Why Correcting Dr. Fuhrman's Data is Not Enough

[RobertaRussell]

THE MOST PRESSING ISSUE NOW IS NOT DATA.

IT IS ABOUT THE CURRENT PRESENTATION OF MISLEADING CLAIMS ABOUT LONG-TERM WEIGHT LOSS WITHOUT A CORRECTION.

Bloggers have asked why I am so interested in this issue.

To set the record strait:
My fascination with learning about the best documented long-term weight loss results began many years ago before I had solved my own problem of losing weight and regaining it. After studying the non-commercial research results and interviewing leading research authorities such as G. Terrence Wilson, PhD, in 1995, I learned that the best long-term, verified weight loss results were held by the non-commercial Trevose Group. For many years I have been incorporating weight-loss and psychotherapy research into my way of life.

In the process, I interviewed Dr. Fuhrman on video when he was publicizing his first edition of his book, Eat To Live (2003). I asked him about the percentage of his patients that kept their lost weight off for 5 or more years and he speculated that it might be as much as 85 percent. I did not broadcast this half of the video because the claimed result wasn't verified. Dr. Fuhrman said then that those patient's results would be studied by Dr. Sarter and the results published. But when the retoactive study was published the facts revealed a much more average result than Dr. Fuhrman had expected. This skew is not uncommon. That's why research is done, to separate fact from unsubstantiated, biased opinion.

The Fuhrman study stopped at 2 years, even though there were 3 years of data that Dr. Fuhrman gave to Dr. Sarter. Only a handful of patients were still losing weight by 2 years. Most had dropped out in the first year and from the raw data second year produced a slight average gain for that year. That doesn't mean that the 17 or 18 patients left at 2 years did not lose an average of 37.6 or 34.25 pounds. There is no significant data conflict over that corrected data.

Sheparded by the force of Dr. Campbell's integrity, mastery of research and courage a correction was eventually published by Dr. Sarter. So that's not what the problem is about now.

Don't be misled into thinking this is about a vendetta, real or imagined. Dr. Campbell is a gentleman and he really tried to get Drs. Fuhrman and Sarter to do the correction.

THE PROBLEM LIES
WHERE DR. FUHRMAN'S STILL-BROADCAST FANTASTIC CLAIMS DEPART FROM THE RESULTS:

The 2008 published study says that the sample was "All overweight patients who came to the office between 2000 and 2003 requesting counseling for weight loss were included in this chart review."

Dr. Furhrman said "The initial number of consecutive charts I transferred to the researchers was 100, then they narrowed them down first to 62 and then to 56 using various inclusion criteria, so the numbers change, and then even fewer that continued for the full two years." (blog post)

As background, this explains why Dr. Fuhrman sometimes in his most fanciful claims refers to 100 patients as have achieved long-term weight-loss, even though the study selected 56 of them.

The raw data that Dr. Campbell and I received separately from Dr. Sarter only showed 63 patients that were narrowed down to 56, for non-compliance. The published study does not mention the pre-selection process. You can't tell why were elimianated.

DR. FUHRMAN PUBLICALLY CLAIMED Long-term success with no regain after 2 years for 100 patients when only 4 out of the 17 left were still losing and had no regain. Dr. Fuhrman made this claim RIGHT AFTER THE STUDY CAME OUT IN 2008.

Remember they were Dr. Fuhrman's consecutive patients, not strangers. Remember, he had the name of Dr. T. Colin Campbell on the study to buttress his claims. Remember that people are eager for results.

Listen for yourself.

Radio Podcast May 1, 2008

Mr. (Eric) Marcus: Thousands of people have taken up your program over the years. Can you tell us the typical results somebody can expect when they get on your plan?

Dr. Fuhrman: “…We’ve even completed a study where we followed 100 consecutive people following the plan and the average person lost 53 pounds which was more weight loss than any other program ever tested.

But I think the interesting thing was that even after the 2 years ... nobody had gained any weight and as follow-up on those people after that period they still continued to lose and didn’t gain weight back."


And the next month on another interview with Dr. Oz:

Radio Podcast June 2008

Dr. Oz: …”You are making some drastic claims with regard to losing weight in the book. In addition, you are going past that and talking about reversing disease. Walk us through that scenario.”

Dr. Fuhrman: …I just had a recent study published this month in a peer-reviewed medical journal where they followed 63 people following the diet plan and they lost more weight than any study in history and they kept it off. They followed them for 2 years.

None of the participants gained any weight back and that was the major difference between other diet plans.”

