Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Gay Advocacy Groups Decry Controversial 'Dr. Oz' Episode

A controversial "Dr. Oz Show" episode has sparked the ire of the nation's most high-profile lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) advocacy groups for promoting the "dangerous and harmful practices" of reparative therapy.

The episode, which aired Nov. 28, debated the merits of so-called reparative, or "ex-gay," therapy. Among the featured guests was Julie Hamilton, a representative of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (or NARTH) which has routinely been at odds with American Psychiatric Association and other scientific organizations.

Among those to decry Dr. Mehmet Oz's decision to represent NARTH on the show was the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamamtion (GLAAD). “The idea of therapists attempting to change a patient’s sexual orientation has been proven ineffective and dangerous, and has been soundly and conclusively rejected by the entire medical establishment," GLAAD President Herndon Graddick said in a statement. "This line of thinking is outdated, ultimately harmful, and in modern media, should be treated like lobotomies or medical mercury."

The Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) felt similarly, saying they would not have particpated in the broadcast had they known NARTH would be represented. “The Dr. Oz Show provided a platform to a fringe organization promoting dangerous and harmful practices that every major health, mental health and education organization has consistently repudiated as harmful to youth," Executive Director Dr. Eliza Byard is quoted as saying. The Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) were more pointed in their response to the show, adding in an email statement: "Although the show also featured guests who condemned the idea and practice of 'reparative therapy,' Dr. Oz himself never weighed in, and the audience was misled to believe that there are actual experts on both sides of this issue."

In a blog post on his website, Oz defended Hamilton's appearance, nothing that he "felt that we needed to include all parties who have considered reparative therapy to hear the stories of people who have tried these treatments. Although some viewers may disagree with this tactic, if we want to reach everyone who might benefit from understanding the risks of this therapy, you have to present multiple perspectives."

Still, he went on to note:

"After listening to both sides of the issue and after reviewing the available medical data, I agree with the established medical consensus. I have not found enough published data supporting positive results with gay reparative therapy and I have concerns about the potentially dangerous effects when the therapy fails, especially when minors are forced into treatments."

by Anonymousreply 6912/01/2012

I watched a little of it and I was getting quite frustrated with how these "life coaches" and "licensed therapists" were being able to discuss their success rates with gay men without revealing ANY of their treatments at all. Plus, you could tell these reparative therapy experts were probably going to backslide back into homosexuality real soon.

by Anonymousreply 111/29/2012

As noted in another thread, I think Dr. Oz meant to come across as fair and impartial in trying to bring the subject to his audience but it seemed more like he was giving the reparative therapists free airtime without questioning them. I thought to myself, what if they were dealing with a physical ailment such as heart disease. Would he have allowed quacks to come his show and push a harmful therapy, especially one not recommend by any credible medical organization?

by Anonymousreply 211/29/2012

Dr. Oz Thinks LGBT Community Should Find Common Ground With Ex-Gay Therapists

By Zack Ford on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:25 am

Dr. Drew was not the only television doctor talking about ex-gay therapy on Wednesday. Dr. Oz dedicated his entire show to the “controversy,” providing ample time to those who profit from the harmful therapy to promote their quackery unchallenged. Representatives from NARTH and People Can Change were presented as “experts” who were offering one side of a debate that the medical community has already settled.

GLAAD, GLSEN, and PFLAG all condemned the episode, explaining how thoroughly the practice of ex-gay therapy had been debunked. GLSEN Executive Director Dr. Eliza Byard participated in the show, but explained that she and other LGBT advocates were not informed NARTH would be represented — let alone featured. During his final thought, Dr. Oz argued that he believed the sides needed to talk to each other, then followed up on his blog that only after the show did he have the epiphany that therapists should affirm gay identities:

[quote]Some guests argued that they have been changed thru these treatments, but I was overwhelmed by the pain of individuals hurt by the experience. After listening to both sides of the issue and after reviewing the available medical data, I agree with the established medical consensus. I have not found enough published data supporting positive results with gay reparative therapy and I have concerns about the potentially dangerous effects when the therapy fails, especially when minors are forced into treatments.

[quote]My biggest epiphany occurred after hearing where the opposing groups found some common ground. The guests who appeared on my show on either side of this debate agreed that entering into any therapy with guilt and self-hate is a major error. Trying to change who you are instead of loving who you are leads to broken spirits and broken hearts. Encouraging self-acceptance is the only way to help alleviate the shame experienced by those who are struggling with their sexuality – and help them reach a place where who they are matches who they want to be.

It should not require an open, unchallenged airing of harmful lies to agree with the established medical consensus. There is no way for self-acceptance and ex-gay therapy to coexist; NARTH and others rely upon shame. Their business depends upon clients having “unwanted sexual attractions” and believing the faulty promise that the attractions can be treated. Because of the visibility of his show and the expertise entrusted in him by his viewers, Dr. Oz performed a massive disservice by treating the issue of ex-gay therapy as an open question.

Clips of the entire episode, as well as post-show reflections from the guests, are available online.

by Anonymousreply 311/29/2012

Caught a glimpse of it. The "converted" gay looked like a tuberculin onion. Hideous. And it looked to me like Dr. Oz didn't believe a word of what he was saying.

by Anonymousreply 411/29/2012

He knew it was wrong to give conversion therapy any legitimacy, but he also knew the subject would have tabloid appeal and be good for ratings. Sounds like he's desperate for ratings, hope he gets cancelled. The View got so lambasted for doing a segment on conversion therapy, it's speculated that's why Barbara ended up hiring Rosie, for damage control.

by Anonymousreply 511/29/2012

[quote]Dr. Oz Thinks LGBT Community Should Find Common Ground With Ex-Gay Therapists

Wouldn't that be like telling people in concentration camps that they should find common ground with the people who herded them into gas chambers?

by Anonymousreply 611/29/2012

I went to his website after the show aired. There were quite a few posts via Facebook from people criticizing the gays for bring rude, butting in and talking over the reparative therapy people. Thankfully, there were gay positive posts too.

by Anonymousreply 711/29/2012

I watched it and it only served to confirm my negative impression of so-called "reparative" therapy. As was noted by Clay Aiken and the other gay guests, the word "reperative" in and of itself implies that there is something "wrong" with a gay person that needs to be remedied. Sure, there are quite a few fucked up gay men and lesbians, but percentage-wise, no more so that fucked up straight people. (Look at Lindsay Lohan, as an extreme example.)

To their credit, however, the so-called therapists DID point out that they did not believe in attemping to convert people who were happy being gay and at least the bald-headed guy claimed to be very supportive of gay marriage, gay adoption, etc., if that is what people wanted for themselves. How sincere he was, I have no idea.

by Anonymousreply 811/29/2012

If it was fair and balanced, they should have gotten the American Psychiatric Board to go there and shoot this shit down!

by Anonymousreply 911/29/2012

They just say that to seem reasonable, r8. Happy gay people aren't their costumer base anyway, so why not say they aren't interested in converting them.

by Anonymousreply 1011/29/2012

Oz wasn't interested in balance, he knew what he was doing, exploiting a sensitive subject matter for ratings. I hope GLAAD is calling for a boycott.

by Anonymousreply 1111/29/2012

How does this little shit still have a show? He stands outside women's bathrooms and asks them about their poop. The Soup makes fun of him constantly.

by Anonymousreply 1211/29/2012

There is no controversy. Dr Oz promoted a cure for homosexuality because he thought it would boost his ratings. That is it.

This guy is ex-Islamic military.

Where is David Geffen on this? That is who we need to pull into this fight, Dr Oz has started against the gay community.

by Anonymousreply 1311/29/2012

He's a dumb dick -- noisy and intrusive.

He said on the news that he will no perform an operation on anyone who cannot provide a relative or friend to be with them during recovery.

As if things aren't bad enough -- you are sick and need surgery, and the dumb dick doctor wants introverted people to run around and come up with a driend.

One guy ended up having to ask his ex-wife, who was nice about it but...


by Anonymousreply 1411/29/2012

Why the closeted Oprah promoted this chicken fried, fat, bald, oaf to national prominence is obvious. I remember when he declined a position in the Obama administration as well. He is no friend of gays.

by Anonymousreply 1511/29/2012

I totally agree that Oz knew exactly what he was doing and decided to pull the trigger anyways. Columbia should cancel his tenure, he is not qualified to practice medicine anymore.

Oprah Winfrey also owns his show and should be held partially to blame for this. After all, Oprah promotes Scientology too and Scientology also promotes a cure for homosexuality. Time to tag Oprah.

by Anonymousreply 1711/29/2012

Dr. Oz also has that guy Brad Lamm on his show who touts himself as a "Board Recognized Interventionist", even though the "Board" consists of Lamm himself, and his own brother! Lamm is an uncredentialed, unlicensed guy with zero background in counseling, social work, or ANY brand of mental health, or medical field at all! He's just a former meth user who attended some 12 step meetings and is looking to cash in with his connections! Oh, and he presents himself as a diet and nutrition expert too. Presumably because he drank a diet coke once years ago!Dr. Oz really doesn't do much thinking or caring about offering up sheer quackery on his show.

Why doesn't he ask himself to "find common ground" with high school grads who simply pretend to be doctors!? It's the same thing as he's suggesting people do with these ex-gay kooks!

by Anonymousreply 1911/29/2012

I've always hated looking at him, he's really dorky and unsexy. I felt a bit guilty about it because I thought he was a nice guy, now it turns out he's a total dick.

by Anonymousreply 2011/29/2012

By doing this Oz is re-enforcing the widely held impression that all Muslims are anti-gay.

by Anonymousreply 2111/29/2012

Well, Oprah would never inflict a quack, a charlatan, or a fake spiritual guru to a wide audience, or anybody who's driven purely by the need for self-promotion while spewing easily digestable soundbites and half-baked advice coated in platitudes. Are you going to tell me next that Iyanla can't really fix my life??

by Anonymousreply 2211/29/2012

David Geffen, Barry Diller, Sandy Gallin should be crushing this guy like a bug by now.

by Anonymousreply 2311/29/2012

Yes r16, the Nazi analogy was over the top (as Nazi analogies usually are) but there's no excuse for a doctor to be promoting junk science. This is the analogy GLAAD made about his stupid "both sides work together" comment.

"Upon rewatching, I can also say I was especially disheartened and even disturbed by the way Dr. Oz ended the show, which he did by implying that this matter is still up for debate, and that the two sides need to "talk to each other" in order to resolve the issue.

That's not how healthcare works.

Dr. Oz is a cardiothoracic surgeon. Let's say he has a patient who needs open heart surgery ASAP.

Now let's say that I sell electric bathtubs. I firmly believe that all this patient needs to do is buy one of my electric bathtubs, have a good soak, and they'll be good as new. (Also relevant because virtually everybody who espouses "reparative therapy" also financially benefits from it.)

What's Dr. Oz's hospital going to do? Are they going to grab a couple of folding chairs and lock me and Dr. Oz in a broom closet until one of us has convinced the other that our method is better? (I'm not budging, by the way.) Or would their responsibility be to do what's in the best interest of the patient? Would they ignore my nonsense and save the patient's life? Of course they would.

This show ends inconclusively.

To end a discussion of this topic inconclusively requires one to pretend that the entire mainstream medical community hasn't completely rejected one side of this alleged "debate."

And to pretend that this is unsettled is to put actual lives in danger. It's fine to talk to these people, but to let them get two segments completely unchallenged, and to end a program as though the issue is unresolved, on a show hosted by an actual medical expert, in my opinion, is the height of irresponsibility."

by Anonymousreply 2411/29/2012

I admit I used to like him when he was on Oprah and was excited when I heard he was getting his own show but now every program is the same and unless you're an overweight housewife with bowel or bladder issues his show is useless.Also what qualifications does his daughter have to get on tv?I mean she seems really nice and all but is she a chef or dietitian?

by Anonymousreply 2511/29/2012

He is repugnant. His tips, everyday it is a different answer for the same half dozen health issues. If you took even a small percent of all his necessary pills and nostrums you would be swallowing all day long.

Dr. Phil, then Nate, now him. UGGHHH

by Anonymousreply 2611/30/2012

Check out this dude's house! He lives in a huge piggish mansion in the middle of what appears to be a normal neighborhood. It's the most bizarre thing!

by Anonymousreply 2711/30/2012

Maybe if "Dr." Oz called out the harmful quacks on his show he might have a leg to stand on, but he presented them as "qualified experts." A tiny blog entry admitting that they are full of shit hardly undoes the damage. I do hope this dipshit likes dead gay kids, because he gave plenty of free advertising to the "ex-gay" jerkoffs and plenty of idiotic and hateful parents will now seek them out to "cure" their kids. Good going, Dr. Asshole.

by Anonymousreply 2811/30/2012

Giving such a group as NARTH "equal" airtime to present an opposing view is just as good as saying they have legitimate medical/scientific standing. It doesn't matter if he said anything or not, the point is that it should have been shut down before it even show was even recorded.

by Anonymousreply 2911/30/2012

Hope I'm not going off topic, but skimming the programs of several of these "therapies" is extremely disturbing for a another reason as well. Do any of you come from a very religious or morally conservative background where touching and hugging is minimal, sexuality in any form is not discussed, and there are many taboos? Can you imagine being forced to suddenly be open to total strangers, and to discuss your innermost thoughts? If you're a victim of "inappropriate" touching, actually common in fundie backgrounds, how traumatic would it be to have to start embracing others in the group? How about those who have social anxiety, or are Aspie, and feel that their privacy and sense of personal space is being violated? Why didn't Dr Oz call out these practices as totally inhumane, for these reasons alone?

by Anonymousreply 3011/30/2012


by Anonymousreply 3111/30/2012

Lets go after the producers of the show too!

by Anonymousreply 3211/30/2012

[quote]"After listening to both sides of the issue and after reviewing the available medical data, I agree with the established medical consensus. I have not found enough published data supporting positive results with gay reparative therapy and I have concerns about the potentially dangerous effects when the therapy fails, especially when minors are forced into treatments."

Dr Oz is a chickenshit homophobe which is why he DID NOT say this on his frau fest of a tv show. He knew the fraus who make up his pitiful audience would be pissed off.

by Anonymousreply 3311/30/2012

[quote]David Geffen, Barry Diller, Sandy Gallin should be crushing this guy like a bug by now.

R23, you are seriously expecting Barry Diller who is in a highly publicized sham marriage to a woman, to do something pro-gay??????? You must be even dumber than the fruas who believe he is in a loving hetero union.

by Anonymousreply 3411/30/2012

Unless this guy is taken down, it is going to happen again and again.

by Anonymousreply 3511/30/2012

I wonder how much money CBS donated to GLAAD to get them to back down?

GLAAD sells out like that.

by Anonymousreply 3611/30/2012

Such bullshit. This is akin to giving Neo Nazis and historical revisionists a forum on a show about the Holocaust.

by Anonymousreply 3711/30/2012

He didn't reverse his opinion while on the air, so it doesn't count.

by Anonymousreply 3811/30/2012

Dr. Oz and "raspberry ketone"

Posted By: Dr. Joe Schwarcz · 2/9/2012 8:34:00 PM

Dr. Oz is by all accounts an excellent cardiac surgeon. And he does offer some sound dietary advice on his popular TV show and recognizes the value of exercise. But you can’t fill five hours a week of television by telling people to get their butt of the couch and load their plate with whole grains, fruits and vegetables instead of burgers and fries. So Oz has to fill time with seductive nonsense. And overweight people are ready to be seduced. Dr. Oz, or more likely his producers, know this. They also know that at least 40% of their viewers are overweight and tune in to the show hoping to hear the latest “news” about weight loss. They hand on Dr. Oz’s every word and are ready to open up their wallets to try any product that seems to impress him. Unfortunately Oz is easily impressed. “Raspberry ketone” are a case in point.

Dr. Oz gave his approval to pills containing this chemical as a potential weapon against weight gain. On what basis? A couple of studies in mice that showed less weight gain from fatty food then expected when the raspberry ketone made up 2% of their diet and some comments from a personal trainer who “swears by” raspberry ketones. There isn’t even a single study on humans and there is no compelling theoretical reason as to why this compound should have an effect on weight gain in humans. Where does the raspberry ketone in the supplements come from? You might think it comes from raspberries. It could, but it doesn’t. It would be way to expensive to source it from berries. Raspberry ketone, 4-para-hydroxyphenyl-2-butanone as it should properly be called, is the main component in the aroma of raspberries, but is actually present in a very small amount. It can, however, be readily synthesized in the lab and incorporated into capsules. The synthetic compound is identical to the natural version and will work the same way in weight loss. That is to say, not at all. Dr. Oz gets a raspberry for promoting products that make unfounded claims.

by Anonymousreply 3911/30/2012

R39, Thank you for your post. Sadly even the mainstream media is saturated with false cures and "money grabs." Like this "therapy" it's not medically regulated, attached to a money back guarantee, and insurance won't cover a harmful outcome.

by Anonymousreply 4011/30/2012

Oz is a guest-host on The View today. I can't watch it because the local station is doing coverage of the lottery winners. I'm not sure I'd watch it anyway, I really hate that show, but hopefully someone will tell us if his "reparative therapy" show came up and if he defended it again. I'm sure the odious View women would back him up too, because they also got flack for featuring the subject on their show years ago.

by Anonymousreply 4111/30/2012

I propose a new Facebook group: One Million Gays! Lets GET 'em!!!

by Anonymousreply 4211/30/2012

Didn't see The View but both Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg are gay-friendly so hopefully one of them brought up the reparative therapy show. Unfortunately though, the issue doesn't seem to be getting any attention outside the gay media.

by Anonymousreply 4311/30/2012

I watched The View today and was not brought up.

by Anonymousreply 4411/30/2012

The Friday show is always taped

by Anonymousreply 4511/30/2012

Yes, but it was already news yesterday, so it was possible they'd bring it up, especially if the View wanted to help him do damage control.

And r43, you give Whoopi too much credit. When Obama had "ex-gay" Donnie McClurkin campaigning for him '08, Whoopi defended it saying people can choose whatever they want to be. She also defended Tracy Morgan's anti-gay rant, and about a week ago went out of her way to say she loves Canada's Prime Minister, calling him a "good guy." Stephen Harper is a far-right, Christian homophobe. Whoopi would've had no problem at all defending Dr. Oz, if for no other reason than he's famous, and she always defends every famous person.

by Anonymousreply 4611/30/2012

Say what you will about Tyra, but she had a lot of gay-themed eps of her talkshow, and she always smacked down the crazies.

This is what infuriates me about talk and news shows. They always have to present "both sides" of the "gay issue." How about, there aren't two sides. There are people who support gay equality, and there are bigots.

by Anonymousreply 4711/30/2012

[quote]you are seriously expecting Barry Diller who is in a highly publicized sham marriage to a woman, to do something pro-gay???????

I don't know anyone who knows about Diller and DVF who DOESN'T know about their "arrangement" and the reason he married her.

Diller has lived most of his adult life as a more or less openly gay man. He has had both short-term boyfriends and long-term relationships (including one with a former editor-in-chief of The Advocate); he appears frequently at gay parties and gay benefits. His sexual orientation has even been referred to in print with regularity.

by Anonymousreply 4811/30/2012

Dr. Oz is nothing but an opportunist media whore, just like all the other assholes that fat bitch Oprah has thrust upon the viewing public (and made multi-millionaires). I refuse to watch any of the people Oprah made big. They're just like her, big fat frauds.

by Anonymousreply 4911/30/2012

[quote]Diller has lived most of his adult life as a more or less openly gay man.

