Half of Dr. Oz’s medical advice is baseless or wrong...

[Janknitz]

Really? Only half???

[Tatooed Lady]

be careful where you get your advice.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn ... tudy-says/

Guess I need to return the fortune cookies...

[chunkyfrog]

Just consult the Magic Eight Ball for better medical advice---not by much, though!

[palerider]

be careful where you get your advice.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn ... tudy-says/

Guess I need to return the fortune cookies...

might be more reliable, they're certainly not just in it for the money...

I'm a little concerned that the last two fortune cookies I got had nothing in them... *ponder*

[palerider]

Just consult the Magic Eight Ball for better medical advice---not by much, though!

well, taking your advice, I asked:

"is chunkyfrog's advice about magic 8 ball sound" and it said "concentrate and ask again"
so I thought hard:

"is chunkyfrog's advice to ask the magic 8 ball for medical adivce sound/a good idea" and it said

most likely

[kteague]

While I have enjoyed both Dr. Oz and The Doctors from time to time, I don't take anyone's advice as unchanging gospel. Especially when so many show segments appear to be ad placements. However, I have learned things from these shows and have been glad to see some health conditions discussed that get little publicity. Even when advice is from non-entertainment type physicians, we know that "current medical thinking" changes over time, especially in areas of emerging knowledge, and that's not even getting into the role of pharmaceutical companies in the advice many physicians dole out. To say such a large percentage of Dr. Oz's advice is not backed by science, well, that doesn't bother me much. (Disproved by science does bother me IF the knowledge is not new.) Maybe my own successful use of a medical treatment not supported by the mainstream medical community has caused me to appreciate that sometimes those things beyond the norm are actually ahead of the curve. Just because something is not proven to work doesn't mean it is or can be proven not to work. I think that report doesn't leave room for the possibility that some unproven things just might do exactly what they say they do. Such a sticky area, and so open to deception for profit. However, my overall impression of this report is that it paints a worse picture than actually exists.

Now putting my trusty but medically baseless TENS Unit on to quiet my legs so I can get a healthy night's sleep.

[archangle]

While I have enjoyed both Dr. Oz and The Doctors from time to time, I don't take anyone's advice as unchanging gospel. Especially when so many show segments appear to be ad placements. However, I have learned things from these shows and have been glad to see some health conditions discussed that get little publicity. Even when advice is from non-entertainment type physicians, we know that "current medical thinking" changes over time, especially in areas of emerging knowledge, and that's not even getting into the role of pharmaceutical companies in the advice many physicians dole out. To say such a large percentage of Dr. Oz's advice is not backed by science, well, that doesn't bother me much. (Disproved by science does bother me IF the knowledge is not new.) Maybe my own successful use of a medical treatment not supported by the mainstream medical community has caused me to appreciate that sometimes those things beyond the norm are actually ahead of the curve. Just because something is not proven to work doesn't mean it is or can be proven not to work. I think that report doesn't leave room for the possibility that some unproven things just might do exactly what they say they do. Such a sticky area, and so open to deception for profit. However, my overall impression of this report is that it paints a worse picture than actually exists.

Now putting my trusty but medically baseless TENS Unit on to quiet my legs so I can get a healthy night's sleep.

Lots of people have been harmed by quack medicine. Either directly harmed or harmed because they didn't get available "traditional" medicine that would have helped. Ask yourself what's the harm of an ineffective "alternative medicine" treatment for diabetes. Or how may people have been killed because they listened to the antivaxers. Or how many people have had their kids killed because someone else listened to the antivaxers.

We don't need the mainstream media promoting quack medicine.

[49er]

While I have enjoyed both Dr. Oz and The Doctors from time to time, I don't take anyone's advice as unchanging gospel. Especially when so many show segments appear to be ad placements. However, I have learned things from these shows and have been glad to see some health conditions discussed that get little publicity. Even when advice is from non-entertainment type physicians, we know that "current medical thinking" changes over time, especially in areas of emerging knowledge, and that's not even getting into the role of pharmaceutical companies in the advice many physicians dole out. To say such a large percentage of Dr. Oz's advice is not backed by science, well, that doesn't bother me much. (Disproved by science does bother me IF the knowledge is not new.) Maybe my own successful use of a medical treatment not supported by the mainstream medical community has caused me to appreciate that sometimes those things beyond the norm are actually ahead of the curve. Just because something is not proven to work doesn't mean it is or can be proven not to work. I think that report doesn't leave room for the possibility that some unproven things just might do exactly what they say they do. Such a sticky area, and so open to deception for profit. However, my overall impression of this report is that it paints a worse picture than actually exists.

