Thursday, March 21, 2013

Evaluating Reliability and Validity

Now I did promise in my previous post to have a quick look into YOR Health's Scientific Advisory Board. Two of these board members came up with something worth sharing.

Heading up the board is one J. Stephen McColgan, M.D, M.B.A. An impressive bio is dedicated to Dr. McColgan, he is considered to be a leader in the field of Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass. A quick search on google finds this. To summarise (quoted directly from

'Stephen J. McColgan, M.D. - Long Beach, CA 10/09/06 - The Board of Medicine issued a Settlement Agreement for Stephen J. McColgan, M.D. The Medical Board of California, Division of Medical Quality, issued a final administrative order regarding the disposition of disciplinary matters relating to repeated negligence, incompetence, violation of drug statutes, and failure to maintain adequate records during the treatment of his ex-wife and of his minor child. Accordingly, the New Hampshire Board has taken reciprocal action. Dr. McColgan is reprimanded and shall provide documentation to the New Hampshire Board of his compliance with the terms of the California Board's order no later than August 21, 2007.'

Now, I'm no lawyer, nor am I a doctor, but I do understand the meaning of 'negligence', 'incompetence', 'violation of drug statutes'. This is public literature, and very interesting in my point of view.

The second member of the advisory board I wish to discuss is John R. Bookwalter, M.D. WELL, in February 2007, a jury in U.S. District Court delivered a $1,160,000 judgment against Dr Bookwalter in a medical malpractice case. Now, I am fully aware that doctors that are sued for malpractice are not necessarily bad doctors, they are human, humans make mistakes, but the further I dig into the depths of YOR Health, the more I question the ethical standards of this company.

ANYWAY, without further adieu, here is the second instalment of my analysis of YOR Health's product information video. We left off with YOR Health's very own Australian legend. An inspiration to many, Dave Nelson has reached Royal Blue Diamond in a mere 2 years! Dave's YouTube video continues:


"30 Day Money Back Guarantee! THAT is how much belief they have in the product strength and the results you guys are gonna feel by taking this"

This is a very manipulative way of persuading customers into a false sense of security. First of all, the Registered Retail Customer Return/Refund Policy states that customers may return the product to the Independent Representative from whom the product was purchased, or to YOR if purchased directly from YOR Health Website, within thirty (30) days from the date of purchase for a replacement, exchange, or full refund of the purchase price. Thirty days from the date of purchase? Is this 30 business days? How long does it take to arrive? How quickly do you have to decide whether or not the products are right for you/effective? If a product was ordered on a Thursday and it took 4-5 business days to arrive, does this mean you have already used 7 days of your 30? The policy also states that 'the Thirty (30) Day Money Back Guarantee applies to any consumable item any customer purchases for the first time (limited to one open container per product). Does this mean if your 'autoship' (see - autoship) sends you your next package before you decide you dislike the product, you are unable to refund the first? What about shipping costs? Oh, nope: 'less shipping and handling if applicable'. Shipping prices are not displayed on YOR Health's website, and are only calculated in the final stages of purchasing, but one customer informed me that the postage price for around 8 products was somewhere around $50. This means that not only do you not get a refund for the postage, but you have to pay shipping fees twice to refund! It's just so messy.


Dave's second (first slide, according to Dave who is betrayed by his numeracy skills, or lack thereof) is another attempt at some health advice. Dave believes that we simply cannot get everything we need from our food anymore. His graph really shows the proof behind his claims. Dave's graph. The graph that is missing two things. Reliability and validity. For a source to be reliable we must evaluate the ability of the source to provide the information. Hang on, where is the source? This graph here, which claims to have important statistics from 1914 - 1997 doesn't even have a source? We can't even begin to evaluate the credibility of such a source. To demonstrate this, see my graph below:

See how silly it seems? Although, I have a sneaking suspicion I did more research during my study...

To be continued..

No comments: