You ask, "Do you think that Gillian McKeith's "work" does more harm than
good?"
The concern is the way her views are dressed up as science. This
misrepresents science and ill informs rather than provides accurate
information and education.
It is a moot point whether the net effect is a good or bad thing - promoting
healthy living is good but promoting bad science and odd beliefs is bad and
could potentially be quite harmful.
But I'm a GP and a scientist! (And don't want people to bring me their
faeces for inspection).
See http://www.badscience.net/ (or the recent Guardian articles) for an
expose of this.
Kind regards,
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: Evidence based health (EBH)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of sue hall
Sent: 15 February 2007 10:45
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Fwd: [Health Care Renewal] The Threat of Pseudoevidence-Based
Medicine
Hi
I am not a scientist or a medic, just a reasonably well-informed member of
the public, but I'd like to put a layperson's point of view. Do you think
that Gillian McKeith's "work" does more harm than good? How bad is the
science? I see her helping people to think twice about what they consume
and how they live - maybe she is popular because her method is successful,
people can identify with what she does?
On the faecal examination, shouldn't we all be keeping an eye on what we
pass, for our health's sake. Don't Austrian toilets have a shelf for that
purpose?
I have felt for a long time that TV lets us down generally by promoting
very few programmes which advocate healthy eating, most of the cookery
programmes still use lots of butter, cheese, cream, chocolate etc; at least
she redresses the balance?
best wishes
Sue
|