Living as an openly gay man means you do not marry a woman when you are middle aged. And you do not make a huge show of your loving marriage to a WOMAN. Post one legit link to Barry himself discussing his being gay, R48. I can post many to him and his beloved wife discussing their blissful hetero marriage...

[quote]The exotic beauty married once more, in 2001, when she wed her longtime paramour, Barry Diller, with whom she continues to be happily smitten — and vice versa — to this day. The secret to love, marriage, and relationships à la von Furstenberg? Read on.

Anyone who expects this closeted self-loathing geezer gay to do ANYTHING against homophobia is a complete idiot.

by Anonymousreply 5011/30/2012

The View had the "Cure the Gays" group on in 2005. So of course they, if anything, are helping to cover up for Oz.

(They interviewed Exodus International and didn't even let any member of the Gay community on the show to rebutt)

' The Gay community has to start taking the gloves off with people like Dr Oz. The nice approach is NOT working. NARTH and Exodus continue to get prime time TV coverage, legitimizing their organizations.

by Anonymousreply 5111/30/2012

The gay billionaire who married his fag hag so he can support her children:

by Anonymousreply 5211/30/2012

R52, once a link TO BARRY DILLER HIMSELF discussing his being gay. Are you too dumb to get that your own link says the exact opposite of that?

[quote]Sure, he threatened Michael Wolff if the media columnist, then at New York magazine, wrote about his personal life. "No. I don't think you understand," he told Wolff. "I would kill you." And a memoir by a former escort who claimed to have bedded various members of Hollywood's gay mafia was expunged of all references by name to Diller; though a character nicknamed The Bear, bearing some resemblance to the compact tycoon, did make an appearance.

Threatening to kill someone if they write about his true "private" life is YOUR idea of living an openly gay life?

by Anonymousreply 5311/30/2012

Diane is not known as "Von Fistenberg" for nothing.

by Anonymousreply 5411/30/2012

The truly sad thing is somebody aa rich and powerful as David Geffen could have the Dr Oz Show canceled with one single phone call, but Geffen chooses not to.

by Anonymousreply 5511/30/2012

Well, Diller's done a piss-poor job closeting himself, to the point that his true sexuality is a secret to no one. He's about as closeted as Calvin Klein.

by Anonymousreply 5611/30/2012

We should really bring to light Dr Oz leaving the USA to go fight for the Turkish Army. That is not very patriotic. Red State America would not approve or let their Fraus watch his show anymore. Bigotry works both ways Dr Oz. He started it, we can finish it.

by Anonymousreply 5711/30/2012

Why are fraus so in love with him? They act like he is sex on a stick. I saw his show at my sister's house and it was sad how all the middle aged women in the all-female audience swooned over his every move.

by Anonymousreply 5811/30/2012

His breath is vile.

by Anonymousreply 5911/30/2012

Nothing to see here folks! The fraus over at "Televisionwithoutpity" haven't even commented on a Dr. Oz show in over a month, so you know no one is even watching.

by Anonymousreply 6211/30/2012

[quote]Diller has lived most of his adult life as a more or less openly gay man

by Anonymousreply 6311/30/2012

Diller has made it to the ripe old age of 70 without once taking a public stand against homophobia so I'm not thinking he will be taking on Dr. Oz over this.

by Anonymousreply 6411/30/2012

GLAAD is not letting Oz off the hook

by Anonymousreply 6511/30/2012

If the gay community gives this guy a pass, they the community deserve to have it happen again.

I always thought Dr Oz was a homophobe, he just had a creepy over masculine arrogance about him.

by Anonymousreply 6612/01/2012

Attacking gays is the last refuge for bigots like Dr. Oz. We're the only minority that it is still acceptable to bash publicly. He would never take on any other group but he knows the gays will just take it and do nothing as usual.

by Anonymousreply 6712/01/2012

GLAAD will just take it, but then GLAAD also did nothing about Prop 8 either.

by Anonymousreply 6812/01/2012

Based on his online "apology", the HRC is now shortlisting Oz as man of the year.

by Anonymousreply 6912/01/2012
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!