good idea! Unfortunately it is the exceptions rather than the rule that everyone seems to remember.

So thanks for all the information, I don’t care who you are or ar not working for, at the end of the day minimal research proves the truth in what you are saying. I would certainly say you’re doing more good for the world than Patrick Holford is!