<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Doctoring the records &#8211; Patrick Holford and Fuel PR</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/</link>
	<description>Ben Goldacre&#039;s Bad Science column from the Guardian and more...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:24:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: diudiu</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-30236</link>
		<dc:creator>diudiu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:12:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-30236</guid>
		<description>&lt;a title=&quot;links of london&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london
&lt;a title=&quot;links london&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links london&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links london 
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london jewellery&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london jewellery&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london jewellery
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london sale&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london sale&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london sale
&lt;a title=&quot;links london sale&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links london sale&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links london sale
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london bracelet&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/bracelets.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london bracelet&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london bracelet
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london charms&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/charms.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london charms&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london charms
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london necklace&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/necklaces.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london necklace&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london necklace
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london bangle&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/bangles.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london bangle&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london bangle
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london earrings&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/earrings.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london earrings&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london earrings
&lt;a title=&quot;links of london ring&quot; href=&quot;http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/rings.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;links of london ring&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; links of london ring</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a title="links of london" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london</strong></a> links of london<br />
<a title="links london" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>links london</strong></a> links london<br />
<a title="links of london jewellery" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london jewellery</strong></a> links of london jewellery<br />
<a title="links of london sale" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london sale</strong></a> links of london sale<br />
<a title="links london sale" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>links london sale</strong></a> links london sale<br />
<a title="links of london bracelet" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/bracelets.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london bracelet</strong></a> links of london bracelet<br />
<a title="links of london charms" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/charms.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london charms</strong></a> links of london charms<br />
<a title="links of london necklace" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/necklaces.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london necklace</strong></a> links of london necklace<br />
<a title="links of london bangle" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/bangles.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london bangle</strong></a> links of london bangle<br />
<a title="links of london earrings" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/earrings.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london earrings</strong></a> links of london earrings<br />
<a title="links of london ring" href="http://www.linksoflondonsale.com/rings.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>links of london ring</strong></a> links of london ring</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: used to be jdc</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10330</link>
		<dc:creator>used to be jdc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2007 08:14:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10330</guid>
		<description>Ben - he hasn&#039;t got time to debate you, he&#039;s too busy selling Â£19 tickets for seminars.
http://www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1704&amp;inc=det
Apparently, &quot;There have been some fascinating quantum leaps in our understanding of how to maximise mental performance over the last year&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ben &#8211; he hasn&#8217;t got time to debate you, he&#8217;s too busy selling Â£19 tickets for seminars.<br />
<a href="http://www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1704&#038;inc=det" rel="nofollow">www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1704&#038;inc=det</a><br />
Apparently, &#8220;There have been some fascinating quantum leaps in our understanding of how to maximise mental performance over the last year&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evidencebasedeating</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10239</link>
		<dc:creator>evidencebasedeating</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 23:19:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10239</guid>
		<description>listen to the evidence!
BBC R4 Womans Hour today concluded a series of articles promoting nutritional myths given daily by Suzi Grant, a &#039;nutritional therapist&#039; and &#039;BANT&#039; accredited member. A showcase piece of how little nutritional therapists know. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/ram/2007_05_fri_03.ram</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>listen to the evidence!<br />
BBC R4 Womans Hour today concluded a series of articles promoting nutritional myths given daily by Suzi Grant, a &#8216;nutritional therapist&#8217; and &#8216;BANT&#8217; accredited member. A showcase piece of how little nutritional therapists know. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/ram/2007_05_fri_03.ram" rel="nofollow">www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/ram/2007_05_fri_03.ram</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pv</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10102</link>
		<dc:creator>pv</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 13:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10102</guid>
		<description>Smacks of desperation by Mr Holford and his &quot;people&quot;. Is he so afraid his reputation and business will go down the toilet if he is exposed? Doesn&#039;t seem unlikely to me because so much of his success, along with that of the obnoxious McTeeth, is based on his being in favour with the meeja. And if anyone is fickle, the meeja certainly is (are)!
As the the recent Big Brother debacle has shown, things are not so secure in the vacuous world of media celebrity. If things get too uncomfortable, if he finds himself and his nutritional expertise to be exposed for the sham is appears to be, might he not find himself slightly out of favour and occupying the ejector seat on the media gravy train?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smacks of desperation by Mr Holford and his &#8220;people&#8221;. Is he so afraid his reputation and business will go down the toilet if he is exposed? Doesn&#8217;t seem unlikely to me because so much of his success, along with that of the obnoxious McTeeth, is based on his being in favour with the meeja. And if anyone is fickle, the meeja certainly is (are)!<br />
As the the recent Big Brother debacle has shown, things are not so secure in the vacuous world of media celebrity. If things get too uncomfortable, if he finds himself and his nutritional expertise to be exposed for the sham is appears to be, might he not find himself slightly out of favour and occupying the ejector seat on the media gravy train?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: used to be jdc</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10098</link>
		<dc:creator>used to be jdc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 11:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10098</guid>
		<description>Ignorant people and stupid people are taken in by Holford. I&#039;m both ignorant and stupid and consequently I was taken in quite easily. Plus if you want to believe in something it is very easy to convince yourself it&#039;s true (just ignore any evidence that doesn&#039;t fit your point of view).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ignorant people and stupid people are taken in by Holford. I&#8217;m both ignorant and stupid and consequently I was taken in quite easily. Plus if you want to believe in something it is very easy to convince yourself it&#8217;s true (just ignore any evidence that doesn&#8217;t fit your point of view).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evidencebasedeating</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10095</link>
		<dc:creator>evidencebasedeating</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:46:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10095</guid>
		<description>Whatever makes you consider ION supporters,and the &#039;therapists&#039; to be in any way scientific  - or even knowledgeable to the variances of nutritional theory? If they truly had any grounded knowledge in the subject  and the current level of (bona fide) evidence they wouldn&#039;t be Patrick supporters, being able to deconstruct his sweeping inaccurate statements on nutrition immediately.

Lets examine a current example- this time int he the HOLFORD (TM) LOW GL DIET - Patrick states that if you want to &#039;optimise&#039; GL - you need HCA supplements - er, NO, Patrick - you don&#039;t. But don&#039;t let excellent research by Dr Stephen Heymsfield, a REAL world renowned leading clinical nutritionist specialising in energy expenditure (at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/280/18/1596, and oodles of other similar references) get in the way of your pseudomedical recommendations. Its surprising that Patrick relies so much on pills for his &#039;Optimum Nutrition&#039; - seeing as another recent book vilifies the &#039;Big Pharma&#039; pill-popping approach to dealing with modern illnesses...
Nay, Patricks supporters are usually middle aged, affluent  and educated (but not in nutrition) females, usually with some tragic experiences of life/ health/ other, trauma who have suddenly seen the light and paid the (therapist/ supplement company) price and have been taken in with the Lineker Looks - and the fact he is always pictured about to eat some tempting food (funny how you never see a picture of him actually taking a bite out of that damned strawberry - perhaps its just too toxic - and better leave it to the supplements for nutritional benefit). 

Think blonded females with borderline eating disorders and gym bunny tendencies, with little darlings just desperate to get into a selected entry school, and you&#039;ve got the genre of Patricks People. Guess they aren&#039;t drawn to your serious Oxbridge Ninja medical status, Ben. Damned if they can make their pretty little brain cells ponder the big (nutritional) science arguments....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whatever makes you consider ION supporters,and the &#8216;therapists&#8217; to be in any way scientific  &#8211; or even knowledgeable to the variances of nutritional theory? If they truly had any grounded knowledge in the subject  and the current level of (bona fide) evidence they wouldn&#8217;t be Patrick supporters, being able to deconstruct his sweeping inaccurate statements on nutrition immediately.</p>
<p>Lets examine a current example- this time int he the HOLFORD (TM) LOW GL DIET &#8211; Patrick states that if you want to &#8216;optimise&#8217; GL &#8211; you need HCA supplements &#8211; er, NO, Patrick &#8211; you don&#8217;t. But don&#8217;t let excellent research by Dr Stephen Heymsfield, a REAL world renowned leading clinical nutritionist specialising in energy expenditure (at <a href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/280/18/1596" rel="nofollow">jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/280/18/1596</a>, and oodles of other similar references) get in the way of your pseudomedical recommendations. Its surprising that Patrick relies so much on pills for his &#8216;Optimum Nutrition&#8217; &#8211; seeing as another recent book vilifies the &#8216;Big Pharma&#8217; pill-popping approach to dealing with modern illnesses&#8230;<br />
Nay, Patricks supporters are usually middle aged, affluent  and educated (but not in nutrition) females, usually with some tragic experiences of life/ health/ other, trauma who have suddenly seen the light and paid the (therapist/ supplement company) price and have been taken in with the Lineker Looks &#8211; and the fact he is always pictured about to eat some tempting food (funny how you never see a picture of him actually taking a bite out of that damned strawberry &#8211; perhaps its just too toxic &#8211; and better leave it to the supplements for nutritional benefit). </p>
<p>Think blonded females with borderline eating disorders and gym bunny tendencies, with little darlings just desperate to get into a selected entry school, and you&#8217;ve got the genre of Patricks People. Guess they aren&#8217;t drawn to your serious Oxbridge Ninja medical status, Ben. Damned if they can make their pretty little brain cells ponder the big (nutritional) science arguments&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr Aust</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10094</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr Aust</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10094</guid>
		<description>Have you considered threatening them with M&#039;learned Friends to get them to take down their &quot;he refused to debate us&quot; line from their website, Ben, since it is clearly untrue? Aren&#039;t they impugning your reputation, and so on?

