If only other cancer patients could wish it all away, like heroic Elle Macpherson | Catherine Bennett

Ille Macpherson’s gratitude journal must have written itself last week. Most days, any wellness industry leader would be right to feel gratitude for the massive profits seemingly made from human gullibility: the reception to her latest venture suggests that the market for experimental self-care may have been vastly underestimated.

Since the exclusive reveal of Macpherson’s “cancer journey” in the Australian women’s weekly magazinethere can hardly have been enough time in the day, without outsourcing the work to a gratitude assistant, to capture the amount of joy a model-turned-entrepreneur experiences when her seeming rejection of evidence-based medicine is broadly presented—with only limited room for objection—as a story of entirely justified heroism.

At the top of the gratitude list are headings like: Daily Telegraph‘I trusted my inner feeling, not chemotherapy to beat breast cancer’; Sky News‘Elle Macpherson says she is now ‘completely healthy’, seven years after finding out she had breast cancer’; and the LA

Times: “Elle Macpherson explains why a holistic approach to breast cancer treatment worked for her“You seem to understand that cancer, when defeated holistically, never comes back as the conventionally treated form did to one of my dearest friends, and that it kills you.

Next on the list: the numerous reports that barely or not at all mention Macpherson’s previous connection to Andrew Wakefield. Crucially, the disgraced doctor’s name was absent from the initial, lengthy account of her recovery, which was generous with mentions of her wellness business, WelleCo, a purveyor of high-end nutritional supplements.

Even in less charitable accounts, Macpherson’s public, as well as personal, association with Wakefield escapes close inspection. Gratuitous as it may be to mention a woman’s old relationships, the realization that she promoted an anti-vaccination film created by an individual blamed for outbreaks of measles and mumps, and still spreading doubts about vaccinationcould have helped readers question whether the apparent MacPherson-esque rejection of science would be right for them.

Even greater gratitude for the fact that rhino horn has not yet been reported. Every day that no one remembers that you there was once talk about consuming The pulverized horn of an endangered species is a good day for a vegan health guru: In the week you want your health insights to be taken seriously while waiting for a new memoir to be published, it’s practically priceless.

Another omission to be thankful for: the alkaline diet that launched Macpherson’s wellness career. Macpherson told the Standard in 2015: “I believe that most ailments stem from an acidic body.” Debunked by Cancer Research UKit was one of the TelegraphThe Worst Celebrity Diets of the Year, Up There TrimSecrets by Michelle Mone. Do we theorize that, even with Macpherson’s patented supplements, a person might not achieve perfect health? Whatever her own conclusions nine years later, some of her converts must be wondering whether they can now stop testing the pH of their urine.

Overall, perhaps the biggest reason to cheer at WelleCo is also good news for all the celebrity wellness entrepreneurs: coverage of Macpherson’s “remission” suggests, as never before, that their industry has somehow risen above years of ridicule to place itself outside of rational consideration—including, it seems, in news outlets once wary of glorifying alternative claims that, if they became popular, would end up killing people. In the same pages where it was once routine to find the then-Prince Charles, for example, being accused of “outright quackery,” crankphobia has diminished to the point where readers are discovering that Macpherson’s “intuitive, heart-guided, holistic approach” deserves serious consideration.

Her achievements are acknowledged by none other than herself: “It was time for deep, introspective reflection. And that took courage.” After seemingly rejecting medical advice, we learn, Macpherson spent eight months in Phoenix, Arizona, with her support team of her personal physician, a holistic dentist, osteopath, chiropractor, naturopath, and therapists. Research has yet to determine which, if any, of these are optional. It must be bitter indeed for caffeine enema advocates that their cancer treatment was endorsed by a prince, not a former supermodel. For Airbnb owners in Phoenix, however, the future looks bright. Just as celebrity health stories can improve public health, as after Kylie Minogue has been diagnosed with breast cancerResearch shows that their influence is great enough to undermine it.

At least companies like Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop, Kardashian’s Poosh, and WelleCo can argue that propagating nonsense about self-love and taking seemingly unproven supplements is their job. The occasional controversy, like vaginal steam, does little to shake consumer faith in the world of “clinically studied” (apparently unproven) ingredients, where it’s normal to point to a “medical psychic” (Goop) or remark (like Macpherson), “I also take really good care of my mitochondria.”

The only evidence needed for Paltrow and Macpherson’s followers absurd health regimesso it seems, is the appearance of their creators. If you don’t believe in the power of structured water (a favorite of Macpherson’s), or think you can reduce your intestinal permeability with bovine colostrum supplements (Goop), then the work of the wellness industry, like astrology perhaps, or the planchette, is probably not for you.

A strong preference for Macpherson over Paltrow – and for the king, too – doesn’t seem to explain why parts of the media that previously loathed Goop are now spreading a rival brand of nonsense, especially one that comes across as so patently irresponsible.

Perhaps it reflects some observable progress – most recently after the Cass review – rejection of medical evidenceOr perhaps the dream of a tailor-made, individually tailored path of self-care, “saying no to standard medical solutions”, appeals to you at a time when many GP practices seem to be focused primarily on avoiding human contact.

But even the worst NHS care is rarely as cruel as Macpherson’s approach to curing cancer. He suggests that the dead were simply not brave enough to cure themselves.