‘Keep away from the doctor’: a visit to an influencer’s wellness event, where the advice could kill

[Wellness Event Exposes Dangereous Alternative Medicine Advocacy]

A roar of laughter erupts from a crowd inside a large conference room at the De Vere Cranage Estate hotel. The irony? The notion that visiting physicians might offer effective treatment for a serious illness.

On stage, the controversial Australian promoter of natural remedies Barbara O’Neill participated in a question-and-answer session for a five-day wellness conference, where science clashes uncomfortable with biblical references and potentially deadly pseudoscientific practices.

She advises attendees at the event held in Cheshire regarding various medical ailments and dismisses the value of antibiotics, vaccinations, or scientifically proven cancer treatments.

Tickets for the residential retreat can cost as much as £1,300. An undercover reporter for The Guardian attended for one day, witnessing four sessions covering topics including the immune system and one titled Barbara Under Attack.

Audience members responded with rapturous laughter when a woman asked O’Neill if there was anything that could help her lupus, which had not responded well to medical treatment. “Yes, stay away from the doctor,” O’Neill quipped.

O’Neill described herself as merely a “little lady,” yet declared herself highly influential, boasting 3.6 million Instagram followers and 1.7 million on Facebook, with many of her videos accumulating millions of views.

Having initially gained success promoting alternative therapies in Australia, O’Neill was banned in 2019 from providing health services in her homeland after authorities determined she had misled vulnerable individuals. They stated she made dangerous claims unsupported by evidence and posed a public safety risk.

She subsequently moved her unregulated services abroad, most recently presenting across the UK and Ireland, prompting concern from experts in both nations. Prominent doctors and scientists have warned that her advice is “dangerous,” cautioning it could cause death.

O’Neill presented herself as regal seated in an armchair, offering softly spoken guidance to attendees on issues such as endometriosis, varicose veins, and constipation.

The 73‑year‑old wore a long skirt with a woollen wrap, later substituting a soft cardigan, creating an appearance reminiscent of both Queen Elizabeth II at Balmoral and Claudia Winkleman in *The Traitors*. The Highlands‑inspired attire was a nod to her Scottish roots, which she mentioned repeatedly.

She exuded an authoritative presence towards her loyal followers, many confident that her doctrine could improve their health.

Despite this, much of her core teaching aligned with established medical advice: balanced nutrition, regular exercise, adequate hydration, and sufficient sleep are key to good health, whereas alcohol, caffeine, and tobacco should be avoided.

During certain lectures, O’Neill drew diagrams on a whiteboard while delivering lengthy pseudo‑scientific explanations.

Notably, she detailed the glycocalyx coating of endothelial cells, which provides anticoagulant effects and releases nitric oxide, a vasodilator.

However, she also offered several highly unscientific and potentially lethal recommendations.

During the Q&A segment, an audience member disclosed having been diagnosed with a stomach tumour and reported two specialists recommending surgical removal. “Sometimes scans are inaccurate,” O’Neill replied, directing the woman to treat the tumour externally with a castor‑oil compress—soaked cloth soaked in thick castor oil from the castor plant—applied to the body’s surface.

O’Neill recommended the same home remedy for nasal polyps, endometriosis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and bile‑duct stones. Medical professionals informed The Guardian that no credible evidence supports these treatments.

She further suggested applying castor oil mixed with a pinch of cayenne pepper to the eye of an audience member suffering from glaucoma and hypertension.

Prof. Gus Gazzard, a leading glaucoma specialist, stated: “There is absolutely no evidence supporting these claims, and unfortunately, there may be significant risk of harm.”

Subsequent questions were read aloud by her husband, Michael, who contributed some of his own presentations during the retreat. The couple stumbled over complex medical terminology while audiences laughed along.

O’Neill counseled a pregnant participant against taking folic acid, a supplement validated by randomized controlled trials to prevent neural‑tube defects in newborns. Elsewhere, she characterized antibiotics as “the worst option” for infections.

When addressing a woman whose thyroid function seemed impaired, O’Neill advised gradually reducing her thyroxine dosage—a prescription medication for hypothyroidism—to observe physiological responses.

Experts warn this approach would result in fatigue, hair loss, weight gain, bradycardia, and low mood. Martin Whyte, professor of metabolic medicine at the University of Surrey, noted that stopping thyroxine to “see what happens” would jeopardize health and risk fatal complications.

A woman seeking to discontinue her metformin regimen for managing type 2 diabetes heard O’Neill recommend ceasing blood‑glucose monitoring, arguing that dietary adjustment alone would restore balance.

This suggestion was deemed perilously unsafe by Gill Livingston, professor of psychiatry at UCL. Untreated diabetes leaves blood sugar levels dangerously elevated, increasing risks of vision loss, neuropathy, dementia, and mortality.

Rejection of medical testing lies at the core of O’Neill’s philosophy. She asserted, “It’s amazing how numerous clinical tests create illnesses.” During a subsequent exposition, without clarifying the specific cancer diagnosis, she cautioned patients that doctors assign labels before prescribing drugs, implying reliance on diagnostic tools is futile.

Throughout her presentations, testimonies of miraculous recoveries circulated—including a stroke survivor claiming no negative effects after opting to halt medications overseen by her retreats. O’Neill publicly expressed indignation at medical interventions, declaring, “The body possesses an innate capacity for self‑healing.”

Professionals from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine labeled her assertions extraordinary. Dr. Liam Smeeth observed that many of her prescriptions, if implemented, could cause considerable harm and even death.

Even non‑medical subjects addressed pseudoscientific concerns, including a product purporting shield against EMF radiation highlighted in an image caption.

Critics note that segments featuring amulets allegedly warding off 5G signals attracted buyers despite lacking scientific basis.

Experts stress that distrust of modern institutions fuels adoption of such practices. Dr. David Robert Grimes, biostatistics specialist, argues fearmongering about electromagnetic fields exploits ignorance and lacks merit. “Balancing” post‑exposure is conceptually nonsensical given ubiquitous environmental energy sources like sunlight and Wi‑Fi.

He further warns that patients drawn to alternative therapy often encounter worse outcomes due to delayed or rejected life‑saving care, frequently with tragic results.

Prior to her latest tour, senior clinicians and researchers, including Grimes, submitted letters urging host venues to reevaluate events that disseminate harmful health narratives to impressionable crowds.

O’Neill’s husband, Michael, runs her business and presents as its driving force; in a closing session titled Barbara Under Attack, he characterizes her persecution by authorities, academia, and the press.

Following an invitation from The Guardian to provide comment, her team posted a video affirming that criticisms against her were speculative, rooted in ideological opposition to medical professionals rather than substantiated critique.

Michael emphasized lack of formal complaints regarding her activities and cited NHS error statistics to characterize her opponents as supporters of the pharma establishment.

He concluded by labeling the campaign against her a modern witch hunt devoid of factual foundation and instead serving as ideological advocacy for the “most corrupt organization in the world”—the pharmaceutical industry.

The couple have pledged to continue their events. O’Neill asserts her motivation stems from divine communication, stating it would be wrong to cease sharing these messages.

“It would be incorrect to stop,” she affirmed.

Source link