Or how about this - do a Michael Moore, turn up at the IoN with a film crew some day when you know Paddy baby is in and ask him to debate, on camera, including why he is saying you wouldn&#039;t debate him. Then send the film to Tonight with Trevor McDonald.

Seem to remember Brian Deer once tried to &quot;doorstep&quot; Andrew Wakefield at a conference, but apart from that I can&#039;t think of any obvious examples of putting BadSciencers on the spot. . Madeleine Portwood of Durham &quot;fame&quot; is another one crying out to be doorstepped, since she has &quot;gone dark&quot; every time Ben has tried to ask her anything</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have you considered threatening them with M&#8217;learned Friends to get them to take down their &#8220;he refused to debate us&#8221; line from their website, Ben, since it is clearly untrue? Aren&#8217;t they impugning your reputation, and so on?</p>
<p>Or how about this &#8211; do a Michael Moore, turn up at the IoN with a film crew some day when you know Paddy baby is in and ask him to debate, on camera, including why he is saying you wouldn&#8217;t debate him. Then send the film to Tonight with Trevor McDonald.</p>
<p>Seem to remember Brian Deer once tried to &#8220;doorstep&#8221; Andrew Wakefield at a conference, but apart from that I can&#8217;t think of any obvious examples of putting BadSciencers on the spot. . Madeleine Portwood of Durham &#8220;fame&#8221; is another one crying out to be doorstepped, since she has &#8220;gone dark&#8221; every time Ben has tried to ask her anything</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barnacle Bill</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10089</link>
		<dc:creator>Barnacle Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10089</guid>
		<description>Holford? Is that Holford in the photo? It looks more like that ex footballer who markets crisps and commentates on football matches.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Holford? Is that Holford in the photo? It looks more like that ex footballer who markets crisps and commentates on football matches.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Goldacre</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10086</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:55:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10086</guid>
		<description>&quot;IT&#039;S PATHETIC THAT YOU WON&#039;T DEBATE HOLFORD YOU HATEFUL LITTLE MAN&quot;

i must say, i&#039;d never really given much thought to the &quot;Institute for Optimum Nutrition&quot; before this, but what seems to me like complicity, ignoring emails etc, has certainly alerted me to the possibility that they may be a little different to most other &quot;.ac.uk&quot; institutions. i honestly can&#039;t think of a proper college or university that would just ignore emails for a week like that. like i say, absolutely bizarre. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;IT&#8217;S PATHETIC THAT YOU WON&#8217;T DEBATE HOLFORD YOU HATEFUL LITTLE MAN&#8221;</p>
<p>i must say, i&#8217;d never really given much thought to the &#8220;Institute for Optimum Nutrition&#8221; before this, but what seems to me like complicity, ignoring emails etc, has certainly alerted me to the possibility that they may be a little different to most other &#8220;.ac.uk&#8221; institutions. i honestly can&#8217;t think of a proper college or university that would just ignore emails for a week like that. like i say, absolutely bizarre.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Goldacre</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10085</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:54:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10085</guid>
		<description>hahahahahhahaaaaaaa the abuse from holford&#039;s fans is trickling in

&lt;i&gt;I see from Patrick Holford&#039;s site that you have refused to debate him. It is obvious that you don&#039;t know what you are talking about with nutrition, Patrick Holford is one of the world&#039;s leading experts and he has very clearly shown the flaws in your so-called science. Now that it has been proved that you are wrong I have no doubt you will never debate him. You are nothing but a coward.&lt;/i&gt;

this is the most childish thing anyone has ever done, i&#039;ve been through all my past emails with holford, i&#039;ve been through my past emails with ION, i&#039;ve found one thread, he suggested a debate, &lt;b&gt;i said yes&lt;/b&gt;, he never got back to me. 

i have tried to find out what he&#039;s on about here. i&#039;ve emailed him and his PR, twice, and all the ION people I can think of, david.nicolson@ion.ac.uk, reception@ion.ac.uk, aliya.dallara@ion.ac.uk, marvalyn.smith@ion.ac.uk, it&#039;s a week later now, not one single one of them has had the gumption to reply. 

absolutely bizarre.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hahahahahhahaaaaaaa the abuse from holford&#8217;s fans is trickling in</p>
<p><i>I see from Patrick Holford&#8217;s site that you have refused to debate him. It is obvious that you don&#8217;t know what you are talking about with nutrition, Patrick Holford is one of the world&#8217;s leading experts and he has very clearly shown the flaws in your so-called science. Now that it has been proved that you are wrong I have no doubt you will never debate him. You are nothing but a coward.</i></p>
<p>this is the most childish thing anyone has ever done, i&#8217;ve been through all my past emails with holford, i&#8217;ve been through my past emails with ION, i&#8217;ve found one thread, he suggested a debate, <b>i said yes</b>, he never got back to me. </p>
<p>i have tried to find out what he&#8217;s on about here. i&#8217;ve emailed him and his PR, twice, and all the ION people I can think of, <a href="mailto:david.nicolson@ion.ac.uk">david.nicolson@ion.ac.uk</a>, <a href="mailto:reception@ion.ac.uk">reception@ion.ac.uk</a>, <a href="mailto:aliya.dallara@ion.ac.uk">aliya.dallara@ion.ac.uk</a>, <a href="mailto:marvalyn.smith@ion.ac.uk">marvalyn.smith@ion.ac.uk</a>, it&#8217;s a week later now, not one single one of them has had the gumption to reply. </p>
<p>absolutely bizarre.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: used to be jdc</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10073</link>
		<dc:creator>used to be jdc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10073</guid>
		<description>Maybe they&#039;re just really busy. *cough*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe they&#8217;re just really busy. *cough*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Goldacre</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10032</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:36:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10032</guid>
		<description>i&#039;ve emailed holford, his PR, the &quot;Institute for Optimum Nutritioni&quot; front desk, and three leading people from the ION, to ask about this invitation that i&#039;ve failed to take up. 

at least two days later and not one single one of them has replied to me. 

bizarre.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i&#8217;ve emailed holford, his PR, the &#8220;Institute for Optimum Nutritioni&#8221; front desk, and three leading people from the ION, to ask about this invitation that i&#8217;ve failed to take up. </p>
<p>at least two days later and not one single one of them has replied to me. </p>
<p>bizarre.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Goldacre</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10028</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2007 23:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10028</guid>
		<description>ahahahah i bet you&#039;re right, it is a data collection exercise. that&#039;s so so funny.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ahahahah i bet you&#8217;re right, it is a data collection exercise. that&#8217;s so so funny.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evidencebasedeating</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10027</link>
		<dc:creator>evidencebasedeating</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2007 23:28:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10027</guid>
		<description>Holfords website fails to mention the email alert inviting paranoid parents to complete the FREE!!!! online questionnaire about your childs diet and if you&#039;re quick enough you&#039;ll be one of the 5000 to receive a FREE!!!! pack of Equazen. 

first the Optimum Nutrition Bible.....

then the feeding of the 5000 - er, with something fishy!

The Bible allegories just keep on coming.
next ?

the nature of the beast suggests a big PR puff! EXPERT NUTRITIONIST has DATA on the BIGGEST SURVEY OF OUR KIDS DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE caused by POOR DIET,  and contributing to POOR RESULTS. 

Guess it&#039;l be launched around Easter  - just in time to get the GCSE brigade rushing for the supplements..... watch this space!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Holfords website fails to mention the email alert inviting paranoid parents to complete the FREE!!!! online questionnaire about your childs diet and if you&#8217;re quick enough you&#8217;ll be one of the 5000 to receive a FREE!!!! pack of Equazen. </p>
<p>first the Optimum Nutrition Bible&#8230;..</p>
<p>then the feeding of the 5000 &#8211; er, with something fishy!</p>
<p>The Bible allegories just keep on coming.<br />
next ?</p>
<p>the nature of the beast suggests a big PR puff! EXPERT NUTRITIONIST has DATA on the BIGGEST SURVEY OF OUR KIDS DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE caused by POOR DIET,  and contributing to POOR RESULTS. </p>
<p>Guess it&#8217;l be launched around Easter  &#8211; just in time to get the GCSE brigade rushing for the supplements&#8230;.. watch this space!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Goldacre</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10012</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10012</guid>
		<description>yeh it&#039;s pretty funny isnt it, especially where Holford says: 

&quot;Both ION and I have previously invited Goldacre to debate the science behind any nutritional claims he wants to take issue with. So far he has not accepted the challenge&quot;

he offered

&lt;strong&gt;and i said yes.

