Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Debunking Mercola, et al - please help
ConnieT1030
Posts: 894 Member
I haven't been around these forums for quite a while, but I know when I was, there was a bunch of very solid science folks here that had info on those quack pseudo-nutritionists (for lack of a better term.)
I was hoping some of you had some links to the specific info/studies, etc that would back that up.
My story is that I was into all that woo (yeah I know! dumb!) about 10 years back but found my way back out in a slow journey over a couple years, and I really dont know where to start to find that stuff again, but when I mentioned to a (non-local) friend on facebook* that Mercola = Fake News, they started persistently pressing me for the science that backs that claim up, and it's not something I saved or have handy!
Im not sure if our "science stars" (aka woo-busters) still post here or not, but if anyone has the links or some useful info for that purpose handy, I'd appreciate it.
I tried searching the forums here, but all I could find is mentions that Mercola, et al, have been debunked, but nothing to point to where/how/when/who.
Hopefully this post is acceptable here, I figured this debate forum was the most likely spot it would be accepted.
*Yes I know facebook arguments convince no one, but one, it isnt really an argument, she just wants some specific info to back up what I said, and two, she won't leave me alone about it!
Appreciate all the helpful folks here. MFP changed my life
[edit for grammar typo]
I was hoping some of you had some links to the specific info/studies, etc that would back that up.
My story is that I was into all that woo (yeah I know! dumb!) about 10 years back but found my way back out in a slow journey over a couple years, and I really dont know where to start to find that stuff again, but when I mentioned to a (non-local) friend on facebook* that Mercola = Fake News, they started persistently pressing me for the science that backs that claim up, and it's not something I saved or have handy!
Im not sure if our "science stars" (aka woo-busters) still post here or not, but if anyone has the links or some useful info for that purpose handy, I'd appreciate it.
I tried searching the forums here, but all I could find is mentions that Mercola, et al, have been debunked, but nothing to point to where/how/when/who.
Hopefully this post is acceptable here, I figured this debate forum was the most likely spot it would be accepted.
*Yes I know facebook arguments convince no one, but one, it isnt really an argument, she just wants some specific info to back up what I said, and two, she won't leave me alone about it!
Appreciate all the helpful folks here. MFP changed my life
[edit for grammar typo]
6
Replies
-
What is Mercola?
The only thing I could find was some quack named Joseph Mercola. Someone would have to be really dense to follow any of his "medical" advice. So hopefully that's not who you're talking about.5 -
What that may be true, it's not really helpful. But thanks for your response anyway, have a good night.1
-
ConnieT1030 wrote: »What that may be true, it's not really helpful. But thanks for your response anyway, have a good night.
Why don't you try answering my question. I'm not sure if who I found and what you are talking about is even the same thing.2 -
I don’t have anything, @ConnieT1030. I’m trying to think of who to tag. @PAV8888 maybe?3
-
@PAV8888 was never into debunking Mercola because of... headache.
But have YOU not, Ms (awesome lifting u-tube clips) @quiksylver296, often referred people to examine.com to find out the real deal about specific "nutriceuticals" of the type that I believe Mercola often sells?
As to the rest of it, including that he is named Joseph, I would highlight from the basic Wikipedia article that comes up when one searches for Dr Mercola:
"In 2005, 2006, and 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned Mercola and his company that they were making illegal claims of their products' ability to detect, prevent, and treat disease.[8] The medical watchdog site Quackwatch has criticized Mercola for making "unsubstantiated claims [that] clash with those of leading medical and public health organizations and many unsubstantiated recommendations for dietary supplements."[9] Of Mercola's marketing techniques, oncology surgeon David Gorski says it "mixes the boring, sensible health advice with pseudoscientific advice in such a way that it’s hard for someone without a medical background to figure out which is which."[10]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola
I would think that a couple of FDA warning for illegal claims, and inclusion by Quackwatch would reduce one's believability factor in terms of considering them a source of scientifically vetted advice.
Of course if the FDA conspiracies are out to get you... well then, you should definitely buy whatever Mercola wants to sell to you! 🤷
@AnnPT77 may want to comment on Mercola's marketing strategies as mentioned in the wikipedia link above:
"A 2006 BusinessWeek editorial stated his marketing practices relied on "slick promotion, clever use of information, and scare tactics" (emphasis mine)
Happy reading: https://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/February-2012/Dr-Joseph-Mercola-Visionary-or-Quack/9 -
He's a quack who is happy to take your money.
"If one wanted to engineer a lucrative sham, the model of the supplement industry is a promising one: Create a product that's outwardly countercultural, but actually undergirded by powerful interests that keep it exempt from meaningful regulation. Tell people it will make them live longer, happier lives, with less anxiety and better sex organs. Position the product as a "natural" alternative to what's being sold by pharmaceutical companies (which must undergo safety testing and demonstrate at least a modicum of effectiveness)."
https://quackwatch.org/11ind/mercola/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2019/10/15/fdc01078-c29c-11e9-b5e4-54aa56d5b7ce_story.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/06/opinion/the-politics-of-fraudulent-dietary-supplements.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/02/how-supplements-work/385119/?utm_source=atlfb3 -
(snippySnipperSnip)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola
(MoreSnip)
@AnnPT77 may want to comment on Mercola's marketing strategies as mentioned in the wikipedia link above:
"A 2006 BusinessWeek editorial stated his marketing practices relied on "slick promotion, clever use of information, and scare tactics" (emphasis mine)
(AndAFinalSnip)
Nope.
But I think the Wikipedia article and Quackwatch, not to mention the other background info linked, ought to be enough to do the job, if it can be done.
If someone is seriously inclined to believe this kind of thing - the hook that someone has powerful information that Big Pharma is trying to hide, but the guru will selflessly share - it's pretty hard to talk them out of it, IME.
It's one thing, if someone read it and believed it, but didn't really swallow the "you now know what the others are trying to hide" nonsense. But for people who did believe that conspiracy-based "hidden secret" idea, and think they now have the revealed insider truth, any attempt to dissuade them is just a part of the Big Pharma conspiracy to herd the sheeple. Attempts to talk someone out of a conspiracy theory are evidence that there really is a conspiracy, in their minds.
Sorry, OP - and good luck, sincerely.
6 -
ConnieT1030 wrote: »What that may be true, it's not really helpful. But thanks for your response anyway, have a good night.
Why don't you try answering my question. I'm not sure if who I found and what you are talking about is even the same thing.
Because your question sounds sarcastic, seeing how he's a well know celebrity quack doctor, and everyone else had no problem. I apologize for being too unspecific for you. Yes, it's Joseph Mercola.3 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »I don’t have anything, @ConnieT1030. I’m trying to think of who to tag. @PAV8888 maybe?
Thanks hun, glad to see you're still out here! 1 -
MurphmomSparkles wrote: »He's a quack who is happy to take your money.
"If one wanted to engineer a lucrative sham, the model of the supplement industry is a promising one: Create a product that's outwardly countercultural, but actually undergirded by powerful interests that keep it exempt from meaningful regulation. Tell people it will make them live longer, happier lives, with less anxiety and better sex organs. Position the product as a "natural" alternative to what's being sold by pharmaceutical companies (which must undergo safety testing and demonstrate at least a modicum of effectiveness)."
https://quackwatch.org/11ind/mercola/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2019/10/15/fdc01078-c29c-11e9-b5e4-54aa56d5b7ce_story.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/06/opinion/the-politics-of-fraudulent-dietary-supplements.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/02/how-supplements-work/385119/?utm_source=atlfb
Great links, thank you so much for your assist!1 -
Science proving that a person's specific claims are false.
Well, besides finding actual studies that happen to show opposite their claims - you aren't going to find a study that had money spent on it to test his "theories" that are the basis of quackery. Probably never pass an ethics board to involve human subjects.
You'd have to pick one of his claims your friend perhaps believes in and see if that is one of his quack ideas or following along with general science.
That's the problem with many of those guys - sometimes they'll have points that totally on their own are correct.
But what they get from that point and the wild road they head down next will have your head spinning.
Just because they happen to agree with some science point, doesn't make all their other points agreeable.6 -
ConnieT1030 wrote: »ConnieT1030 wrote: »What that may be true, it's not really helpful. But thanks for your response anyway, have a good night.
Why don't you try answering my question. I'm not sure if who I found and what you are talking about is even the same thing.
Because your question sounds sarcastic, seeing how he's a well know celebrity quack doctor, and everyone else had no problem. I apologize for being too unspecific for you. Yes, it's Joseph Mercola.
Well I had never heard of him, but glad others were able to provide some info.3 -
(snippySnipperSnip)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola
(MoreSnip)
@AnnPT77 may want to comment on Mercola's marketing strategies as mentioned in the wikipedia link above:
"A 2006 BusinessWeek editorial stated his marketing practices relied on "slick promotion, clever use of information, and scare tactics" (emphasis mine)
(AndAFinalSnip)
Nope.
But I think the Wikipedia article and Quackwatch, not to mention the other background info linked, ought to be enough to do the job, if it can be done.
If someone is seriously inclined to believe this kind of thing - the hook that someone has powerful information that Big Pharma is trying to hide, but the guru will selflessly share - it's pretty hard to talk them out of it, IME.
It's one thing, if someone read it and believed it, but didn't really swallow the "you now know what the others are trying to hide" nonsense. But for people who did believe that conspiracy-based "hidden secret" idea, and think they now have the revealed insider truth, any attempt to dissuade them is just a part of the Big Pharma conspiracy to herd the sheeple. Attempts to talk someone out of a conspiracy theory are evidence that there really is a conspiracy, in their minds.
Sorry, OP - and good luck, sincerely.
Ah sorry, I cant seem to edit very well on the phone app but in regards to the "nope".. 🤣🤣🤣!
You are so right, once people have bought into something like that its really hard to just talk them out out of it. They have to want to see their own way out, which is why I tried to avoid answering her with specifics, but since she insists she is "open" I figured if I had a few good sources to point to, she could either dismiss them (not sure if she goes as far as the "big pharma" conspiracy or not) or else start her own search/research.
I was just pretty sure some folks here had that kind of info a whole lot more handy than I would, knowing the sorts of things that come up (over & over!)
So much thanks for coming through for me! As always, MFP is the best, and consistently entertaining as well 😉
2 -
As pointed out above, it's rare to find specific studies debunking scam artists like Mercola because reputable scientists aren't typically going to construct studies to address specific wacko claims like "AIDS isn't real" or "sunscreen kills your gonads."
Instead of focusing on proving that claims aren't real, I find it is sometimes more useful to reframe the question. What is the evidence that Mercola is right about AIDS or sunscreen or polio vaccinations or microwaves? The burden isn't on us to establish that Mercola is wrong. He's the one making claims that are unsupported so it's reasonable to look at the "evidence" he's presenting and evaluate accordingly.7 -
ConnieT1030 wrote: »(snippySnipperSnip)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola
(MoreSnip)
@AnnPT77 may want to comment on Mercola's marketing strategies as mentioned in the wikipedia link above:
"A 2006 BusinessWeek editorial stated his marketing practices relied on "slick promotion, clever use of information, and scare tactics" (emphasis mine)
(AndAFinalSnip)
Nope.
But I think the Wikipedia article and Quackwatch, not to mention the other background info linked, ought to be enough to do the job, if it can be done.
If someone is seriously inclined to believe this kind of thing - the hook that someone has powerful information that Big Pharma is trying to hide, but the guru will selflessly share - it's pretty hard to talk them out of it, IME.
It's one thing, if someone read it and believed it, but didn't really swallow the "you now know what the others are trying to hide" nonsense. But for people who did believe that conspiracy-based "hidden secret" idea, and think they now have the revealed insider truth, any attempt to dissuade them is just a part of the Big Pharma conspiracy to herd the sheeple. Attempts to talk someone out of a conspiracy theory are evidence that there really is a conspiracy, in their minds.
Sorry, OP - and good luck, sincerely.
Ah sorry, I cant seem to edit very well on the phone app but in regards to the "nope".. 🤣🤣🤣!
You are so right, once people have bought into something like that its really hard to just talk them out out of it. They have to want to see their own way out, which is why I tried to avoid answering her with specifics, but since she insists she is "open" I figured if I had a few good sources to point to, she could either dismiss them (not sure if she goes as far as the "big pharma" conspiracy or not) or else start her own search/research.
I was just pretty sure some folks here had that kind of info a whole lot more handy than I would, knowing the sorts of things that come up (over & over!)
So much thanks for coming through for me! As always, MFP is the best, and consistently entertaining as well 😉
Why do you feel it's your place to talk anyone out of anything. Present facts, let them come to their own conclusions, right or wrong. You gotten plenty of factual info above.5 -
People are gonna believe what they believe. Traditional or Holistic. Perhaps a bit of both if proven.
Someone mentioned Quackwatch above -- that publication claimed for years that Chiropractic is Quackery. Not just one Chiropractor, but the entire industry! There are some Chiropractors that I've seen that are quacks, for sure, but some have helped me immensely when my family (traditional doc) didn't do squat for me. And "Sciencebasedmedicine.com" is a about as biased as it comes -- they hate anything Holistic yet never ever rip prescription drugs that fail or have recalls or lawsuits (not one word about those). So you have to really consider the source of any information.
I tend to agree with what mmapags said -- why bother? If they believe crazy views from the extreme, they are gonna believe that.
I don't believe most of what Mercola says, but I'm also skeptical when a conventional doc wants to give me a pill or prescription as well. As we all should be skeptical.4 -
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »
Not missing much. The irony is he was a Psychiatrist! Also a guy that once claimed all Gulf War Syndrome was in their heads. Nothing like telling vets that they are candy arses. Just my two cents (and a Psych Major -- hardly "hard" science!!).3 -
Maybe quackwatch should be vetted by examine.com????4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions