Dr. Oz: I'm a diet scam victim too (CNN)

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oz makes it sound like he's an advocate for evidence based medicine instead of the scam artist he is.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Oz makes it sound like he's an advocate for evidence based medicine instead of the scam artist he is.

He knew how he had to try to make himself appear. The knowledgeable expert who's misunderstood and really agrees that scams are shameful, and what a shock, he's even a victim too so he can relate to why he had to testify but he's totally not a perpetrator.

 

[ravdin]

It's not as though Congress itself is a bastion of sound scientific reasoning regarding food issues. They pass countless laws that do far more harm than Dr. Oz ever could, e.g. sugar subsidies or bogus nutritional charts. I have no love for Dr. Oz but he should have told them to eff off.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Good question. I started this thread because it dealt with diet scam issues I felt might belong in Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology section. The issues are multifaceted, and cover a wide range of subject matter.

I defer to you and/or the JREF Forum Moderators to locate this thread for where you/they feel is most appropriate.

Still, where's the science in this thread? Not even a link to a Reader's Digest's article, or even their "health tips". Do those comments about gaining and loosing weight stand as science or just casual conversation?

Is this doctor Oz -I believe he's from HBO's homonymous tv series- saying something remotely related to science in that video?

 

[CosmicDP]

I cut down on my calories, not my kilocalories. It's a thousand times easier and the grams just fall off!

Well, I'm fat because I have a glandular problem. It's with my salivary glands.

I like the cut of your jib!

 

[Woolgatherer]

Is this doctor Oz -I believe he's from HBO's homonymous tv series- saying something remotely related to science in that video?

Mehemet Oz from The Dr. Oz Show

 

[Ernie M]

Still, where's the science in this thread? Not even a link to a Reader's Digest's article, or even their "health tips". Do those comments about gaining and loosing weight stand as science or just casual conversation?

Is this doctor Oz -I believe he's from HBO's homonymous tv series- saying something remotely related to science in that video?

I believe 'science' is integral to the (purported) weight loss products; how the product(s) are supposed to do what's claimed, how products are evaluated and tested, and the apparent promotion of said products by Dr. Mehmet Oz. Dr. Oz holds a Doctor of Medicine degree. A lot of what goes into a medical degree is based on science.

According to wikipedia, Dr. Mehmet Oz^WP first appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show^WP in 2004. I'm not familiar with the HBO television series you mentioned. Subsequent to The Oprah Winfrey Show and other TV programs, Dr. Oz became host of the daytime TV series The Dr. Oz Show, in 2009.

I have the utmost admiration for Dr. Oz pertaining to his his skills and abilities as a cardiothoracic surgeon, some of his personal endeavors such as founding HealthCorps^WP and with limitations, I find Dr. Oz to be a superlative TV personality. Limitations mostly involve pseudoscientific products or services, such as the diet scam issues, and the use of "psychics."

For me, Dr. Mehmet Oz is highly influential and people may listen to his statements and blindly follow them, because they accept that he is a very successful medical doctor, author, and TV personality. But also at issue is the lack of supporting science evidence to some of his statements/claims, and the products/services he promotes. That's were there is a word called iatrogenesis^WP, that I feel TV viewers, and Dr. Oz, should be aware of. Iatrogenesis can mean the unintended event (harm) resulting from medical treatment or advice to patients (I include TV viewers because I feel some viewers will take Dr. Oz's advice without seeking medical help for their specific needs or conditions.)

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Some? I'd venture lots of people. The portrayal of Homer Simpson isn't far off: if it's on TV, it must be so, to lots of people.

 

[grunion]

Sad to see the defenders of woo jump all over McCaskill as a shill of Big Pharma for questioning the Great And Powerful Oz.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Sad to see the defenders of woo jump all over McCaskill as a shill of Big Pharma for questioning the Great And Powerful Oz.

So that's who is behind that damn curtain! A little shrimpy guy with a megaphone.

 

[George 152]

He knew how he had to try to make himself appear. The knowledgeable expert who's misunderstood and really agrees that scams are shameful, and what a shock, he's even a victim too so he can relate to why he had to testify but he's totally not a perpetrator.

Just to think that he was once a medical doctor and now he's anything but

 

[dropzone]

Oz makes it sound like he's an advocate for evidence based medicine instead of the scam artist he is.

He's both. He's a very good cardiothoracic surgeon who brings crystal and aroma therapy people into the operating room. He can cut me, but I'm not paying extra for the woo.

I like the cut of your jib!

I live to serve, but if I'm not careful I may have to start wearing mainsails, not jibs.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I believe 'science' is integral to the (purported) weight loss products; how the product(s) are supposed to do what's claimed, how products are evaluated and tested, and the apparent promotion of said products by Dr. Mehmet Oz. Dr. Oz holds a Doctor of Medicine degree. A lot of what goes into a medical degree is based on science.

...

I understand and agree with what you're saying, but still, the thread is about that Oz guy being a bad boy and not about science.

Some time ago I learnt here about a somewhat famous talkshow hostess engaged in that danger of vaccines meme and she was heavily criticized here. I have to admit that this lady or this Oz chap seem to be pretty unimportant, but distance is talking; spacial distance, language distance and cultural distance.

What I'm saying is this thread is the opposite of Quack Watch when it shouldn't be. If this Oz guy is so dangerous because his public exposition, why isn't there a thread called "Dr. Oz strikes again" criticizing one of his many claims and endorsements, to be followed by another one, and so on. Such a thread would be expected to live forever and burst with science and it'll do the job much better than a bunch of guys agreeing about the bloke being a pain in the derrière and complaining in a chorus.

The value of this forum is at stake. It has suffered recently a blast of quirky threads including petty personal whims, born from curiosity or boredom, like "why -3 by -3 is 9 and not -9" which for me is a motive for banning, not for replies. It shouldn't be a forum for the few doing science, but like science itself it shouldn't allow the majorities to decide what is science either.

 

[Damien Evans]

It is that simple to at least stop gaining weight. I cut many element of my eating, I am stable on weight (well sadly overweight) and not gaining anymore Kg. Eating raw carrot now for example instead of pizza.

Now to durably lose weight, I should keep my diet and do more sport, but sadly it is the part which is not that simple.

But I am pretty sure that barring a *few* rare case, it is something a lot of people could do. But don't out of lazyness.

I'm the other way around. I do plenty of sporting activities, but I eat too much tasty tasty junk food.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

It's not as though Congress itself is a bastion of sound scientific reasoning regarding food issues. They pass countless laws that do far more harm than Dr. Oz ever could, e.g. sugar subsidies or bogus nutritional charts.

There's a movie called, "Bigger, Faster, Stronger", available streaming on Netflix.

Mainly about the use and abuse of anabolic steroids, but also zeros in on the supplement industry, and Congress's role in making it the nearly unregulated mess that it is.

I found it a well done little documentary, worth the watch.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I understand and agree with what you're saying, but still, the thread is about that Oz guy being a bad boy and not about science.

Some time ago I learnt here about a somewhat famous talkshow hostess engaged in that danger of vaccines meme and she was heavily criticized here. I have to admit that this lady or this Oz chap seem to be pretty unimportant, but distance is talking; spacial distance, language distance and cultural distance.

What I'm saying is this thread is the opposite of Quack Watch when it shouldn't be. If this Oz guy is so dangerous because his public exposition, why isn't there a thread called "Dr. Oz strikes again" criticizing one of his many claims and endorsements, to be followed by another one, and so on. Such a thread would be expected to live forever and burst with science and it'll do the job much better than a bunch of guys agreeing about the bloke being a pain in the derrière and complaining in a chorus.

The value of this forum is at stake. It has suffered recently a blast of quirky threads including petty personal whims, born from curiosity or boredom, like "why -3 by -3 is 9 and not -9" which for me is a motive for banning, not for replies. It shouldn't be a forum for the few doing science, but like science itself it shouldn't allow the majorities to decide what is science either.

