Steven Bartlett Faces Scrutiny After Dragons’ Den Appearance Highlights Health Misinformation Concerns
Steven Bartlett, the youngest ever Dragon on the popular BBC show Dragons’ Den, found himself in an uncomfortable position during a recent episode. The episode, which aired after allegations of harmful health misinformation being shared on his podcast, "The Diary of a CEO," featured a pitch from two entrepreneurs, Issa and Ash Patel, for their vitamin and supplement company, Diso 18. The cousins emphasized the importance of science-backed health information during their presentation, a point that seemed to resonate with viewers, particularly given the recent controversy surrounding Bartlett’s podcast.
The timing of the pitch couldn’t have been more awkward for Bartlett. Just weeks prior, a BBC World Service investigation had alleged that his podcast had spread numerous harmful health claims that contradicted scientific evidence. The investigation, conducted with the assistance of health professionals, reportedly identified an average of 14 misleading claims per episode across 15 health-related episodes. These claims allegedly included anti-vaccine conspiracies and downplaying the efficacy of established cancer treatments.
As the Patel cousins highlighted the scientific basis of their product and their commitment to avoiding unsubstantiated claims, the camera cut to Bartlett, who appeared visibly uncomfortable and shifted in his seat. This moment quickly went viral on social media, with viewers pointing out the irony of the situation. Many commented on the juxtaposition of the entrepreneurs’ emphasis on scientific rigor and the allegations against Bartlett’s podcast. The incident added fuel to the ongoing debate surrounding the responsibility of podcasters and media personalities in disseminating accurate health information.
The Patels ultimately left the Den without securing an investment. Bartlett cited a lack of innovation and differentiation in their products as his reason for declining. Other Dragons also expressed concerns about the product’s texture. While the Patels’ pitch may not have won over the Dragons, it inadvertently highlighted the larger issue of health misinformation in the media, bringing the controversy surrounding Bartlett’s podcast back into the spotlight.
Bartlett’s podcast, "The Diary of a CEO," boasts significant reach, with a reported 1 billion views and listens across various platforms. Launched in 2017, it has rapidly gained popularity. However, the BBC investigation casts a shadow over this success, questioning the credibility and responsibility of the platform. The investigation cited specific instances of concerning claims, including an episode featuring cancer researcher Dr. Thomas Seyfried, who reportedly compared modern cancer treatments to “medieval cures” and advocated for a keto diet as part of cancer treatment.
In another episode, Dr. Aseem Malhotra allegedly claimed that the “Covid vaccine was a net negative for society.” While both Dr. Seyfried and Dr. Malhotra stood by their statements when approached by the BBC, the investigation raises concerns about the potential impact of these claims on listeners. The dissemination of such information, particularly on a platform with a large and engaged audience, raises questions about the ethical responsibilities of podcast hosts and the potential for misinformation to spread.
A spokesperson for Bartlett’s podcast responded to the BBC investigation by emphasizing the thorough research that goes into each episode and the platform’s commitment to freedom of expression for its guests. They also pointed out that the BBC had only examined a small percentage of the total episodes published. However, the controversy highlights the ongoing tension between providing a platform for diverse viewpoints and the need to ensure the accuracy and responsibility of information shared with a wide audience. The incident on Dragons’ Den served as an uncomfortable reminder of this tension, placing Bartlett in the awkward position of having his own commitment to scientific rigor questioned in light of the allegations against his podcast.
