Talk:Joseph Mercola

Consumer food safety template

Joseph Mercola has been added to the Consumer food safety template in the section "Regulation, standards, watchdogs". That is very odd and should be removed. I noticed that the Weston A. Price Foundation has also been added to the same template. I don't know if this was a mistake or it is trolling, but this is clearly misuse of the template and these should be removed. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

It's not really clear how the template is really intended unless it's in reference to Mercola's misdoings and scrutiny of them, but I saw a few other categories that didn't really seem valid at the template either, so I removed a few. KoA (talk) 18:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

If the other topics with controversial histories are fine in staying it would be inconsistent and unprofessional for Mercola and WAPF to not be allowed. Altanner1991 (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Mercola's misdoings shouldn't negate the fact that he is, or was, the most involved in the topic across the internet. Just my 0.02. Put another way, it doesn't seem right to me to devise a system whereby controversial people have an article but not on navboxes, etc. That is overly penal. Altanner1991 (talk) 09:59, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

The Non-GMO project is just as pertinent and it is reputable; it should likewise not be removed. Altanner1991 (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Oof, please see WP:FRINGE for calling the Non-GMO Project reputable, which also applies to Mercola. We have to be careful about lumping such subjects into more reputable groups or people. KoA (talk) 15:19, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Complete nonsense, because the other pages on that navbox are just as controversial. Altanner1991 (talk) 15:41, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

If they are allowed to have an article, then they are allowed to be on the related navboxes. Altanner1991 (talk) 15:46, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Existence doesn't imply WP:CONSENSUS, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't really a grounded argument. As was already made clear, the edit related to this page was overreaching for the category. KoA (talk) 15:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Alrighty. I guess they'd be better organized on navboxes like Template:Alternative medicine or maybe even Template:Pseudoscience/Template:Conspiracy theories. Altanner1991 (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

New documentary

Mercola was the topic of an NY Times documentary (Links: NY Times, Hulu). Perhaps it might be something worth including in the article. ScienceFlyer (talk) 05:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect

Wikipedia has posted incorrect info about Mercola 184.62.202.42 (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Uh oh. Sad! Now you only need to tell us which information that is and which reliable source we can cite to correct it. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:54, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Hypocritical FDA

"the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned Mercola and his company that they were making illegal claims for their products' ability to detect, prevent, and treat disease." And yet, the FDA is allowed to make claims that a drug or vaccine is safe, then later have to recall many of them, after so many nasty side effects and deaths are reported. If the FDA is so errant in the approval process, why should I trust them, and why are they allowed to continue with impunity? 75.174.135.52 (talk) 07:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)