&lt;/strong&gt;as far i can tell from searching my emails he never got back to me.  

i&#039;ve asked him to confirm that i chickened out as he says - since all the evidence i can find says i was up for it - but he hasn&#039;t even replied.

what a total loser.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yeh it&#8217;s pretty funny isnt it, especially where Holford says: </p>
<p>&#8220;Both ION and I have previously invited Goldacre to debate the science behind any nutritional claims he wants to take issue with. So far he has not accepted the challenge&#8221;</p>
<p>he offered</p>
<p><strong>and i said yes.</p>
<p></strong>as far i can tell from searching my emails he never got back to me.  </p>
<p>i&#8217;ve asked him to confirm that i chickened out as he says &#8211; since all the evidence i can find says i was up for it &#8211; but he hasn&#8217;t even replied.</p>
<p>what a total loser.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stever</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10011</link>
		<dc:creator>stever</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:10:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10011</guid>
		<description>holford says this:


&quot;In Ben Goldacreâ€™s column on Saturday he once again reiterates a statement in one of my books that â€˜AZT is potentially harmful and proving less effective than vitamin Câ€™. What he fails to mention is that the author of the research I referred to - Dr Raxit Jariwalla â€“ wrote to the Guardian (20/1/05) the last time Goldacre made this claim to confirm that my statement is correct on the basis of two studies on HIV infected cells, thus he is guilty, once again in misleading readers. The real crime here is that no full scale human trials have been funded on vitamin C to follow up Jariwallaâ€™s important finding because it is non-patentable and hence not profitable.

 

Goldacre, who only left university in 1995, further accuses me of being unqualified to call myself a nutritionist. I have spent the last thirty years researching, teaching, writing and practising nutrition. I am not sure what else I can call myself. I did not confer my own diploma, as he states. The Board of Trustees of the Institute for Optimum Nutrition (ION), which is an educational trust that I founded in 1984, awarded me an honorary diploma. I am not, nor have ever been on the Board of Trustees. ION offers a fully accredited Foundation Degree in Nutritional Therapy, upgradeable to a BSc with a further yearâ€™s extra study. The British Association of Nutritional Therapy, which is the self-regulating organisation that represents this profession, made me an Honorary Fellow. I am unclear about his qualifications for dismissing these professional standards or his patronising comment that anyone can call themselves a nutritionist.

 

Both ION and I have previously invited Goldacre to debate the science behind any nutritional claims he wants to take issue with. So far he has not accepted the challenge, seeming to prefer to use his column to defame health professionals with a non-drug approach, rather than expose the numerous examples of distorted and poor quality research used to support the use of drugs whose side effects kill more than 10,000 people a year in the UK.&quot;


you could do a point by point rebuttal of all the silliness in this letter but i dont suppose its really worth it. The last point is especially ludicrous. 

Id be interested to know if ben has actually had any invites to debates from Holford. 

NB. on the same page we are offered: 

 

 



Join 100% Health
100% Health Benefits
Forgotten your login details?
Do you want to

    * Increase energy
    * Lose weight
    * Boost your immunity
    * Improve your digestion
    * Balance hormones
    * Superb skin
    * Improve your mood
    * Enhance memory &amp; concentration
    * Say no to cancer
    * Say no to heart disease
    * Say no to alzheimer&#039;s
    * Say no to arthritis
    * Improve Your Sex Life/Drive

