If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Doctors Say, Reader's Digest is Wrong
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, April 3, 2010 Doctors Say, Reader's Digest is Wrong Physicians and Researchers Set the Record Straight about Vitamins (OMNS, Apr 3, 2010) Yes, Reader's Digest actually said: "Once upon a time, you believed in the tooth fairy. . . And you figured that taking vitamins was good for you. Oh, it's painful when another myth gets shattered." ( http://www.rd.com/living-healthy/5-v...cle175625.html ) But these doctors disagree: "From start to finish, the Reader's Digest article, '5 Vitamin Truths and Lies' was one of the worst bits of propaganda I ever saw. There was not one word in it discussing the benefits of multivitamins, vitamin C, and studies supporting the use of vitamins for preventing cancer and heart disease. Not once was a single dose mentioned. This alone makes the entire effort a farce aimed at a readership that is relying on the publication for accurate information." Allan N. Spreen, M.D. (Mesa, AZ) "Vitamins are among the safest substances known. They have the most minimal side effects, even in large doses, compared with the death rate due to conventional drugs taken according to the manufacturers' advice. Vitamin C is among the most powerful immune modulators if given in large doses. Scare stories against the use of vitamins do the public no good." Erik Paterson, M.D. (Vancouver, BC) "This is not the first time Reader's Digest has written about "bad" vitamins, and they always seem to manage to put it on the front page. But look at their advertising: so much of it is for pharmaceutical drugs. No wonder the article states virtually nothing of the thousands of positive results with vitamins." James A. Jackson, Ph.D. (Wichita, KS) "The author of the Reader's Digest article has not understood the articles used to support her arguments. For example, with vitamin C and the common cold, the article appears to refer to the 2007 Cochrane report. However, this report has been updated frequently since 2007. The last update was on February 2nd of this year. Either the reporter did not read the up-to-date review, or she was unable to understand its content. The review applies only to low intakes, and contains major objections that studies of large doses and orthomolecular intakes were not included. All the data were for intakes far below the levels actually claimed to be effective. The summary of the paper does indeed give a misleading impression, but people might expect an intelligent reporter to check the rest of the report before giving advice." Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (Manchester, UK) "The material was not well-researched, and a bias was clearly in play. 15 pages of drug advertisements in that issue of Reader's Digest is very telling, indeed." Thomas E. Levy, M.D. (Colorado Springs, CO) "What a poor job! Reader's Digest needs to review the literature. Haven't they read any articles by Dr. Bruce Ames? Do they know what quantities of vitamin C ascorbic were used in the cold studies mentioned in their one-sided report? Do they know of the high doses that showed benefit? Do they know of the many studies that have reported benefit from vitamin E and carotenes? It's easy to be ignorant but biased. Before a magazine does such a public health disservice, first get the all the facts." Michael J. Gonzalez, Ph.D. (San Juan, PR) "As a family practitioner who has prescribed vitamins for many reasons, with beneficial results over the past 25 years, I have removed Reader's Digest from my waiting room. Unless there is a follow-up article disclaiming most of what was written, I will discourage my patients from reading Reader's Digest because of their biased and misleading information." Stephen Faulkner, M.D. (Duncan, BC) Owen Fonorow of The Vitamin C Foundation adds: "Why did Reader's Digest deem it appropriate to publish unbalanced opinions about the value of vitamins in the April 2010 issue? A balanced report would have quoted experts from both sides of the argument. The negative studies of vitamins are biased, utilizing too small amounts, especially of vitamin C, to fairly evaluate the therapeutic use of the vitamins. There is a 70-year-long history of vitamin C research (now more than 80,000 papers) that consistently shows therapeutic results at higher dosages of many thousands of milligrams. Linus Pauling recommended at least 5,000 mg of vitamin C daily for reversing heart disease. It is a serious public health mistake for Reader's Digest to recommend against a multivitamin." To give Reader's Digest one more chance at the truth, send your thoughts directly to the people responsible: To learn more about how high doses of vitamins safely and effectively fight disease: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource. Editorial Review Board: Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (Canada) Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom) Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico) Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (United Kingdom) James A. Jackson, PhD (USA) Bo H. Jonsson, MD, Ph.D (Sweden) Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA) Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico) Erik Paterson, M.D. (Canada) Gert E. Shuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands) Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D. (USA), Editor and contact person. Email: To Subscribe at no charge: http://www.orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html To Unsubscribe from this list: http://www.orthomolecular.org/unsubscribe.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Doctors Say, Reader's Digest is Wrong
