Misplaced Pages

Quackwatch: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:29, 23 January 2007 editGigiButterfly (talk | contribs)141 edits Kaffman cited references to support his literature.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 09:49, 17 November 2024 edit undoGreenC bot (talk | contribs)Bots2,547,809 edits Removed 1 archive link. Wayback Medic 2.5 per WP:URLREQ#time.com 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Use mdy dates|date=January 2019}}
{{POV}}
{{Short description|American alternative medicine watchdog website}}
{{Infobox website
| name = Quackwatch
| logo = QuackWatch logo.png
| logo_size = 100
| logo_alt =
| logo_caption =
| screenshot =
| collapsible =
| collapsetext =
| background =
| screenshot_size =
| screenshot_alt =
| caption =
| url = {{langx|en|{{URL|quackwatch.org|Quackwatch.org}}}}<br />{{langx|fr|{{URL|http://www.sceptiques.qc.ca/quackwatch/}}}}
| commercial = No
| type =
| registration = No
| language = English, French, Portuguese
| num_users =
| content_license =
| programming_language =
| owner =
| author =
| editor = ]
| launch_date = 1996
| revenue =
| ip =
| issn =
| oclc = 855159830
| current_status = Active
| footnotes =
}}


'''Quackwatch''' is a United States–based website, self-described as a "network of people"<ref name=whofundsquackwatch >{{cite web |last=Barrett |first=SJ |date=April 18, 2016 |title=Who Funds Quackwatch? |url=https://quackwatch.org/about/funding/ |publisher=Quackwatch |access-date=January 13, 2017}}</ref> founded by ], which aims to "combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct" and to focus on "]-related information that is difficult or impossible to get elsewhere".<ref name="BarrettBio">{{cite web |last=Barret |first=SJ |date=December 21, 2016 |title=Stephen Barrett, M.D., Biographical Sketch |url=http://www.quackwatch.com/10Bio/bio.html |publisher=Quackwatch |access-date=January 13, 2017}}</ref><ref name="mission">{{cite web |last=Barret |first=SJ |date=May 2, 2007 |title=Quackwatch Mission Statement |url=http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mission.html |publisher=Quackwatch |access-date=January 13, 2017}}</ref> Since 1996 it has operated the ] ] website '''quackwatch.org''', which advises the public on unproven or ineffective alternative medical remedies.<ref name="quacks">{{cite news |last=Baldwin |first=FD |date=July 19, 2004 |title=If It Quacks Like a Duck.{{nbsp}}...|url=http://www.medhunters.com/articles/ifItQuacksLikeADuck.html |publisher=] |access-date=February 1, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080206060833/http://www.medhunters.com/articles/ifItQuacksLikeADuck.html |archive-date=February 6, 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The site contains articles and other information criticizing many forms of alternative medicine.<ref name="QWmainpage">{{cite web |last=Barret |first=SJ |url=http://www.quackwatch.org/ |title=Quackwatch.org main page |publisher=Quackwatch |access-date=February 12, 2007 }}</ref><ref name="The Good Web Guide">{{cite book|author=Arabella Dymoke|title=The Good Web Guide|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JCipdQBDUucC&pg=PA35|access-date=September 4, 2013|year=2004|publisher=The Good Web Guide Ltd|isbn=978-1-903282-46-5|page=35|quote=Quackwatch is without doubt an important and useful information resource and injects a healthy dose of scepticism into reviewing popular health information. Its aim is to investigate questionable claims made in some sectors of what is now a multi-million pound healthcare industry.}}</ref><ref name="Eastern Medicine Goes West">{{cite web |last=Politzer |first=M |date=September 14, 2007 |title=Eastern Medicine Goes West |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118971914846626834?mod=googlenews_wsj |work=] |access-date=September 14, 2007}}</ref>
'''Quackwatch''' Inc. is an ] ] organization that aims to "combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct," with its primary focus on what it characterizes as ].<ref name="mission"></ref> Since 1996, it has operated a website, , which contains articles and other types of information criticizing all forms of alternative medicine.


Quackwatch cites ] journal articles and has received several awards.<ref name="Awards and Honors">{{cite web|title=Awards Received by Quackwatch|url=http://www.quackwatch.org/00AboutQuackwatch/Awards/awards.html |work=Quackwatch|date=November 7, 2005 }}</ref> The site has been developed with the assistance of a worldwide ] of volunteers and expert advisors. It has received positive recognition and recommendations from mainstream organizations and sources, although at times it has also received criticism for perceived bias in its coverage. It has been recognized in the media, which cite quackwatch.org as a practical source for online ].<ref name="jaroff_bust">{{cite magazine |last=Jaroff |first=L |date=April 22, 2001 |title=The Man Who Loves To Bust Quacks |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101010430-107254,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050406044958/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101010430-107254,00.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=April 6, 2005 |magazine=] |access-date=August 16, 2007}}</ref> The success of Quackwatch has generated the creation of additional affiliated websites;<ref name="ascp">{{cite news|first=Bao-Anh |last=Nguyen-Khoa |title=Selected Web Site Reviews — Quackwatch.com |url=http://www.ascp.com/publications/tcp/1999/jul/access.shtml |publisher=] |date=July 1999 |access-date=June 24, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090318041703/http://www.ascp.com/publications/tcp/1999/jul/access.shtml |archive-date=March 18, 2009 }}</ref> {{as of|2019|lc=y}} there were 21 of them.<ref name=21_sites>{{cite web|url=http://www.quackwatch.org/00AboutQuackwatch/new.html|title=Recent Additions to Quackwatch|access-date=April 4, 2019}}</ref>
==History==
]]]


== History ==
Quackwatch was founded by ], M.D., as the Lehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud in 1969, and incorporated it in the state of Pennsylvania in 1970.<ref> </ref> In 1996, the organization began the Quackwatch website,<ref name="mission"> </ref> renaming the organization Quackwatch in 1997 as the website attracted attention.
{{Infobox organization
|name = Quackwatch
|image = QuackWatch logo.png
|image_border =
|size = 100
|caption = Quackwatch logo
|map =
|msize =
|mcaption =
|abbreviation =
|motto =
|formation = 1969 (as the LVCAHF)<br />1970 (incorporated)<br />2008 (network of people)<br /> 2020 (made a part of the ])
|founder = ]
|dissolved = 1970 (the original association)<br />2008 (the corporation)<br />2020 (the network of people)
|type = Unincorporated association (1969–1970)<br />Corporation (1970–2008)<br />Network of people (2008–2020)<br />Part of the ] (2020–present)
|status =
|purpose = "Combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct" and focus on "]-related information that is difficult or impossible to get elsewhere"
|headquarters =
|location = United States
|region_served =
|membership =
|language = English, French, Portuguese
|leader_title = Chairman
|leader_name = Stephen Barrett
|main_organ =
|parent_organization =
|affiliations = ] (NCAHF)
|num_staff =
|num_volunteers =
|budget =
|website = {{URL|http://www.quackwatch.org}}
|formerly = Lehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud (LVCAHF; 1969–1997)<br />Quackwatch, Inc. (1997–2008)
|remarks =
}}


Barrett founded the Lehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud (LVCAHF) in 1969, and it was incorporated in the ] in 1970.<ref name=whofundsquackwatch/> In 1996, the corporation began the website quackwatch.org, and the organization itself was renamed ''Quackwatch,&nbsp;Inc.'' in 1997. The Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation was dissolved after Barrett moved to North Carolina in 2008,<ref name=whofundsquackwatch/> but the network's activities continue.<ref name="mission" /> Quackwatch co-founded, and was closely affiliated with, the ] (NCAHF).<ref name=NCAHF_history>{{cite web
==Mission and scope==
|url=http://www.ncahf.org/about/history.html
|title=NCAHF's History
|access-date=October 29, 2007
}}</ref><ref name="QWmainpage"/> The NCAHF was formally dissolved in 2011.


In February 2020, Quackwatch became part of the ]. CFI planned to maintain its various websites and to receive Barrett's library later in the year.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Fidalgo |first1=Paul |title=Quackwatch Joins the Center for Inquiry |url=https://centerforinquiry.org/press_releases/quackwatch-joins-the-center-for-inquiry/ |website=Center for Inquiry |access-date=26 February 2020|date=February 26, 2020 }}</ref>
Quackwatch is operated by ] with input from his board of advisors and help from volunteers that include a number of medical professionals.<ref name="rosen">Rosen, Marjorie (October 1998). ''Biography Magazine''</ref> The website has won three awards and has been quoted in the press and medical journals.


== Mission and scope ==
Quackwatch reports that its activities include the following:
Quackwatch is overseen by Barrett, its owner, with input from advisors and help from volunteers, including a number of medical professionals.<ref name="rosen">{{cite web |last=Rosen |first=M. |date=October 1998 |title=Biography Magazine Interviews: Stephen Barrett, M.D. |url=http://www.quackwatch.org/10Bio/biography.html |access-date=January 13, 2017 |publisher=Quackwatch}} Original published in '']''.</ref> In 2003, 150 scientific and technical advisors: 67 medical advisors, 12 dental advisors, 13 mental health advisors, 16 nutrition and food science advisors, three podiatry advisors, eight veterinary advisors, and 33 other "scientific and technical advisors" were listed by Quackwatch.<ref name="advisors">{{cite web|last=Barrett |first=SJ |date=January 28, 2003 |title=Scientific and technical advisors |url=http://quackwatch.org/09Advisors/advbd.html |publisher=Quackwatch |access-date=January 13, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030416193827/http://quackwatch.org/09Advisors/advbd.html |archive-date=April 16, 2003 }}</ref> Many more have since volunteered, but advisor names are no longer listed.<ref>{{cite web |last=Barrett |first=SJ |date=March 20, 2011 |title=How to Become a Quackwatch Advisor |url=http://www.quackwatch.org/09Advisors/advbd.html |publisher=Quackwatch |access-date=January 13, 2017}}</ref>


Quackwatch describes its ] as follows:
:"investigating questionable claims, answering inquiries about products and services, advising quackery victims, distributing reliable publications, debunking pseudoscientific claims, reporting illegal marketing, improving the quality of health information on the internet, assisting or generating consumer-protection lawsuits, and attacking misleading advertising on the internet."<ref name="mission"></ref>


<blockquote>...{{nbsp}}investigating questionable claims, answering inquiries about products and services, advising quackery victims, distributing reliable publications, debunking pseudoscientific claims, reporting illegal marketing, improving the quality of health information on the internet, assisting or generating ] lawsuits, and attacking misleading advertising on the internet.<ref name="mission"/></blockquote>
The website contains essays on what it deems to be misleading or fraudulent health-related therapies and enterprises, loosely termed "quackery". The essays are not, and do not claim to be, ] scientific papers, but are mainly critical descriptions of treatments, commercial products, and health providers, mainly written by Barrett and his board of advisors for the non-specialist consumer. The essays generally explain in detail the reasons Barrett considers them fraudulent, misleading, or ineffective. They usually include references and links to sources used, as well as to sources for further study. Quackwatch is especially critical of those therapies that it considers potentially dangerous.


Quackwatch has no salaried employees, and the total cost of operating all Quackwatch's sites is approximately $7,000 per year. It is funded mainly by small individual donations, commissions from sales on other sites to which they refer, profits from the sale of publications, and self-funding by Barrett. The stated income is also derived from the usage of ]s.<ref name="mission"/>
The site contains information about specific people who perform, market, and advocate what Quackwatch considers to be dubious therapies, in many cases providing details of convictions for past marketing fraud. The website also presents lists of sources, individuals, and groups which Quackwatch considers questionable and non-recommended, sometimes without explanation or justification.<ref name="nonrecsource">Barrett SJ. Quackwatch. Retrieved July 19, 2006.</ref><ref name="nonrec">Barrett SJ. Quackwatch. Retrieved July 19, 2006.</ref> Among those mentioned critically are ], for recommending ] "mega-dose" ] treatment of ] and <ref>Marshall CW, Barrett SJ (ed). revised 18 May 2002, accessed 13 Dec 2006.</ref><ref name="pauling">Barrett SJ. (May 5, 2001). </ref> and integrative medicine proponent ].


==About the site== == Site content ==
The Quackwatch website contains ]s and ]s, written by Barrett and other writers, intended for the non-specialist consumer.<!-- The numerous other writers are identified in each article they wrote. --> The articles discuss health-related products, treatments, enterprises, and providers that Quackwatch deems to be misleading, fraudulent, or ineffective. Also included are links to article sources and both internal and external resources for further study.


The site is developed with the assistance from volunteers and expert advisors.<ref name="Los Angeles Times">{{cite news|title=Let's check in with the skeptics! (They're way more fun than the credulous)|url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2010/02/lets-check-in-with-the-skeptics-theyre-way-more-fun-than-the-credulous-.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times | date=February 5, 2010}}</ref> Many of its articles cite ] research<ref name="ascp"/> and are footnoted with several links to references.<ref name="FactCheckED.org">{{cite web|title=Quackwatch|url=http://www.factchecked.org/Sfts_PolicyWonksDetails.aspx?myId=8|work=FactCheckED.org|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070921193725/http://www.factchecked.org/Sfts_PolicyWonksDetails.aspx?myId=8|archive-date=September 21, 2007}}</ref> A review in ''Running & FitNews'' stated the site "also provides links to hundreds of trusted health sites."<ref name="American Running Association">{{cite news|title=Cutting through the haze of health marketing claims|url=http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/27449056/cutting-through-haze-health-marketing-claims|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190414232045/http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/27449056/cutting-through-haze-health-marketing-claims|url-status=dead|archive-date=2019-04-14|work=]|publisher=Running & FitNews|date=September–October 2007|access-date=February 1, 2008}}</ref>
Quackwatch engages the services of 150+ scientific and technical advisors, who author articles and help to "evaluate web sites, answer health-related questions, review books, help prepare articles, and engage in other projects that foster the spread of accurate information on the Internet."<ref name="advisors"></ref> ], 67 medical advisors, 12 dental advisors, 13 mental health advisors, 16 nutrition and food science advisors, 3 podiatry advisors, 8 veterinary advisors, and 33 "other scientific and technical advisors" were listed.<ref name="advisors"/>


=== Related and subsidiary sites ===
Quackwatch claims that it has no salaried employees and "…operates with minimal expense, funded mainly by small individual donations, commissions from sales on other sites to which we refer, sponsored links, and profits from the sale of publications. If its income falls below what is needed for the research, the rest comes out of my pocket… The total cost of operating Quackwatch's many Web sites is approximately $7,000 per year."<ref name="funding">Barrett SJ. </ref>.
Naturowatch is a subsidiary site of Quackwatch<ref>{{cite journal |title=Bacteria, ulcers, and ostracism? H. pylori and the making of a myth |first=Kimball C. |last=Atwood IV |journal=Skeptical Inquirer |volume=28 |issue=6 |page=27 |year=2004|url=https://www.csicop.org/si/show/bacteria_ulcers_and_ostracism_h._pylori_and_the_making_of_a_myth}}</ref> which aims to provide information about ] that is "difficult or impossible to find elsewhere".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.naturowatch.org/ |title=Naturowatch<sup>SM</sup> |access-date=April 28, 2017}}</ref> The site is operated by Barrett and ], an anesthesiologist by profession, who has become a vocal critic of alternative medicine.<ref name=Parascandola>{{cite journal |title=Alternative medicine trial suspends recruitment |first=Mark |last=Parascandola |journal=Research Practitioner |volume=9 |issue=6 |page=193 |year=2008|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266795147}}<!-- teaser URL=http://www.centerwatch.com/advertise/samplerp.pdf --></ref>


The site is available in French<ref name="French"></ref> and formerly in German<ref name="German"> (archived)</ref> and Portuguese,<ref name="Portuguese"></ref> as well as via several ].
The site is part of a network of related sites, such as Homeowatch<ref>Homeowatch</ref> (on ]), Credential Watch<ref>Credential Watch</ref> (devoted to exposing ]), Chirobase<ref>Chirobase </ref> (specifically devoted to ], cosponsored by the ] and Victims of Chiropractic<ref>Victims of Chiropractic</ref>), and others, each devoted to specific topics.<ref>There are affiliated with Quackwatch.</ref>