Terms and Conditions &#124; Privacy Policy &#124; About this site &#124; Print this pagePrint This Page
Â© Copyright 2007 Holford and Associates. A</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>holford says this:</p>
<p>&#8220;In Ben Goldacreâ€™s column on Saturday he once again reiterates a statement in one of my books that â€˜AZT is potentially harmful and proving less effective than vitamin Câ€™. What he fails to mention is that the author of the research I referred to &#8211; Dr Raxit Jariwalla â€“ wrote to the Guardian (20/1/05) the last time Goldacre made this claim to confirm that my statement is correct on the basis of two studies on HIV infected cells, thus he is guilty, once again in misleading readers. The real crime here is that no full scale human trials have been funded on vitamin C to follow up Jariwallaâ€™s important finding because it is non-patentable and hence not profitable.</p>
<p>Goldacre, who only left university in 1995, further accuses me of being unqualified to call myself a nutritionist. I have spent the last thirty years researching, teaching, writing and practising nutrition. I am not sure what else I can call myself. I did not confer my own diploma, as he states. The Board of Trustees of the Institute for Optimum Nutrition (ION), which is an educational trust that I founded in 1984, awarded me an honorary diploma. I am not, nor have ever been on the Board of Trustees. ION offers a fully accredited Foundation Degree in Nutritional Therapy, upgradeable to a BSc with a further yearâ€™s extra study. The British Association of Nutritional Therapy, which is the self-regulating organisation that represents this profession, made me an Honorary Fellow. I am unclear about his qualifications for dismissing these professional standards or his patronising comment that anyone can call themselves a nutritionist.</p>
<p>Both ION and I have previously invited Goldacre to debate the science behind any nutritional claims he wants to take issue with. So far he has not accepted the challenge, seeming to prefer to use his column to defame health professionals with a non-drug approach, rather than expose the numerous examples of distorted and poor quality research used to support the use of drugs whose side effects kill more than 10,000 people a year in the UK.&#8221;</p>
<p>you could do a point by point rebuttal of all the silliness in this letter but i dont suppose its really worth it. The last point is especially ludicrous. </p>
<p>Id be interested to know if ben has actually had any invites to debates from Holford. </p>
<p>NB. on the same page we are offered: </p>
<p>Join 100% Health<br />
100% Health Benefits<br />
Forgotten your login details?<br />
Do you want to</p>
<p>    * Increase energy<br />
    * Lose weight<br />
    * Boost your immunity<br />
    * Improve your digestion<br />
    * Balance hormones<br />
    * Superb skin<br />
    * Improve your mood<br />
    * Enhance memory &amp; concentration<br />
    * Say no to cancer<br />
    * Say no to heart disease<br />
    * Say no to alzheimer&#8217;s<br />
    * Say no to arthritis<br />
    * Improve Your Sex Life/Drive</p>
<p>Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | About this site | Print this pagePrint This Page<br />
Â© Copyright 2007 Holford and Associates. A</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr Aust</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10007</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr Aust</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10007</guid>
		<description>Well, of course the Nutri-balls fraternity&#039;s income depends on their &quot;public credibility&quot; - i.e. that their buddies in Meejah-land keep booking them on TV, and treating them as authorities.. So they will of course try to refute, or gag, criticism. A letter to the paper is fair right of response - better that than the threatening lawyers&#039; letters some people have got when they diss Ms McKeith.  

What annoys me is that the criticism always comes just from courageous individual dieticians, doctors or scientists - it takes guts to speak out when you are aware that people like TAPL are quick to get on the phone to M&#039;Learned Friends -  and not the medical or scientific establishment. It should be the British Dietetic Association or similar professional body that should be speaking out about things like the Durham Nonsense, or the fatuous Woo and fleecing of the public promoted by the Nutri-balls gang. Not just the odd individual.

I suspect the professional bodies keep shtum for a range of reasons: &quot;giving them the oxygen of publicity&quot;, not wanting to &quot;come out&quot; as slagging media-darling types, It&#039;ll all just go away, &quot;some of the advice is sensible&quot; etc. etc. But I think all the professional associations and learned societies are far too craven about this.

What would be so hard about a factual statement from the Brit Dietetic Association pointing out that, while parts of the advice given by Holford, McK et al.might be sound, many also promote, or are associated with, loads of thoroughly discredited nonsense, they have no proper qualifications or real professional accreditation in the field they profess to be expert in etc etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, of course the Nutri-balls fraternity&#8217;s income depends on their &#8220;public credibility&#8221; &#8211; i.e. that their buddies in Meejah-land keep booking them on TV, and treating them as authorities.. So they will of course try to refute, or gag, criticism. A letter to the paper is fair right of response &#8211; better that than the threatening lawyers&#8217; letters some people have got when they diss Ms McKeith.  </p>
<p>What annoys me is that the criticism always comes just from courageous individual dieticians, doctors or scientists &#8211; it takes guts to speak out when you are aware that people like TAPL are quick to get on the phone to M&#8217;Learned Friends &#8211;  and not the medical or scientific establishment. It should be the British Dietetic Association or similar professional body that should be speaking out about things like the Durham Nonsense, or the fatuous Woo and fleecing of the public promoted by the Nutri-balls gang. Not just the odd individual.</p>
<p>I suspect the professional bodies keep shtum for a range of reasons: &#8220;giving them the oxygen of publicity&#8221;, not wanting to &#8220;come out&#8221; as slagging media-darling types, It&#8217;ll all just go away, &#8220;some of the advice is sensible&#8221; etc. etc. But I think all the professional associations and learned societies are far too craven about this.</p>
<p>What would be so hard about a factual statement from the Brit Dietetic Association pointing out that, while parts of the advice given by Holford, McK et al.might be sound, many also promote, or are associated with, loads of thoroughly discredited nonsense, they have no proper qualifications or real professional accreditation in the field they profess to be expert in etc etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evidencebasedeating</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10005</link>
		<dc:creator>evidencebasedeating</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 01:12:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10005</guid>
		<description>more doctoring

seems that the link in post #21 regarding dodgy diet gurus and Food for the Brain &#039;trial that is not research&#039; seems mysteriously to have fallen off the Indy&#039;s website into the Internet equivalent of a black hole. Thank goodness for Bens posting of the full text...
How fortunate for Mr Holford. His peeved comments about the dietitian being &#039;professionally jealous&#039; of his self-styled qualification/ dietary interventions/ &#039;whatever &#039;is now removed from public scrutiny, whilst he can continue to undermine the dietitian (called Catherine Collins) on his website.  Er - just how professional is that Mr Holford. And The Independent. It is. ....Really??

