Controversies related to Mehmet Oz

Controversies of Mehmet Oz relates to widespread criticism that he has received due to his tendency to feature pseudoscientific information on his show The Dr. Oz Show and other public platforms. He has been widely criticized by physicians, government officials, and publications, including Popular Science and The New Yorker, for giving non-scientific advice and promoting alternative medicine. In 2014, the British Medical Journal examined over 400 medical or health recommendations from 40 episodes of his program and found that only 46% of his claims were supported by reputable research, while 15% of his claims contradicted medical research and the remainder of Oz's advice were either vague banalities or unsupported by research.

Pseudoscientific claims

A study published in the British Medical Journal on the effectiveness of Oz's medical advice found that only 46 percent of his recommendations had any scientific backing or rationale. The study showed that 39 percent had no supporting scientific evidence, while the remaining 15 percentage points went directly against scientific evidence.

Popular Science and The New Yorker have published critical articles on Oz surrounding his "non-scientific" advice. These criticisms include questioning if he is "doing more harm than good" and pointing out his questionable treatment of eating disorders.

Oz has also been supportive of homeopathy and has stated that he is a proponent of alternative medicine and that he makes great efforts to inform viewers that he neither sells nor endorses any supplements. As well, Oz's image and quotes have been used in many weight loss product scams, and has made statements that have been subsequently exploited by scammers.

In April 2015, a group of ten physicians from across the United States, including Henry Miller, a fellow in scientific philosophy and public policy at Stanford University's Hoover Institute, sent a letter to Columbia University calling Oz's faculty position unacceptable. They accused Oz of "an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain".

The James Randi Educational Foundation has awarded Oz with their Pigasus Award on three separate occasions (more than any other recipient). The aim of the award is "to expose parapsychological, paranormal or psychic frauds that Randi has noted over the previous year":

• In 2009 for the promotion of energy therapies such as Reiki.
• In 2010 for support of faith healing and psychic communication with the dead, among other controversial practices. Oz became the first person to receive a Pigasus Award two years in a row.
• In 2012, Oz won "The Pigasus Award for Refusal to Face Reality" for his continued promotion of "quack medical practices, paranormal belief, and pseudoscience".

Reparative therapy of homosexuals

A November 28, 2012 episode of The Dr. Oz Show was devoted to reparative therapy, "forms of therapy that are designed to turn a gay person straight", all of which have been directly rejected by the mainstream mental health professions. The broadcast featured Julie Hamilton, a representative of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), which offers reparative therapy, and also had guests who condemned it. Three of the groups who were consulted for the show — GLAAD, GLSEN, and PFLAG National — issued a joint press release repudiating the episode just after it aired. The press release, calling NARTH "a splinter group of anti-gay therapists/activists", criticized the episode for starting with two segments of the show featuring proponents of reparative therapy without challenge, then introducing the NARTH representative as an "expert", and providing no opinion by Dr. Oz on the subject, which the press release authors characterized as causing the audience to be "misled to believe that there are actual experts on both sides of this issue". The press release also stated that "GLSEN would not have participated in The Dr. Oz Show had we known that NARTH would be represented". Oz responded in a blog post, mentioning the opposition of respected medical organizations to the practice of reparative therapy, and saying that "if we want to reach everyone who might benefit from understanding the risks of this therapy, you have to present multiple perspectives." He also said that he agreed "with the established medical consensus", that he had "not found enough published data supporting positive results with gay reparative therapy", and that he was concerned about "potentially dangerous effects when the therapy fails". Oz also pointed out that "the guests who appeared on my show on either side of this debate agreed that entering into any therapy with guilt and self-hate is a major error."

Arsenic in apple juice

In September 2011, Oz drew criticism for a show focusing on the alleged dangers of arsenic in apple juice. Oz hired an independent toxicology laboratory, EMSL, and found arsenic levels in some samples to be above the limit the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows in drinking water. The FDA said "there is currently no evidence to suggest a public health risk", and criticized the emphasis on measurements of total arsenic without distinguishing between harmless organic arsenic compounds and toxic inorganic arsenic compounds that pose differing levels of health risk.

Consumer Reports conducted similar tests on samples of apple and grape juices around the same time. Unlike the tests done by Oz, Consumer Reports tested for both organic and inorganic types of arsenic. Results showed that 6% (5 out of 80) of the samples tested by Consumer Reports exceeded the 10-parts-per-billion (ppb) federal limit for arsenic in drinking water. However, when counting only inorganic arsenic, only one of the 80 apple juice samples tested exceeded 10-parts-per-billion limit, and even then only slightly, at 10.48 ppb. The limits, however, only apply to arsenic levels for drinking water; there are no legal limits for arsenic in fruit juices. However, after the Dr. Oz Show aired, the FDA indicated it is continuing to research the levels of arsenic in fruit juices and other foods, and may implement limits for fruit juices in the future.