When asked, Dr Fuhrman added that this study was published in the Journal of Alternative Therapies in Health & Medicine

After reading these 2 transcripts you can go to http://www.drfuhrman.com/events/default.aspx as of now at least and listen for yourself. Scroll down when you get there and look for the dated podcasts on the left.

SPURIOUS CLAIMS OF A 100% SUCCESS IN MAINTAINING A LARGE WEIGHT LOSS FOR 2 YEARS WITHOUT ANY REGAIN, IF BELIEVED, WILL SELL BOOKS, MOVIES, TALKS, SUPPLEMENTS AND BLENDERS. Many people are desperate for a solution.

Such claims, belied by Dr. Fuhrman's own published study, currently appear in Fat Sick and Nearly Dead, a movie that is currently scrolled on the internet.

IF JOE CROSS SUBSTITUTED FUHRMAN'S REAL RESULT in Fat, Sick and Nearly Dead, STATING THAT OF THE 100 PATIENTS HE GAVE TO DR. SARTER, ONLY 4 WERE STILL LOSING WEIGHT AFTER 2 YEARS, HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT HIS BUSINESS ?

I believe that now that Joe Cross knows the truth he should do just that, as a service to the people that were duped by that claim and acted accordingly and because Dr. Campbell's reputation may be unfairly damaged by association.

The ongoing problem is not the data. .

It is that Dr. Fuhrman's misleading claims of the best weight loss ever for all of the patients in his retrospective study with no regain in 2 years, still listed as 53 pounds, is currently scrolling on the internet in Fat Sick and Nearly Dead.

Even if a note corrected the 53 pound claim to 37.6 or 34.25 pounds Dr. Furhman's claims of no regain for all even after 2 years would still be very misleading.

To correct for this misinformation the facts that most patient's dropped out by one year and that only an handful of patients were left who had not gained in the last year of the study are vital to understanding the short-term of the weight loss for most wistful dieters.

I hope that Joe Cross sets this right. He did a great job on himself and is an inspiration to others. It would be a shame to tar the fine message of healthful plant-based eating with manipulative claims that sell product and services, but do not do not provide healing truth.

Roberta Russell

[ParsleyPatch]

Roberta, thank you for helping me to understand this travesty even further. Maybe a lawsuit or two inserted into this mess by someone can clean it up!

[rijman]

Roberta, thank you for helping me to understand this travesty even further. Maybe a lawsuit or two inserted into this mess by someone can clean it up!

Rather than a lawsuit I was thinking the recent conflict played out here in the McDougall forums might open up dialogue between Dr. Fuhrman and the other doctors to hopefully make peace. I can't imagine they'll continue airing their disagreements in the forums. For the good of our community we need the plant based doctors to work together, I am suggesting a coalition, in a united front to send a clear and concise message to the public about diet and disease.

[nurseratchit]

Roberta, thank you for helping me to understand this travesty even further. Maybe a lawsuit or two inserted into this mess by someone can clean it up!

Rather than a lawsuit I was thinking the recent conflict played out here in the McDougall forums might open up dialogue between Dr. Fuhrman and the other doctors to hopefully make peace. I can't imagine they'll continue airing their disagreements in the forums. For the good of our community we need the plant based doctors to work together, I am suggesting a coalition, in a united front to send a clear and concise message to the public about diet and disease.

That would be great, but I don't get the impression Dr. Fuhrman likes sharing the stage with anyone. Joe Cross is also on the Advisory Board for Fuhrman's Nutritional Research Foundation, so I'd be surprised to see that go anywhere. https://www.nutritionalresearch.org/team

[Nutrition411]

From everything I have heard and read Dr. Fuhrman is willing to meet and discuss all the issues. Unfortunately Drs. Esseltyn and Campbell are not. Perhaps Dr. McDougall can persuade them to do so. That would be much more helpful than providing this space for nasty accusations. But if not, it is clear who wants peace and who does not.

Roberta, as you well know Dr. Fuhrman has stated he simply provided his charts and had nothing to do with the analysis. If you know anything about clinic research you would understand this. If you have other information please provide proof not more false allegations. Also Dr. F's interviews were before the errors were found and corrected, so blaming him for that is also unfair. I am surprised others have not corrected you on this as well.

[rijman]

From everything I have heard and read Dr. Fuhrman is willing to meet and discuss all the issues. Unfortunately Drs. Esseltyn and Campbell are not. Perhaps Dr. McDougall can persuade them to do so. That would be much more helpful than providing this space for nasty accusations. But if not, it is clear who wants peace and who does not.

It appears it was Dr. Fuhrman who stirred the pot with Drs. McDougall, Esselstyn and Campbell creating conflict, now you want to paint him as the peace maker? If Dr. Fuhrman didn't create the rifts to begin with there would be nothing to patch up. Perhaps the good doctors know all too well what Dr. Fuhrman is about and prefer not to associate with him whether or not he apologies for his past transgressions.

[jaysmetalart]

People have done a lot worse for the love of money.....Life is short....and chasing after this issue is getting old.....Hey I got some good news...I think I may have gotten my sister to try this WOE...I have not seen her in almost 20 years...I showed her this website and told her to read John Mcdougall's story....My mom is 70+ years old and has type 2 diabetes, this could lead her to this place also....yea...Jay

[Norm]

But if not, it is clear who wants peace and who does not.

Is it really?

Let me tell you a story. Way back when Big Norm was just a little kid I was quite the bully... Not all the time and not to all people but when I got a streak in me I was quite mean, and I learned this little trick at an early age... walk up to some kid you were mad at and push them down. Then while they were kicking and screaming pretend to offer to help them up. Nobody paid attention to what was going on until it got noisy, and by that time from all appearances I was just trying to help someone who appeared to be very hostile to me. They looked bad. I looked good. The louder they got and the more they kicked and screamed, the worse they looked and the better I looked. Great little trick for a bully, and it worked darn near every time!

I'm not saying that Dr. Furhman is a bully. I'm not even going to question the sincerity of his public offer to mend fences. But I am going to say that just because someone cries "Peace, Peace" louder than someone else doesn't prove jack diddly squat about their intentions. It may only mean they want to appear to be the peacemaker. And just because someone spurns such an offer doesn't mean they don't want peace. They may be nothing more than someone who's just been pushed down and knows a false offer of peace when they see it.

I do not believe that Dr Campbell or Esselstyn would spurn what they believed was a legitimate offer to peacefully settle this.

That's my two cents.

-Norm

[patty]

Dr. Campbell was Dr. Fuhrman's cash cow.

It just takes a few horses to change the direction of the social herd mentality. We might be next in line in to do that in a doctor's office or a ER room, with no discourse except a strong belief system to data of what works. I trust Dr. McDougall, Dr. Campbell, Dr. Esselstyn and Dr. Shintani. Why because my body tells me, and my mind follows:)

95% of our day is run by our subconscious. We subconsciously eat the same amount of weight of food daily. ETL promotes a 'calorie paradox', where you eat too many low calorie dense foods and too many higher end calorie dense food. The lack of satiety puts the person in the money seat of chasing unrequited hunger. Food and money are the last two seats on the Titanic.

80% of hospitals make their money from heart disease. Dr. Fuhrman is still part of the problem and he will be until his unconscious becomes conscious. Right now money is his drug, because he is not addressing the biological metabolic dollar/fat and oil, through starches.

Food addiction kicked my oklee. Talking to Dr. Fuhrman would be like talking to one of the doctors in the hospital, because they are vested in the dollar vs. service. Some people stay sick to teach you how to get well as some get well to teach you. No one gets thrown off the ship. It is only when you emotionally detach there are no natural consequences. Dr. Fuhrman just mirrors that part of us that doesn't get it. The best revenge is to be happy and healthy.

Aloha, patty

[carollynne]

Patty, I agree with all that you just wrote! You have a real knack for writing things down and make sense of it all for me anyway! Thanks for the analogy to the titanic, I am going to remember that one when I ever think of getting anything off the McDougall plan again.
You are a smart lady!

[carolc]

We subconsciously eat the same amount of weight of food daily. ETL promotes a 'calorie paradox', where you eat too many low calorie dense foods and too many higher end calorie dense food. The lack of satiety puts the person in the money seat of chasing unrequited hunger.

Patty
You hit the nail on the head. I did ETL for a while and that was my experience. Thank you.

[RobertaRussell]

MISLEADING CLAIMS
The problem of Dr. Fuhrman's misrepresentations can be examined and seen clearly by looking at the published evidence.

Deflecting the attention to alleged fueds or even to the merits of his diet advice doesn't change the fact that Dr. Fuhrman's claims of a successful 2-year weight loss of 53 pounds (now changed to 37.6 or 34.25) for everyone in his study, be it 100, 65 or 53 patients are not factual.

Only a handful of his patients were losing weight by 2 years and most had dropped out.

Keep in mind that these were Dr. Fuhrman's weight-loss patients, all of them for 3 years, not blind subjects in an experiment. According to Fuhrman/Sarter's published study (Dr. Campbell officially removed his name)"All overweight patients who came to the office between 2000 and 2003 requesting counseling for weight loss were included in this chart review."

Could Dr. Fuhrman have actually concluded that all of these patients lost an average of 53 pounds without regain when the data reveal that most patients had dropped out and only a handful were left who had not regained by 2 years?

Contrary to fact, this is the message currently scrolling on the internet in FSND video and on websites and other videos that reach all over the world.

[veggylvr]

From everything I have heard and read Dr. Fuhrman is willing to meet and discuss all the issues. Unfortunately Drs. Esseltyn and Campbell are not. Perhaps Dr. McDougall can persuade them to do so. That would be much more helpful than providing this space for nasty accusations. But if not, it is clear who wants peace and who does not.

Apparently, you are not reading the comments of Dr. Campbell and Dr. Esselstyn, just Dr. Fuhrman's lame excuses. Please read Dr. Campbell's additional reply to the locked thread:

Mark Simon’s commentary on Dr. Fuhrman’s misdeeds is excellent. There’s not much else to say, except perhaps to remind ourselves that the proposition of using a whole food, plant-based diet, with little or no added oil, sugar and salt, is an amazingly productive story that has so much to offer.

I must add, however, one additional comment to my own post on Dr. Fuhrman. This concerns my ‘take’ on the matter of trust in science, especially as it applies to the publication of research results in professional peer-reviewed journals. It is a process that is poorly understood by most people.

When manuscripts are submitted for publication, reviewers of the manuscripts rarely if ever see the raw data. They only see the summaries of these raw data. Thus they are compelled to trust the authors who compile the data into tables and graphs. If any of these raw data are not included, this must be explained. This process is a matter of trust that is so fundamental to science. If and when this trust is broken, penalties can be severe. At least this is the way that science is supposed to work and I am confident that it does for the vast majority of researchers who publish papers. Our reputations in science rest on this trust and without it, our reputations--and our careers--can be quickly destroyed.

I accepted Dr. Fuhrman’s request to help him publish a peer-reviewed paper by lending my name as a secondary author. I did so because I believed his claim that he had something important to say. In effect, he wanted to use my reputation because of my half-century of publishing about 350 papers, my serving on the editorial review boards of five journals and my serving on several grant review panels of NIH, the American Society and other organizations.

Fuhrman’s manuscript really was not a study. It was a summary of case histories from his practice. As project director his name was listed last, as is customary. Dr. Sarter was the person who tabulated the data. Her name was listed first, as is customary. They are the authors who assembled the data, wrote the manuscript and submitted the paper. My name was in the middle, as is customary for people who have a secondary part in the project.

The paper was submitted to two respectable journals. Both rejected the manuscript. About two years later, I inquired of Dr. Fuhrman what had become of the manuscript and he informed me that it was being published in a journal with a much lesser reputation (May 2008).

Three years later (2011) I learned that the findings of this paper were being questioned. I was urged to get a copy of the raw data to see for myself. Initially, Dr. Sarter who I have never met, denied giving me a copy. My second request succeeded, thus giving me my first opportunity to see her compilation of the data, in the form of an Excel sheet. I did my own compilation and it was flawed, as initially suspected by the person who brought this to my attention. But, importantly, this is only Dr. Sarter’s and Dr. Fuhrman’s compilation of the data. To this day, I have never seen the real raw data as presented in the case histories.

I also learned (in 2011) that my name, three years earlier (2008), had been changed to my being listed first in the journal’s archives. This is a serious misrepresentation, although I do not know who did this and why it was done. In any event, it incorrectly gave the impression to others that I was main author of this so-called study.

Like I have done hundreds of times for reviews of other manuscripts, I had trusted Drs. Fuhrman and Sarter to honestly summarize the data--a huge mistake on my part, as it turned out.

But, unbelievably, this flawed summary of data was only the beginning of the problem. Dr. Fuhrman then grossly exaggerated these flawed findings even further, in very public places.

I therefore had to withdraw my name by submitting to the journal a proposed retraction letter. I shared a copy of my letter with Dr. Fuhrman, assuming that he would want to do the same, as is customary in matters of this sort. He failed to take advantage of this opportunity and continued to go forward with the same exaggerations. Indeed, he began using this study, with my name intact, to raise public funding for his version of research.

