How Dr.Oz Disappointed Us With His Double Life

After Dr. Mehmet Oz made his first appearance on The Oprah Winfrey Show in 2004, his career took off. His partnership with Winfrey led him to launch The Dr. Oz Show on the Harpo Network in 2009, and now he's a household name—as well as a guy who seems to be constantly trying to sell you a "natural" weight loss pill that works like a "miracle." Let's break down the double life of one of the most well-known doctors in the world.



He promises a lot of "miracles"

Dr. Oz referred to Green Coffee Extract as "the magic weight-loss for every body type," and cited "scientists" as agreeing with him. He called Raspberry Ketone "the number one miracle in a bottle to burn your fat," and referring to Garcinia Cambogia, he said, "It may be the simple solution you've been looking for to bust your body fat for good."

For the record, there's no science to back up any of those claims—in fact, studies have indicated otherwise. A 1998 study showed that Garcinia Cambogia didn't notably help participants lose weight; a similar 2013 study proved the same for Green Coffee; and there isn't enough data on Raspberry Ketone to indicate much of anything either way. In fact, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sued the company that makes Green Coffee Extract. Sorry, folks, good old-fashioned diet and exercise continue to be the only way to successfully lose weight naturally.


He had to face the Senate

After accusations of misleading his audience about various weight-loss products, Dr. Oz was summoned to face a Senate subcommittee in 2014. He promptly began to backtrack on his claims. While he never referred to his comments as outright lies, he did concede that his language was a little strong (e.g. using words such as "miracle" when referring to a pill that will likely do nothing at all). "I'm in a position where I'm second-guessing every word I use on the show right now," he told Senator Claire McCaskill. "I'm very respectful, I've heard the message, I've told my colleagues at the FTC, I get it."

He claims his show is "not medical"

Dr. Oz. said his show is "not a medical show" in response to those who scrutinize the accuracy of the medical advice he dispenses and defended the title by giving a convoluted justification about the logo. "It's called The Dr. Oz Show," he said. "We very purposely, on the logo, have 'Oz' as the middle, and the 'Doctor' is actually up in the little bar for a reason. I want folks to realize that I'm a doctor, and I'm coming into their lives to be supportive of them. But it's not a medical show."


Roughly half of his claims are rubbish

The British Medical Journal performed a study in 2014 examining claims made on Dr. Oz's show and another medical daytime talk series, The Doctors. Its findings revealed that roughly four out of ten claims on The Dr. Oz Show were not supported by evidence or are in direct contradiction to scientific studies. They were only able to find legitimate evidence to support around 46 percent of the recommendations on the show; 15 percent of Dr. Oz's claims were found to be in direct contradiction to scientific evidence, and no evidence was found for the remaining 39 percent.



 The 'Dr. Oz Effect'

When Dr. Oz tells his millions of viewers to buy a product, they listen. Science Based Medicine calls this phenomenon the "Dr. Oz Effect," noting that when he promoted green coffee bean extract on his show along with "naturopath" Lindsey Duncan, they directed consumers to websites owned and operated by Duncan. Duncan reportedly sold $50 million worth of the "weight-loss supplement" following the segment on The Dr. Oz Show.


 He's been sued by viewers

Dr. Oz was sued by a consumer who purchased the faulty weight-loss supplement Garcinia Cambogia. The customer claimed Dr. Oz sold the product by saying it could be the "magic ingredient that lets you lose weight without diet or exercise." A representative for The Dr. Oz Show said the lawsuit attacked Dr. Oz's right to freedom of speech and argued that the show "does not sell these products, nor does [Dr. Oz] have any financial ties to these companies."


 Doctors tried to remove him from Columbia University


 In 2015, a group of ten physicians wrote a letter to Columbia University, where Dr. Oz is vice chairman of the department of surgery, asking that he be removed from his post, reported Fox News. "Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine," the group wrote, claiming he's repeatedly "misled and endangered" the public. Columbia refused the request, saying it wouldn't remove Dr. Oz as vice chairman because the school is "committed to the principle of academic freedom and to upholding faculty members' freedom of expression for statements they make in public discussion."


 He's been accused of selling snake oil

In addition to allegations of lying about numerous weight-loss products, Dr. Oz has also been accused of peddling other fraudulent items. According to The Huffington Post, Dr. Oz touted red palm oil as the "miracle oil for longevity," adding, "There's a secret inside the flesh of this fruit, extending the warranty of nearly every organ in your body. This mega-oil may very well be the most the most miraculous find of 2013." He also claimed it could prevent dementia and Alzheimer's, the Post said, despite there being no research to support that claim. In fact, Vitamin E supplements reportedly have no proven effect on these conditions, and a 2004 study shows that an increased intake of saturated fats, such as red palm oil, could potentially lead to cognitive decline.


 He upset the LGBT community

In 2012, Dr. Oz came under fire for airing an episode debating reparative therapy (or, therapy used to change one's sexual orientation), on which they invited a member of the controversial National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and called them an "expert."

The episode became so hotly contested that a number prominent LGBT groups, including GLADD, condemned the Dr. Oz Show in a public statement. "Producers of the Dr. Oz Show framed their program on so-called reparative therapy in a way that provided a lengthy platform for junk science …Although the show also featured guests who condemned the idea and practice of 'reparative therapy,' Dr. Oz himself never weighed in, and the audience was misled to believe that there are actual experts on both sides of this issue. There are not."

The statement also took aim at NARTH, saying, "NARTH co-founder Charles Socarides called gay people 'a purple menace that is threatening the proper design of gender distinctions in society.' NARTH says it supports clients who seek to 'diminish their homosexuality and to develop their heterosexual potential' through therapy."



 He hinted that anxiety could be fought with food

 In March 2017, Dr. Oz upset some of his social media followers when he posted a tweet suggesting that anxiety could be fought "naturally" with seven foods, including chickpeas and dark chocolate. "Someone is going to abruptly discontinue their meds, thanks to your appeal to nature rhetoric. You are a threat to public health, Mehmet Oz," wrote one follower. "No. Stop. You're insulting my clients and making life so much harder for those of us that actually work in mental health!!!" added another.

The incident was also cited in Forbes magazine's May 2017 piece titled "America, We Need To Break Up With Dr. Oz." "It might seem harmless at first glance, but suggesting that anxiety disorders can be treated with food is irresponsible—these disorders affect millions of Americans and are often debilitating," Forbes wrote. "Anxiety disorders are highly treatable with behavioral therapy and medication, but too many people suffer without treatment, largely because of common misinformation and a stubborn stigma. There is no proven food-based therapy."


 Was he too soft on Donald Trump?


In the lead-up to the 2016 Presidential Election, many reporters, talk-show hosts and beyond were criticized for the softball approach they took to the highly controversial Republican candidate, Donald J. Trump. Some outlets, like Politico, took particular issue with Trump's appearance on the Doctor Oz Show, which aired at a time when rival Hillary Clinton's health was being widely debated in the media. "For Donald Trump, Oz's show proved to be a safe space, a haven shielded from any tough questions or follow-ups, and offered Trump a platform to offer up whatever he wanted, from saying that he feels as good as a 30-year-old to playing up his stamina and his [testosterone] levels," Politico argued.

The episode was also criticized for the unveiling of Trump's medical records, which were two sheets of paper, and the questionable on-air physical that Dr. Oz conducted on the soon-to-be President. "[There were] no actual exams, no hands laid on the patient, no verification of the patient's data. Just a series of questions and the two pieces of paper from Trump — authored by none other than [Trump's longtime doctor] Harold Bornstein," Vox wrote, calling the episode "surreal" and "disturbing."

Dr. Oz has defended this segment, saying "Why not release [Trump's medical records] on a show that talks to people every day about health and have some context put on the results?"


 His magazine might be in trouble

In May 2017, Page Six reported that Dr. Oz's magazine, Dr. Oz the Good Life, was being cut down from 10 issues a year to a quarterly "bookazine," designed to rely more on reader revenue than money advertising.

The move was spun in a positive light, with some of the blame being put on poor ad sales. "We're always looking at whatever the most relevant market is," David Carey, the president of Hearst Magazines, said (via Page Six). "Dr. Oz is still tremendously popular with consumers."

Still, the switch came with a cost. Page Six reported that most of the magazine's 35-person staff was being laid off, including Editor-in-Chief Jill Herzig and Publisher Jill Seelig.


 People have come to his defense

Author and journalist Bill Gifford wrote a 2015 column for The New York Times arguing that Dr. Oz was "no quack." He explained that one of the doctors who tried to get Oz removed from his position at Columbia did prison time for Medicaid fraud and argued that even "evidence-based medicine," as referenced in the doctors' letter, was questionable at times. He also argued that the aforementioned study conducted by the British Medical Journal technically proved that only around 11 percent of Dr. Oz's claims have been proven false; not more than half, as previously reported. "The BMJ authors also didn't list the statements they examined and the evidence for or against," Gifford writes, "so it's hard to know how serious these errors might have been."


from: nickiswift