This thread is about Dr. Oz appearing before a US Senate hearing. There are other Oz threads in this forum where the crap he promotes is discussed.

A major problem with Dr Oz is that he does not understand how science works. He will take one small scientific paper that says, "We studied the effect of GoogaGoola juice in a double-blind test with 67 subjects and found that there was a slight, self-reported improvement in their flexibility," and suggests to the gullible millions in his audience that they should use GoogaGoola juice (at $42 a pint) to get in better shape.

You cannot derive any conclusion from such a small study except, "That's interesting let's investigate further." Six years later, when have a dozen other more expansive experiments have been done, the scientific concensus is that GoogaGoola juice is worthless. In the meantime hundreds of millions have been spent on something useless. Money that could have been spent on something useful.

 

[Ernie M]

Video of the U.S. Senate hearing

“Protecting Consumers from False and Deceptive Advertising of Weight-Loss Products”
Tuesday, June 17 2014 9:30 AM
Russell Senate Office Building - 253

video coverage from U. S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation's Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Insurance

video coverage from C-SPAN (bigger & better image resolution)

United States Senators appearing in hearing:
Senator Richard Blumenthal, Senator Dean Heller, Senator Amy Klobuchar, Senator Claire McCaskill, Senator John R. Thune

Witness Panel 1 (appearing in hearing):
Note: The links containing written testimony are not an exact transcript of the video.

Ms. Mary Koelbel Engle
Associate Director, Division of Advertising Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission
Prepared Statement of the Federal Trade Commission, Mary Koelbel Engle

Dr. Mehmet C. Oz
Chairman and Professor of Surgery, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Host, The Dr. Oz Show
Dr. Oz- Appendix (includes advertising examples)

Dr. Oz Testimony

Dr. C. Lee Peeler
President and Chief Executive Officer, Advertising Self-Regulatory Council 
Executive Vice President, Council of Better Business Bureaus
Testimony of C. Lee Peeler

Mr. Steven M. Mister
President and Chief Executive Officer, Council for Responsible Nutrition
Written Testimony by Steven Mister

Mr. Robert Hatton Haralson IV
Executive Director, TrustInAds.org
Written Testimony of Robert Hatton Haralson IV

Dr. Daniel Fabricant
Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Natural Products Association
Testimony to the Senate

 

[Garrette]

This thread is about Dr. Oz appearing before a US Senate hearing. There are other Oz threads in this forum where the crap he promotes is discussed.

A major problem with Dr Oz is that he does not understand how science works. He will take one small scientific paper that says, "We studied the effect of GoogaGoola juice in a double-blind test with 67 subjects and found that there was a slight, self-reported improvement in their flexibility," and suggests to the gullible millions in his audience that they should use GoogaGoola juice (at $42 a pint) to get in better shape.

You cannot derive any conclusion from such a small study except, "That's interesting let's investigate further." Six years later, when have a dozen other more expansive experiments have been done, the scientific concensus is that GoogaGoola juice is worthless. In the meantime hundreds of millions have been spent on something useless. Money that could have been spent on something useful.

I think he understands perfectly well. I think he is that worst sort of scam artist who uses his knowledge and position not only to peddle what he knows is flim flam but also to do it in such a way that he can conveniently deny wrongdoing, such as he is doing now.

He's smart and slick, and he knows what keeps his show popular and therefore what keeps fame and money coming in.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I think he understands perfectly well. I think he is that worst sort of scam artist who uses his knowledge and position not only to peddle what he knows is flim flam but also to do it in such a way that he can conveniently deny wrongdoing, such as he is doing now.

He's smart and slick, and he knows what keeps his show popular and therefore what keeps fame and money coming in.

You are much more cynical than I.

And I say that in a good way.

 

[grunion]

He does tell a good story, horrific grammar and typos and all, in the document Ernie linked to above. He is a cheerleader for weight loss that is willing to try anything to spread the gospel. The Healthcorps idea sounded like a good one. But I think once Oprah got her hooks in (giving Ozzie the benefit of the doubt here) his woo detector went on the fritz.