Metabolic Type: Unscientific Premise, Dangerous Advice

Dr. Joseph Mercola is a prolific writer with a large following. Much of his advice is well-founded and worth reading.

Lately, however, I have been asked by readers of DiseaseProof to assess some of his more outlandish claims: for instance, that coconut oil has miraculous properties, that "metabolic type" (as determined by a $59 online survey) determines dietary requirements, that special butter and grass-fed beef are wonderful health foods.

By looking at these things in detail, I have found that in some cases Dr. Mercola is not practicing good science.

That does not mean everything he advocates is wrong or that his diet is not better than the much worse diet that most Americans eat. However his judgment and nutritional advice is not scientifically based and demonstrates poor judgment and bias.

For instance, there has never been a study showing that any blood type or "metabolic type" is protected from the dangerous effects (primarily heart disease and cancer) of a diet rich in red meat and butter. His advice appeals to the majority of Americans who are addicted to meat and want to justify their dangerously high consumption of saturated fat (butter, cheese and meat) with rationalizations that lack adequate scientific support. Prudent people must recognize that red meat and butter (even if consumed raw from grass-fed cows) must be avoided or consumed in very minimal quantities by all types of people to assure protection against premature aging and the leading causes of death.

I have already addressed his claims about coconut oil, in the comments of a previous post.

Over the next few days, we will investigate:

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
Comments (4) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
row - March 21, 2006 1:15 AM

"Dr. Joseph Mercola is a prolific writer with a large following. Much of his advice is well-founded and worth reading."
dr mercola pushes a meat based, [so called] "healthy fat" diet,he is part of the price -pottenger foundation. go to his web site----lnked in above article and do a search on vegetarian, nothing positive comes up.If dr fuhrman recommended dr mercola as good writer, I don't know how he came to that conclusion. I am not impressed with dr mercola writting content

Joel Fuhrman - March 21, 2006 5:11 PM

Okay, so I started being a little too polite, wait until you see the rest of my comments on Mercola coming the rest of the week.

row - March 27, 2006 10:28 AM

I take back my comment that I posted early, thankyou very much for all the long hours you must have put in to write all those fine papers on Dr Mercola.

go meat! - January 22, 2010 4:51 PM

we have been eating meat as a major source of food for thousands of years. there is nothing unhealthy about it. we were meant to be meat eaters. the metabolic diet i follow is all free range and organic. if man would stop screwing with the food we have to eat and adding chemicals to it we be better off. the truth is...because of the cost of organic and the way the economy is, the average american cannot afford to go comepletely organic. in the end, they end up have to scrimp and save by eating that jumk sold at the grocery store full of additives which causes toxicity or imbalances in the body that screw up our body function and even if you exercise daily, you still aren't going to get healthy. i think you are right in saying there should be research done to back the claims he is making, but not everyone who eats red meat dies of heart desease. that has to do with your heredity just as much as what you consume.

Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?