Discuss Latest WCI Blog Post: The Rise of Dr. Oz and How He Made So Much Stinkin’ Money

[mkintx]

Felt a little like being trolled for outrage. Dr. Oz is not a physician role model and has demeaned the profession with his high profile unethical practices, so I have very little interest in how wealthy he is.

It's been interesting to see how WCI has changed since I started reading it years ago. I initially found this site because of a financial "advisor" who specialized in physician portfolios. I realized I was being taken advantage of, and wanted to get a "fair shake" on Wall Street, per the WCI motto. I learned so much, and have benefited greatly from the information on this site. I have become very cynical of those who specifically target physicians as clients, knowing that we are trusting, financially stable, and ignorant of many things outside of our narrow focus in medicine. As such, when the proliferation of courses targeting physicians, such as the real estate courses, started to pop up, I was wary. It felt so similar to that financial "advisor" years ago, trying to make a buck off of an unsuspecting and trusting physician. Except now it was physicians marketing to other physicians. I appreciate that WCI is upfront about this being a for-profit venture, and about getting kickbacks from promoting courses from other physicians, but at some point it seems as if the valuable information here is being swapped for clickbait that lacks substance. I can, of course, choose not to read those articles, not to reply, etc, and indeed I have found myself spending less time on the site in general, and clicking the email links less often. Maybe I'll stop buying the WCI book for new colleagues as well. I know Jim wants the eyeballs, and posts like this will likely do the trick, but it makes me trust other content less too. I am, apparently, not the target audience any longer.

[ScopeMonkey]

Oh, he is definitely worse than those. Generally the drugs have some evidence behind them which is required to go through the FDA approval process. As far as the overpriced courses on how to make money passively, I am not sure exactly what you are referring to. If the problem is that they are overpriced, that is a far lesser transgression.

The stuff that he promotes often has no evidence behind it, no good-faith reason to believe it, and often is nonsense which has been debunked. It's definitely worse.



This is completely absurd. Just because there are other unethical people out there who would do what he does, that makes what he does OK? Seriously?

And then this weird challenge to try it? Why would any one want to debase themselves and try to mislead vulnerable and trusting people. You are not wrong that it's harder than it seems. But why would anyone want to do that. It's not much different from admiring someone from being a high-quality murderer or thief. Yes, he is quite good at this unethical thing he does. So what? Are you saying the only reason you don't spew garbage advice to the masses like Oz does is because you are not as good as monetizing it as he is?



I don't think anyone here is jealous of him. I suppose it's possible that people may envy the money he has. But if that is the standard, then I 'envy' Vladimir Putin. I don't envy either of them. I would not want to do the things they have done to get where they are. And I like money quite a bit.

Ditto all these points; the fact is that he promotes and makes money off "remedies" that have likely no benefit. Will the next article be touting the oxygen treatments you can do in Vegas casinos?

[ScopeMonkey]

Felt a little like being trolled for outrage. Dr. Oz is not a physician role model and has demeaned the profession with his high profile unethical practices, so I have very little interest in how wealthy he is.

t's been interesting to see how WCI has changed since I started reading it years ago. I initially found this site because of a financial "advisor" who specialized in physician portfolios. I realized I was being taken advantage of, and wanted to get a "fair shake" on Wall Street, per the WCI motto. I learned so much, and have benefited greatly from the information on this site. I have become very cynical of those who specifically target physicians as clients, knowing that we are trusting, financially stable, and ignorant of many things outside of our narrow focus in medicine. As such, when the proliferation of courses targeting physicians, such as the real estate courses, started to pop up, I was wary. It felt so similar to that financial "advisor" years ago, trying to make a buck off of an unsuspecting and trusting physician. Except now it was physicians marketing to other physicians. I appreciate that WCI is upfront about this being a for-profit venture, and about getting kickbacks from promoting courses from other physicians, but at some point it seems as if the valuable information here is being swapped for clickbait that lacks substance. I can, of course, choose not to read those articles, not to reply, etc, and indeed I have found myself spending less time on the site in general, and clicking the email links less often. Maybe I'll stop buying the WCI for new colleagues as well. I know Jim wants the eyeballs, and posts like this will likely do the trick, but it makes me trust other content less too. I am, apparently, not the target audience any longer.

Agree as well. Keep in mind that almost all of the promoted courses (especially the RE investing ones) are fairly superficial and much more detail can be found on certain well-regarded (free) websites. Hoping WCI will avoid topics like this one (Oz) in future and perhaps focus on similar success but from ethical docs.

[Teiresius]

As an Oncologist Ill just say F*** this Quack. Misinformation kills my patients.

Talking about him cheapens the WCI brand.

I agree with the poster above: "at some point it seems as if the valuable information here is being swapped for clickbait that lacks substance... indeed I have found myself spending less time on the site in general, and clicking the email links less often. I know Jim wants the eyeballs, and posts like this will likely do the trick, but it makes me trust other content less too."

