Talk:Patrick Holford

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents 1 Holford's diploma and his claim to be published in The Lancet 2 Suggested addition on qualifications 3 Criticism re. accuracy of some of Holford's work 4 What are his qualifications? When/where?

[edit] Holford's diploma and his claim to be published in The Lancet

I started this article, and I personally am impressed with Holford's books, but I don't want to be tricked into posting inaccurate information. I know, for example that Gillian McKeith's claims to have a doctorate are rather suspect, as it's from a non-accredited college. I gathered my information from Holford's books, and from his profile on his website.

An anon added "His only qualification in Nutrition is a diploma conferred by this, the institution he himself founded." on 26 March.[1] I changed that, because it's rather POV; it implies that the qualification is suspect, and that he's not properly qualified. Information that is accurate (assuming that this is accurate) can still violate NPOV through its placing — when it is intended to give a particular impression.

Yesterday, another anon changed:

His research into the rôle that nutrition plays in children's IQ levels was published in The Lancet in 1988.

to

He has often stated that his research into the rôle that nutrition plays in children's IQ levels was published in peer-reviewed academic journal The Lancet in 1988. However, the medical indexes show that there has never been an article in The Lancet with Holford's name on it.

As it was added by an anon, there is no possibility of a follow-up — asking the user where and how this can be verified. I don't have access to The Lancet indexes. I don't want to insist on keeping that claim if it's not accurate. But while many unregistered users make sensible, conscientious edits, there are some who don't; and the fact that anons can change IP every time they log on means that they can't be contacted on their talk page and held accountable for their claims. I know, for example, that anons often target Institut Le Rosey and Salem witch trials, adding hoax names of former students in one case, and names of executed "witches" in the other.

After some hesitation, I removed that addition, and put the {{accuracy}} tag at the top of the article. I'd appreciate input from people who have knowledge of this issue. Thanks. AnnH ♫ 18:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page Ann for complete NPOV the article should make it clear that the title nutritionist is unregulated in the UK and is commonly mistaken for dietition which is a professional regulated body. I think balanced criticism can be quoted from the Guardian article [2] so I'll give it a go as I think for NPOV this should be included. Sophia 11:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll watch out for your edit(s), Sophia, and I found the Guardian article quite interesting. Bear in mind, though, that if the title is unregulated, it doesn't mean that a particular holder of the title is unqualified. In Ireland, and probably in the UK, people can call themselves "musicians" without any music qualifications, and can set themselves up as music teachers (though they're unlikely to get a job in a reputable institute). However, that shouldn't discredit those who have, say, a BMus and an FTCL. There are also some (older) musicians who are much sought after for masterclasses, adjudicating, etc., who don't have lots of "letters after their names" simply because some of the mainstream qualifications either didn't exist or were not considered important when they were training. These people are more than capable of training younger musicians for all the prestigious diplomas. As far as I know, Patrick Holford lectures on the diploma course at his own institute, and that diploma has now been upgrated to a Foundation Degree, accredited by the University of Luton.

Regarding the claim about the Lancet, I looked in several of my Patrick Holford book (the "about the author" page), and found no mention of the Lancet. One of them — The H Factor — did, however, say that his research was the subject of a Horizon documentary. So I've added that, I've taken out the Lancet claim, and I've removed the accuracy tag. AnnH ♫ 12:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Usually with academic qualifications there are honorary degrees etc to sort out those problems - however the question has been asked that if an equivilent recognized body exists - why is he not a member. Usually people become experts in the established fields before they branch off. As you say all this does not reflect on his abilities but as a scientist I would treat his conclusions with caution and look for external verified evidence (no different to Jesus etc actually!) which is what I think the Guardian article is basically saying - don't ignore but treat with caution. I'll suggest any changes here before I add them to the article. I'm busy over the next couple of days (half term) so I may not do it till next week. Sophia 13:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested addition on qualifications

The BMJ is only on-line from 1996 but in September when I begin my teacher training course I'll have access to the Uni library so can check the archives for the 1988 paper. Until then unless someone else beats me to it here's my suggestion for balance.

In the UK nutritionist is not term covered by a registered professional body so some have questioned Patrick Holford's qualifications and expertise. [3]

Any thoughts? Sophia 11:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd like Ann to comment before I add it incase I've missed something. Sophia 06:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thanks Sophia. That's fine, though I think I'd use "title" instead of "term", maybe something like "the title nutritionist is not regulated by" etc. AnnH ♫

Will do with change as suggested. Sophia 10:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism re. accuracy of some of Holford's work

Added a specific example of how the accuracy of Holford's work has been criticised - the article seemed slightly too positive for a NPOV in my opinion. At the moment, there's very little in the article that would make people view Holford's research as less than reliable - whereas I would argue that some of his claims are unjustified. I'm open to suggestions, though, if people think this criticism is too critical/inappropriate etc Jon m

[edit] What are his qualifications? When/where?

Just looking over his bio at the mo, I think it would be extremely useful to list his qualifications as it is a factual area that has not been covered