This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Analysis of sources for lead article (Please maintain and do not archive)
Malhotra is a controversial character. I have analysed all the independent sources (not those written by the subject himself) in the following table so the lead paragraph can give a balanced reflection of what the sources say. As time goes on and there are new sources and new points to be made please add to the table. Viv Hamilton (talk) 19:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Source Type
Source
Year
Personal words
Ref to work
Positive Notability
ST5002016
2016
Cardiologist
Founding Action on Sugar
High Sugar
KF2015
2015
Cardiologist
Anti-obesity expert
Practicing NHS doctor
Highly respected public health campaigner
Founding Action on Sugar
Reducing sugar
Sugar's role in T2D and obesity
Sustain
2013
Cardiologist
Uses media profile
Weaknesses of Responsibility Deal
Choc filled vending machines in hospital
Marketing of junk food to children
Advocate of sugary drinks duty
HSJ2013BME
2013
Interventional cardiologist specialist registrar
Uses media profile
"Yes. He challenges people"
Educate the public on health issues
against big corporations’ profit making at the cost of increasing health risks to the general public, particularly children
original research on the effects of sugar rich diets on obesity and heart morbidity/mortality
highlighted unhealthy hospital meals
calling for a ban on the sale of junk food in hospitals
HSJ2014BME
2014
Honorary Consultant Cardiologist
Member of the Academy of Royal Colleges Obesity Group
"An upcoming star"
ignited debate over diagnosis: doctors’ treatment of simple cases that bring “no benefit to the patients”
a culture of over-investigation” includes excessive use of antibiotics and imaging for non-sinister headaches
catapulting the BMJ’s “too much medicine” campaign into the media
EvStd2014Supersmart
2014
Media Savvy Consultant
Science Director Action on Sugar
too much attention has been on saturated fat, while the dangers of sugar have been under-stated
want to pressurise the Government to regulate the food industry to reduce the amount (of sugar) they’re spiking our food withs
excess sugar consumption increases the risk of heart disease and type 2 diabetes even in those of normal weight
Critics
Not all articles describe
Malhotra in person
Some articles are
discussing very particular points
ButterNonsense
2018
Cardiologist
dissident scientist
chlorestrol sceptic
statin critic
urges a low carb, high fat diet
sbm
2020
British Consultant Cardiologist
statin denialist
circular reference
This article quotes from WP article
Quotes from the WP article not included here
ARS Technica
2017
Controversial UK Cardiologist
high profile on media and television
advocate of high fat diets
written scores of editorials
I don't understand this table, and separating sources between "Positive Notability" and "Critics" is bound to lead to POV violations. --Hipal (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Biographical Bias
Several paragraphs of the biographical and work history section read like they're written by the subject and are heavily biased. They are not neutral at all and I suggest rewriting to remove much of the glorified fluff. 82.8.55.103 (talk) 01:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please can you be more specific. Other than the quote about his motivation, as far as I can see, the second and third paragraphs are sourced and referenced from third party sites. Viv Hamilton (talk)
I have added some quotes from the Sarah Boseley article "Butter Nonsense". This section is dealing with Malhotra as a person and his career - the article already has a lot of criticism of his statements under the specific issues in the next section of the article. The issue of balance is that overall organisations tend to give positive recognition of people but there are very few that give negative ones (ignoble and Darwin being some exceptions). So on average for a biography it's not unexpected that the balance of what the Reliable Sources say is positive. There is plenty of criticism of Malhotra out there but most of it is in self-published articles so cannot be used here (there is also plenty of praise for him too in self-published material, which is equally not included in the article). Viv Hamilton (talk) 16:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article looks like a government propaganda piece
The article goes on and on about NHS guidance, which we all know leads to an obese population, same for many western countries. No matter this article's editors' opinions about the diet, the article should restrict itself to a couple of paragraphs on the book, and a couple of paragraphs and published criticisms. The rest is just extra fluff.--Tallard (talk) 07:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Or a public relations piece. The lede is a mess. --Hipal (talk) 16:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've posted to WP:FTN, hoping for some help. --Hipal (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, placing counter-arguments in an article, especially a BLP, is a violation of WP:SYN. 108.18.156.124 (talk) 21:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a lot to take in ... Bon courage (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting source. Aseem Malhotra was also recently on the GB News channel and was supportive of the carnivore diet, [1], he says towards the end that it can "cure" people (he cites Jordan Peterson's daughter). Completely irresponsible. Psychologist Guy (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In which the BMA investigate the fallout of Malhotra falsely claiming to have received an award from the BMA chair, and note that he "holds views that are contrary to BMA policy, particularly regarding vaccination for prevention of SARS-CoV-2". Bon courage (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bon courage: I think we need to be careful using a primary source such as this - do you know if this was picked up by any news organisations? From a quick search I couldn't find anything. SmartSE (talk) 09:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. But I'm also not sure it's a primary source – isn't the author/investigator (Flynn) at a remove from the evidence/people involved in the incident? And in any case a BMA publication is surely reliable for its own view wrt Malhotra. Is there anything here you see as contentious? Bon courage (talk) 09:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it fits WP:PRIMARY pretty closely - Flynn and the BMA were closely involved in the events. WP:BLPPRIMARY says that we should be very cautious about using primary sources in BLPs. A broader issue about this regardless of whether it is primary or not and why I asked whether anyone else covered this, is WP:WEIGHT. It looks to me like there was some controversy within the BMA about the award and tweet but it doesn't seem as if anyone else took much notice. SmartSE (talk) 09:40, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay - I wasn't aware Flynn was involved in the events. Out of caution I've removed this though I feel what the BMA feels about a doctor's COVID views (which we air) is relevant to the article. Let's see what others think. Bon courage (talk) 11:22, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Excessive detail on controversies
I firmly believe that the article, in its current shape, has way too much detail on the various controversies regarding cholesterol, statins, saturated fat etc. These are of course topics that Mr. Malhotra has opined on, but I don't think it's due to include entire paragraphs on what national health authorities recommend for human consumption in his biography. I do think we ought to describe the pushback Mr. Malhotra has received from various experts in context, but that ought to be more specific regarding the debate he has engaged in, rather than simply repeating what the general health guidelines recommend, which is already duly covered elsewhere in the Wikipedia. Nutez (talk) 17:08, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of the policy on biographies is that we should only cite references that actually mention the person, otherwise the content is original research or off topic. I would agree with your removals, I don't think we can include huge chunks of text about what the mainstream guidelines say, only if they specifically mention Malhotra. All that material can be found elsewhere. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:33, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked for help at WP:FTN. Looks like we're all on the same page. It might be helpful to look for more references (or better use what we have) that clearly reference Mallhotra's viewpoints.
This may only tangentially related: At a glance, I'm unclear if all the non-independent references are being used appropriately, especially his own works. --Hipal (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]