April 20, 2017

Podcast: Wellness programs – do they work?

Posted By

Comments (2)

We Welcome Comments. But please note: We will delete comments left by anyone who doesn’t leave an actual first and last name and an actual email address.

We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified facts, product pitches, or profanity. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. Comments should primarily discuss the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages about health and medicine. This is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science. Nor is it a forum to share your personal story about a disease or treatment -- your comment must relate to media messages about health care. If your comment doesn't adhere to these policies, we won't post it. Questions? Please see more on our comments policy.

Andrew DePristo

April 22, 2017 at 6:56 am

I listed to this podcast and really didn’t hear anything that indicates these programs could be harmful to one’s health except some offhand comment about people losing and then regaining weight. If one eliminates the problem at Penn State (i.e., intrusive questions and coerced participation) and doesn’t try to measure whether each program is good for all people, doesn’t the fact that the programs push the 3 M’s (mediterranean, movement, moderation in eating) mean that the participants have to benefit? What possible harm can come from such a wellness program?

Gary Schwitzer

April 22, 2017 at 7:43 am

Andrew,

Thanks for your note.

The focus of the podcast – and the headline of the surrounding blog post – was “do they work?” – not “are they harmful?” And I don’t believe there was a single reference to the point you raise – “these programs could be harmful to one’s health.”

However, in the body of the podcast, was this section, capturing some of the beliefs of Al Lewis – one of 3 people interviewed in the podcast:

“What he considers harmful are the following: programs that don’t follow the screening guidelines of the US Preventive Services Task Force and screen way too much. Also, programs that are involuntary and use a punitive approach like the now-defunct Penn State program did. Finally, wellness programs that incentivize unhealthy behaviors like competitive weight loss programs, but then turn around and fail to provide up-to-date, evidence-based health advice. Then there is the issue of regulation. How much training and oversight is there in the wellness industry?”

There are legitimate questions about whether these programs work – especially in the ways that they are promoted. So there is potential harm in devoting time and money and institutional or corporate commitment to programs that may not deliver all that is promised.

Gary Schwitzer
Publisher, HealthNewsReview.org

COMMENTS button We welcome comments, which users can leave at the end of any of our systematic story reviews or at the end of any of our blog posts.

But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.

You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.

This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.

We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.

We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.

There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”

The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:

“Shed light, not just heat. Facts, challenges, disagreements, corrections — those are all fine. Attacking the person, instead of the idea or the interpretation, is neither acceptable nor helpful.”

We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.

And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.

The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.