Yes, you are right in saying that some of us don't have a very high opinion of Dr. Oz. If you ate all of the things he claims will add months or years to your life it probably adds up to half a century. More likely, you will just get to be obese. No doubt eating some things and avoiding others will do your body good but as a retired scientist, I ask, "Where is the proof?" We have an entire industry of nutritional supplements which Congress in its infinite wisdom exempted from the pure food and drug act. If it is classified a "food" or "nutritional supplement" instead of a "medicine" almost any claim can be made. In many cases you do get just a bit lighter as the supplement seller lightens your wallet considerably. The only time these things come off the market is if they actually kill someone. Just being worthless doesn't count.

Is this the same Dr. Oz who ran medicine shows until he wound up in The Emerald City and became Wizard?
That would explain everything.

I grow raspberries in my garden. In fact, I grow and pick far more than I can eat. While most raspberries don't bear the first year and only give fruit on last year's growth, that is not the case with all of them. I have some varieties that bear on both this year's and last year's growth. I start picking in May and don't stop until December, although there is a period in the late summer/early fall when the yield is low since some plants are winding down their production on last year's growth and some are starting up on this year's.

We used to host a chess instructor from Moscow every June. His wife and daughter thought raspberries were the best fruit in the world. He would tease them by eating large bowls of fresh raspberries while talking to them on Skype.

Anyway, I think the only aspects of raspberries that are likely to significantly contribute to weight loss are the calories expended in growing them and the time away from other snacks while tending/picking them.

Had Raspberries in the garden for the first time last year and although the yield was not great- it was enough to say that we have planted more. Too sharp in taste from the bush for me but the pies were good. Once the ground is prepared then they are left to their own devices and are easy to grow. Only point is that it will cost me a fortune in extending the Fruit cage as the pigeons get to them before us.

I have to say, I prefer mulberries, but, and this isn't a problem if you want a good effort vs calorie ratio, it's a real pain to make a pie out of them if you pull all the little stems out of each one first.

Dr Oz is self-promoting businessman. I don't think he's evil but I'd take everything he says with a grain of Himalayan Crystal salt.

It is good to take in berryous opinions, but trust berry little of what you take in.

Stapfam, if it's not to late, plant a different variety or two from what you have already. I have four different ones in my raspberry patch they each have different flavours and taste than the other ones.

Done that-Started last year with 12 of two different varieties and found out how good they are. Not much of a crop in the first year and had to net them from the birds but I have a fruit cage with the blackcurrants and gooseberries in. I also grow the cabbage in there as too many pigeons about to get a good crop. So the Cabbage are out for next year and another 16 raspberries planted. Variety of the new ones are Polka and Octavia--apparently the best crop and taste we have in the UK. Won't expect much from the new ones for next year but the old ones should start cropping well. So the fruit cage is going to be extended for the cabbage and the older raspberry canes. All that work so I can get extra fruit for those "Home Made" Pies.

I tried it, it didn't do much.

As far as genetically modified food goes, he had the author of
Wheat Belly on last week. That guy thinks that genemodded wheat
is bad for you.

What you can do is combine hunger supressors. I have tried taking
a rasberry with a svetol and washed them down with a big cup of green tea.
That helps, but the effect doesn't last very long.

Make the cage big enough to plant yellow and black varieties. I have a wild black one which I rescued from a road expansion in the neighbourhood and a yellow one called Autumn Gold which has a mild raspberry tastes but always seems to be the one people want more of. Anne yellow seems to be popular if you can find it.

There is so much money and power at stake a lot of snake oil is generated. Fact is since the days of Babylon, or maybe earlier humans have been genetically modifying their food. Selective breeding of animals and plants is genetic modification and has proven to be very effective. These people who say they "don't like this or that" are speaking for reasons other than good health of the public.

Mind you a person has to be careful not to do the old apples and oranges thing. Genetic modification is not the same as using the chemistry lab to produce something that is sold as food; witness the contents labels of much that is sold in supermarkets. That is a whole other kettle of fish and produces a very rotten smell.

The problem is the manipulation of the gene itself. The incorporation of a genetic feature from a completely different species or plant or animal group into another is something that simply is impossible to do in nature.

That is completely different to crossing types and and producing hybrids within the same species.

Just quibbling for sport but that is exactly what was supposed to happen according to the endosymbiotic theory of evolution.

I knew a woman called Margulis advanced the theory. I didn't remember her name so I put in Cindy Margulis. I didn't realize biologists could be so hot.

Suggest just a slight change of direction. I think that show covered rasberry ketones, and while it might be a lot easier to take one pill rather than eat 60 pounds of rasberries, there has never been any scientific studies done on human beings to back up the claims being made.

Rasberry extracts are a whole other thing and while they might be a lot of fun on ice cream - its not a pill format and I doubt that anything with a sugar and alcohol base is really gonna help anyone lose weight.

There is a serious diversity of opinion on GM foods in the scientific community. That's a fact. If the producers of these products are confident why do they oppose measures to label food products as GM?

Since my gf is a behaviorist who creates plans for children on the spectrum I am pretty up to date on the current thinking regarding autism and, among other factors, vaccines. Trying to paint me as someone who believes in "conspiracy theories" or the like just because I don't agree with your assessment of the issue at hand is intellectual dishonesty.

Within the established scientific community (of which I am a part as a geneticist and a microbiologist), there isn't as much debate on the validity of GMOs as you might think. There's a lot of debate on the business practices of companies like Monsanto that seem to overstretch their bounds when it comes to enforcing their patents (and much debate about the morality of being able to patent genes and living organisms), but not much debate about the safety of GMOs. Those studies where they "showed" that GMO DNA or RNA got into host cells were never able reproduced and/or shown to be faked (depending on the study).

Companies that make GMOs are opposed to the labeling of them as such because of all the misinformation of them out there (they've been tested for years and shown to be safe and not cause cancer unlike what you've heard) and they're in practically everything (which would make labeling overly tedious, but mainly they don't want to label them because of all the fears out there based on misinformation.

Sorry if I offended you with the mislabeling, but I tend to get hit so often with the people that think GMOs are going to kills us all if the big pharma companies don't don't kill us all with their secret mercury poisoning of us through vaccines, but I probably won't live long enough to see it because one of these days I'm going to be struck by lightning because I can cause bacteria to evolve and demonstrate that to you or impressionable college students in less than a weak - making me an agent of the devil.

Does the fact that GMOs have been shown to be safe mean I don't think there should be some regulatory agency that they have to pass things by (maybe a commissioner of common sense)? No, you never know what someone (well meaning or not) might decide to do one day out of stupidity (I don't think we really need pets that glow in the dark), but I also think the FDA (or someone similar) should be put back in charge of regulating vitamins and dietary supplements.

Thanks for getting us back on my original track. Gene manipulation to change food is a long standing practice. If people want to really get in discussion maybe someone would start a thread on that? It pertains to our health and ability to fully enjoy our cycling sport.

Back to my original question: From what I saw Oz wasn't making and weight loss claims. He was claiming the extract converted fat to glucose and so reduced the amount of fat in the body. By reducing the amount of fat a person would start "thinkin lean" and become more active. Being more active would bring weight loss and better health. The claim was 100mg/day was the same as eating 90# of rasberries. And yes, he was talking about extract not juice.

The difference between "extract" and juice is . . . ?

[QUOTE=DnvrFox;15032808]The difference between "extract" and juice is . . . ?[/QUOTE


Juice is just the berry in another form and includes the water, sugars and other stuff. Extract only includes the desired chemical; the ketones. Or, so says the advertising.

People said DDT was safe, too. So was thalidomide. And a host of other carefully manipulated and "scientifically tested" products that later were shown to be not safe.

It is getting to a point where anything that includes "science" as its basis is being distrusted by the community.

Raspberry extract is just another snake oil solution to a problem that simply requires recognition of the doctrine that weight loss comes from expending more energy than is consumed.

As previously stated; not a weight loss product. Not promoted that way and I didn't post it that way in the quote you posted.

A very brief research of internet info. says research seems to support Oz's claims.

Can't stop you from making a statement that has nothing to do with my post which you quoted. But, it is your credibility that is at stake, not mine.

Lots of interesting information in this: https://front.moveon.org/bill-maher-s...rc=daily.share

Doesn't make me feel better about GMOs.

I'm not especially a Dr. Oz enthusiast but my wife (with Ph.D. in molecular biology) likes to follow him and then do some informal research about his subject matter. Her 25-word-or-less description is that Dr. Oz was a bit of a victim in that raspberry episode (which started a few years ago). Apparently he presented someone else's work, his own assessment splitting the edge between of amazement and disbelief. The perpetrators then used is picture and comment "wow" to sell their product, resulting in a lawsuit and other haggling. If he is guilty of anything it is in not vetting his subject matter carefully enough, but then he is running a TV show, not conducting medical research.