Derek Draper, as well as having an unreliable CV, has appeared on ITV1′s Kyle’s Academy through his DIY-Therapy website – described as “The one-stop-shop for information and tools to improve your emotional wellbeing.”. Jon from the magnificent and recently redesigned Holfordwatch has alerted me to a document published by DIY-Therapy ‘The Good Mood Diet‘ which contains some dubious claims typical of nutritionists, such as Patrick Holford – another individual with an interesting history of CV revisions.
The document starts off with a rather simplistic telling of the serotonin hypothesis of depression arguing that lowered levels of serotonin cause depression and that high doses alleviate, it is of course more complicated than that, as this recent review argues. It also contains the claim that aspartame lowers serotonin levels, a claim wide spread amongst the more alternative corners of the internet but one on which the scientific evidence is confusing, contradictory and limited.
More canards creep in as you read further, especially relating to the effect diet has on mood. Draper claims that eating food rich in tryptophan can increase brain serotonin, this is a claim not borne out by the scientific evidence. Where diet can affect mood is more likely to be due to the fluctuation of insulin levels related to the amount and type of carbohydrate in a meal and not to tryptophan. Although there is some evidence that supplementing with tryptophan may be beneficial. Draper also recommends a protein intake of 60-90g/day, up to 50% more than the recommended daily average for a male adult. There is also slight comedy value in misplaced parenthesis suggesting that rye, oats and barley are in fact wheat. This is part of a section on ‘bad mood foods’, and betrays a worrying belief in the opiod theory of wheat proteins that has informed the opinions of Andrew Wakefield and others on the alternative fringe of autism science.
The source of these canards appears to be a book titled ‘The Mood Cure’ by Julie Ross, I have not read the book but judging by it’s interpretation of the science of depression it would not feel overqualified sitting next to the works of Patrick Holford in the lifestyle section of your local bookshop. Julie, like Patrick, holds a qualification in psychology, although only an MA, which she feels sufficient to pass herself off as an expert in nutrition and diet.
In fact this raises an interesting point about those who operate in the more alternative spectrum of healthcare, there seems to be little awareness of the limits of professional competence. Merely holding a qualification in a particular discipline is seen sufficient to hold an experty type opinion in tangentially connected or completely unrelated fields. Not only that but individuals such as Draper, Ross and Holford seem very keen to enhance their actual credentials through ommission and lack of clarity, there is failure of understanding that the strength of a position in science and healthcare is defined, not by the qualifications of those holding it, but by the strength of the supporting evidence. It is a shame that the media favour individuals such as Draper and Holford whose arguments of ‘trust me, I’m an expert’ come at the expense of evidence based reasoning and whose personal trust is somewhat undermined by an exaggerated CV.
[BPSDB]