==Notability== == Influence ==
Sources that mention Stephen Barrett's ''Quackwatch'' as a useful source for consumer information include website reviews,<ref name="The Good Web Guide"/><ref name="ascp"/><ref name="forbes">{{cite magazine|url=https://www.forbes.com/bow/b2c/review.jhtml?id=865 |magazine=] |title=Best of the Web website reviews: Quackwatch. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080114071544/http://www.forbes.com/bow/b2c/review.jhtml?id=865 |archive-date=January 14, 2008 }}</ref><ref name="thedietchannel">{{cite news
|title=Diet Channel Award Review Of Quackwatch
|url=http://www.thedietchannel.com/Quackwatch-Review.htm
|access-date=September 18, 2007
|quote=Quackwatch is a very informative site which informs you about health fraud and gives you advice on many decisions.}}</ref><ref name="USNWR1999">{{cite news|title=U.S. News & World Report: The Best of The Web Gets Better |url=https://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/991115/archive_002597_7.htm |work=US News |date=November 7, 1999 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060524122033/http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/991115/archive_002597_7.htm |archive-date=May 24, 2006 }}</ref> government agencies, and various journals<ref name="AJPE">{{Cite journal |pmc = 1803699|year = 2006|last1 = Pray|first1 = W. S.|title = Ethical, Scientific, and Educational Concerns with Unproven Medications|journal = American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education|volume = 70|issue = 6|pages = 141|pmid = 17332867|doi = 10.5688/aj7006141}}</ref><ref name="JME">{{cite journal |doi=10.1177/0273475303257763|title=If it Walks Like a Duck{{nbsp}}...: Concerns about Quackery in Marketing Education|journal=Journal of Marketing Education|volume=26|pages=4–16|year=2004|last1=Chonko|first1=Lawrence B.|s2cid=167338734|id={{ERIC|EJ807197}}}}</ref><ref name="MJA" >{{Cite journal |pmid = 16336135|year = 2005|last1 = Sampson|first1 = Wallace|title = Propagation of the absurd: Demarcation of the absurd revisited|journal = The Medical Journal of Australia|volume = 183|issue = 11–12|pages = 580–1|last2 = Atwood IV|first2 = Kimball|doi = 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb00040.x|s2cid = 43272637}}</ref><ref name="JADA">{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00117-1|title=Internet hoaxes: How to spot them and how to debunk them|journal=Journal of the American Dietetic Association|volume=101|issue=4|pages=460|year=2001|last1=Cunningham|first1=Eleese|last2=Marcason|first2=Wendy}}</ref><ref name=JAMA>{{cite journal |doi=10.1001/jama.280.15.1380|pmid=9794323|title=Click here: How to find reliable online health information and resources|journal=JAMA|volume=280|issue=15|pages=1380|year=1998}}</ref> including '']''.<ref name="The Lancet">{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)78918-2|title = Medical quackery squashers on the web|journal = The Lancet|volume = 351|issue = 9114|pages = 1520|year = 1998|last1 = Larkin|first1 = Marilynn|s2cid = 54300255}}</ref>


=== Mention in media, books, and journals ===
Quackwatch has been mentioned in the media and various journals, as well as receiving numerous awards and honors,<ref></ref> including:
Quackwatch has been mentioned in the media, books and various journals, as well as receiving several awards and honors.<ref name="Awards and Honors"/> The '']'' mentioned Quackwatch as one of nine "select sites that provide reliable health information and resources" in 1998.<ref name="JAMA"/> It was also listed as one of three medical sites in '']'s'' "Best of the Web" in 1999.<ref name="USNWR1999"/> Thomas R. Eng, director of the ] Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health, stated in 1999 that while "the government doesn't endorse Web sites{{nbsp}}... is the only site I know of right now looking at issues of fraud and health on the Internet."<ref name="Ladd">{{cite news|first=Donna|last=Ladd|title=Dr. Who? Diagnosing Medical Fraud May Require a Second Opinion|url=http://www.villagevoice.com/news/doctor-who-6421391|work=]|date=June 22, 1999|access-date=August 5, 2017}}</ref>


Sources that mention quackwatch.org as a resource for consumer information include the ], the ], the '']'', the Diet Channel, and articles published in '']'', the '']'', the '']'', the '']'', and the '']''.<ref name=QW_as_a_resource>Sources that mention quackwatch.org as a resource for consumer information:
* In 1998, '']'' named Quackwatch one of nine "select sites that provide reliable health information and resources."<ref>, Journal of the American Medical Association 280:1380, 1998.</ref>
* {{cite web|url=https://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/fraud-and-nutrition-misinformation|title=Fraud and Nutrition Misinformation |work=Food and Nutrition Information Center|publisher=]|access-date=March 31, 2019}}
* {{cite journal |pmc = 1803699|year = 2006|last1 = Pray|first1 = W. S.|title = Ethical, Scientific, and Educational Concerns with Unproven Medications|journal = ]|volume = 70|issue = 6|pages = 141|pmid = 17332867|doi = 10.5688/aj7006141}} Quackwatch and '']'' are suggested resources for a pharmacy course on unproven medications and therapies.<!--not in the digital copy on pubmed, but it appears as a line item in a table in the print version-->
* {{cite journal |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(05)78918-2|title=Medical quackery squashers on the web|journal=]|volume=351|issue=9114|pages=1520|year=1998|last1=Larkin|first1=Marilynn|s2cid=54300255}}. Names Quackwatch as the premier site for exposing purveyors of health frauds, myths, and fads.
* {{cite journal |doi=10.1177/0273475303257763|title=If it Walks Like a Duck{{nbsp}}...: Concerns about Quackery in Marketing Education|journal=]|volume=26|pages=4–16|year=2004|last1=Chonko|first1=Lawrence B.|s2cid=167338734}} Chonko states "Many of the thoughts on which this article is based are adapted from materials found on this site." (referring to Quackwatch)
* {{cite journal |pmid = 16336135|year = 2005|last1 = Sampson|first1 = W.|title = Propagation of the absurd: Demarcation of the absurd revisited|journal = ]|volume = 183|issue = 11–12|pages = 580–1|last2 = Atwood IV|first2 = Kimball|author-link2=Kimball Atwood|doi = 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb00040.x|s2cid = 43272637}}. Sampson says that "CAM source information tends to exclude well known critical and objective web pages such as those found on Quackwatch (www.quackwatch.org)."
* {{cite journal |doi = 10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00117-1|title = Internet Hoaxes|journal = ]|volume = 101|issue = 4|pages = 460|year = 2001|last1 = Cunningham|first1 = Eleese|last2 = Marcason|first2 = Wendy}}
* ]: {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090831003638/http://www.nia.nih.gov/HealthInformation/Publications/quackery.htm |date=August 31, 2009 }} – ]
* {{cite web
|title=Nursing on the Net Web Sampler: Health News, Health Fraud & Continuing Education
|url=https://nnlm.gov/psr/guides/nursing-sampler/news-fraud-ce
|website=National Network of Libraries of Medicine: Pacific Southwest Region
|access-date=April 18, 2019
}}
* {{cite web|first=Robert Todd|last=Carroll|title="alternative" health practice|url=http://skepdic.com/althelth.html|work=]|date=January 29, 2008|access-date=February 2, 2008}}
* Diet Channel: {{cite news|title=Diet Channel Award Review Of Quackwatch|url=http://www.thedietchannel.com/Quackwatch-Review.htm|publisher=Diet Channel|access-date=September 18, 2007|quote=Quackwatch is a very informative site which informs you about health fraud and gives you advice on many decisions.}}</ref> In addition, several nutrition associations link to Quackwatch.<ref name="Dietetic Associations">{{cite news|title=Links|url=https://gnyda.org/Links|publisher=Greater New York Dietetic Association|access-date=April 21, 2019|archive-date=April 21, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190421143950/https://gnyda.org/Links|url-status=dead}}<br />&nbsp;•{{cite news|title=Professional Resources — Health Quackery|url=https://www.dce.org/public-resources/health-quackery|work=]|publisher=Diabetes Care and Education|year=2007|access-date=April 21, 2019}}</ref> An article in '']'' listed it as one of three websites for finding the truth about Internet rumors.<ref name=Luhn>Robert Luhn, " {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120918065108/http://www.pcworld.com/article/111109/article.html |date=September 18, 2012 }}," '']'' June 30, 2003 </ref> A '']'' review of alternative medicine websites noted that "skeptics may find Quackwatch offers better truth-squadding than the ] or the ]."<ref name=Walker>Leslie Walker. '']'', March 26, 1999</ref>


The books ''Low-Carb Dieting for Dummies'' (2003),<ref name="Katherine B. Chauncey">{{cite book |author=Katherine B. Chauncey |pages=292 |title=Low-Carb Dieting For Dummies |publisher=For Dummies |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-7645-2566-7}}</ref> ''The Arthritis Helpbook'' (2006),<ref name="Kate Lorig">{{cite book |author1=Kate Lorig |author2=James Fries |pages= |title=The Arthritis Helpbook |publisher=Da Capo Press |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-7382-1070-4 |url=https://archive.org/details/arthritishelpboo00rnka/page/335 }}</ref> ''The Rough Guide to the Internet'' (2007),<ref name="Peter Buckley">{{cite book |author1=Peter Buckley |author2=Duncan Clark |chapter=Thing to do online |pages=273 |title=The Rough Guide To The Internet |edition=13th |publisher=Rough Guides |year=2007 |isbn=978-1-84353-839-4}}</ref> ''Navigating the Medical Maze: A Practical Guide'' (2008),<ref name="Steven L. Brown">{{cite book |author=Steven L. Brown |chapter=How Can I Tell If The Evidence Is Any Good? |pages= |title=Navigating the Medical Maze: A Practical Guide |edition=2nd |publisher=Brazos Press |year=2008 |isbn=978-1-58743-207-1 |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/navigatingmedica00brow/page/191 }}</ref> ''Chronic Pain For Dummies'' (2008),<ref name="For Dummies">{{cite book |chapter=Ten or So Web Sources for People with Chronic Pain |pages=327 |title=Chronic Pain For Dummies |publisher=For Dummies |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-471-75140-3}}</ref> and ''The 2009 Internet Directory'' (2008)<ref name="Vince Averello">{{cite book |author1=Vince Averello |author2=Mikal E. Belicove |author3=Nancy Conner |author4=Adrienne Crew |author5=Sherry Kinkoph Gunter |author6=Faithe Wempen |pages= |title=The 2009 Internet Directory: Web 2.0 Edition |edition=1st |publisher=Que |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-7897-3816-5 |url=https://archive.org/details/2009internetdire0000unse/page/236 }}</ref> mention or use content from Quackwatch.
* In 1999, '']'' listed Quackwatch as one of three medical sites in their "Best of the Web".<ref></ref>