In Response To The Article Titled â€˜Doctors Warn Against Food Fad Dangersâ€™

The following letter has been sent to the editor of the Independent on Sunday for publication:

 

Dear Sir

 

Re: IoS, 7th January 2007 â€“ Doctors Warn Against Food Fad Dangers

 

I write in response to the article titled â€˜Doctors warn against food fad dangersâ€™ in last Sundayâ€™s paper.

 

This was a British Dietetic Association-led article expressing concern about people adopting â€˜faddie dietsâ€™ and it took, as an example, commentary from Catherine Collins about one child in a large school project in which I am involved.  She was quoted as being â€œextremely concernedâ€ about the weight loss of an autistic child. 

 

I wish to object strongly to the comments made, which were incorrect and misleading to the reader, and would like to set the record straight with the true facts of this particular case.

 

In the article Catherine Collins claims that the autistic child â€˜suffered sleep problems and her weight dropped as a result of the advice Mr Holford gaveâ€™ and that â€˜her parents were told to remove soya milk and cow&#039;s milk from her dietâ€™. In fact, before we even started this project, the child had been diagnosed by her doctors as milk allergic and was already on a dairy-free diet, additionally refusing to have soya milk. She was also a very poor and fussy eater and was sleeping very little, waking up throughout the night. Consequently, Ms Collins is utterly wrong to claim I restricted the girlâ€™s diet by elminating cow&#039;s and soya milk.

 

Since the project started we have expanded the foods sheâ€™ll eat, improved her diet and given her supplements.  As a result of our intervention she is now less hyperactive, sleeping much better, has reduced her asthma and consequently her need for asthma medication.

 

Behaviour-wise she has, on independent behavioural tests, made significant improvements in her ADHD, social difficulties, shyness and anxiety. Her mother is extremely pleased with the results. â€œBefore she woke up a lot in the night. Now she sleeps the whole night without waking.â€ she says. â€œShe is behaving better and has calmed down a lot. She is more confident and independent. Her asthma has improved a lot. She doesnâ€™t real cough or wheeze anymore. Her health is better. She hasnâ€™t had a cold for a long time. Iâ€™m not worried about her weight. I think the Eye Q essential fats and the other supplements helped. I donâ€™t give her Weetabix anymore. Iâ€™ve noticed she gets very hyperactive.â€ Her psychiatrist actually called us to find out what specifically we had been doing to bring about these obvious improvements.

 

The temporary weight loss may have occurred when we agreed, with her dietician, to put her on a gluten-free diet following an IgG food intolerance test which identified that she was gluten sensitive. Unfortunately she wouldnâ€™t eat the gluten-free options so we put her back on pasta, for example, which she would eat. Wheat gluten and dairy allergy is quite common in autistic children. She has since regained the weight she lost.

 

Catherine Collins, the accusing dietician, is not the girlâ€™s dietician and, as far as we know, has never met her, nor is in any way involved with the school or with this project and therefore is really not in a position to have an informed opinion. The results of the project, which is proving highly successful, can be found on our website.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Patrick Holford â€“ Food for the Brain Foundation</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>more doctoring</p>
<p>seems that the link in post #21 regarding dodgy diet gurus and Food for the Brain &#8216;trial that is not research&#8217; seems mysteriously to have fallen off the Indy&#8217;s website into the Internet equivalent of a black hole. Thank goodness for Bens posting of the full text&#8230;<br />
How fortunate for Mr Holford. His peeved comments about the dietitian being &#8216;professionally jealous&#8217; of his self-styled qualification/ dietary interventions/ &#8216;whatever &#8216;is now removed from public scrutiny, whilst he can continue to undermine the dietitian (called Catherine Collins) on his website.  Er &#8211; just how professional is that Mr Holford. And The Independent. It is. &#8230;.Really??</p>
<p>In Response To The Article Titled â€˜Doctors Warn Against Food Fad Dangersâ€™</p>
<p>The following letter has been sent to the editor of the Independent on Sunday for publication:</p>
<p>Dear Sir</p>
<p>Re: IoS, 7th January 2007 â€“ Doctors Warn Against Food Fad Dangers</p>
<p>I write in response to the article titled â€˜Doctors warn against food fad dangersâ€™ in last Sundayâ€™s paper.</p>
<p>This was a British Dietetic Association-led article expressing concern about people adopting â€˜faddie dietsâ€™ and it took, as an example, commentary from Catherine Collins about one child in a large school project in which I am involved.  She was quoted as being â€œextremely concernedâ€ about the weight loss of an autistic child. </p>
<p>I wish to object strongly to the comments made, which were incorrect and misleading to the reader, and would like to set the record straight with the true facts of this particular case.</p>
<p>In the article Catherine Collins claims that the autistic child â€˜suffered sleep problems and her weight dropped as a result of the advice Mr Holford gaveâ€™ and that â€˜her parents were told to remove soya milk and cow&#8217;s milk from her dietâ€™. In fact, before we even started this project, the child had been diagnosed by her doctors as milk allergic and was already on a dairy-free diet, additionally refusing to have soya milk. She was also a very poor and fussy eater and was sleeping very little, waking up throughout the night. Consequently, Ms Collins is utterly wrong to claim I restricted the girlâ€™s diet by elminating cow&#8217;s and soya milk.</p>
<p>Since the project started we have expanded the foods sheâ€™ll eat, improved her diet and given her supplements.  As a result of our intervention she is now less hyperactive, sleeping much better, has reduced her asthma and consequently her need for asthma medication.</p>
<p>Behaviour-wise she has, on independent behavioural tests, made significant improvements in her ADHD, social difficulties, shyness and anxiety. Her mother is extremely pleased with the results. â€œBefore she woke up a lot in the night. Now she sleeps the whole night without waking.â€ she says. â€œShe is behaving better and has calmed down a lot. She is more confident and independent. Her asthma has improved a lot. She doesnâ€™t real cough or wheeze anymore. Her health is better. She hasnâ€™t had a cold for a long time. Iâ€™m not worried about her weight. I think the Eye Q essential fats and the other supplements helped. I donâ€™t give her Weetabix anymore. Iâ€™ve noticed she gets very hyperactive.â€ Her psychiatrist actually called us to find out what specifically we had been doing to bring about these obvious improvements.</p>
<p>The temporary weight loss may have occurred when we agreed, with her dietician, to put her on a gluten-free diet following an IgG food intolerance test which identified that she was gluten sensitive. Unfortunately she wouldnâ€™t eat the gluten-free options so we put her back on pasta, for example, which she would eat. Wheat gluten and dairy allergy is quite common in autistic children. She has since regained the weight she lost.</p>
<p>Catherine Collins, the accusing dietician, is not the girlâ€™s dietician and, as far as we know, has never met her, nor is in any way involved with the school or with this project and therefore is really not in a position to have an informed opinion. The results of the project, which is proving highly successful, can be found on our website.</p>
<p>Yours sincerely</p>
<p>Patrick Holford â€“ Food for the Brain Foundation</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evidencebasedeating</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-10001</link>
		<dc:creator>evidencebasedeating</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-10001</guid>
		<description>Hmm. So Mr Holfords &#039;award&#039; of an Hon Diploma from his own institute was awarded by the trustees,not him. so who are his trustees? not listed on the website, but assuming they&#039;re the same as FFTB franchise, find them here

http://www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1684

1 teaching rep
1 prof of hospitality management
1 business manager with good brand development
1 lawyer
2 ION &#039;graduates&#039;
.. and a couple of others. 

guess that demonstrates their knowledge in imparting &#039;honorary diploma&#039;s&#039;. Just imagine if medical degrees were awarded similarly.......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm. So Mr Holfords &#8216;award&#8217; of an Hon Diploma from his own institute was awarded by the trustees,not him. so who are his trustees? not listed on the website, but assuming they&#8217;re the same as FFTB franchise, find them here</p>
<p><a href="http://www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1684" rel="nofollow">www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1684</a></p>
<p>1 teaching rep<br />
1 prof of hospitality management<br />
1 business manager with good brand development<br />
1 lawyer<br />
2 ION &#8216;graduates&#8217;<br />
.. and a couple of others. </p>
<p>guess that demonstrates their knowledge in imparting &#8216;honorary diploma&#8217;s&#8217;. Just imagine if medical degrees were awarded similarly&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: used to be jdc</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/01/doctoring-the-records/comment-page-2/#comment-9995</link>
		<dc:creator>used to be jdc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2007 13:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=345#comment-9995</guid>
		<description>Re the link @ #60 - there is a link on the left of that page that refers to the BS column Ben wrote on Holford. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re the link @ #60 &#8211; there is a link on the left of that page that refers to the BS column Ben wrote on Holford.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

