It is just a vain hope that when he is reported in MSM, the journalists involved note that he has these ASA against him. I’ve no idea how realistic that is and how they would present that information.

Does Holford have to pay a fine? Issue an apology?

Or is the ASA just saying “Naughty boy! Don’t do it again!”

Patrick Holford is regarded as Britain’s best-selling author and leading spokesman on nutrition, food, environmental and health issues, frequently quoted in national newspapers from the Daily Mail to the Guardian. Patrick is also popular on radio shows and national television as a presenter, interviewer and guest.

When did he become a leading spokesman on food, the environment and general health issues as well as nutrition?

Same blurb for the sensitively named:

Methylation, Mood, Memory and Madness – reversing the cause of ‘disconnection’ with optimum nutrition

If you are seeking a UK degree-level qualification, you should also look at http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/recognisedukdegrees, which provides a list of all institutions recognised as awarding UK degrees.

Other institutions may award degree-level qualifications from other countries. You should be clear about whether you are studying for a UK degree or one accredited from abroad, as it may affect the status of your qualification.

It is illegal for institutions to offer degree-level qualifications purporting to be UK degrees where they do not have permission to do so, so all the information from the college at which you intend to study should be clear about the status of their degree-level qualifications.

The website says that only one course which is on offer is accredited by the Uni of Bed, and that is not a full degree course.

I don’t know how degree accreditation works (I’ve spent about 10 mins googling but I haven’t really got anywhere)and it would be nice to find – for example – a complete list of DFES accredited institutions which would confirm or refute my allegation.

The website says that only one course which is on offer is accredited by the Uni of Bed, and that is not a full degree course.

I don’t know how degree accreditation works (I’ve spent about 10 mins googling but I haven’t really got anywhere)and it would be nice to find – for example – a complete list of DFES accredited institutions which would confirm or refute my allegation.

Which drug companies?
I expect the pharmaceutical giants, although by no means perfect, have bigger fish to fry and more profitable things to do with their time, but I’d dearly like to see at least one of them stamp on this sort of defamation of the industry.

Which reminds me actually – I believe there’s now something about car advertisements not allowed to show reckless, dangerous, and over-fast driving – but there’s a loophole for non-realistic portrayals. So we had Frank Sinatra singing over a kind of insane and rather horrible acrobatic circus of flying metal, we’ve got jogging Transformers, and basically anything goes in the advert once again as long as the bloke gets out at the end and folds the car up and puts it in his pocket, or something.

I thought in the old days the ASA self-regulation trick was that a ruling would be given against an ad campaign that had finished last year anyway. “No, no, of course we will not be asking Saddam Hussein to make any more commercials for us… what? dead? such terrible news! oh, my!” Justice was served and awards were slyly presented at around the same time.

You said:

“I think there’s a porky in their defence. They have said that the Institute for Optimum Nutrition is “degree-accredited”. ”

The Institute for Optimum Nutrition’s diploma qualification is accredited by the University of Bedfordshire. Getting the diploma is a kind of two for one offer in that you also gain a foundation degree in Nutriton.

People who have gained the Foundation Degree have the option to study for a full honours degree. The ION does not say on its website how many people have progressed from the foundation to the honours degree. Probably not many given they do not need it to practise as nutritonal therapists.

Lee

I would have spent the last few years, sneaking out of the back door, wearing a bag over my hand and my version of the Coue (?) formula would be:

Everyday, in every way, I must remember that I’m not the superlative intellect/scholar that I think that I am.

I’m a bear of little brain, but I can’t see how the material in this complaint differs that much from the material that he (legally) carries on his website, Say No to Cancer etc. or the promotions for his Food Is Better Medicine Than Drugs book. However, the latter 2 must fall within the purview of free speech.

Holford & Associates

Carters Yard
Wandsworth High Street
London
SW18 4AB
Adjudication details. (Date, media type, sector and origin) Date: 26th March 2003
Media: Leaflet
Sector: Health and beauty
Complaint(s) from: London
Complaint type: Public
Complaint

Objection to a leaflet for health books. It stated “Feel better, look younger, live longer … The easy, natural health secrets the drug companies don”t want you to know…” and made several health-related claims including “Eradicate your risk of heart disease”, “5 easy, NATURAL steps to prevent Alzheimer’’s”, “ALL of today’’s major health problems have already been solved. There’’s no mystery behind cancer, heart disease, diabetes and Alzheimer’’s, the major killer diseases. These are ALL preventable and, in almost all cases, reversible”, “so you haven”t been told all this before? Two reasons, both of which you may find shocking … First your GP probably doesn”t even know. A trainee GP spends less than 12 hours studying nutrition, compared to thousands of hours studying pharmacology. Second, the drug companies don”t want you to find out that, for example, the pain of arthritis can be eliminated using nature’’s own pain killers”, “Most of what you are being told by the Government, in the papers, on TV and by your doctor, is wrong” and “Britain’’s most informed, independent health expert … Patrick Holford”.

The complainant challenged whether:

1. the advertisers could substantiate the claims “Eradicate your risk of heart disease”, “5 easy, NATURAL steps to prevent Alzheimer’’s”, “ALL of today’’s major health problems have already been solved. There’’s no mystery behind cancer, heart disease, diabetes and Alzheimer’’s, the major killer diseases. These are ALL preventable and, in almost all cases, reversible” and “the drug companies don”t want you to find out that, for example, the pain of arthritis can be eliminated using nature’’s own pain killers”;

2. the leaflet exploited the vulnerable by creating undue fear about conventional medical treatment and

3. Patrick Holford was “Britain’’s most informed, independent health expert” as the leaflet implied.

The Authority challenged:

4. whether the advertisement irresponsibly discouraged readers from seeking professional help for serious medical conditions.

Codes section: 3.1, 6.1, 7.1, 9.1, 50.1, 50.2, 50.3, 50.4, 50.5, 50.11
Adjudication

1. Complaint upheld
The advertisers said they had evidence to support all efficacy claims. They maintained that the risk of heart disease could be reduced by as much as 100% by lowering conditions such as high blood pressure, high homocysteine, high cholesterol, insulin resistance and by adopting a healthy diet and lifestyle including stopping smoking, reducing weight and exercising. The advertisers said, however, that they would change the claim “Eradicate your risk of heart disease” to “Virtually eradicate your risk of heart disease”. They sent copies of studies to substantiate the claim. The advertisers said the “5 easy, NATURAL steps to prevent Alzheimer’’s” involved increasing vitamin E intake, reducing homocysteine, reducing stress levels, exercising and increasing intake of vitamins and antioxidants through diet and supplementation. They sent copies of studies to substantiate the claim. The advertisers said that in the claim “ALL of today’’s major health problems have already been solved … These are ALL preventable and in almost all cases, reversible” they were willing to change the word “ALL” to “Most”. They maintained that the stated illnesses were curable. The advertisers said they had already stated how heart disease and Alzheimer’’s disease could be prevented. They said the case for cancer as a preventable and reversible disease was made in Patrick Holfords” book “Say No to Cancer”, which referred to numerous studies that showed how nutritional and lifestyle interventions reduced the risk of cancer. They argued that medical scientist Sir Richard Doll, in his study of 45,000 pairs of twins, found that choices about diet, smoking and exercise accounted for 58% to 82% of cancers studied. The advertisers sent evidence to support the claim. The advertisers said it was well-established that non-insulin diabetes, the most prevalent form, was caused by poor dietary and lifestyle habits. They argued that the complications of diabetes could be more than halved by controlling glucose levels and that, when given chronium, diabetic adults showed improved glucose levels. They maintained that a diet for stabilising blood glucose levels and supplementation with chronium could both prevent and improve diabetes. They sent evidence to support the claim. The advertisers said they intended to change the claim “the drug companies don”t want you to find out that, for example, the pain of arthritis can be eliminated using nature’’s own pain killers” to “There is no commercial motivation for drug companies to let you know that, for example, the pain of arthritis can (often) be (reduced) and sometimes eliminated using nature’’s own pain killers”. They argued that the claim was supported by a comprehensive dietary and supplementary strategy, for reducing pain and inflammation, created by Patrick Holford and by several studies that found patients who suffered from arthritis improved when given fish oil, omega 3 or GLA supplements. The advertisers sent books and copies of clinical studies to substantiate the claims.

The Authority noted, firstly, that Patrick Holford’’s book merely referred to clinical studies on cancer and did not produce clinical evidence, secondly, that the studies sent showed a link between diet, lifestyle and nutrition but did not find that heart disease could be eradicated, that cancer, diabetes and Alzheimer’’s could be prevented or that most major health problems had already been solved and, thirdly, that some studies found that supplements could reduce pain in arthritis sufferers but did not show that pain could be eliminated. The Authority was not satisfied that the evidence sent by the advertisers substantiated the comprehensive health claims made. It asked the advertisers not to repeat the claims unless they could send conclusive evidence to substantiate them. The Authority told the advertisers to consult the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Copy Advice team and ensure that they were satisfied with the evidence for their claims before finalising their future advertisements.

2. Complaint upheld
The advertisers said they had interviewed GPs and estimated that the total number of study hours GPs spent on nutrition did not exceed 12 hours in contrast to the thousands of hours spent on pharmacology. They said the claim could be supported by statements from GPs. The advertisers said they would delete the claim “Most of what you are being told by the Government, in the papers, on TV and by your doctor, is wrong”. The Authority welcomed the advertisers” decision to delete that claim. It was not satisfied, however, that the advertisers had substantiated the claim ” A trainee GP spends less than 12 hours studying nutrition” and asked them not to repeat it. The Authority told the advertisers to consult the CAP Copy Advice team when preparing future advertisements.

3. Complaint upheld
The advertisers explained that most of Patrick Holford’’s research and writing had been carried out when he was the director of the Institute for Optimum Nutrition (ION), which he founded. They said he now worked as an independent health and nutrition researcher, writer and presenter. The advertisers pointed out that Patrick Holford had written over 20 books on health and nutrition and was regularly referred to in the media as Britain’’s leading nutritionist. The advertisers said the claim was their opinion but they believed it was an opinion shared by many others and was supported by Patrick Holford’’s work. The Authority considered that the claim would be seen as an objective one. It noted the claim was a superlative one. The Authority was not satisfied that the advertisers had demonstrated the truth of the claim and asked them not to use it until they could.

4. Upheld
The advertisers believed the leaflet did not discourage people from seeing their GPs but merely encouraged them to study nutrition to help promote and maintain their health. The Authority noted that the leaflet encouraged readers to regard nutrition as a method of maintaining health. It was concerned, however, that the leaflet referred to ways to treat serious medical conditions and discouraged readers from going to their GP and from taking medication. The Authority told the advertisers to ensure they complied with the Codes in future.

The Professional Association for Registered Dietitians

5th Floor, Charles House, 148/9 Great Charles Street Queensway, Birmingham B3 3HT

MediaRelease

19 September 2007 For immediate release

Response to Advertising Standards Authority

Final Adjudication – 100% Health Ltd/ Patrick Holford

The British Dietetic Association (BDA) today welcomed the Advertising Standards Authority’s decision to uphold a complaint about claims made in a direct mailing for books by Patrick Holford.

A spokesperson for the British Dietetic Association, said: “The decision by the ASA that the claims made in the direct mailing was a breach of the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code -clauses on truthfulness and substantiation – and that it was misleading is welcomed by the BDA and dietitians. This case highlights the need for the public to be wary of nutritional therapists who advocate the benefits of a specific supplement or treatment as their advice may not be completely impartial.”

“For the majority of people eating a well balanced and varied diet, as identified in the recently launched Eatwell Plate, by the Food Standards Agency, this should provide sufficient vitamins and minerals to help them live a normal healthy life, without the need to take extra supplements. People who feel they are lacking in certain nutrients should consult appropriate expert help and will usually be better changing the amount or type of foods they eat rather than reaching for supplements.

“Dietitians are the only statutorily recognised nutrition professionals; they have undertaken specific training to enable them to give individualised advice and support. Any decision on the need for additional vitamins and minerals to a diet should be made in consultation with a registered dietitian. Taking excess amounts of vitamins and minerals is at best expensive and wasteful, and can interfere with other functions in the body resulting in harm. Unlike nutritional therapists, dietitians are bound by a strict code of conduct, which means that any claims made about a product or particular treatment must be substantiated by scientific evidence. ”

- Ends -

m/f

Media enquiries to The British Dietetic Association should be directed to our media hotline on

1. The British Dietetic Association, founded in 1936, is the professional association for registered dietitians in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It is the nation’s largest organisation of food and nutrition professionals with over 6,000 members. About two-thirds of members are employed in the National Health Service. The remaining members work in education, industry, research, sport settings or freelance.
2. Registered dietitians hold the only legally-recognised graduate qualifications in nutrition and dietetics. They are experts in interpreting and translating the science of nutrition into practical ways of promoting nutritional well-being, disease treatment and the prevention of nutrition-related problems. Their advice is sound and based on current scientific evidence.
3. Registration, awarded by the Health Professions Council, is an indication that a Dietitian is fit to practise and is working within an agreed statement of conduct. For further details about The British Dietetic Association, please visit our websites: http://www.bda.uk.com, http://www.bdaweightwise.com, http://www.teenweightwise.com.