On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 08:50:23 +0100, "john" wrote:
Doctors Say, Reader's Digest is Wrong Physicians and Researchers Set the Record Straight about Vitamins But these doctors disagree: Allan N. Spreen, M.D. (Mesa, AZ) Certified Nutritional Consultant , founder of The Nutrition Physician(tm), a nutrition therapy service Erik Paterson, M.D, Orthomolecular Practitioner James A. Jackson, Ph.D. PhD apparently in Physiology, Pharmacology, and Biochemistry from the School of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn. For many years head of the Bio-Centre laboratory which provides clinical assays focusing on nutritional medicine. Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (Manchester, UK) PhD in Medical Biophysics. Awarded the Volvo Award for back pain research and developed a range of conformable catheters. Member of the Alliance for Natural Health "expert committee" Thomas E. Levy, M.D. (Colorado Springs, CO) Former Medical Technical Advisor, International Tesla Society left when it went bankrupt late in 1998 due to internal political dissent. Professor, non accredited Capital University of Integrative Medicine until 2006 when CUIM discontinued its degree granting function and went out of business. Michael J. Gonzalez, Ph.D. (San Juan, PR) Inventor of the bioenergetic theory of the origin of chronic degenerative diseases. consultant for several companies and responsible for designing formulations of supplements and pharmaceutical products. Consultant for The Center for the Improvement of Human Functioning. Now why do you think all these people disagree? Might it be that they all selling books, pamphlets, nostrums and services which could be affected if anyone took any notice of the Readers Digest? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Doctors Say, Reader's Digest is Wrong
On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 08:50:23 +0100, "john" wrote:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, April 3, 2010 ################################################## ### Aha, the vitamin-mafia PR company... .. -- "Esowatch knipst Eso-seiten aus" http://www.promed-ev.de/modules/newb...d=569&forum=48 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Doctors Say, Reader's Digest is Wrong
Torrential Feedback To Reader's Digest Anti-Vitamin Article
No, You Can't Fool All the People All the Time (OMNS, Apr 8, 2010) More than half of America now takes nutritional supplements. Here's some of what the vitamin-taking public had to say to Reader's Digest about their anti-vitamin scaremongering: "The more your readers digest the lies presented in "5 Vitamin Truths and Lies", the sicker they will become. But no need to fear because your sponsors, the pharmaceutical companies, provide the remedy: drugs and lots of them, which are readily available within the pages of your magazine. Seems to me a good return on their investment." "I'm very disappointed to find out that a reputable publication such as yours would put out such a slanted and biased article about nutritional supplements. I grew up reading Reader's Digest, and used to enjoy it tremendously before it was apparently taken over by pharmaceutical ads. Then, the articles were pure and touched the heart. Now, it seems that they are biased and are only written to support Big Pharma." "Antioxidants did not cause death from cancer among smokers that you attributed to vitamins. Smoking did." "So what are you going to follow this with in your next issue Reader's Digest? 'Bacon and Hot Dogs are Actually Good For You' or '10 Ways to Serve Gravy as a Beverage'? I mean, could you BE any more of a disservice to humanity?" "Can't wait for Reader's Digest's next '5 Truths and Lies' article. Laughter is the best medicine." "The research demonstrating that vitamin supplements are beneficial in thwarting and healing heart disease, inflammatory disease, Alzheimer's disease, mental illness, diabetes, and more is solid and growing. If the article were accurate, the author might have stated the astonishing discrepancy between the number of deaths per year related to the pharmaceutical industry vs that of the nutraceutical and vitamin industry. ( http://www.doctoryourself.com/deathmed.html ) But then, those facts do not support the ad on the back cover of the magazine." "The Reader's Digest article 'Vitamin Truths and Lies' is simply an outright lie. The only part missing is the TRUTHS." "I have personally witnessed the healing effects of therapeutic doses of cheap and common vitamin supplements, such as vitamin C, niacin, and others. I think you will find many other readers who echo this sentiment." "Reader's Digest insults its readership with this type of propaganda. Add another check to the growing list of people who won't be reading any longer." "If supplement companies advertised in your magazine instead of Big Pharma, the article might have read differently. Needless to say, this was the last Reader's Digest I'll ever read." "I've been taking vitamins successfully to cure colds and prevent them for the past year. I also feel much better, lost 30lbs, and have more energy than ever. My wife used to have seasonal allergies that are no longer an issue. Vitamins do work when taken in proper doses, with virtually zero side affects, I might add." "The pharmaceutical companies are trying to protect their monopoly on healthcare by bashing supplements. The alternative to boosting your nutritional intake is to live your life on a large number of prescription drugs and poor food, while 'enjoying' a debilitated existence." "The Reader's Digest has joined the Flat Earth Society. Shame on you!" "For seven years I was a regular clinic/hospital visitor due to either severe colds or inflamed tonsils. For my tonsillitis, two EENT specialists had recommended surgical removal. Three years ago, while browsing the internet I came across websites and articles about orthomolecular medicine where I have learned the importance of supplements. In my desperation, I megadoses of vitamin C up to 23,000mg, vitamin E 800 IU, B-complex 300mg, and niacin 600mg. My tonsil inflammation was gone in 5 days." "How do sleep well at night after these awful lies, misleading the people again? Maybe with some pills from the pharmaceutical industry?" "When health issues are at stake, I would much rather put my trust in vitamin supplements than have to rely on pharmaceuticals. How many people have died from vitamins? ( http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v06n04.shtml ) How many have died from drug complications?" ( http://www.doctoryourself.com/deathmed.html ) "As I read their amazingly biased information regarding vitamins, I realized Reader's Digest does publish some nice fiction stories." "Basic biochemistry and a review of the literature support the benefits of supplementation. Not all supplementation helps. Much supplementation does. Reader's Digest discussed only science that it chose to discuss. Cherry-picking science is bad science. " "Why did you miss reporting on large studies showing vitamin supplements improve IQ scores in children?" ( http://www.doctoryourself.com/downs.html and http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v04n15.shtml ) "Having made mistakes in my own health column years ago when a reporter for a Los Angeles newspaper, I know how easy it is to disseminate false information. However, with fact checkers and common sense use of the Internet and PubMed I believe your reporter could have discovered many thousands of scientific studies on the health benefits of vitamins and minerals." "I challenge Reader's Digest to contact the doctors on the Editorial Review Board of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, and submit 'Vitamin Truths and Lies' for its critical review, and publish their response in its entirety. " "I sent a message to the Reader's Digest, lambasting them for the misinformation they had the gall to publish about vitamins. Their reply said that the author is a prize-winning writer who is known for thorough research prior to publication. I asked the Digest for references and citations. I received none." "Please see ( http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v06n12.shtml ) to read the statements from doctors refuting your article on vitamins. At the very least I hope to see Reader's Digest interview some of these researchers and physicians that have been studying and using vitamins/supplements in their practice for years, and write another article with both sides represented. You can also go to http://www.clinicalpearls.com/ witch is a website that summarizes current research in nutrition and integrative medicine." "It works for Prevention magazine, so why not Reader's Digest? I once opened a Prevention magazine and counted 18 drug ads and articles before I came to one on nutrition. Should we expect more from Reader's Digest?" "You have got to be kidding. You have ignored a flotilla of articles, peer reviewed as well, on the benefits of vitamins for a variety of conditions including macular degeneration. I know this field well as I am an ophthalmologist. The only explanation I can think of is that you have been unduly influenced by your pharmaceutical advertisers." "I am a registered nurse and read many articles on health. I feel that your recent article on vitamins was very misleading. Please ask the author to research more thoroughly and write a new article." "Ignorance may be bliss, but when ignorance is reported as if it were a truth in this case it is not bliss but close to a crime. Ignorance accompanied by 15 pages of drug advertisements is closer to a racket." "For a full and comprehensive research on what vitamins can do you need to go to http://www.orthomolecular.org and http://www.doctoryourself.com where you can find real research, not the kindergarten stuff reported in your April 2010 issue. I have been following the impeccable reporting of the orthomolecular people for years now and will give them an A+ on their content, and you a flat F." "Your slamming of vitamins and minerals is truly tragic. For those who look to Reader's Digest as a valued resource, you have let them down. You neglect of the thousands of therapeutic nutritional research studies and articles from universities and from other research teams worldwide that you can find easily in Medline, and the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine. Bad journalism (telling half the story) can result in poor health for millions. I hope your own families weren't reading this article." To post your comments at the Reader's Digest website, or to read their original biased article if you missed it: http://www.rd.com/living-healthy/5-v...cle175625.html To send your thoughts directly to the Reader's Digest editors: To learn more about how vitamins safely and effectively fight disease: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Right Name -- Wrong Man... | Dusty | Child Support | 0 | June 1st 08 12:02 AM |
am I doing something wrong? | determined | Breastfeeding | 4 | November 6th 06 02:51 PM |
You guys always ask the wrong questions and then give the wrong answers | 0;-> | Foster Parents | 0 | January 23rd 06 05:20 PM |
Need help with what could be wrong | Mark Probert-February 28, 2004 | Kids Health | 4 | March 1st 04 03:14 AM |
Isn't this just WRONG! | Irish Marie | Breastfeeding | 18 | December 13th 03 01:05 AM |