I find most extreme approaches too extreme for my tastes, too.
Organic foods can have their own problems, and they are no more nutritious than conventionally raised foods (there may be other good reasons to support organic farming, but nutrition is not one of them). As for "natural" cosmetics, that term is quite literally meaningless--the FDA doesn't even bother to define the term, so it can go on any pretty much any bottle of chemical sludge manufacturers choose.
"Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof." I find it extraordinary that anyone would believe that shampoo and other topically-applied cosmetics could add weight. If these substances penetrated skin, they'd be classed as drugs, not cosmetic products. It's
vastly more likely that the Dove bar I ate, not the Dove bar I washed with, made me fat.
I agree that there's a fine line between someone saying, "I control health issue X with food and exercise alone" and saying, "
Everyone should control health issue X with food and exercise alone." It's something to aim for and good for those who can manage it--but I hope that doesn't slide into casting aspersions on people who still need the boost of medication to correct a medical concern. (They would have to pry my levothyroxine from my cold, dead hands.)
When it all comes down to it, people in the public eye often go extreme in their statements because they A) don't live in a world in which choosing betweeen a food bill and a doctor's visit is a real concern, B) spend less than a fraction of a percent of their income on food at all and don't recognize that most of us will opt for the six-dollar chicken over the twelve-dollar chicken, and C) have a product to sell.
You can't sell well if you aren't
L-o-o-o-u-u-u-d!! so celebrities tend to quack a lot.