He made it clear to me that he had no intention of acknowledging his culpability or of changing course in making false public claims. Instead, he and one of this colleagues began accusing me of “personal attack”, among other charges. Finally, about six months later my retraction letter was published but only after the editor eliminated the substance of my reason for submitting the letter.

Aside from Fuhrman’s serious misrepresentations, this affair reveals how important is this matter of trust in science. It is literally impossible for reviewers and secondary authors of studies to examine the details of raw data. They must trust those who assemble these data in a form that can be properly reviewed, analyzed and interpreted. When that trust is broken, science fails, and severe penalties can be the consequence. In this case, based on what I have experienced, I can no longer trust anything that Dr. Fuhrman does or says, as I said in my previous post. Were he to have been a member of a professional society, I am confident that he would by now have been put out to pasture.

And finally, returning to my initial point, although we must clean up messes when they occur, we also must not lose sight of the extraordinary possibilities that this dietary lifestyle offers for solving so many of our problems. We also must acknowledge the exceptional work and courage shown by the majority--and growing number--of professionals working in this area for these past 2-3 decades.

This isn't about "making peace" and everyone getting along. This is about good science and credibility. It's clear that Dr. Campbell initially presumed Dr. Fuhrman would withdraw his name from the study, just as he did, but instead, Fuhrman has continued to promote the flawed data and misuse Dr. Campbell's name and association.

How can you make peace with someone who does that? As long as they're still making false claims, you can't!

The ball is in Dr. Fuhrman's court to stop making the false claims. That is the only resolution to this now, and it doesn't seem that the other doctors view this as very likely. But perhaps you, and other Fuhrman supporters, can advocate for that. Speak to him and say he needs to fix these exaggerations in his marketing and stop denigrating his colleagues.

[jaysmetalart]

MISLEADING CLAIMS
The problem of Dr. Fuhrman's misrepresentations can be examined and seen clearly by looking at the published evidence.

Deflecting the attention to alleged fueds or even to the merits of his diet advice doesn't change the fact that Dr. Fuhrman's claims of a successful 2-year weight loss of 53 pounds (now changed to 37.6 or 34.25) for everyone in his study, be it 100, 65 or 53 patients are not factual.

Only a handful of his patients were losing weight by 2 years and most had dropped out.

Keep in mind that these were Dr. Fuhrman's weight-loss patients, all of them for 3 years, not blind subjects in an experiment. According to Fuhrman/Sarter's published study (Dr. Campbell officially removed his name)"All overweight patients who came to the office between 2000 and 2003 requesting counseling for weight loss were included in this chart review."

Could Dr. Fuhrman have actually concluded that all of these patients lost an average of 53 pounds without regain when the data reveal that most patients had dropped out and only a handful were left who had not regained by 2 years?

Contrary to fact, this is the message currently scrolling on the internet in FSND video and on websites and other videos that reach all over the world.

Ill be honest with you...your first thread was so long and full of links...that it is in cumbersome. I believe the men involved here are grown ups and can handle their own problems...I mean if I were to attack someone on a personal level on this forum...such as you even....Mr Jim Browne would censure me in a heart beat....I know because he has done it for a lot less. I think this is just "stirring the pot" mentality, and the fact is there is nothing new here, all of this information was already aired out on another thread. The news is out...I think most people get it already...Just a thought...a friend of mine once told me this....."Arrogance sees no inconsistencies in it self, only in others".....I agree with what you are saying, but I disagree with you saying it over and over for your own personal reasons.....Also think about this......When Dr. Fuhrman responded on this board, he became a member on this board....So you and anyone else who jumps at this opportunity to continue to express dislike or potential law suits against Dr Fuhrman are breaking the rules of conduct on this board...any way maybe we can let this go now....Jay

[ParsleyPatch]

The success that Dr. Fuhrman has had with thousands of patients should be what is talked about, not personal accusations and attempts to misrepresent his goal which is helping people obtain optimal health. This board has allowed Dr. Fuhrman to be publicly bashed and slandered. I came to this discussion forums to find support and guidance on weight loss and nutrition. Instead what has happened is that 2 of my posts have been censored and removed and all I see is a group of people set out to destroy another physician who has different viewpoints.

Some of my posts have "disappeared" the last couple of days too, through web glitches--they were on totally different subjects, not this one, so I highly doubt anyone is being censored for an opposing viewpoint.

This board has allowed facts to be stated and any rational, critical thinker who actually reads the posts on this topic would draw reasonable conclusions.

As for the poster jaysmetalart--- no one is forcing anyone to read posts they are not interested in.