Marketing claims

Real Age drug marketing

Oz is a spokesman and advisor for the website RealAge.com, which The New York Times has criticized for its pharmaceutical marketing practices. The site solicits medical information from visitors to determine a visitor's biological age and then uses the visitor's medical profile for pharmaceutical marketing purposes. As The Times reporter explained the significance of this fact: "While few people would fill out a detailed questionnaire about their health and hand it over to a drug company looking for suggestions for new medications, that is essentially what RealAge is doing."

June 2014 Senate hearing

During a Senate hearing on consumer protection, Senator Claire McCaskill stated that by airing segments on weight loss products that are later cited in advertisements, 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." Mary Engle of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) criticized Oz for calling green coffee extract "magic" and a "miracle", stating that it is difficult for consumers to listen to their inner voices when products are praised by hosts they trust.

One of the products Oz was promoting, Green Coffee Bean Extract, was found to have no weight loss benefits. Two of the researchers who were paid to write the study admitted that they could not back their data so they retracted their paper. The FTC filed a complaint that the Texas-based company Applied Food Sciences (the promoters of the study) had falsely advertised. The FTC alleged that the study was "so hopelessly flawed that no reliable conclusions could be drawn from it" so Applied Food Sciences agreed to pay a $3.5 million settlement.

Olive Oil lawsuit

In November 2016, the North American Olive Oil Association, a trade group of oil packagers and importers, sued Dr. Oz for a segment on The Dr. Oz Show. Dr. Oz told millions of his viewers in May 2016 that 80 percent of extra virgin oil in supermarkets may be “fake”. The association claimed that Oz falsely attacked the quality and integrity of Olive Oil in supermarkets and sued him for misinformation. In the segment, Oz showed a certified olive oil expert who conducted a blind smell test of five popular Italian extra virgin olive oils, claiming that only one was authentic extra virgin oil. The expert was revealed to be an employee of the California Olive Ranch, although she was not introduced as such. The group claims that it monitors the quality of olive oil by conducting independent testing on oils taken directly from the shelves of supermarkets.

The lawsuit took place in Georgia court, one of the states in the U.S. which has a food libel law and a lower threshold of proof than a defamation allegation. The Dr. Oz Show defended its story and refuted the allegations. In March 2017, the lawsuit was dismissed. The judge ruled that the association failed to show that it was financially hurt by Oz's actions and found no statements which claimed that olive oil was unsafe for human consumption.

Politics

Donald Trump's The Dr. Oz Show appearance

In September 2016, during his presidential campaign, Donald Trump appeared on The Dr. Oz Show. In the days leading up to the appearance, Trump had come under fire in the media for an apparent refusal to publicly share the results of a recent physical health examination he had undergone. In the lead-up to the show's taping, Oz promoted Trump's appearance with a guarantee to obtain and ostensibly broadcast the exam's results, although the host declared that he would not ask Trump questions the then-Republican nominee did not wish to answer.

The taping remained closed to the press. Oz reportedly read the results off of a sheet of paper Trump himself handed to the host. NBC journalist Katy Tur reported that a source in the studio claimed that Oz remarked positively regarding Trump's health report, saying he "would be happy if any of his patients had similar results." The one-page summary that Trump released to Oz reflected a health report generated by Trump's personal physician Dr. Harold N. Bornstein in 2015. Bornstein's note was widely criticized for its "unusual, brief" tone.

Reports on Trump's weight conflicted: Oz declared Trump "slightly overweight" at 236 pounds; earlier reports reported Trump's weight at 267 pounds.

Several news outlets speculated that Trump's appearance aimed to appeal to The Dr. Oz Show's large female viewership. The episode coincided with the media fallout that occurred after the Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton took a brief hiatus from the campaign trail after falling ill with pneumonia.

Bruce Japsen, Forbes contributor, criticized Trump's appearance given that Oz is not Trump's doctor. Japsen further pointed out the American Medical Association's ethics directives which warn against "personal opinion" in favor of evidence-based exams informing publicly given advice.

Backpage scandal

Oz has voiced his support of shutting down Backpage, a controversial website which was seized by U.S. authorities in April 2018. Backpage has earned millions of dollars by allowing sex ads to be hosted on its website, some of which featured children. The site has been supported by the Center for Democracy and Technology and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA) and the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) have been passed by the U.S. Congress in 2018 as a response to Backpage.