Half of Dr. Oz’s advice is baseless or wrong, Canadian researchers find

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: Domo1

Or promoted.

I mean I like the idea, but where? What's the next step up from irritating jackass? Bothersome donkey? Screw it. I'll take it.

a reply to: Domo1

What's the next step up from irritating jackass?

Sargent irritating jackass? Or perhaps Rear Admiral would be more appropriate? Yeah, that has a nice ring, Rear Admiral Irritating Jackass...

originally posted by: PsychoEmperor
Can't wait to show this to my wife! Stupid oz

HA! I just did that!

She really wasn't too shocked.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: texasgirl

I learned how much fiber was in fruit and how the berries, like strawberries, blueberries, blackberries and raspberries

Case in point, you learned that on dr.oz...



those berries are high in sugars, its not cane sugar but its still sugar, and still cause insulin spikes in your blood sugar, just like refined sugar does, which , if youre trying to loose weight, or you are on certain training or diet programs can destroy your diet........



Just saying...

I didn't say berries were low in sugar but that out of all of the fruits he suggests berries because they're LOWER in sugar. And fiber content is higher in these fruits. Blackberries have 7 grams, as opposed to an apple which has 3 grams.

I didn't learn that fruits had sugar but I did learn that berries were LOWER in sugar. Yes, sugar is sugar but the benefits of consuming berries outweigh the negatives. They're full of antioxidents, have higher fiber to help you feel fuller and eat less. They help protect against inflammation.

Dr. Oz has nutritionists and dieticians on his show regularly on how to incorporate fruits and veggies into your daily meals. I, personally, like how he does this.

So these researchers chose 40 shows and picked out 479 instances of poor advice but they don't list any examples. I'd like to see this report. What, exactly, are they saying is 'baseless and wrong'?

So a Nutrition and Cancer journal lambasted Dr. Oz for his assertion that endive, red onion and sea bass can decrease the likelihood of ovarian cancer by 75%?

This link shows it's possible:

www.drfuhrman.com...


Red onions are better than white onions because they are richer in flavenoids and phenols, cancer-fighting organosulfur compounds which are mostly responsible for cancer-protective effects.

Here's one from American Institute of Cancer:

preventcancer.aicr.org...

Fish, like sea bass, are a source of health-promoting omega 3 fats, which helps lower risk of certain cancers.

More research on red onions as cancer fighting properties, this time from Cornell University:

www.news.cornell.edu...

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: texasgirl

I learned how much fiber was in fruit and how the berries, like strawberries, blueberries, blackberries and raspberries

Case in point, you learned that on dr.oz...



those berries are high in sugars, its not cane sugar but its still sugar, and still cause insulin spikes in your blood sugar, just like refined sugar does, which , if youre trying to loose weight, or you are on certain training or diet programs can destroy your diet........



Just saying...

I don't believe berries cause insulin spikes if you keep it under 2 cups a day. Berries are lower in carbs, a problem that diabetics have. Some fruit can hurt your diet, such as bananas or mangoes. A banana contains as much as 30 carbs and a mango a whopping 50 carbs! But berries are okay to eat for those diabetics who have to watch their blood sugar.

I have never heard of eating berries as a diet destroyer.

healthyeating.sfgate.com...

originally posted by: jude11
While I'm not a fan of OZ we have to ask who is paying for the studies?



Is big pharma behind it? Who else would benefit?



Peace

Dr. Oz put out a petition for people to sign that warns against a new GMO corn and soy product that is being approved by the EPA. He is asking Obama to stop it. My guess is there aren't too many people happy with him right now:

www.facebook.com...

originally posted by: jude11
While I'm not a fan of OZ we have to ask who is paying for the studies?

Is big pharma behind it? Who else would benefit?

Peace

Very good point...I am thinking the same thing...hum...let's see...alternative holistic remedies told about by Dr. Oz as options...now why would big pharma be against that? Oh yeah...they would lose money.

