What if the Series reception section were something like this?

Series reception

edit

The Goop Lab was criticized for various reasons. Many sources described the show as promoting pseudoscience.[1][2][3] Mia de Graaf wrote in Business Insider Malaysia that the series "can legitimize unscientific, magical thinking about health, as well as pseudoscientific therapies... [and] further erode the foundations and trust in scientific professions."[4] Jonathan Jarry of McGill's Office for Science and Society wrote "The core problem with the series, in my opinion, is its coronation of personal experience... [Such] anecdotes are dirty data: they are contaminated by a dozen variables..."[5] Ars Technica similarly accused the series of making as if "the subjective experiences of a few select individuals are equivalent to the results of randomized, controlled clinical trials..."[6]

Other critics concluded that science and medicine are not the correct standards by which to judge the Netflix series. The series announced in a disclaimer before each episode that "The following series is designed to entertain and inform — not provide medical advice." Monica Hesse wrote in the Washington Post: "Maybe you [Gwyneth Paltrow] owe people more than curiosity. Maybe you owe them vigilance. And maybe this is getting too solemn a viewing exercise that was meant to be a lark. 'The Goop Lab' ultimately doesn’t make a serious dent in conventional wisdom. Most of the crazy-sounding claims eventually wind their way toward something reasonable." (make into reference: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/help-i-keep-watching-gwyneth-paltrows-goop-tv-show/2020/01/31/5ca5d24e-4394-11ea-b503-2b077c436617_story.html ) Jen Chaney wrote in Vulture: "Goop, the website, has been called out before for pushing pseudoscience, and Netflix seems quite aware of that. Every episode is preceded by a disclaimer that says, 'The following series is designed to entertain and inform — not provide medical advice.' The truth is that none of the episodes seems to be trying to provide medical advice, really. And for the most part, the ideas they explore aren’t super-woo-woo as much as they are a bit experimental. If you’re the kind of person who thinks traditional thinking and standard Western medicine don’t always adequately address every ailment that afflicts humans — and a great many rational individuals feel this way — a lot of what’s in The Goop Lab won’t seem completely out there."

Those ideas were treated specifically by some critics. BBC News reported on topics covered by three of the episodes:[7]

  • Psychedelics psychotherapy: "The use of psychedelics for therapeutic purposes has increased in recent years, with continuing studies in the US and the UK exploring their short-term and long-term impact on mental health disorders. They have so far been linked to having potentially positive effects related to the treatment of addiction, anxiety related to terminal illness, chronic PTSD, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and social anxiety... While it found little to no evidence of participants experiencing increased life satisfaction, researchers indicated there were lower levels of stress and depression reported." Regarding microdosing, they reported "The use of such powerful psychedelics outside of a controlled environment and without the proper medical expertise is not recommended by medical professionals."
  • Cold exposure therapy: "There is some science behind Mr Hof's claims... However, cold-water swimming can be very dangerous - and there is a significant risk of hypothermia when not done in a controlled setting. There is also a risk from the body's acute cold shock response, which may affect the arm muscles while swimming and can lead to incapacitation and potential drowning within minutes if unsupervised."
  • Energy healing: "Currently, there is no scientific evidence proving such energy exists." Regarding John Amaral's statements regarding quantum physics' proving his claims, physics professor Philip Moriarty told BBC News that Amaral's attempts to relate the theory to his practice were "pure and utter nonsense."

Addressing mediums, New Scientist wrote "Paltrow interviews a scientist who says she has carried out rigorous studies that prove mediums are real. But other work has shown that scientists are too easily fooled and that the best people at catching out mediums are professional magicians and illusionists. The researcher rolls out another cliche – 'science is just one way of knowing' – which leaves me sceptical that she is appropriately sceptical."

Addressing the episode on women's sexual pleasure, Olivia Willis wrote on ABC that "Goop's record on women's health is not strong... You can imagine my surprise (and utter delight) to find 35 minutes of vulva anatomy, body positivity and frank discussions about women's sexual health and autonomy. The success of this episode is, in large part, thanks to Betty Dodson, a 90-year-old feminist sex educator and her colleague, Carlin Ross, who run workshops that aim to empower women with knowledge about their bodies. Dodson notes that many women feel shame or embarrassment when it comes to sex, and most of the episode is spent trying to counter this." [make this a reference https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-02-01/the-goop-lab-health-claims-review-gwyneth-paltrow-review/11910770]

Some characterized the series as an "infomercial,"[8][9][10] but others noted that it did not promote products.[3]

Critics were also divided on the series' entertainment value. Ars Technica, a Condé Nast publication, concluded that "the show is just, well, boring."[6] Writing in Vox under the headline "Netflix’s The Goop Lab pushes flimsy wellness trends. But it’s strong on vulvas," Julia Belluz who had previously published a reaction to the series trailer said that "When we watched the actual show, we found it was generally less edgy than the trailer suggested — some episodes were downright boring (like the 'health-span plan' about dieting for longevity), while others contained useful health messages (such as caring for and loving your body)"[11]

Others rated the series' entertainment value more highly. Reviewing the series in Vulture, Jen Chaney wrote that "I was fully prepared to hate The Goop Lab... I regret to inform everyone on the internet, where it’s become a competitive sport to vocally loathe Paltrow and her website that sells vagina-scented candles for $75, that The Goop Lab isn’t particularly hateable. Some of the episodes are even helpful... the half-hour installments, which each focus on a specific wellness topic and recruit Goop employees to try out various treatments and therapies, are actually interesting and informative. My chief complaint about The Goop Lab, believe it or not, is that its episodes need to be a little longer. I just wrote that sentence and meant it. I know: It’s unbelievable to me, too!"[12]

A few reviews claimed the show was entertaining and criticized it for being so. Variety wrote that "Paltrow is a compelling host — not giving too much of herself away, ever stopping short of pure endorsement of any topic even as she gives it air — on what is a carefully structured, elegantly built, compulsively watchable show about, mainly, complete nonsense." Entertainment Weekly said the series was "either unexpectedly moving or morally disgusting." By contrast, reviewing the show for the Washington Post, Monica Hesse was generally critical of Goop but begrudgingly praised Paltrow: "Maybe one day I’ll understand how I can actually love Gwyneth Paltrow, and yet find that, when I open my mouth, only snark comes out. Is it that I find her earnestness both poignant and poisonous? Do I fear my own inner truth? I’d wager that anyone making time for “The Goop Lab” is coming to it from a similar place: A love-hate desire to know what she’s actually like when she doles out the advice that usually appears, disembodied, on her website. And the answer is: Thoughtful. Open. Searching. Curiosity is hard to fake, and Gwyneth has it, whether she’s asking a doctor to explain his psychedelic research or querying one of her assistants/guinea pigs about the effects of an experiment." [make reference https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/help-i-keep-watching-gwyneth-paltrows-goop-tv-show/2020/01/31/5ca5d24e-4394-11ea-b503-2b077c436617_story.html]

  1. ^ Bradley, Laura (31 January 2020). "UK Health Chief Calls B.S. on Gwyneth Paltrow's 'Goop Lab' for Spreading 'Misinformation'". Thedailybeast.com. The Daily Beast. Archived from the original on 31 January 2020. Retrieved 31 January 2020.
  2. ^ Mosendz, Polly (17 January 2020). "Pseudoscience and Sobbing: The Goop Lab on Netflix, Reviewed". Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg. Retrieved 21 January 2020.
  3. ^ a b Franich, Darren; Baldwin, Kristen (17 January 2020). "Gwyneth Paltrow's The Goop Lab is either unexpectedly moving or morally disgusting". EW.com. Entertainment Weekly. Archived from the original on 17 January 2020. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
  4. ^ de Graaf, Mia (27 January 2020). "Psychics are the new therapists, and Gwyneth Paltrow's Netflix show is bringing the $2 billion industry into the mainstream". Businessinsider.my. Businless Insider Malaysia. Retrieved 28 January 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  5. ^ Jarry, Jonathan (2020-01-24). "The Goop Lab Experiments With Viewers' Credulity". Office for Science and Society. Archived from the original on 2020-01-25. Retrieved 2020-01-25.
  6. ^ a b Mole, Beth (17 January 2020). "Goop's Netflix series: It's so much worse than I expected and I can't unsee it". arstechnica.com. Ars Technica. Archived from the original on 17 January 2020. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
  7. ^ "What is the science behind The Goop Lab's claims?". BBC News. February 8, 2020. Archived from the original on 8 February 2020. Retrieved February 8, 2020. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  8. ^ Garber, Megan (18 January 2020). "Gwyneth Paltrow's Netflix Show Is Painful to Watch". TheAtlantic.com. The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 21 January 2020. Retrieved 21 January 2020. But to watch The Goop Lab as a series, with its arcing assumptions about the limitations of medical science, is also to wonder where to locate the line between open-mindedness and gullibility. It is to wonder why Gwyneth Paltrow, celebrity and salesperson, should be trusted as an arbiter of health. To have a body is to live in a constant state of uncertainty. Goop transforms that anxiety into a sales pitch.
  9. ^ Mosendz, Polly (17 January 2020). "Pseudoscience and Sobbing: The Goop Lab on Netflix, Reviewed". Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg. Retrieved 21 January 2020.
  10. ^ Mangan, Lucy (2020-01-24). "The Goop Lab review – so Gwyneth Paltrow doesn't know what a vagina is". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on 2020-01-25. Retrieved 2020-01-25.
  11. ^ Belluz, Julia; Resnick, Brian (17 January 2020). "Netflix's The Goop Lab pushes flimsy wellness trends. But it's strong on vulvas". Vox.com. Vox. Archived from the original on 21 January 2020. Retrieved 21 January 2020. Watching The Goop Lab helped us understand why Goop survives despite its critics.
  12. ^ Chaney, Jen. "The Goop Lab Is Less Goop-y Than You Might Think". Vulture.com. Vulture. Retrieved 19 February 2020.