Now putting my trusty but medically baseless TENS Unit on to quiet my legs so I can get a healthy night's sleep.

Lots of people have been harmed by quack medicine. Either directly harmed or harmed because they didn't get available "traditional" medicine that would have helped. Ask yourself what's the harm of an ineffective "alternative medicine" treatment for diabetes. Or how may people have been killed because they listened to the antivaxers. Or how many people have had their kids killed because someone else listened to the antivaxers.

We don't need the mainstream media promoting quack medicine.

If anyone thinks that convention medicine is safe, you might want to look at this synopsis of a play by a woman telling her story of harm. Her story is not unusual:

http://www.madinamerica.com/2014/12/sic ... rs-tedmed/

To make a long short, she suffered depression from birth control pills which is a common reaction. Instead of simply waiting for the symptom to pass, she was referred to a psychiatrist who prescribed antidepressants. She then suffered adverse reaction from them such as hallucinations and was put on antipsychotics. Needless to say, she want through h-ll and when finally, she got well, it was because she got off the psych meds which she never needed in the first place since she was never mentally ill.

Sadly, this situation is not uncommon as doctors like to prescribe meds to deal with side effects from the 1st one. I don't know, it would make more sense to remove the offending drug when someone suffers a horrific adverse reaction but what the heck do I kno.

Many of the drugs that doctors prescribed are based on very biased studies that drug companies have alot of influence on. Google Ben Goldacre, a British physician who has found this out.

Regarding maintream diabetes treatment, it is based on the shoot em up theory by the ADA that takes money from companies like coca cola and other food companies that don't exactly promote the healthiest diets. Many people have found using a high fat, low carb diet, which the ADA shuns, has provided the best success and has been done no medicine or if someone needs it, on a much lower dose.

And all this aside, many of the mainstream providers don't even teach patients how to eat to the meter. I was telling a friend about this who has out of control diabetes and she said none of her health care professionals have ever taught her about this.

On the antidrepressant withdrawal board that I visit, many people end up there because conventional doctors prescribed a horrible tapering regime. Some of the worst cases were people being cold turkeyed off of multiple drugs putting them in big time h-ll. That is damage that can last for years.

Archangle, as you know, I am not a fan of alternative medicine as I think there are alot of ripoff artists in that field also. But I will bet if a totally unbiased study was done which I know is big time fantasyland, that alot more people have been harmed by conventional vs. alternative medicine.

Finally, instead of focusing on Dr. Oz, I wish the media would ask the tough questions as to why foster kids and senior citizens and other vulnerable populations are over diagnosed on psych meds. If you all recall, the issue with the foster kids and psych med prescriptions made the news a few years ago but unfortunately, it has gone away. Business as usual.

49er

[Hose_Head]

So maybe the real question is that if half of Dr Oz's medical advice is baseless or wrong, how is it that he still has a license to practice medicine? Why isn't the medical licensing board (or what ever it is called) taking action? They have an interest and an obligation to do so. Surely, they aren't just sitting back, waiting for a complaint of some kind.

[Krelvin]

So maybe the real question is that if half of Dr Oz's medical advice is baseless or wrong, how is it that he still has a license to practice medicine? Why isn't the medical licensing board (or what ever it is called) taking action? They have an interest and an obligation to do so. Surely, they aren't just sitting back, waiting for a complaint of some kind.

There are articles on the net that address this. The AMA can't enforce its rules, that is up to the States. The State of NY doesn't do anything because

Oz is not practicing medicine when he calls supplements "magic weight loss cures" or "lightening in a bottle" on TV. He also denies any financial stake in the products he features on his show, so the state regulator has no grounds on which to go after him.

The system lets him do it. Really a sham on both him and the system.

One of the many articles: http://www.vox.com/2014/6/24/5838690/wh ... l-a-doctor

[chunkyfrog]

I cannot believe that Dr. Oz has absolutely no financial stake in many of the products he "pimps"
Either the money trail is expertly hidden (we know that is possible), or he is just that gullible.
Or maybe I just don't like him.

[49er]

I will bet Dr. Oz causes alot less harm than the doctors who overm edicate various population groups such as the elderly, foster kids, and veterans with various cocktails of psych meds. Don't misunderstand me, I am not justifying what he does but meanwhile alot worse atrocities are committed in my opinion that deserve alot more scrutiny.

http://www.ibtimes.com/medicating-our-t ... rs-1572217
http://webspecial.mercurynews.com/druggedkids/?page=pt1
http://seniorplanet.org/nursing-homes-a ... -drugging/

[chunkyfrog]

You win!

[Tatooed Lady]

I know worse happens...but SOMEONE needs to be the first to go down.

[chunkyfrog]

D##n anal leakage!