When I watch a show such as Dr. Oz's...sometimes I take notes and do research for myself.

a reply to: caladonea

So never mind the massive boost in sales that these "alternative" snake oil peddlers receive whenever a new quack remedy is promoted by Dr. Oz, it's clearly the work of Big Pharma. Right.

Makes perfect sense.

a reply to: GetHyped

I believe in holistic alternative medicine...when I happen to watch the Dr. Oz show...which is every once in a while...like I said...I take notes and investigate for myself.

Everyone has an opinion...and their own way of doing things and what they believe in...many times I will agree to disagree with someone...but I avidly support their right to believe what they want.

a reply to: caladonea

Why would "Big Pharma" be mad? Do you really think that the big companies like Nature Made that produce these holistic "remedies" aren't part of "Big Pharma?" This stuff is an easier money maker for them than actually making drugs. They don't have to worry about any kind of FDA oversight or trials and as long as they don't make any explicit claims about their product they can rake in the money by telling people like Dr. Oz what to say.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I don't consider Nature Made a holistic product...after all they do use some GMO ingredients...I'm just saying.

I think it would be one thing if he was pushing cheaper alternatives to what other doctors are pushing on patients. But the medical field doesn't work that way. It isn't about the cheaper alternative, or even solving a patients problem. It's about what will make the patient continue to pay the most money possible. After hearing about this, I questioned whether or not he was really a doctor, to which someone told me he's a surgeon, but his lies and half truths kind of discredit his work as a surgeon.


And I can only wonder... He's had other doctors on his show, will they be discredited now due to his lies?

originally posted by: caladonea
a reply to: Xcalibur254

I don't consider Nature Made a holistic product...after all they do use some GMO ingredients...I'm just saying.

Holistic products do not exist, never have and never will, in fact holistic itself is a complete misnomer, really.

I constantly see people who claim to be using holistic diets in trouble with their own bodies, since no 2 people are alike it is comical listening to anyone who claims ANYTHING, really....they are not trained in what actually is going on in the body, trainers included, this is why its changing daily, and everybody loves it.

originally posted by: ANNED
Dr Oz, Dr Drew The Doctors and Dr Phil are all quack's.

time.com...

lol indeed, the 20/20 diet of Dr Phil is joke, all the recipes are all known there isnt any secret from them on how to lose weight those people that did lose weight probably had some secondary options which Phill didnt want to mention.

I don't watch TV much. I don't know much about him. I've only seen him two, maybe three times.

In the segments I saw, he stated emphatically that he was into nutrition and he was for the most part, anti-pharma.
He was totally anti-GMO. He also stated that it was terrible how children were being prescribed anti-depression and
anti-psychotic meds.

I certainly agree with him on those points. Funny how when some of his statements are called into question,
he becomes a quack and a charlatan.

a reply to: Indigent

In this day and age, where illness is viewed as a cash cow by the for profit healthcare, anyone who actually listens to these quacks is crazy to do so, my advice to all: use your common sense, stay away from all the chemicals, anything that isn't from a plant is poison to humans, eat healthy, stay semi active (I don't believe in wearing out one's body and joints through intense exercise), and most of all, smile a lot and try to be happy. It just happens that this particular quack got caught at his own game. Great post!

a reply to: texasgirl

The problem is he stands by without a single concern selling dangerous, untested, unapproved "miracles" for weight loss and other maladies that end up being expensive, worthless and at times dangerous

He's talked about a few simple things you can do to increase health and those simple things were indeed true...but then he backs it all with these products that do more harm than good...at least to the pocket book

Meanwhile, millions of people buy this BS because Oprah slapped her seal of approval on it...it's huckster stuff...snake oil and at time dangerous to those who don't understand it

a reply to: ColeYounger

and if it was just non-GMO and lessening dangerous pills...I'd be with him...until the miracle products come out

Garcinia...miracle product!!! No diet! No exercise! No effort!

practically his words....and it's crap...you'll find a few people it work on...and hope they aren't photoshopped...or exercise like 4 hours a day behind the scenes...and this crap gets shown for what it is

You can hate the FDA and I will back you...but all these miracle products are practically untested by what I think is proper science...And I think that is snake oil at best and dangerous at worst