Slashdot Mirror
Columbia University Doctors Ask For Dr. Mehmet Oz's Dismissal
circletimessquare writes Dr. Mehmet Oz serves as vice chairman of Columbia University Medical Center's department of surgery. He is a respected cardiothoracic surgeon but his television show has been accused of pushing snake oil. Now other doctors at Columbia University want Dr. Oz kicked off the medical school faculty. Dr. Oz has responded on his Facebook account: "I bring the public information that will help them on their path to be their best selves. We provide multiple points of view, including mine which is offered without conflict of interest. That doesn't sit well with certain agendas which distort the facts. For example, I do not claim that GMO foods are dangerous, but believe that they should be labeled like they are in most countries around the world." In their letter, the doctors accuse Dr. Oz of quackery: "Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops. Worst of all, he has manifested an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain."
he's irresponsibly pandering to ignorance to raise his profile
ignorant think he's informing them and giving them "choices"
but this is merely a logical fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
a choice between quackery and sound science is not a choice
it's preying on the science illiteracy of many and steering them to make uneducated bad choices that hurt their health. all to turn a quick buck and bask in the blessings of idiots
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
or you hurt the spell.
Pay no attention to that quack behind the curtain.
As long as he was peddling magical dietary supplements and weight loss pills he was a lovable scamp and was allowed to carry on with his mischief. But as soon as he dared cross Monsanto, he is a quack that must be squashed.
I thought Jamie Oliver comprehensively put this guy on the quack-heap: https://youtu.be/WA0wKeokWUU
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
Quackery they could tolerate. But how dare he question the nutritious yummy GMOs whose manufacturers are pumping millions of dollars into endowments for those other Columbia University medical faculty. While he's enriching himself, those poor souls may lose out on lucrative $$$. Can't have that.
(That's not to say dr. Oz is not a quack - he certainly is a snake oil salesman, but these guys have an agenda that's as clear as day)
they're jealous because they want to be successful snake oil salesmen?
so according to you, the only reason to oppose snake oil salesmen... is because you want to be one?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
In this story, which one is the Ancel Keys?
We've seen how well allowing those with greedy minds out into the natural world pans out (horrible drought, the death of the oceans, animal extinctions, famine). If the Dr. Oz is opposed to GMO than he opposes humans messing with things that we have no right to without the say so of everyone who faces the consequences.
Lack of accountability and oversight mixed with corruption and greed are pretty obvious indicators of a system gone bust - selling such a system should come with dire consequences that go beyond mere shame.
Perhaps a punitive system that takes into account the fact that the actions of scientists who willingly cause future repercussions through their work, with intent or not, would be good for targeting these dubious and sinister folks who believe that the almighty dollar is worth more than the soul of humanity?
Check this shit out, with some guy named Mehmet!
trying to correct bad impressions that my mother gets from this guy.
I mentioned it to my internist and he told me most doctors he knows consider him a quack.
Amazing how some people will sell their soul for money and television appearances.
No one wants to be the lesser known snake oil salesman. If you're not first, you're last.
consistently avoids any discussion of the hard medical facts about the dangers of marijuana, ignoring significant findings and reports.
While Ill agree with your claim on oz being a kook, can you please explain this? because it seems for every study that says it is bad, another one shows up that says the one claiming bad is all BS. Citations???
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
You can't fire a faculty member because outside the scope of his duties he expresses an opinion you don't like -- even if it's a clearly crackpot opinion. If you could, Stanford would have kicked Linus Pauling out when he became a Vitamin C crackpot.
The difference, though, is that Pauling was a sincere crackpot -- brilliant people are often susceptible to crackpottery because they're so used to being more right than their neighbors. Dr. Oz is a snake-oil salesman; when he's faced with people who are educated -- not necessarily scientists but critical thinkers -- in a forum he doesn't control, he speaks in a much more equivocal fashion. That shows he knows the language he uses on his show and in his magazine is irresponsible.
So selling snake-oil isn't crackpottery, it's misconduct. But somebody's got to find, chapter and verse, the specific institutional rules of conduct Dr. Oz's misconduct violates. There will have to be due process, particularly if he's a tenured professor, which will probably require lesser disciplinary measures than dismissal be tried first.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Genetic engineering rice to add vitamin A is ass kicking science and haters should kiss off. Being worried about engineering plants to allow huge amounts of pesticides to be applied just might be rational. Sticking in random genes that make plants toxic to the insects that co-evolved with them might boost production but might wipe out whole species. Like every other part of science people get scared when they don't understand it and more importantly when they think money is in control and no one is watching.
A letter signed by ten doctors -- all of whom have financial ties to industry -- calls for Columbia University to force Dr. Oz to resign from the university's Department of Surgery.