[Teiresius]

Next week on WCI:

"Lessons from Andrew Wakefield on publishing high-impact papers and translating science to the masses for a lasting cultural impact..."

but hey you do you.

[fatlittlepig]

has anyone who is criticizing him actually watched his show? was every show promoting some naturopathic remedy or did some shows talk about early cancer screening, the benefits of exercise, the benefits of meditation etc. I don't know because I don't watch TV, but I suspect there's more nuance there than: he's a total charlatan.

[Teiresius]

He literally sells a Homeopathy kit called Dr. Oz's Homeopathy starter kit.

He's either a charlatan or an idiot, but I somehow doubt he's dumb enough to believe in nonexistent molecules and the memory of water... so he's just a craven opportunist.

Physicians SHOULD hold themselves to a higher standard

[bovie]

has anyone who is criticizing him actually watched his show? was every show promoting some naturopathic remedy or did some shows talk about early cancer screening, the benefits of exercise, the benefits of meditation etc. I don't know because I don't watch TV, but I suspect there's more nuance there than: he's a total charlatan.

You're assuming that nuance exists online

[fatlittlepig]

You're assuming that nuance exists online

call me a nuanced contrarian. everything is always more complicated than it's made out to be.

[The White Coat Investor]

and BTW, I enjoyed your mountaineering blog posts where you once did a 48 or 72 hour climbing expedition covering a few mountains. I am looking forward to some more of those.

That never ran on the blog. The only reason it's on WCI at all is it's the only place I have to host something like that. I use the site to host images to post on forums sometimes too. For those interested, the post is here:

https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/ho...erse-in-a-day/

[AR]

has anyone who is criticizing him actually watched his show? was every show promoting some naturopathic remedy or did some shows talk about early cancer screening, the benefits of exercise, the benefits of meditation etc. I don't know because I don't watch TV, but I suspect there's more nuance there than: he's a total charlatan.

Let's say hypothetically the Dr Oz show had great advice all the time. However, every 10th show he picks a random member of the audience and murders them. Since this is all hypothetical we're going to assume that we are in some sort of alternative reality where he can do this routinely without repercussions. He has being doing this for years, so his body count is high. So 9 out of 10 shows have excellent advice and nothing else. The 10th show also has excellent advice except for the 5 minutes where he kills someone.

Do you think the proper reaction is "Wow, you guys are being so unfair. Over 90% of the time his show has great advice"? I would hope not. The problem is that some things are so bad, that there s no realistic good he could do the rest of the time that would justify it. That's what is happening in on his actual show. I'm sure if we did a minute by minute dissection of his show, there would be some things he says that are at least fine, if not good. The problem is that the bad things are so bad, the good things don't even matter.

[fatlittlepig]

Let's say hypothetically the Dr Oz show had great advice all the time. However, every 10th show he picks a random member of the audience and murders them. Since this is all hypothetical we're going to assume that we are in some sort of alternative reality where he can do this routinely without repercussions. He has being doing this for years, so his body count is high. So 9 out of 10 shows have excellent advice and nothing else. The 10th show also has excellent advice except for the 5 minutes where he kills someone.

Do you think the proper reaction is "Wow, you guys are being so unfair. Over 90% of the time his show has great advice"? I would hope not. The problem is that some things are so bad, that there s no realistic good he could do the rest of the time that would justify it. That's what is happening in on his actual show. I'm sure if we did a minute by minute dissection of his show, there would be some things he says that are at least fine, if not good. The problem is that the bad things are so bad, the good things don't even matter.

uh OK.

[Tim]

That never ran on the blog. The only reason it's on WCI at all is it's the only place I have to host something like that. I use the site to host images to post on forums sometimes too. For those interested, the post is here:

https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/ho...erse-in-a-day/

I want your daughter’s update on her car.

[Hank]

Let's say hypothetically the Dr Oz show had great advice all the time. However, every 10th show he picks a random member of the audience and murders them. Since this is all hypothetical we're going to assume that we are in some sort of alternative reality where he can do this routinely without repercussions. He has being doing this for years, so his body count is high. So 9 out of 10 shows have excellent advice and nothing else. The 10th show also has excellent advice except for the 5 minutes where he kills someone.

Do you think the proper reaction is "Wow, you guys are being so unfair. Over 90% of the time his show has great advice"? I would hope not. The problem is that some things are so bad, that there s no realistic good he could do the rest of the time that would justify it. That's what is happening in on his actual show. I'm sure if we did a minute by minute dissection of his show, there would be some things he says that are at least fine, if not good. The problem is that the bad things are so bad, the good things don't even matter.

Gotta admit, I'd probably watch Dr. Oz more frequently, if only in a watching NASCAR or Running Man sort of way.

[jacoavlu]

the WCI forum is weird bc we’re kinda the hard core people but bc we’re the hard core people we are naturally or educationally resistant to the monetization that has naturally and necessarily evolved. Hence the resistance to the RE ads and funds and clickbait. It’s the journalistic dilemma

if i were Jim I’d have had a hard time passing up that fat check offered a while back.