Heated exchanges as Noakes case wraps up
HEATED exchanges rounded off the hearing into the professional conduct of Professor Tim Noakes yesterday, as his defence team argued that he was being prosecuted because of a scientific disagreement, and the charges against him were laid by a disgruntled dietitian.
At the conclusion of months of testimony and argument, the Health Professions Council of SA (HPCSA) has argued that Noakes does not have the expertise or evidence to advise a mother, via Twitter, to wean her infant on to a low-carb, high-fat (LCHF) diet. HPCSA advocate Ajay Bhoopchand questioned how it made sense to recommend a diet geared toward the reduction of weight – for a baby.
Noakes has been accused of acting unprofessionally by advising Pippa Leenstra to wean her baby on to a LCHF diet. Leenstra tweeted him and nutritional therapist Sally-Ann Creed, who co-authored The Real Meal Revolution book with Noakes, to ask if the LCHF Banting diet was safe for the babies of breastfeeding mothers.
Noakes replied: “Baby doesn’t eat the dairy and cauliflower. Just very healthy high-fat breast milk. Key is to wean baby on to LCHF.”
Claire Julsing-Strydom, the former president of the Association of Dietitians of SA, approached the HPCSA and it laid the charge against Noakes. His defence team, however, says that no harm has come from the tweet.
Noakes’s advocate, Michael van der Nest, argued that Noakes had not entered into a doctor/ patient relationship with Leenstra.
“In the absence of a doctor/ patient relationship, what he said would amount to expressing a scientific opinion in a public forum.”
He said Julsing-Strydom was disgruntled. “It is the prosecution of a scientific disagreement.”
He also called Strydom’s reaction to Noakes’s tweet “childlike” and added that Noakes should not be prosecuted because diet- itians feel he gets more airtime as a celebrity.
Bhoopchand said that contrary to what the defence had argued, Noakes did not put out a general tweet, but a specific response to Leenstra.
He said the HPCSA could charge Noakes for the “potential harm” of the tweet.
A judgment/verdict on the matter will be issued on Friday, April 21.