How Good is Oprah’s Health Advice?
According to this Newsweek article, it’s pretty “iffy”.
I don’t watch the show myself, but I’ve been reading about issues raised by the authors from other authoritative sources… All I can say is it’s good to see a mainstream critique.
Share
William on 24 Jun 2009 at 7:58 pm #
You have got to be kidding me. You want people to take your site and health information seriously and for people to feel you have any kind of integrity and you post this bit of nothingness, based on that absurd Newsweek article? If you had done any research at all, you would know that the aforementioned article was nothing but an attack by big pharma, trying to discredit ALL of the information given on the Oprah Winfrey show and XM station, when in actuality her information has led thousands of people to go the natural route with hormone replacement.
My wife is someone who suffered heart problems as a result of Pharma hormone replacement. Bioidentical hormones saved her life, her sanity, our marriage, and her health. The same can be said for plenty of others.
Yes, there have been some kooks out there touting crazy aspects of taking hormones, and that is what the magazine focused on. But the fact remains that responsible use of bioidentical hormones is far more effective and far more SAFE than the Big Pharma route. And that information getting out there is exactly what they are scared of.
Had you read the article in Newsweek you would have seen what a crappy piece of non-journalism it was. Shame on you for affirming it here, and without even having read it!
Elissa on 25 Jun 2009 at 2:24 am #
Oh I read it all right…nor is it my only source of information on the health info promoted on Oprah’s show. Oprah is doing an intense amount of damage by promoting Jenny McCarthy and her anti-vaccine crusade. And I would hardly say that Suzanne Somers’ regime represents a “responsible use” of bioidentical hormones (or supps, for that matter). Ditto Oprah’s promotion of “The Secret”.
If YOU had actually read the article, you would have seen quotes from doctors that downplay hormone replacement therapy, period – including that from Big Pharma. Criticizing Oprah’s irresponsible behavior and promotion of non-credible sources of information does not, in turn, mean the authors are endorsing Big Pharma as an alternative. I am aware of Pat Wingert’s background, but did not see anything in her writing to indicate that there were hidden, “pro-Big Pharma” messages there.
Nor did I get the impression the authors were attempting to discredit all the information on the show, at all. What they point out in quotes like this one:
“Some of the many experts who cross her stage offer interesting and useful information (props to you, Dr. Oz). Others gush nonsense. Oprah, who holds up her guests as prophets, can’t seem to tell the difference.”
…is that Oprah does not discriminate between the good and not-so-good advice, and leaves it up to her audience to sort it out…for good or ill.
Sorry you can’t see past your own bias, so that even a simple posting of the article for reading and discussion becomes evidence of my lack of “integrity.” I’d say your inability to objectively critique the article on its merits, and similar inability to take in information that conflicts with your worldview without making intemperate accusations places that shoe firmly on the other foot.
I’m sorry that your wife had a bad experience with HRT and am happy she was helped by alternatives, but that in no way excuses Oprah’s promotion of Somers, who certainly appears to be one of those “kooks out there touting crazy aspects of taking hormones”. There are plenty of other, more credible clinicians that Oprah could have turned to on this particular topic. From this POV, the authors’ comments:
“She has the power to summon the most learned authorities on any subject; who would refuse her? Instead, all too often Oprah winds up putting herself and her trusting audience in the hands of celebrity authors and pop-science artists pitching wonder cures and miracle treatments…”
look pretty accurate, to me.
jedikitty on 25 Jun 2009 at 3:09 am #
This sounded interesting, up until this post turned into an argument… oh, well.
Best of health to you both
Elissa on 25 Jun 2009 at 3:22 am #
Thanks! Best of health to you and yours as well.
Paul on 27 Jun 2009 at 4:41 am #
Jedikitty…
I get the feeling you were turned off by the tone of the follow up discussion between Elissa and William.
The problem is that William did not present a countering position to the Newsweek piece, or a countering argument (argument here meaning “a process of reasoning where different points of view are presented and supported by fact”). His post is as much of an argument as this is…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM
Instead, what he did was lash out, call the credibility of both and I Elissa into question, and in as many words, called us both idiots.
If he had actually READ the Newsweek piece, he would have seen the balance present in it, as already pointed out by Elissa in her post above.
Instead, he falls back on the “Big Pharma” conspiracy theory (in fact, the retailers of “alternative products” are no less motivated by money and are just as likely to take advantage of their customer – as witnessed by the zillions of actions by the FTC – especially since the lack of regulation in the health supplement industry makes it so easy to do).
Nice.
Unfortunately, when someone lashes out with so much vitriol and so little common sense, Elissa is entirely justified in pulling out the clown hammer.
Hope you understand.