=== Citations by journalists ===
* In its "Best of the Web Directory &mdash; Health" category, '']'' online magazine listed Quackwatch among 25 sites<ref></ref> and provided this review:
Quackwatch and Barrett have also been cited by journalists in reports on ],{{citation needed|date=April 2019}} ], ]'s baldness treatments, ]'s ] claims, ]'s "]" therapy, ], ] and ].<ref name=journalist_mentions>Journalist mentions of Quackwatch criticisms of:
* ]: ] (September 13, 2004). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051201032145/http://www.nbc4.tv/news/3725785/detail.html |date=December 1, 2005 }}
* ]'s ] claims: Leon Jaroff, (March 14, 2003), , '']'' magazine
* ]'s "]" therapy: Brian Vastag (September 2, 2008), '']''
* ]: {{cite magazine|url=https://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/health/feeds/hscout/2006/03/02/hscout531309.html|title=Noni Juice Might Lower Smokers' Cholesterol|magazine=]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070322074356/https://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/health/feeds/hscout/2006/03/02/hscout531309.html|archive-date=March 22, 2007}}
* ]: Leon Jaroff, (September 29, 2004), , '']'' magazine
* ]: {{cite news |last1=Hamblin |first1=James |title=A Heart Surgeon's Viral Confession |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/01/a-heart-surgeons-viral-confession/283413/ |access-date=April 28, 2019 |work=The Atlantic |date=January 28, 2014 }}
</ref>


=== Recommendations and endorsements ===
:: "Dr. Stephen Barrett, a psychiatrist, seeks to expose unproven medical treatments and possible unsafe practices through his homegrown but well-organized site. Mostly attacking alternative medicines, homeopathy and chiropractors, the tone here can be rather harsh. However, the lists of sources of health advice to avoid, including books, specific doctors and organizations, are great for the uninformed. Barrett received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for fighting nutrition quackery in 1984. BEST: Frequently updated, but also archives of relevant articles that date back at least four years. WORST: Lists some specific doctors and organizations without explaining the reason for their selection."<ref name="forbes"></ref>
The ] lists Quackwatch as one of ten reputable sources of information about alternative and complementary therapies in their book '']''.<ref name=ACS>{{cite encyclopedia|url=https://archive.org/details/cancermedicine60002unse/page/|isbn=978-1-55009-213-4|year=2003|encyclopedia=Holland – Frei Cancer Medicine|edition=6|at=|publisher=]|editor1-first=Donald W|editor1-last=Kufe|editor2-first=Raphael E|editor-last2=Pollock|editor-first3=Ralph R|editor-last3=Weichselbaum|editor-first4=Robert C|editor-last4=Bast Jr.|editor-first5=Ted S|editor-last5=Gansler|editor-first6=James F|editor-last6=Holland|editor-first7=Emil|editor-last7=Frei III|first1=Barrie R.|last1=Cassileth|first2=Andrew|last2=Vickers|title=Chapter 76. Complementary and Alternative Cancer Therapies}}</ref> In a long series of articles on various alternative medicine methods, it uses Quackwatch as a reference and includes criticisms of the methods.<ref name="ACS_altmed_series"><!-- --> A list of articles on many forms of alternative medicine on the ] website that use Quackwatch as a source. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030825205753/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/eto/content/eto_5_3x_oxygen_therapy.asp?sitearea=ETO&viewmode=print |date=August 25, 2003 }}, {{cite web |url=http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Metabolic_Therapy.asp |title=Metabolic Therapy |access-date=July 26, 2016 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100628015912/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3x_Metabolic_Therapy.asp |archive-date=June 28, 2010 }} Metabolic Therapy, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100122103514/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Kirlian_Photography.asp |date=January 22, 2010 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100627204410/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Crystals.asp |date=June 27, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100123194128/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Psychic_Surgery.asp |date=January 23, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090415193137/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Folic_Acid.asp?sitearea=ETO&viewmode=print& |date=April 15, 2009 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100202210402/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Craniosacral_Therapy.asp |date=February 2, 2010 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100628014310/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Transcutaneous_Electrical_Nerve_Stimulation.asp |date=June 28, 2010 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100409115545/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Neuro-Linguistic_Programming.asp?sitearea=ETO |date=April 9, 2010 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100627111208/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3x_Questionable_Practices_In_Tijuana.asp |date=June 27, 2010 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061205032040/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/MIT/content/MIT_2_3X_Breathwork.asp |date=December 5, 2006 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100628014157/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Moxibustion.asp |date=June 28, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100212221706/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Faith_Healing.asp |date=February 12, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100628020717/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Cancer_Salves.asp?sitearea=ETO |date=June 28, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100626010408/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Qigong.asp |date=June 26, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030806004535/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Osteopathy.asp?sitearea=ETO&viewmode=print |date=August 6, 2003 }}, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100425070930/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3x_Imagery.asp |date=April 25, 2010 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080528100333/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/MIT/content/MIT_2_3X_Qigong.asp |date=May 28, 2008 }},
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100627204312/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Magnetic_Therapy.asp?sitearea=ETO |date=June 27, 2010 }}.</ref>


The ], which confers the '']'' "Code of Conduct" certification to reliable sources of health information in cyberspace, recommends Quackwatch.<ref name=recommendation> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150910032450/http://www.hon.ch/MediaCorner/FAQs_HONcode.html#HONcode8 |date=September 10, 2015 }} ]</ref> It also advises Internet users to alert Quackwatch when they encounter "possibly or blatantly fraudulent" healthcare websites.<ref name=alert> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140513092504/http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/audience_t.html |date=May 13, 2014 }} ]</ref>
Quackwatch has also been cited or mentioned by journalists in reports on ],<ref name=kolata">Kolata, Gina (April 1, 1998). '']''</ref> ],<ref name="siwolop">Siwolop, Sana (January 7, 2001). '']''</ref> ] and his claimed baldness treatments,<ref name="eichenwald">Eichenwald, Kurt and Michael Moss (February 6, 2001), . '']'' </ref><ref name=AP">Associated Press (September 13, 2004). </ref><ref> - ]</ref> ] (especially when sold by health care providers),<ref name="fessenden">Fessenden, Ford with Christoper Drew (March 31, 2000). '']''</ref> Robert Barefoot's ] claims,<ref>Leon Jaroff, (March 14, 2003), , '']'' magazine</ref> ],<ref>. '']'' article</ref> ],<ref>Leon Jaroff, (Sep. 29, 2004), , '']'' magazine</ref> ],<ref>Damon Darlin, (April 8, 2006), , '']''</ref> and the Mexican clinic where ] died.<ref name="mckinley">McKinley, James C Jr. (February 1, 2006). . '']''</ref>


In a 2007 feasibility study on a method for identifying web pages that make unproven claims, the authors wrote:
==Criticism==
{{quote|Our gold standard relied on selected unproven cancer treatments identified by experts at <nowiki>http://www.quackwatch.org</nowiki>{{nbsp}}... By using unproven treatments identified by an oversight organization, we capitalized on an existing high quality review.<ref name=Aphinyanaphongs>{{cite journal|pmid=17911859|url=http://www.hon.ch/medinf07_fichiers/Doc/Aphinyanaphongs_2007a.pdf|year=2007|last1=Aphinyanaphongs|first1=Y.|title=Text categorization models for identifying unproven cancer treatments on the web|journal=Studies in Health Technology and Informatics|volume=129|issue=Pt 2|pages=968–72|last2=Aliferis|first2=C.|access-date=March 28, 2009|archive-date=September 24, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924031234/http://www.hon.ch/medinf07_fichiers/Doc/Aphinyanaphongs_2007a.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>}}
The Quackwatch website has attracted critics, most of whom are ] proponents. Many of them are also critical of ], the owner and founder of the website:


== Site reviews ==
*Joel M. Kauffman, ] ] of the Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry at ]<ref></ref> who contests conventional medical consensus in nutrition on ] and ]{{cn}} wrote a website review entitled "Watching the Watchdogs at Quackwatch" which was published in the ].<ref name="Kauffman">Kauffmann JM (2002). Website Review: , ], '''16''', 2</ref> His website review examined eight Quackwatch articles and he concluded that the articles were "contaminated with incomplete data, obsolete data, technical errors, unsupported opinions, and/or innuendo". Kauffman stated in a disclaimer that "any recommendations... are based on studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. I am not an M. D. and cannot engage in the practice of medicine."<ref name="Kauffman">Kauffmann JM (2002). Website Review: , ], '''16''', 2</ref> Kauffman cited references to support his literature.<ref name="Kauffman">Kauffmann JM (2002). Website Review: , ], '''16''', 2</ref> He concluded:
Writing in the trade-journal '']'' in 1999, pharmacist Bao-Anh Nguyen-Khoa characterized Quackwatch as "relevant for both consumers and professionals" and containing articles that would be of interest to pharmacists, but that a peer review process would improve the site's legitimacy. Nguyen-Khoa said the presence of so many articles written by Barrett gave an impression of lack of balance but that the site was taking steps to correct this by recruiting expert contributors. He also noted that<blockquote>Barrett often inserts his strong opinions directly into sections of an article already well supported by the literature. Although entertaining, this direct commentary may be viewed by some as less than professional medical writing and may be better reserved for its own section.<ref name="ascp" /></blockquote>], a journalist with '']'', in 1999 described Barrett as "a full-time journalist and book author", "never a medical researcher", and one who "depends heavily on negative research ... in which alternative therapies do not work" but "says that most case studies that show positive results of alternative therapies are unreliable". She quoted Barrett as saying that "a lot of things don't need to be tested they simply don't make any sense".<ref name="Ladd"/>
:: "Hostility to all alternatives was expected and observed from the website, but not repetition of groundless dogma from mainstream medicine…It remains a mystery how they and I have interpreted the same body of medical science and reached such divergent conclusions…It is very probable that many…visitors to the website have been misled by the trappings of scientific objectivity… The use of this website is not recommended. It could be deleterious to your health."<ref name="Kauffman"/>


Writing in '']'', Mona Okasha wrote that Quackwatch provides an "entertaining read", but described it as only appropriate for limited use as it fails to provide a balanced view of ].<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1016/S1470-2045(00)00162-5|title = Quackery on the web – questionable cancer therapies|year = 2000|last1 = Okasha|first1 = Mona|journal = The Lancet Oncology|volume = 1|issue = 4|pages = 251}}</ref> Jane Cuzzell viewed Quackwatch similarly, arguing that it was entertaining but that the "resource value of this site depends on what the visitor is seeking" and had concerns about the appearance of bias in the selection of the material.<ref>Cuzzell, Jane. (2000). "", ''Dermatology Nursing'', Apr. 2000, p. 134. Accessed 6 November 2019.</ref> However, while Lillian Brazin also found it to be biased, she described Quackwatch as credible, and noted both the credentials of the contributors and the thoroughness of the content.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Brazin | first1 = Lillian R | year = 2007 | title = Alternative and Complementary Therapies | journal = Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet | volume = 11 | issue = 2| pages = 91–96 | doi = 10.1300/J381v11n02_08 | s2cid = 216590316 }}</ref>
*] proponent Burton Goldberg wrote: "In the paradox of 'quackbusting,' the quackbusters say they're protecting public health, but in fact, they're abandoning the public to their own suffering to protect the financial interests of conventional medicine, which has no interest in or ability to produce benefits for these conditions. The 'quackbusters' say they're serving the public, but the truth is they're grossly disserving patients."'' and ''"As alternative medicine continues to grow more popular&mdash;an estimated 42% of Americans now use it&mdash;the "quackbusters" are growing more clamorous in their denunciations of our field. They have to be&mdash;they're almost a minority view."<ref name="goldberg">''What's Eating Stephen Barrett?'', Burton Goldberg, Alternative Medicine Digest, July 1998 </ref>


In a 2002 book, Ned Vankevitch, associate professor of communications at ],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://twu.ca/academics/faculty/profiles/vankevich-ned.html |title=Ned Vankevitch |work=Trinity Western University |access-date=March 4, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120927044610/http://twu.ca/academics/faculty/profiles/vankevich-ned.html |archive-date=September 27, 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> places Barrett in a historical tradition of anti-quackery, embracing such figures as ] and ], which has been part of American medical culture since the early-twentieth century. Although acknowledging that Quackwatch's "exposé of dangerous and fraudulent health products represents an important social and ethical response to deception and exploitation", Vankevitch criticizes Barrett for attempting to limit "medical diversity", employing "denigrating terminology", categorizing all complementary and alternative medicine as a species of medical hucksterism, failing to condemn shortcomings within conventional biomedicine, and for promoting an exclusionary model of medical ] and health that serves hegemonic interests and does not fully address patient needs.<ref name=Vankevitch>{{cite book|author=Vankevitch, Ned|chapter=Limiting Pluralism|editor=Ernst, Waltraud |title=Plural medicine, tradition and modernity, 1800-2000 |publisher=Routledge |location=New York |year=2002 |pages=219–244|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DVp71Gp4eE4C|isbn=978-0-415-23122-0}}</ref>
*Ray Sahelian, MD, board certified in family medicine, is an advocate of ] and the author of health related books on nutrition<ref>Sahelian R. Mind Boosters: A Guide to Natural Supplements that Enhance Your Mind, Memory, and Mood. St. Martin's Griffin; 1st edition. 7 July 2000. ISBN-10: 0312195842; ISBN-13: 978-0312195847</ref> and a proponent of supplements<ref></ref> asks: "Why has Stephen Barrett, M.D. focused most of his attention on the nutritional industry and has hardly spent time pointing out the billions of dollars wasted each year by consumers on certain prescription and non-prescription pharmaceutical drugs?" and "Another point I would like to make regarding Quackwatch is that Dr. Barrett often, if not the majority of the time, seems to point out the negative outcome of studies with supplements (you can sense his glee and relish when he points out these negative outcomes), and rarely mentions the benefits they provide."<ref> . Accessed Sept. 3, 2006</ref>


], professor of the history of medicine at ],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://history.brookes.ac.uk/research/degrees/step2/prof.asp?ID=583 |title=Waltraud Ernst |work=Oxford Brookes University |access-date=May 8, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140513070612/http://history.brookes.ac.uk/research/degrees/step2/prof.asp?ID=583 |archive-date=May 13, 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> commenting on Vankevitch's observations in 2002, agrees that attempts to police the "medical cyber-market with a view to preventing fraudulent and potentially harmful practices may well be justified". She commends "Barrett's concern for unsubstantiated promotion and hype," and says that "Barrett's concern for fraudulent and potentially dangerous medical practices is important," but she sees Barrett's use of "an antiquarian term such as 'quack'" as part of a "dichotomising discourse that aims to discredit the "'old-fashioned', 'traditional', 'folksy' and heterodox by contrasting it with the 'modern', 'scientific' and orthodox." Ernst also interprets Barrett's attempt to "reject and label as 'quackery' each and every approach that is not part of science-based medicine" as one which minimizes the patient's role in the healing process and is inimical to medical pluralism.<ref name=Waltraud_Ernst>{{cite book |editor=Ernst, Waltraud|author=Ernst, Waltraud |chapter=Plural medicine, tradition and modernity|title=Plural medicine, tradition and modernity, 1800–2000 |publisher=Routledge |location=New York |year=2002 |pages=1–18 |isbn=978-0-415-23122-0|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DVp71Gp4eE4C}}</ref>
*Elmer M. Cranton, MD, author of ''Textbook on EDTA Chelation Therapy'', has responded to criticism by Quackwatch of the ] that he explicitly supports by stating: "There exist a small number of self-styled medical thought-police who call themselves 'quack busters'. They even have their own website, QuackWatch. This organization has the mission of attacking alternative and emerging medical therapies in favor of the existing medical monopoly."<ref name="Cranton">Cranton EM.''''</ref> He further stated: "I will answer below, point by point, a critical article on the Quackwatch website by Dr. Saul Green entitled 'Chelation Therapy: Unproven Claims and Unsound Theories',<ref name="Green">Saul Green. ''''</ref> in which Dr. Green attempts to discredit EDTA chelation using half-truths, speculation, and false statements."<ref name="Cranton"/>


A 2003 website review by '']'' magazine stated:
*Peter Barry Chowka,<ref>Chokwa PB. website accessed 24 Dec 2006.</ref> an investigative journalist, medical-political analyst and former adviser to the National Institutes of Health's Office of ], has said that Barrett "seems to be putting down trying to be objective." He went on to state that "Quackwatch.com is consistently provocative and entertaining and occasionally informative,… But I personally think he's running against the tide of history. But that's his problem, not ours."<ref>Donna Ladd, ''Diagnosing Medical Fraud May Require a Second Opinion'', The Village Voice, June 23&ndash;29, 1999 </ref>


