Mercola Articles

[Anonymous]

I'm just wondering what the credibility of the articles about the swine flu at the Mercola website are. I read several last night and they all seem rather convincing. Is it a legitimate medical site or a quack site?

[Anonymous]

100% quack.

Read this: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=mercola

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:100% quack.

Read this: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=mercola

Sciencebasedmedicine.org is a legit site?

[Anonymous]

It's legitimate in that alternative medicine proponents raise legitimate questions about the traditional practice of medicine and often real overreliance on drugs to solve our problems. It's illegitimate in that it has no science (yet) to back up the claims that vaxes and other drugs are inherently harmful. That's not to say that some vaxes haven't been proven harmful over the years, they have. But he turns his back on most traditional medicine and that site tries to beat it into your head that if it's a drug, it's by definition bad. And if it's alternative medicine, it's by definition perfect. Neither of which is true.

But do not be fooled. He's making a fortune off what he sells.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:100% quack.

Read this: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=mercola

Sciencebasedmedicine.org is a legit site?

Look at the blog editors -- REAL MDs who make real arguments. Real the article -- makes an abundance of scientific sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:100% quack.

Read this: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=mercola

Sciencebasedmedicine.org is a legit site?

Look at the blog editors -- REAL MDs who make real arguments. Real the article -- makes an abundance of scientific sense.

Mercola isn't a real doctor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:100% quack.

Read this: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=mercola

Sciencebasedmedicine.org is a legit site?

Look at the blog editors -- REAL MDs who make real arguments. Real the article -- makes an abundance of scientific sense.

Mercola isn't a real doctor?

He's a DO, not an MD. Make of that what you will.

[Anonymous]

penguinsix wrote:Mercola is not an MD but an DO (Doctor of Osteopath). He refuses to reveal where he did his residency and I'm not sure what medical school he attended.

DO vs. MD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_M.D._and_D.O.

There's another review of Mercola here, building on the other points raised in sciencebasedmedicine
http://genome.fieldofscience.com/2009/10/more-misinformation-on-flu-from-mercola.html

Quackwatch:
http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/mercola.html

And here:
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2008/08/mercola_still_lying.php


Mercola exists to sell his products. He has everything from 'cures' to tanning beds (yes, I kid you not). The FDA has cracked down on him twice for making ridiculous 'snake oil' claims for some of his products, and he has basically zero respect from the scientific community.

Taking his advice on Swine Flu is tantamount to having the store manager of your local GNC vitamin store working as your pediatrician.

Yikes, ok that makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's legitimate in that alternative medicine proponents raise legitimate questions about the traditional practice of medicine and often real overreliance on drugs to solve our problems. It's illegitimate in that it has no science (yet) to back up the claims that vaxes and other drugs are inherently harmful. That's not to say that some vaxes haven't been proven harmful over the years, they have. But he turns his back on most traditional medicine and that site tries to beat it into your head that if it's a drug, it's by definition bad. And if it's alternative medicine, it's by definition perfect. Neither of which is true.

But do not be fooled. He's making a fortune off what he sells.

I agree with the above.

I will point out though, that a Doctor of Osteopath IS a real doctor, who can perform surgery in the US and prescribe medication. (Not that the PP objected to Mercola on these grounds, but another poster did.)

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002020.htm

Doctor of Osteopathy (D.O.)

Osteopathy A doctor of osteopathic medicine (D.O.) is a physician licensed to practice medicine, perform surgery, and prescribe medication.

Like allopathic physicians (or M.D.s), osteopathic physicians complete 4 years of medical school and can choose to practice in any specialty of medicine. However, osteopathic physicians receive an additional 300 - 500 hours in the study of hands-on manual medicine and the body's musculoskeletal system.

I have great respect for osteopathy and the fact that a person is one doesn't discredit him, in my book. Mercola, however, I have no use for.

[Anonymous]

Qucik agree and defense of DOs! They are equal to MDs except that their training includes a focus in a holistic approach. This was not the dominant training favored in the US for a long time, so MDs became more known, but obviously we are moving in that direction now. They have equal training and pass same boards as an MD. YOu may not even realize that a doc you see is a DO vs. a MD

[Anonymous]

The first tab on his web site is a series of products he sells:

*pills
*air purifiers
*juicers
*massagers
*Ferrite beads
*grass fed beef and free range chicken
*anti-aging secrets
*a variety of DVDs and books
*weight loss product

The fourth tab sells dog products

Here are the positions he's currently hiring for. I will put asterisks by any position with medical or scientific expertise:

C# developer
Brand Manager
Chef
Marketing Manager
Product Manager
Customer Service Rep
Content Writer
Copy Writer
International Writer
(whew, my asterisk key barely made it through that exercise!)


Bottom line: go to scientists for science. Got to a marketer when you want to buy something. Don't confuse the two.