Dr. Mehmet Oz is one of the most influential promoters of outright quackery. I once (many years ago) met him at a meeting where we both were lecturing. My impression was that he does not believe a single word he speaks. Oz later became a TV star and had ample occasion to confirm my suspicion.
Oz’s wife, Lisa, is a Reiki master and has spoken widely of her insights into energy and health. Mehmet Oz appeared as a health expert on The Oprah Winfrey Show. In 2009, Winfrey offered to produce a syndicated series. The Dr. Oz Show debuted in September 2009 and became the most successful promotion of charlatanery in the US. During a Senate hearing on consumer protection in 2014, Senator Claire McCaskill stated that “the scientific community is almost monolithic against you” for airing segments on weight loss products that are later cited in advertisements, concluding that Oz plays a role, intentional or not, in perpetuating these scams, and that she is “concerned that you are melding medical advice, news, and entertainment in a way that harms consumers.” This judgement was supported by a 2014 analysis published in the BMJ; here is the abstract:
Objective To determine the quality of health recommendations and claims made on popular medical talk shows.
Design Prospective observational study.
Setting Mainstream television media.
Sources Internationally syndicated medical television talk shows that air daily (The Dr Oz Show and The Doctors).
Interventions Investigators randomly selected 40 episodes of each of The Dr Oz Show and The Doctors from early 2013 and identified and evaluated all recommendations made on each program. A group of experienced evidence reviewers independently searched for, and evaluated as a team, evidence to support 80 randomly selected recommendations from each show.
Main outcomes measures Percentage of recommendations that are supported by evidence as determined by a team of experienced evidence reviewers. Secondary outcomes included topics discussed, the number of recommendations made on the shows, and the types and details of recommendations that were made.
Results We could find at least a case study or better evidence to support 54% (95% confidence interval 47% to 62%) of the 160 recommendations (80 from each show). For recommendations in The Dr Oz Show, evidence supported 46%, contradicted 15%, and was not found for 39%. For recommendations in The Doctors, evidence supported 63%, contradicted 14%, and was not found for 24%. Believable or somewhat believable evidence supported 33% of the recommendations on The Dr Oz Show and 53% on The Doctors. On average, The Dr Oz Show had 12 recommendations per episode and The Doctors 11. The most common recommendation category on The Dr Oz Show was dietary advice (39%) and on The Doctors was to consult a healthcare provider (18%). A specific benefit was described for 43% and 41% of the recommendations made on the shows respectively. The magnitude of benefit was described for 17% of the recommendations on The Dr Oz Show and 11% on The Doctors. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest accompanied 0.4% of recommendations.
Conclusions Recommendations made on medical talk shows often lack adequate information on specific benefits or the magnitude of the effects of these benefits. Approximately half of the recommendations have either no evidence or are contradicted by the best available evidence. Potential conflicts of interest are rarely addressed. The public should be skeptical about recommendations made on medical talk shows.
During the presidential campaign in 2016, Oz supported Trump and hosted him on his TV show. In 2018, Donald Trump appointed him to the President’s Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition, Oz was criticized as an example of choosing “pundits over experts”. Recently, Oz announced he intends to run for the U.S. Senate as a Republican.
In April 2020, Oz also spurred controversy because he said that children should be sent back into schools despite the fact that the novel coronavirus pandemic had only just begun and there were no vaccines or therapeutics yet available. “I tell you, schools are a very appetizing opportunity,” he said, claiming that resuming classes “may only cost us 2 to 3 percent in terms of total mortality,” according to his “reading” of medical journals. The mistake was so substantial that Oz later provided a kind of half-apology, saying that he “misspoke.”
Dr Oz the far right charlatan doctor and Oprah Winfrey the far left specialist in cahoots. I am so confused how these two hooked up, amazing. Popularity and money can make a person shallow, no?
Correction, I believe Oprah and Oz are medium left and right, not extreme.
I would never vote for OZ, he is fake.
Not sure any correction is needed. Where anyone is on the politicfal spectrum is certainly not a precise science. Oz easily falls into “extreme” by almost any measure–he had Trump on his show and totally bought the whole farce of Trump’s letter from his doctor that we now know from the doctor in question that Trump wrote himself–no surprise there if you look at the pompous and increulous language used in the letter.
As to Oprah, she seems a bit more sincere but is in the end an opportunist. She grew up poor and abused so will do anything to escape all that, but I certainly hope she regrets showering fame and fortune on the most distasteful quack Oz.
Oz is not the only quack she promoted. There are other quacks she promoted:
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2018/01/09/oprah-winfrey-president-anyone-remember-pseudoscience-quackery-shes-promoted/
She is not the only one that promotes quacks on TV but she is certainly one of the most famous celebrities to do so repeatedly.
Hahaha I saw this comment on FB, I wonder which one you would choose 🙂
“Least terrible option?
a) Oz on his own TV show
b) Oz in politics
c) Oz hosting Jeopardy
d) Oz playing GP in real life”
Sending children back to school “may only cost us 2 to 3 percent in terms of total mortality,”
His mistake is that mortality rates for children are actually much less than 1 percent. Meanwhile suicide rates for school age children skyrocketed. Dr Oz’s assessment that they should be is school is correct.
Here is a listing of the studies on HCQ, which they assess:
“Early treatment consistently shows positive effects. Negative evaluations typically ignore treatment time, often focusing on a subset of late stage studies.”
https://c19hcq.com/
I recommend an antidote to this blogpost. Read “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health.” You can decide for yourself who the real frauds and purveyors of medical misinformation are..
a good comment:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dr-oz-shouldnt-be-a-senator-or-a-doctor/?amp;text=Dr
Here is more on this story:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/01/dr-oz-dropped-by-columbia-amid-pro-trump-republican-senate-run-report?CMP=share_btn_tw
Apparently, gods of quackery were not kind to America’s Quack Doctor.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/pennsylvania-senate-midterm-2022-john-fetterman-wins-election-rcna54935
… and I thank them for it!
Pennsylvania would elect a person without a heartbeat, forget about a missing brain.
It may have been to late to take his name off the ballot, but voters still checked the box…. lol
US elections are more shameful than banana republics.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dead-man-wins-reelection-as-pennsylvania-state-representative/ar-AA13W0BT