<blockquote>Dr. Stephen Barrett, a psychiatrist, seeks to expose unproven medical treatments and possible unsafe practices through his homegrown but well-organized site. Mostly attacking alternative medicines, homeopathy and chiropractors, the tone here can be rather harsh. However, the lists of sources of health advice to avoid, including books, specific doctors and organizations, are great for the uninformed. Barrett received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for fighting nutrition quackery in 1984. BEST: Frequently updated, but also archives of relevant articles that date back at least four years. WORST: Lists some specific doctors and organizations without explaining the reason for their selection.<ref name="forbes"/></blockquote>
*Patrick Timothy (Tim) Bolen is a supporter of ] and the webmaster of Quackpot Watch,<ref>Quackpot Watch: email newsletter archive <nowiki>http://www.quackpotwatch.org/</nowiki></ref><!--- This site has been deemed so unworthy of fulfilling any condition for use at Misplaced Pages that it is just listed without being activated --> a website that challenges Barrett's views on ]. Bolen characterizes Quackwatch.com as ''dubious'',<ref>''For Quackbuster's NCAHF&mdash;It's All Over But The Shouting…'', Tim Bolen, QuackPotWatch.com, July 9, 2003. <nowiki>http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/for_quackbuster.htm</nowiki> available online</ref> and as "the "bible" for the quackbusters, the place where all the "quackbusters" send their unsuspecting victims for allegedly "good information".<ref>''The American Medical System is Broken…'', Tim Bolen, QuackPotWatch.com, May 27, 2004. <nowiki>http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/american%20health%20system2.htm</nowiki> available online</ref>


A 2004 review paper by Katja Schmidt and ] in the '']'' identified Quackwatch as an outstanding complementary medicine information source for cancer patients.<ref name="K Schmidt">{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1093/annonc/mdh174|pmid = 15111340|title = Assessing websites on complementary and alternative medicine for cancer|journal = Annals of Oncology|volume = 15|issue = 5|pages = 733–742|year = 2004|last1 = Schmidt|first1 = Katja|last2=Ernst|first2=Edzard|author-link2=Edzard Ernst|doi-access = free}}</ref><ref name="Pilcher">{{cite web|author=Helen Pilcher|title=Unreliable websites put patients at risk – Expert in complementary medicine criticizes bogus cancer advice|url=http://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=1200|work=BioEd Online|publisher=Macmillan Publishers Ltd}}</ref>
==References==
<div class="references-small"><references/></div>


The Good Web Guide said in 2006 that Quackwatch "is without doubt an important and useful information resource and injects a healthy dose of scepticism into reviewing popular health information", but "tends to define what is possible or true only in terms of what science has managed to 'prove' to date".<ref name="The Good Web Guide 1772"> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071103051137/http://new.thegoodwebguide.co.uk/index.php?rid=1772 |date=November 3, 2007 }} Retrieved on September 14, 2007.</ref>
==See also==


The organization has often been challenged by supporters and practitioners of the various forms of alternative medicine that are criticized on the website.<ref name="Ladd" /><ref name="Evaluating_CAM">{{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00081.x|title=Evaluating Complementary and Alternative Medicine: The Limits of Science and of Scientists|journal=The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics|volume=31|issue=2|pages=198–212|year=2003|last1=Hufford|first1=David J.|pmid=12964264|s2cid=29859505}}. Hufford's symposium presentation was the counterpoint for another doctor's presentation, which argued that "alternative medicine" is not medicine at all. See {{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00080.x|title=The (Alternative) Medicalization of Life|journal=The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics|volume=31|issue=2|pages=191–197|year=2003|last1=Schneiderman|first1=Lawrence J.|pmid=12964263|s2cid=43786245}}</ref>
* ]

== See also ==
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* '']''
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]


== External links == == References ==
{{Reflist|2}}
* - Official website


=== Favorable === == Further reading ==
* {{cite encyclopedia |editor-last=Farha |editor-first=Bryan |year=2007 |title=Paranormal Claims: A Critical Analysis |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tzEdpR4gizsC |publisher=University Press of America |isbn=978-0-7618-3772-5}} Three of the eighteen chapters are reprints of Quackwatch articles.
* - David Mendosa
* - Fred Baldwin


=== Critical === == External links ==
* {{Official website|https://quackwatch.org/}}
* - Chiro.org
* - Helke Ferrie
* - Tim Bolen


{{Pseudoscience}}
]


] {{DEFAULTSORT:Quackwatch}}
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 09:49, 17 November 2024

American alternative medicine watchdog website
Quackwatch
Available inEnglish, French, Portuguese
EditorStephen Barrett
URLEnglish: Quackwatch.org
French: www.sceptiques.qc.ca/quackwatch/
CommercialNo
RegistrationNo
Launched1996
Current statusActive
OCLC number855159830

Quackwatch is a United States–based website, self-described as a "network of people" founded by Stephen Barrett, which aims to "combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct" and to focus on "quackery-related information that is difficult or impossible to get elsewhere". Since 1996 it has operated the alternative medicine watchdog website quackwatch.org, which advises the public on unproven or ineffective alternative medical remedies. The site contains articles and other information criticizing many forms of alternative medicine.

Quackwatch cites peer-reviewed journal articles and has received several awards. The site has been developed with the assistance of a worldwide network of volunteers and expert advisors. It has received positive recognition and recommendations from mainstream organizations and sources, although at times it has also received criticism for perceived bias in its coverage. It has been recognized in the media, which cite quackwatch.org as a practical source for online consumer information. The success of Quackwatch has generated the creation of additional affiliated websites; as of 2019 there were 21 of them.

Quackwatch files at Center for Inquiry

History

Quackwatch
Quackwatch logo
Formation1969 (as the LVCAHF)
1970 (incorporated)
2008 (network of people)
2020 (made a part of the Center for Inquiry)
FounderStephen Barrett
Dissolved1970 (the original association)
2008 (the corporation)
2020 (the network of people)
TypeUnincorporated association (1969–1970)
Corporation (1970–2008)
Network of people (2008–2020)
Part of the Center for Inquiry (2020–present)
Purpose"Combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct" and focus on "quackery-related information that is difficult or impossible to get elsewhere"
Location
  • United States
Official language English, French, Portuguese
ChairmanStephen Barrett
AffiliationsNational Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF)
Websitewww.quackwatch.org
Formerly calledLehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud (LVCAHF; 1969–1997)
Quackwatch, Inc. (1997–2008)

Barrett founded the Lehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud (LVCAHF) in 1969, and it was incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1970. In 1996, the corporation began the website quackwatch.org, and the organization itself was renamed Quackwatch, Inc. in 1997. The Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation was dissolved after Barrett moved to North Carolina in 2008, but the network's activities continue. Quackwatch co-founded, and was closely affiliated with, the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF). The NCAHF was formally dissolved in 2011.

In February 2020, Quackwatch became part of the Center for Inquiry. CFI planned to maintain its various websites and to receive Barrett's library later in the year.

Mission and scope

Quackwatch is overseen by Barrett, its owner, with input from advisors and help from volunteers, including a number of medical professionals. In 2003, 150 scientific and technical advisors: 67 medical advisors, 12 dental advisors, 13 mental health advisors, 16 nutrition and food science advisors, three podiatry advisors, eight veterinary advisors, and 33 other "scientific and technical advisors" were listed by Quackwatch. Many more have since volunteered, but advisor names are no longer listed.

Quackwatch describes its mission as follows:

... investigating questionable claims, answering inquiries about products and services, advising quackery victims, distributing reliable publications, debunking pseudoscientific claims, reporting illegal marketing, improving the quality of health information on the internet, assisting or generating consumer-protection lawsuits, and attacking misleading advertising on the internet.

Quackwatch has no salaried employees, and the total cost of operating all Quackwatch's sites is approximately $7,000 per year. It is funded mainly by small individual donations, commissions from sales on other sites to which they refer, profits from the sale of publications, and self-funding by Barrett. The stated income is also derived from the usage of sponsored links.

Site content

The Quackwatch website contains essays and white papers, written by Barrett and other writers, intended for the non-specialist consumer. The articles discuss health-related products, treatments, enterprises, and providers that Quackwatch deems to be misleading, fraudulent, or ineffective. Also included are links to article sources and both internal and external resources for further study.

The site is developed with the assistance from volunteers and expert advisors. Many of its articles cite peer-reviewed research and are footnoted with several links to references. A review in Running & FitNews stated the site "also provides links to hundreds of trusted health sites."

Related and subsidiary sites

Naturowatch is a subsidiary site of Quackwatch which aims to provide information about naturopathy that is "difficult or impossible to find elsewhere". The site is operated by Barrett and Kimball C. Atwood IV, an anesthesiologist by profession, who has become a vocal critic of alternative medicine.

The site is available in French and formerly in German and Portuguese, as well as via several mirrors.

Influence

Sources that mention Stephen Barrett's Quackwatch as a useful source for consumer information include website reviews, government agencies, and various journals including The Lancet.

