Chuck Norris Pushes ‘Detox’ Scam

I’ve never quite understood why the Worldnetdaily thinks Chuck Norris some sort of expert on health medicine. I mean, I know he did a ridiculous infomercial for some piece of exercise equipment, but that hardly qualifies him for med school. And now he’s gone completely over to the side of medical woo, embracing the “detox” fraud and the single worst anti-science crank in that entire field.

Mr. Norris, after a month of eating holiday sweets immersed in sugars and saturated fats, I’m ready to flush my body’s system for a new year. Any advice on how to detoxify? – The Florida Filter

Detoxify? That is a big word that basically means “get rid of the toxins in your body.” And there are solid reasons for detoxifying as we enter the new year that go far beyond holiday binging.

For starters, Mike Adams, aka “Health Ranger,” an outspoken consumer health advocate and award-winning investigative journalist, reported, “Today, more than 95 percent of all chronic disease is caused by food choice, toxic food ingredients, nutritional deficiencies and lack of physical exercise.”

For starters, Mike Adams is…You know, I’ve been trying really hard not to describe people as crazy or insane, but people like Adams make it really difficult. The man is simply unhinged. There isn’t a conspiracy he hasn’t bought into and advocated. He’s a 9/11 truther, a birther, an anti-vaxxer, an HIV/AIDS denialist. In fact, he denies the germ theory of disease completely. He believes in chemtrails and that every mass shooting is a false flag operation intended to pave the way to taking all our guns. He thinks the UN is going to take over the United States very soon. You name the deranged conspiracy theory, he believes it. So, pretty much perfectly in line with everything else found in the Worldnetdaily.

"The Rev chose the second option."

Christian Con Man Disproves Global Warming
"Care to cite this map you're referring to?"

Christian Con Man Disproves Global Warming
"My goodness. They've supported the idea for a hundred and twenty years. Who rewrote chemistry ..."

Christian Con Man Disproves Global Warming

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Stuff like this just piles on more reasons to reject his memetic badassery.

    Fact: Bruce Lee killed Chuck Norris in Enter the Dragon, but Norris is in denial.

  • Mr Ed

    Are we sure this isn’t a humor piece? It reads like Duck’s Breath Mystery Theater’s Doctor Science.

    Johnny: Gee Mr. Norris, after a month of eating holiday sweets immersed in sugars and saturated fats, I’m ready to flush my body’s system for a new year. Any advice on how to detoxify?

  • Doug Little

    Sounds like something Troy McClure should present.

  • @Bronze Dog.

    You’ve broken the cardinal rule:

    There are no Bruce Lee jokes because

    Bruce Lee is not a joke.

  • Norris is probably dim enough to be entirely sincere in his embrace of detoxification.

  • “Detoxify” is not really that big of a word. Even for morons.

  • Thumper: Token Breeder

    …an HIV/AIDS denialist.

    Hang on, what? That’s a thing?

    In fact, he denies the germ theory of disease completely.

    WHAT?! But we’ve seen bacteria and viruses under microscopes! If we infect someone with E.coli, they present the symptoms of being infected with E.coli. How exactly does one go abut denying that?

  • coragyps

    Detoxify? That is a big word that basically means…..

    Huh? “Detoxify” isn’t a big word!! “3-(hydroxymethyl)-1-{[(5-nitro-2-furanyl)methylene]amino}-2,4-imidazolidinedione” is sort of getting biggish, and it’s probably a bit toxic, too. But “detoxify” isn’t even a big word here in West Texas.

  • Doug Little

    WHAT?! But we’ve seen bacteria and viruses under microscopes!

    Every time you look through a microscope you are looking a tiny sound stage in Hollywood.

  • DonDueed

    “Detoxify” is so a big word! It has five syllables! FIVE!!!!

  • spamamander, internet amphibian

    @ Thumper

    I only recently realized that germ theory and HIV/ AIDS denial were real things. I lost a lot of brain cells looking them up on the Interwebz. Dear dog people are stupid. Seriously.

  • How do they deny germ theory of disease? They take the extreme tack that correlation, no matter how consistent, no matter how controlled the circumstances, no matter how clear the sequence of events is, is ever proof of causation. So, they rationalize that being sick merely makes your body a breeding ground for those harmless germs. Or that particular illnesses make your body manufacture corresponding germs.

  • blf

    If I recall an old post (by Orac, I think) correctly, many germ theory denialists believe humorism. And I too was amazed to learn there are supposedly-educated people who deny germ theory.

    HIV/AIDS denialism has been around “forever”, with the most disgusting case I can now recall being the then-“science editor” at the London (Sunday?) Times newspaper starting a “campaign” — which he explicitly compared-to that newspaper’s much earlier correct and useful anti-thalidomide campaign — to “correct” the supposedly mistaken connection between HIV and AIDS. That so infuriated the then-editor of Nature, John Maddox, that he began running of series of editorials in Nature about the anti-scienceism in the newspaper. (It is also the initial reason I boycott those papers, albeit nowadays the owner (Murdock) is the reason I continue to boycott them.)

  • NitricAcid

    @#10: “Three, sir!”

    @#12&13: The local naturoquack, in her semiweekly newspaper column, once wrote a gushing review of a “new” pleomorphic theory of disease that claimed that germs, parasites and viruses were actually different stages of the same life form, and were actually produced by sick people, rather than being causes of disease.

  • jnorris

    Mr Norris (no relation) may have endorsed detoxification because he believes it, but, if the check hadn’t cleared, he would never have done it.

  • Trebuchet

    He’s … an anti-vaxxer, an HIV/AIDS denialist. In fact, he denies the germ theory of disease completely.

    So, Bill Maher then.

  • Sastra

    The idea behind germ theory denial, as others have noted, is that yes, germs exist but they’re not the real problem. The one I’ve run into consists of an admission that they can and do cause disease — but only if your body is not in its natural state of wellness. Someone who eats right, exercises right, and — very critical — has the proper frame of mind/spirit — just won’t be susceptible to germs. Your immune system will always manage to fight them off if you’ve followed Nature.

    There’ s a grain of truth under there, in that both a very bad lifestyle and major stress has been measured as having some negative effect on the immune system — but they exaggerate this and run over a cliff.

    “Crank Magnetism” is a term invented by skeptics which describes the common observation that someone who believes in one weird, whacked-out thing will often believe in some other totally unrelated weird, whacked-out thing. Homeopaths who track Big Foot, say, or alien abductees who also deny the holocaust. As Ed suggests, this probably has its roots in conspiracy thinking. Once you fall in love with the idea that the real truth is hidden below the surface and the “experts” are not to be trusted, why draw a line anywhere? It’s little old you vs. the People of the Lie.

    I think the religious mindset is inherently conspiracy-prone, in that Spiritual Truths can only be seen or known by special intuitives (“the faithful.”) Approaching them through reason and science is a sign of the blindness and delusion of the masses. The answer to “why doesn’t everyone accept what God says/is?” involves invoking a kind of conspiracy theory.

  • According to Dr. Don Colbert, who is the author of many health books

    Many health books?

    Give me a couple weeks and I can achieve that. Mind you, these books might not be very good, but I could achieve that given just some time.

    I’d find it more compelling if it said “many peer reviewed research papers” or even just “many journal articles” or “many well-regarded health books”. The first of these would obviously be the strongest establishment of the guys credentials, but even the latter two would at least hint that the guy did more than spew crap onto paper.

    If this is the best Norris can say about one of his sources, it would give me very little confidence in the rest of what he had to say, even if I knew little enough about the topic to be potentially foolable.

  • I didn’t think it was possible to have less respect for Chuck Norris. I was wrong.