What does this have to do with anything to do with news for nerds? So some doctor is having his credentials questions/recalled by his university. What the fuck does this have to do with anything? This isn't a fucking medical journal.
"in my opinion this guy is like Jenny McCarthy"
When Jenny McCarthy found out that what she was saying was wrong and harmful, she largely retracted her entire position. Oz knows what he's saying is wrong and harmful, but he keeps doing it, for the money.
That makes it clear. Nothing to do but sit back and wait for Oprah's spawn to burst from his chest.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
As the Slate article clearly states: the doctors writing the letter are not from Columbia University. They are a group of random doctors from various other institutes that sent a letter to Columbia University administrators.
Why do you omit the most important fact when attempting to conflate genetic modification with evolution? You know, that pesky fact that evolution maintains balance because ALL creatures are evolving. GMO foods do not.
The second most important fact is that people in the US are not demanding a ban, they are demanding labeling so that they can choose. Your statements, nor the big GMO companies, address that simple fact. They treat the request for label as if it were a ban.
Lastly, evolution does not allow the types of modifications genetics is allowing. Look at how many GMO vegetables contain Fungus, Insect, and Animal DNA. Attempting to claim it's the same as evolution is an absolute lie.
You insult someone else as being ignorant as your last defense... pathetic, and transparent.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
One out of how many modified foods? Every time people back GMOs they claim Rice is the great savior. You know, that rice that has been banned in most countries in Europe, and is being dumped on the poor Asian population. Meanwhile, Japan was able to create a flood resistant rice with a few seasons of hybridization and no genetic modification since Japan outlawed GMO foods. That was the first rice that was touted as the great savior of GMO reputation, but we didn't need the damn fungus and insect genes to do it!
And look, I'm not saying all GMOs are bad. I'm saying that not all of them have been good. Do you think that no science was used in the European countries who all banned GMOs? That, is called denial.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Show me the examples of him being a quack, or even a specific from the letter outside of "anti-gmo". You know, facts and evidence. The things you are supposed to have when leveling charges attempting to damage people. I see lots of ad hominem, and quite a bit from you as well. Pretty handy how you use several appeals to emotion so that anyone disagreeing with your opinion is either "HURRR DURRR" conspiracy theory or smearmonger.
If you want to claim a MD is a quack, you need to address specifics.
I have only seen his show a couple times and didn't see anything "harmful" or different than my doctor might. If he did something no other MD would do, lets see the evidence.
Sadly there are plenty of assholes that claim people are guilty because they have an opinion. Happens all the time here. Take a good whiff and make sure it's not you that smells. Facts and evidence are pretty important things to have, and I have seen nothing from you or the people who wrote the letter that resemble facts.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Genetic engineering rice to add vitamin A is ass kicking science and haters should kiss off.
I've always wondered if these idiots think we should halt evolution in it's tracks, and force all pants to be genetically true to say, 1800. Pick a date though.
Because plants evolve - they change genetically. And some of those changes will by nature not be good for people.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I read the letter, and the blog post TFA links to. I see no facts or evidence. I heard GW Bush claim Saddam had WMDs too, and that didn't happen did it?
The only way to prove their claim is demonstrating with evidence.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Do you have a link to the murdering bitch's retraction?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
... and like... alternative crystal healing... so... why is he not simply tased when he sets foot on the property? Possibly have some gentlemen run out with a big butterfly net, then give him a shirt with really long sleeves... and then give him a nice quite room with pillows on the walls.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Do you think that no science was used in the European countries who all banned GMOs?
Yes, those bans came from fear mongering.
"Storm" by Tim Minchin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Bert
He is mentioned extensively in the Sony leaked documents. I skimmed through them. Sony was very pleased with him - they consider his show to be one of their most successful and profitable.
They also told him to do fewer weight-loss segments, because it makes the audience feel negative.
He already is Oprah's spawn: He started out by doing a segment on Oprah, but was so popular the studio decided to give him his own show.
While all of this was going on, how much money did Columbia University make off of Oz's name? How many donations, surgeries, etc. were linked to the university "advertising" that he was on staff?
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
First of all none of the signatories are from Columbia university (i.e. none of the signatories are his colleagues)
Secondly, many of the 'distinguished' signatories are in cahoots with the GMO industry -- including one that was earlier a shill for the tobacco industry. See this post for details: http://science.slashdot.org/co...
You may not like Dr. Oz, but beware - this enemy of your enemy is not your friend.
For future reference, if you want to comment on a story that you've moderated in I believe you can post AC without having your mod points revoked. I'm reasonably certain I've done this in the past successfully. At the very least it's worth a shot next time.
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
Agreed, I've never seen a RETRACTION. I've seen where she lied about her earlier position so as to re-cast herself (hopefully) as less than criminally stupid. But nowhere so far have I seen where she said "I was wrong, what I said earlier shouldn't be used as advice by anyone. Dr. Wakefield misled me and I said things that were based on fear instead of any form of evidence."
We did a similar thing with the wild boar, by selectively breeding from the ones that were fatter, less aggressive, and with smaller tusks.
But if we tried till the end of time we couldn't get one to fuck a jellyfish.
Not the same thing at all.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Here's a recent link where she denies changing her position in any way. I'm afraid she's still a murdering bitch.
To support the removal of the quack?
http://www.naturalnews.com/049395_Doctor_Oz_Monsanto_Mafia_glyphosate_toxicity.html
This plot to destroy Dr. Oz originates with all the usual "Monsanto Mafia" suspects such as Henry Miller, the indignant biotech puppet and Stanford biotech operative who helped run disinformation campaigns and fake science front operations for Big Tobacco. See the full details on Henry Miller here.
Also signing the attack letter against Dr. Oz was Dr. Gilbert Ross, executive director of the American Council on Science and Health -- a shady industry front group that spreads biotech disinformation and lies under the false label of "science."
Dr. Ross is a convicted criminal and Medicaid fraud artist. He was "convicted of racketeering, mail fraud and conspiracy," and was "sentenced to 47 months in jail, $40,000 in forfeiture and restitution of $612,855" in a scheme to defraud the Medicaid system, reports the U.S. Right to Know campaign in a page describing the ACSH's sleazy practices.
While there may well be merit to the criticisms of Oz, it should be noted that the doctors behind this initiative are not without their own conflicts of interest: http://america.aljazeera.com/blogs/scrutineer/2015/4/17/doctors-behind-anti-oz-letter-have-own-conflicts-of-interest.html
Dr. Oz, in my opinion, is no kook. The medical establishment in this country is in bed with the pharmaceutical industry. They are generally not open to alternative therapies and they usually discount the role of nutrition and prevention in medicine. Now I'm not against pharmaceuticals, but they should not be the only therapy available to doctors and patients. I speak from experience using various forms of effective, alternative treatments. Thank you.
Evidence based medicine is commonly wrong because the evidence is interpreted incorrectly.
Around the 1600s, cedar leaf tae saved Jacques Cartier's crew from scurvy, 25 died the rest were save and when he got back to France was told there as no evidence this worked.
Prior to that Vasco de Gamma nearly diet near the Cape of Good Horn but his crew found eating citrus fixed it.
Hundreds of years later, evidence showed citrus prevented scurvy and it became institutionalized. Later it was boiled on copper kettles (which neutralize the C) and nobody noticed it didn't work any more as diets had improved, until sailors and polar explorers began dying. Similarly at around the same time the new process of warming babies milk to kill bacteria also killed the vitamin C and a new disease of the rich emerged: infantile scurvy. By 1933 vitamin C had be found and scurvy became much less widespread.
The point is scurvy has been around for 20 million years, it' s in recorded history for 5500 years but as of the Scott Antarctic expedition people were still dying of it despite cures being known since Egyptian times ("bitter herbs" all have ascorbate). It's not that the evidence is lacking, it's that there's a disruptive influence from commerce and industrialization. Some unintentional, some because of vested interest. History records that "the evidence was contradictory" and while this is true it never stopped being true that two fresh citrus a day prevented and even cured scurvy, of course more was better, ascorbate does not take up into the body in hours it takes days. so any time i the past 500 years it's been true people have been saying "look I know if I eat fresh fruit I won't get sick" while the medical community insisted, no, it' something else we disproved that. During Scott's antarctic mission the medically accepted ce for scurvy was a brew called "vitriol" containing sulphuric acid. That where evidence based medicine got you and this is one of the reason it's a UN right that you can deterring your own course of treatment to any illness. Science is just a sure it's right the nit's wrong as it is when it's right and it's been worn as recently as elat year, the recent fats ans cholesterol deacle as well as finding out sugar is the cause of cholesterol is proof at least to me that the conventional wisdom is neither.
It cannot be said this does not exist today. I'm not a TV guy and have only a very casual knowledge of the claims he made. ome I know are wrong and know why there are right and I know why but are rejected by industry. Given the near complete control by industry of antu to do with pharmaceuticals they are not the best ones to adjudicate this. The belief that if it's in our pharmacopoeia it's good and anything that isn't is bad it fatally flawed in many many ways.
I don't think they'll pursue this very far. All it's going to take is one thing Oz says that works that they say doesn't but actually does and now everything else they say is in question.
If you have unwavering faith in the pharmaceutical industry to be acting only out of the best interests of your health in an ethical manner at all times then you must not have seen these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://projects.propublica.org...
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/soci...
http://www.plosmedicine.org/ar...
http://www.nature.com/nature/j...
Need Mercedes parts ?
Yes, Monsanto developed the terminator gene technology.
They have never used it in their products.
Yes, Monsanto enforces their contract that prohibits seed saving by farmers. If farmers want to use seed saved from harvest for the next year's crop, they have to use some other source for their initial seed. Most US and European farmers were already buying seed every year before GMO seed became available. This was less common with soybeans, but the trend was there.
NPR report on the Top Five Myths Of Genetically Modified Seeds.
I dont disagree with your theory, I agree as well in actuality. but oz doesnt help the situation as much as he thinks
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Actually chinese snake oil actually works - it' made from water snakes with a high Omega 3 content and is still sold today. It has proven efficacy at a topical liniment to relieve inflammation mostly in joints..
American snake oil was made from rattlesnakes who ate mice and contained no Omega 3 and didn't do anything. So it's really a pejorative of the patent medicine industry in the US, and a known working product in Asia. It says more about the person using it that doesn't know this than it does about anything else.
That is it's not really hokum the pharma industry just fucked it up without knowing what they were doing and never tested it properly. If you watch Ben Goldacre's Ted talk you'll see the exact same thing happens today and if you look at the history of scurvy it's been going on for at least 500 years.
And they always say they're right of course.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Dr oz is a fucking faggot?
I bring the public information that will help them on their path to be their best selves. We provide multiple points of view, including mine which is offered without conflict of interest.
Says the man who promotes male genital mutilation. He certainly demonstrates a cultural bias if not a conflict of interest.
they're jealous because they want to be successful snake oil salesmen?
so according to you, the only reason to oppose snake oil salesmen... is because you want to be one?
Some of the stuff he promotes is so horrific, that normal people will vomit on trying them, all at very low low hundreds of dollars.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
The 2 types of doctors. Those that treat the sick. Those that cure illnesses.Example: All those with a Novell CNE raise your hand. Are you still working on Novell Netware. Did you ever have clean a virus out of the NOS ? Now all you MCSE peoples do the same thing.
if we test things? Don't you know that blindly following authority is the key to life on earth and biology is the tool of the Devil? ;)
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
outs you all as a bunch of religious crackpots who are not one damn bit better than the GOP except in your own weakened Protestant minds. (Yes, we know where scientific spiritualists got all your copy from, and we'd be laughing our asses off at you if you weren't useful to the elites and therefore dangerous.)
If you think GMOs are so great, then I expect you'll announce your opposition to gene and plant patents so that the technology is not subordinate to the corporate structures that invent them. Otherwise, you're a shill for your class interests, thus every bit as insane and expendable as the GOP's followers.
Funny how "science" means whatever Monsanto wants it to mean this week, innit?
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
If you're rich, you can do anything. If you are a big donor to a university, the rules simply do not apply to you. See also Steven Salaita, where there is some evidence of just this happening, along with the usual identity-politics shills coming out to astroturf for power.
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
I know Americans' heads are so full of BS that they can't understand the roles surrounding the means of production, but there are definite class interests involved here. They're protecting the popular credibility of industrial medicine against competitors, and thus the value of their skills and their value to their corporate sponsors, against a world with new information.
You're competing for your imaginary friends with MY life. Is there any reason that you're not completely expendable as a matter of self-defense?
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
One of the MD co-signers is a convicted felon but mainstream media absolutely refuses to report that. This media attack was yet again the Monsanto discredit bureau doing what they do best, destroying anyone brave enough to speak out against the dangers of glyphosate & GMOs. I mean you get that right? It's funny, I think Soilent Green any time I read about MonSatan these days but chances are in reality they're far worse
My understanding is that caffeine and other stuff in coffee beans is intended to keep away predators (insects etc).
I've been collecting coffee grounds as adding them to my garden as
a) They add minerals which plants love (phosphorus, potassium, nitrogen, magnesium)
b) For tomatoes, they help keep the tomato bugs away
However, it's also gone beyond the original intended purpose (killing weeds), and is used as a desiccant. To make wheat easier to harvest, it is soaked in glyphosate to speed the drying process pre-harvest.
That's convenient for the farmers, but there are a lot of studies showing links between celiac'ism etc and glyphosate overuse. Notably, a lot of people with gluten intolerance seem to be able to eat wheat-products in Europe (where the roundup/glyphosate use is often banned), but get sick when eating it in the US.