Mention in media, books, and journals

Quackwatch has been mentioned in the media, books and various journals, as well as receiving several awards and honors. The Journal of the American Medical Association mentioned Quackwatch as one of nine "select sites that provide reliable health information and resources" in 1998. It was also listed as one of three medical sites in U.S. News & World Report's "Best of the Web" in 1999. Thomas R. Eng, director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health, stated in 1999 that while "the government doesn't endorse Web sites ... is the only site I know of right now looking at issues of fraud and health on the Internet."

Sources that mention quackwatch.org as a resource for consumer information include the United States Department of Agriculture, the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the Skeptic's Dictionary, the Diet Channel, and articles published in The Lancet, the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, the Journal of Marketing Education, the Medical Journal of Australia, and the Journal of the American Dietetic Association. In addition, several nutrition associations link to Quackwatch. An article in PC World listed it as one of three websites for finding the truth about Internet rumors. A Washington Post review of alternative medicine websites noted that "skeptics may find Quackwatch offers better truth-squadding than the Food and Drug Administration or the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine."

The books Low-Carb Dieting for Dummies (2003), The Arthritis Helpbook (2006), The Rough Guide to the Internet (2007), Navigating the Medical Maze: A Practical Guide (2008), Chronic Pain For Dummies (2008), and The 2009 Internet Directory (2008) mention or use content from Quackwatch.

Citations by journalists

Quackwatch and Barrett have also been cited by journalists in reports on therapeutic touch, Vitamin O, Almon Glenn Braswell's baldness treatments, Robert Barefoot's coral calcium claims, William C. Rader's "stem cell" therapy, noni juice, shark cartilage and saturated fat.

Recommendations and endorsements

The American Cancer Society lists Quackwatch as one of ten reputable sources of information about alternative and complementary therapies in their book Cancer Medicine. In a long series of articles on various alternative medicine methods, it uses Quackwatch as a reference and includes criticisms of the methods.

The Health On the Net Foundation, which confers the HONcode "Code of Conduct" certification to reliable sources of health information in cyberspace, recommends Quackwatch. It also advises Internet users to alert Quackwatch when they encounter "possibly or blatantly fraudulent" healthcare websites.

In a 2007 feasibility study on a method for identifying web pages that make unproven claims, the authors wrote:

Our gold standard relied on selected unproven cancer treatments identified by experts at http://www.quackwatch.org ... By using unproven treatments identified by an oversight organization, we capitalized on an existing high quality review.

Site reviews

Writing in the trade-journal The Consultant Pharmacist in 1999, pharmacist Bao-Anh Nguyen-Khoa characterized Quackwatch as "relevant for both consumers and professionals" and containing articles that would be of interest to pharmacists, but that a peer review process would improve the site's legitimacy. Nguyen-Khoa said the presence of so many articles written by Barrett gave an impression of lack of balance but that the site was taking steps to correct this by recruiting expert contributors. He also noted that

Barrett often inserts his strong opinions directly into sections of an article already well supported by the literature. Although entertaining, this direct commentary may be viewed by some as less than professional medical writing and may be better reserved for its own section.

Donna Ladd, a journalist with The Village Voice, in 1999 described Barrett as "a full-time journalist and book author", "never a medical researcher", and one who "depends heavily on negative research ... in which alternative therapies do not work" but "says that most case studies that show positive results of alternative therapies are unreliable". She quoted Barrett as saying that "a lot of things don't need to be tested they simply don't make any sense".

Writing in The Lancet, Mona Okasha wrote that Quackwatch provides an "entertaining read", but described it as only appropriate for limited use as it fails to provide a balanced view of alternative cancer treatments. Jane Cuzzell viewed Quackwatch similarly, arguing that it was entertaining but that the "resource value of this site depends on what the visitor is seeking" and had concerns about the appearance of bias in the selection of the material. However, while Lillian Brazin also found it to be biased, she described Quackwatch as credible, and noted both the credentials of the contributors and the thoroughness of the content.

In a 2002 book, Ned Vankevitch, associate professor of communications at Trinity Western University, places Barrett in a historical tradition of anti-quackery, embracing such figures as Morris Fishbein and Abraham Flexner, which has been part of American medical culture since the early-twentieth century. Although acknowledging that Quackwatch's "exposé of dangerous and fraudulent health products represents an important social and ethical response to deception and exploitation", Vankevitch criticizes Barrett for attempting to limit "medical diversity", employing "denigrating terminology", categorizing all complementary and alternative medicine as a species of medical hucksterism, failing to condemn shortcomings within conventional biomedicine, and for promoting an exclusionary model of medical scientism and health that serves hegemonic interests and does not fully address patient needs.

Waltraud Ernst, professor of the history of medicine at Oxford Brookes University, commenting on Vankevitch's observations in 2002, agrees that attempts to police the "medical cyber-market with a view to preventing fraudulent and potentially harmful practices may well be justified". She commends "Barrett's concern for unsubstantiated promotion and hype," and says that "Barrett's concern for fraudulent and potentially dangerous medical practices is important," but she sees Barrett's use of "an antiquarian term such as 'quack'" as part of a "dichotomising discourse that aims to discredit the "'old-fashioned', 'traditional', 'folksy' and heterodox by contrasting it with the 'modern', 'scientific' and orthodox." Ernst also interprets Barrett's attempt to "reject and label as 'quackery' each and every approach that is not part of science-based medicine" as one which minimizes the patient's role in the healing process and is inimical to medical pluralism.

A 2003 website review by Forbes magazine stated:

Dr. Stephen Barrett, a psychiatrist, seeks to expose unproven medical treatments and possible unsafe practices through his homegrown but well-organized site. Mostly attacking alternative medicines, homeopathy and chiropractors, the tone here can be rather harsh. However, the lists of sources of health advice to avoid, including books, specific doctors and organizations, are great for the uninformed. Barrett received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for fighting nutrition quackery in 1984. BEST: Frequently updated, but also archives of relevant articles that date back at least four years. WORST: Lists some specific doctors and organizations without explaining the reason for their selection.

A 2004 review paper by Katja Schmidt and Edzard Ernst in the Annals of Oncology identified Quackwatch as an outstanding complementary medicine information source for cancer patients.

The Good Web Guide said in 2006 that Quackwatch "is without doubt an important and useful information resource and injects a healthy dose of scepticism into reviewing popular health information", but "tends to define what is possible or true only in terms of what science has managed to 'prove' to date".

The organization has often been challenged by supporters and practitioners of the various forms of alternative medicine that are criticized on the website.

See also

References

  1. ^ Barrett, SJ (April 18, 2016). "Who Funds Quackwatch?". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
  2. Barret, SJ (December 21, 2016). "Stephen Barrett, M.D., Biographical Sketch". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
  3. ^ Barret, SJ (May 2, 2007). "Quackwatch Mission Statement". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
  4. Baldwin, FD (July 19, 2004). "If It Quacks Like a Duck. ..." MedHunters. Archived from the original on February 6, 2008. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
  5. ^ Barret, SJ. "Quackwatch.org main page". Quackwatch. Retrieved February 12, 2007.
  6. ^ Arabella Dymoke (2004). The Good Web Guide. The Good Web Guide Ltd. p. 35. ISBN 978-1-903282-46-5. Retrieved September 4, 2013. Quackwatch is without doubt an important and useful information resource and injects a healthy dose of scepticism into reviewing popular health information. Its aim is to investigate questionable claims made in some sectors of what is now a multi-million pound healthcare industry.
  7. Politzer, M (September 14, 2007). "Eastern Medicine Goes West". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved September 14, 2007.
  8. ^ "Awards Received by Quackwatch". Quackwatch. November 7, 2005.
  9. Jaroff, L (April 22, 2001). "The Man Who Loves To Bust Quacks". Time. Archived from the original on April 6, 2005. Retrieved August 16, 2007.
  10. ^ Nguyen-Khoa, Bao-Anh (July 1999). "Selected Web Site Reviews — Quackwatch.com". The Consultant Pharmacist. Archived from the original on March 18, 2009. Retrieved June 24, 2013.
  11. "Recent Additions to Quackwatch". Retrieved April 4, 2019.
  12. "NCAHF's History". Retrieved October 29, 2007.
  13. Fidalgo, Paul (February 26, 2020). "Quackwatch Joins the Center for Inquiry". Center for Inquiry. Retrieved February 26, 2020.
  14. Rosen, M. (October 1998). "Biography Magazine Interviews: Stephen Barrett, M.D." Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017. Original published in Biography Magazine.
  15. Barrett, SJ (January 28, 2003). "Scientific and technical advisors". Quackwatch. Archived from the original on April 16, 2003. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
  16. Barrett, SJ (March 20, 2011). "How to Become a Quackwatch Advisor". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
  17. "Let's check in with the skeptics! (They're way more fun than the credulous)". Los Angeles Times. February 5, 2010.
  18. "Quackwatch". FactCheckED.org. Archived from the original on September 21, 2007.
  19. "Cutting through the haze of health marketing claims". Thomson Gale. Running & FitNews. September–October 2007. Archived from the original on April 14, 2019. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
  20. Atwood IV, Kimball C. (2004). "Bacteria, ulcers, and ostracism? H. pylori and the making of a myth". Skeptical Inquirer. 28 (6): 27.
  21. "Naturowatch". Retrieved April 28, 2017.
  22. Parascandola, Mark (2008). "Alternative medicine trial suspends recruitment". Research Practitioner. 9 (6): 193.
  23. Quackwatch en Français
  24. Quackwatch auf Deutsch (archived)
  25. Quackwatch em Português
  26. ^ "Best of the Web website reviews: Quackwatch". Forbes. Archived from the original on January 14, 2008.
  27. "Diet Channel Award Review Of Quackwatch". Retrieved September 18, 2007. Quackwatch is a very informative site which informs you about health fraud and gives you advice on many decisions.
  28. ^ "U.S. News & World Report: The Best of The Web Gets Better". US News. November 7, 1999. Archived from the original on May 24, 2006.
  29. Pray, W. S. (2006). "Ethical, Scientific, and Educational Concerns with Unproven Medications". American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 70 (6): 141. doi:10.5688/aj7006141. PMC 1803699. PMID 17332867.
  30. Chonko, Lawrence B. (2004). "If it Walks Like a Duck ...: Concerns about Quackery in Marketing Education". Journal of Marketing Education. 26: 4–16. doi:10.1177/0273475303257763. S2CID 167338734. ERIC EJ807197.
  31. Sampson, Wallace; Atwood IV, Kimball (2005). "Propagation of the absurd: Demarcation of the absurd revisited". The Medical Journal of Australia. 183 (11–12): 580–1. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb00040.x. PMID 16336135. S2CID 43272637.
  32. Cunningham, Eleese; Marcason, Wendy (2001). "Internet hoaxes: How to spot them and how to debunk them". Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 101 (4): 460. doi:10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00117-1.
  33. ^ "Click here: How to find reliable online health information and resources". JAMA. 280 (15): 1380. 1998. doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1380. PMID 9794323.
  34. Larkin, Marilynn (1998). "Medical quackery squashers on the web". The Lancet. 351 (9114): 1520. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)78918-2. S2CID 54300255.
  35. ^ Ladd, Donna (June 22, 1999). "Dr. Who? Diagnosing Medical Fraud May Require a Second Opinion". The Village Voice. Retrieved August 5, 2017.
  36. Sources that mention quackwatch.org as a resource for consumer information:
  37. "Links". Greater New York Dietetic Association. Archived from the original on April 21, 2019. Retrieved April 21, 2019.
     •"Professional Resources — Health Quackery". American Dietetic Association. Diabetes Care and Education. 2007. Retrieved April 21, 2019.
  38. Robert Luhn, "Best Free Stuff on the Web Archived September 18, 2012, at the Wayback Machine," PC World June 30, 2003
  39. Leslie Walker. Alternative Medicine Sites. Washington Post, March 26, 1999
  40. Katherine B. Chauncey (2003). Low-Carb Dieting For Dummies. For Dummies. p. 292. ISBN 978-0-7645-2566-7.
  41. Kate Lorig; James Fries (2006). The Arthritis Helpbook. Da Capo Press. pp. 335. ISBN 978-0-7382-1070-4.
  42. Peter Buckley; Duncan Clark (2007). "Thing to do online". The Rough Guide To The Internet (13th ed.). Rough Guides. p. 273. ISBN 978-1-84353-839-4.
  43. Steven L. Brown (2008). "How Can I Tell If The Evidence Is Any Good?". Navigating the Medical Maze: A Practical Guide (2nd ed.). Brazos Press. pp. 191. ISBN 978-1-58743-207-1.
  44. "Ten or So Web Sources for People with Chronic Pain". Chronic Pain For Dummies. For Dummies. 2008. p. 327. ISBN 978-0-471-75140-3.
  45. Vince Averello; Mikal E. Belicove; Nancy Conner; Adrienne Crew; Sherry Kinkoph Gunter; Faithe Wempen (2008). The 2009 Internet Directory: Web 2.0 Edition (1st ed.). Que. pp. 236. ISBN 978-0-7897-3816-5.
  46. Journalist mentions of Quackwatch criticisms of:
  47. Cassileth, Barrie R.; Vickers, Andrew (2003). "Chapter 76. Complementary and Alternative Cancer Therapies". In Kufe, Donald W; Pollock, Raphael E; Weichselbaum, Ralph R; Bast Jr., Robert C; Gansler, Ted S; Holland, James F; Frei III, Emil (eds.). Holland – Frei Cancer Medicine (6 ed.). American Cancer Society. Table 76-4, Reputable Sources of Information about Alternative and Complementary Therapies. ISBN 978-1-55009-213-4.
  48. A list of articles on many forms of alternative medicine on the American Cancer Society website that use Quackwatch as a source. Oxygen Therapy Archived August 25, 2003, at the Wayback Machine, "Metabolic Therapy". Archived from the original on June 28, 2010. Retrieved July 26, 2016. Metabolic Therapy, Kirlian Photography Archived January 22, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Crystals Archived June 27, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Psychic Surgery Archived January 23, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Folic Acid Archived April 15, 2009, at the Wayback Machine, Craniosacral Therapy Archived February 2, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Archived June 28, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Neuro-Linguistic Programming Archived April 9, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Questionable Practices In Tijuana Archived June 27, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Breathwork Archived December 5, 2006, at the Wayback Machine, Moxibustion Archived June 28, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Faith Healing Archived February 12, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Cancer Salves Archived June 28, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Qigong Archived June 26, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Osteopathy Archived August 6, 2003, at the Wayback Machine, Imagery Archived April 25, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Qigong Archived May 28, 2008, at the Wayback Machine, Magnetic Therapy Archived June 27, 2010, at the Wayback Machine.
  49. Can you give some examples of charlatans and fraud on the health Internet? Archived September 10, 2015, at the Wayback Machine Health On the Net Foundation
  50. How to be a vigilant user. Archived May 13, 2014, at the Wayback Machine Health On the Net Foundation
  51. Aphinyanaphongs, Y.; Aliferis, C. (2007). "Text categorization models for identifying unproven cancer treatments on the web" (PDF). Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 129 (Pt 2): 968–72. PMID 17911859. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 24, 2015. Retrieved March 28, 2009.
  52. Okasha, Mona (2000). "Quackery on the web – questionable cancer therapies". The Lancet Oncology. 1 (4): 251. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(00)00162-5.
  53. Cuzzell, Jane. (2000). "Quackwatch: Your Guide to Health Fraud, Quackery, and Intelligent Decisions", Dermatology Nursing, Apr. 2000, p. 134. Accessed 6 November 2019.
  54. Brazin, Lillian R (2007). "Alternative and Complementary Therapies". Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet. 11 (2): 91–96. doi:10.1300/J381v11n02_08. S2CID 216590316.
  55. "Ned Vankevitch". Trinity Western University. Archived from the original on September 27, 2012. Retrieved March 4, 2013.
  56. Vankevitch, Ned (2002). "Limiting Pluralism". In Ernst, Waltraud (ed.). Plural medicine, tradition and modernity, 1800-2000. New York: Routledge. pp. 219–244. ISBN 978-0-415-23122-0.
  57. "Waltraud Ernst". Oxford Brookes University. Archived from the original on May 13, 2014. Retrieved May 8, 2012.
  58. Ernst, Waltraud (2002). "Plural medicine, tradition and modernity". In Ernst, Waltraud (ed.). Plural medicine, tradition and modernity, 1800–2000. New York: Routledge. pp. 1–18. ISBN 978-0-415-23122-0.
  59. Schmidt, Katja; Ernst, Edzard (2004). "Assessing websites on complementary and alternative medicine for cancer". Annals of Oncology. 15 (5): 733–742. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdh174. PMID 15111340.
  60. Helen Pilcher. "Unreliable websites put patients at risk – Expert in complementary medicine criticizes bogus cancer advice". BioEd Online. Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
  61. The Good Web Guide. Archived November 3, 2007, at the Wayback Machine Retrieved on September 14, 2007.
  62. Hufford, David J. (2003). "Evaluating Complementary and Alternative Medicine: The Limits of Science and of Scientists". The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 31 (2): 198–212. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00081.x. PMID 12964264. S2CID 29859505.. Hufford's symposium presentation was the counterpoint for another doctor's presentation, which argued that "alternative medicine" is not medicine at all. See Schneiderman, Lawrence J. (2003). "The (Alternative) Medicalization of Life". The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 31 (2): 191–197. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00080.x. PMID 12964263. S2CID 43786245.

Further reading

External links

Pseudoscience
List of topics characterized as pseudoscience
Terminology
Topics
characterized as
pseudoscience
Medicine
Social science
Physics
Other
Promoters of
pseudoscience
Related topics
Resources
Categories: