Newsweek had an interesting article on Oprah this week, titled, "Why health advice on 'Oprah' could make you sick," that lists all the quacks and charlatans that she has had on her show, including:
Suzanne Somers who takes over sixty vitamins a day and injects estrogen into her vagina.
Dr. Christiane Northrup who uses tarot cards to help diagnose her patients.
Dr. Karyn Grossman who touted the one-hour face lift!, without bothering to mention the serious side effects and complications to the procedure.
The article has a few more "experts" that Oprah has given air time to, but failed to mention my least-favorite quack, Dr. Phil. "You don't need a porcupine to put some pep in your step!" That lovely token is from the Dr. Phil quote generator, and honestly sounds just like the random, nonspecific, and nonsensical stuff that he says. You just went there too, didn't you? LOL.
I know that everyone should have the right to air out their latest crackpot idea or opinion, but for Oprah to give them credence really frustrates me, because people believe her and her opinion. Often she doesn't feel the need to include science or empirical evidence, or heck even a warning. Dr. Oz supports the show by saying that people should not take Oprah's experts advice without consulting a doctor, but some people really don't have any sense. It's unfortunate but true. This is a case that everyone (even celebrities) should have the freedom to say what they want, but it still frustrates me when people get hurt or sick because of it. I am really glad that Newsweek wrote this article, so people might think about Oprah and her claims a little more critically.
What do you think?
Kosova, W. & Wingert, P. (2009, June 9). Why health advice on 'Oprah' could make you sick. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/id/200025
MangyDog. (2009). Dr. Phil quote generator. Retrieved from http://www.genfun.net/drphil.htm
Not Goodbye, but See Ya Later
9 months ago
OK so I confess to watching Oprah. I also confess to being a fan of Dr. Oz. I have not seen the Suzanne Somers show. I did see Dr. Northrup but not any part where she mentioned tarot cards; maybe she's been on more than once. I didn't see the other doc either. I lost respect for Dr. Phil when he tried to save Britney, never have seen his show. But many watch these shows daily and consider the hosts to be credible sources.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that even with warnings, some people don't have any sense and would blindly follow anything that they think Oprah recommends. (Note that she doesn't use any of these practices or docs personally, however, that we know of.)
People will also believe things they find on the Internet as far as medical information. We are fortunate that we know how to look for signs that a source is credible. But everyone does not have that knowledge, so issuing warnings should be required. Maybe they occur in fine print in the scroll. If so, they need to occur in large print before and after the show and verbally by Oprah. I hadn't heard about this article so thanks for sharing it.
Excellent topic! I am an on and off again Oprah fan. I started getting frustrated with her lately because of all the "stuff" she seems to be selling Americans. I am fine if she wants to promote reading or to talk about the latest gadgets she cannot live without. But every other day is about her spirituality and her latest opinions on health. And all that bs from Suze Orman-- oh goodness, do not even get me started. Who does she think she is?
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that Americans have elevated Oprah to god-like status. People blindly accept her stamp of approval without thinking of whether its good for them or not. Thus-- a 20 second warning is just as useful as those warnings on cigarettes or those warnings on rollercoasters. (Not useful!)
Thankfully, that article by Newsweek shows that at least some people are starting to question the supremeness of Oprah.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteGreat and interesting topic. I want to first say that I'm not a real fan of Oprah -- although I give her two thumbs up when she donates items to families in need around the holidays. But aside from that I never really pay to much attention to Oprah, that is until you posted this crazy blog about her. I can't believe she would host such as show like this and allow celebraties that people love and admire to share their most weirdest secrets. For example, the one that really bothered me the most is the comment from Suzanne Somers who openly states she injects estrogen into her vagina -- Yuke!! -- Now what happens when a dedicated Oprah fan tries this at home and gets hurt. (and I bet this has happened)..With that being said, I wonder if Oprah has ever been sued by a dedicated fan who claimed her talk show caused them to do something crazy and dangerous. I know this may sound outlandish but you would be surprise with the things people try to get away with...Poor Oprah and her fans!!!
I confess to not watching either Oprah or Dr. Phil, but I have seen a few minutes of Oprah while waiting for the news, and it's hard to esxape the ubiquitous Dr. Phil--he was even on Sesame Street! I think he's dangerous becaue he does not seem to realize--or perhaps care--that some people have serious psychological problems that cannot be resolved in an hour. And his comments are so irritating and perplexing. As for Oprah, I'll give her her due: she engages in pilanthropy and her book club got people to read--good things to be sure. But she is an intelligent woman: she knows that having "quacks" on her show serves as an endorsement of their practices; she has an obligation,given her great and somewhat inexplicable, influence to be more responsible, more accountable. I do not know if warnings would work: desperate people will latch onto the slimmest of hopes, and that is what makes the situation so sad. Tammy
ReplyDeleteGood point Donna and Tammy about warnings probably not working. I've generally considered Oprah to be a force for good despite her ego many times interfering. She seems to have a penchant for having famous "friends" on the show, and I wonder if that has anything to do with who she's allowing to speak about medical issues. I'll be interested to know whether she responds to the Newsweek article.
ReplyDeleteI have mixed emotions... Oprah, like every other TV show is looking for ratings, ratings, ratings. I am sure the discussions around having a guest focus on anticipated ratings, not how accurate or ethical they are. Where the problem enters is Oprah has such a following, and has gotten enough postive recogonition for admirable things she has done, that many are under the false impression that she is an authority on way too many things. So because of her status and success is it reasonable to set higher standards for her? While it may be the "right" thing to do she has no legal responsibility. Maybe the problem is not that she is giving others a podium, maybe it is the fact that for so long there has been no counter voice. Kudos to Newsweek for providing an opposing viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteI think MB, that is why it bothers me so much is because she doesn't have any legal responsibility and doesn't always seem to do the "right" thing. For me, it is a pick and choose, because I love Oprah magazine, I have watched a couple of her shows, and overall I think she is an excellent role model to so many people. At the same time, I was really disappointed with her due to her January cover, where she came out saying she couldn't believe she gained weight again. A couple of previous months was an article all about loving yourself and self-acceptance. I very strongly believe size acceptance and not dieting, so I felt really bad that she felt it was okay to shame herself in such a negative, and public way. It is a really negative message to send, and I think it was inappropriate. If anyone is interested in the topic of size acceptance and Oprah, here are a couple of links:
ReplyDeleteDarryl Roberts: An open letter to Oprah
Kate Harding: Dear Oprah
It's good to see that the mainstream media has finally "outed" Oprah--she's been receiving criticism in skeptic circles for years. Though Oprah does do some good, I think that constantly having these quacks on her show without any real criticism is irresponsible and immoral.
ReplyDeleteAnd I think Newsweek went far too easy on Dr Oz--though he might be a fine heart surgeon, he also seems to believe in & promote a lot of wacky things: http://skeptologic.com/2008/05/15/the-not-so-wonderful-wizard-of-oz/
Given the popularity of such junk science, I sometimes worry if libraries share guilt for the harm it does every time we purchase another alternative medicine book for the collection.
I agree. I just keep coming back to accuracy and scope. If books show both the benefits and potential dangers, then I think it is fine, but having materials that do not offer full information is irresponsible.
ReplyDelete