Misplaced Pages

Stephen Barrett: 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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:04, 17 August 2007 editArthur Rubin (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers130,168 edits Reverting; {{cite news}} not approrpriate; Undid revision 151709415 by QuackGuru (talk)← Previous edit Revision as of 00:23, 17 August 2007 edit undoRandom user 39849958 (talk | contribs)19,517 edits Sorry, but QuackGuru has not brought up any valid objection allowing for the removal of three pieces of well-sourced criticism, a misleading sublink and mischaracterization of the opinion of critics.Next edit →
Line 12: Line 12:
}} }}


'''Stephen J. Barrett''', M.D. (born ]), is a retired ] ], ], co-founder of the ] (NCAHF), and the webmaster of ]. He runs a number of websites dealing with what he calls ] and health ]. He says that he bases his writings on ], ], and ]. Barrett's critics have accused him of having a lack of objectivity. He has brought several defamation lawsuits against a number of them with mixed results. '''Stephen J. Barrett''', M.D. (born ]), is a retired ] ], ], co-founder of the ] (NCAHF), and the webmaster of ]. He runs a number of websites dealing with what he calls ] and health ]. He says that he bases his writings on ], ], and ]. Critics have accused Barrett of bias, lack of objectivity, and lacking the expert qualifications he claims. He has brought several defamation lawsuits against a number of them with mixed results.


== Biography == == Biography ==
Line 68: Line 68:
|publisher=] |publisher=]
|date=December 18, 2001 | Volume 135 Issue 12 | Pages 1098-1106 |date=December 18, 2001 | Volume 135 Issue 12 | Pages 1098-1106
|accessdate=2007-08-12}}</ref> medical journals. According to his website, he "has written more than 2,000 articles and delivered more than 300 talks at colleges, universities, medical schools, and professional meetings. His media appearances include '']'', the '']'', '']'', '']'', '']'', ], ], and more than 200 other radio and television talk show interviews."<ref name="SBcv"/> |accessdate=2007-08-12}}</ref> medical journals. According to his website, he "has written more than 2,000 articles and delivered more than 300 talks at colleges, universities, medical schools, and professional meetings. His media appearances include '']'', the '']'', '']'', '']'', '']'', ], ], and more than 200 other radio and television talk show interviews."<ref name="SBcv"/>


Barrett has received a number of awards and recognition for his ] work against quackery.<ref name="nettie"/> ] received the award of ''Best Physician- Authored Site'' by MD NetGuide, May ].<ref name="nettie"> ''MDNetGuide'', May/June 2003.</ref> Barrett has received a number of awards and recognition for his ] work against quackery.<ref name="nettie"/> ] received the award of ''Best Physician- Authored Site'' by MD NetGuide, May ].<ref name="nettie"> ''MDNetGuide'', May/June 2003.</ref>
Line 149: Line 149:
* ]<ref name="amalgam">Barrett, S. "" Retrieved 17 July 2007</ref> within ] * ]<ref name="amalgam">Barrett, S. "" Retrieved 17 July 2007</ref> within ]
* ]<ref name="qw-homepage"/> * ]<ref name="qw-homepage"/>
* ]<ref name="altmed">Barrett, S. "" Retrieved 17 July 2007</ref> * ]<ref name="altmed">Barrett, S. "" Retrieved 17 July 2007</ref>
* ]<ref name="qw-homepage"/> * ]<ref name="qw-homepage"/>
* ]<ref name="qw-homepage"/> * ]<ref name="qw-homepage"/>
Line 190: Line 190:
Barrett's objectivity to critique alternative medicine has been challenged by several different people. Barrett's objectivity to critique alternative medicine has been challenged by several different people.


* According to '']'' journalist ], Barrett relies mostly on negative research to criticize alternative medicine, rejecting most positive case studies as unreliable. She further writes that Barrett insists that although most alternative therapies are under-researched, they should be disregarded because they are illogical. Peter Barry Chowka, a former adviser to the National Institutes of Health's Office of Alternative Medicine, describes this as "putting down trying to be objective."<ref name="Ladd"/> And a number of practitioners and supporters of ] criticize Barrett and Quackwatch for its criticism of alternative medicine.<ref name="colgan">{{cite news * According to '']'' journalist ], Barrett relies mostly on negative research to criticize alternative medicine, rejecting most positive case studies as unreliable. She further writes that Barrett insists that although most alternative therapies are under-researched, they should be disregarded because they are illogical. Peter Barry Chowka, a former adviser to the National Institutes of Health's Office of Alternative Medicine, describes this as "putting down trying to be objective."<ref name="Ladd"/>
|first=Michael
|last=Colgan
|title=The Vitamin Pushers
|url=
|work=
|publisher=Townsend Letter for Doctors
|date=October 1992, p. 126
|accessdate=2007-08-12}}</ref>


* Joel M. Kauffman, ] at ],<ref> </ref> and author of ''Malignant Medical Myths''<ref>Joel Kauffman, ''Malignant Medical Myths: Why Medical Treatment Causes 200,000 Deaths in the USA each Year and How to Protect Yourself.'' Infinity Publishing (January 30, 2006) ISBN 0-7414-2909-8</ref> has "turned his attention to exposing fraud in medicine."<ref> Curriculum Vitae, Joel M. Kauffman.</ref> In a website review of ], published in the '']'',<ref name="JSE">''The primary goal of the international Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE) is to provide a professional forum for presentations, criticism, and debate concerning topics which are for various reasons ignored or studied inadequately within mainstream science.'', "Mission Statement", Journal of Scientific Exploration </ref>, Kauffman analyzed eight Quackwatch articles,<ref name="Evaluating_CAM">Hufford DJ. David J Hufford, "Symposium article: Evaluating Complementary and Alternative Medicine: The Limits of Science and Scientists." J Law, Medicine & Ethics, 31 (2003): 198-212. Hufford's symposium presentation was the counterpoint for another doctor's presentation, which argued that "alternative medicine" is not medicine at all. See Lawrence J. Schneiderman, "Symposium article: The (Alternative) Medicalization of Life." J Law, Medicine & Ethics, 31 (2003): 191-198. </ref> including five written by Stephen Barrett, and found them to be "contaminated with incomplete data, obsolete data, technical errors, unsupported opinions, and/or innuendo." Kauffman wrote in conclusion that it was "very probable that many...visitors to the website have been misled by the trappings of scientific objectivity."<ref name="Kauffman">Kauffman 2001. Joel M. Kauffman, "Alternative Medicine: Watching the Watchdogs at Quackwatch", Website Review, '']'' 16(2), 312-337 (2002). </ref>
⚫ Barrett's involvement in the legal system has also spawned controversy about his objectivity to pass judgment on those he deems "quacks." He or NCAHF has initiated a number of lawsuits against those engaged in what he considers unscientific medical practices. He has also offered testimony on psychiatry, FDA regulatory issues, homeopathy, and other areas of alternative medicine.
<!-- * James A. Mertz, then-President of the ], which has been criticized by Barrett often,<ref name="chiro_subluxation"/><ref name=questionable/> wrote in a letter to Time in 2001: "The American public is being grossly misled by Dr. Stephen Barrett."{{fact}} -->

* Analyzing and reviewing a book, ''Vitamin Pushers'', by Stephen Barrett and Victor Herbert, ], whose Colgan Institute was criticized by Barrett as "questionable",<ref name=questionable>Barrett, S. "" Retrieved 12 August 2007</ref> states, ''"Most of their book does not discuss supplements at all. It is filled with derisive statements about individuals and organizations in the health care and natural foods industries."''<ref name="colgan">Dr. Michael Colgan, ''The Vitamin Pushers,'' Townsend Letter for Doctors, October, 1992, p. 126.</ref>

*The ''Chiropractic in New Zealand'' report of 1979 was a government inquiry of chiropractic services within ]. Of Barrett's writing on chiropractic the investigators reported: ''It is plainly propaganda. What we have seen of the rest of his writings on chiropractic has the same tone. Nothing he has written on chiropractic that we have considered can be relied on as balanced.''<ref name="new zealand">Inglis BD, Fraser B, Penfold BR. Chiropractic in New Zealand report: commission of inquiry into chiropractic. 1979; 105-106.</ref>


== Defamation lawsuits == == Defamation lawsuits ==
Line 229: Line 226:
At least one of Barrett's lawsuits is still pending in federal court.<ref name="barrettVnegreteRemand"> At least one of Barrett's lawsuits is still pending in federal court.<ref name="barrettVnegreteRemand">
''Barrett v. Negrete'', a suit against Negrete and Clark which the Ninth Circuit ]ed, reversing the district court's dismissal. {{cite web|url=http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/negreteappeal.html|author=Barrett SJ|title=''Appeals Court Upholds Malicious Prosecution Suit against Hulda Clark and Attorney Carlos Negrete'', (Mem,. No. 04-55193 D.C. No. CV -02-0221 O-JML; No. 03-56663 D.C. No. CY -02-0221 O-JML March 14, 2005|accessdate=2007-02-12|publisher=Quackwatch}}. ''Barret v. Negrete'', 126 Fed.Appx. 816 (9th Cir. 2005) (unpublished).</ref> ''Barrett v. Negrete'', a suit against Negrete and Clark which the Ninth Circuit ]ed, reversing the district court's dismissal. {{cite web|url=http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/negreteappeal.html|author=Barrett SJ|title=''Appeals Court Upholds Malicious Prosecution Suit against Hulda Clark and Attorney Carlos Negrete'', (Mem,. No. 04-55193 D.C. No. CV -02-0221 O-JML; No. 03-56663 D.C. No. CY -02-0221 O-JML March 14, 2005|accessdate=2007-02-12|publisher=Quackwatch}}. ''Barret v. Negrete'', 126 Fed.Appx. 816 (9th Cir. 2005) (unpublished).</ref>

⚫ Barrett's involvement in the legal system has also spawned controversy about his objectivity to pass judgment on those he deems "quacks." He or NCAHF has initiated a number of lawsuits against those engaged in what he considers unscientific medical practices.<!--is this sentence redundant with above paragraph?--> He has also offered testimony on psychiatry, FDA regulatory issues, homeopathy, and other areas of alternative medicine.


== Selected publications == == Selected publications ==

Revision as of 00:23, 17 August 2007

Stephen J. Barrett, MD
Born1933
New York City
Occupation(s)Psychiatrist, Author, Consumer Advocate, Webmaster

Stephen J. Barrett, M.D. (born 1933), is a retired American psychiatrist, author, co-founder of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), and the webmaster of Quackwatch. He runs a number of websites dealing with what he calls quackery and health fraud. He says that he bases his writings on consumer protection, medical ethics, and scientific skepticism. Critics have accused Barrett of bias, lack of objectivity, and lacking the expert qualifications he claims. He has brought several defamation lawsuits against a number of them with mixed results.

Biography

Barrett is a 1957 graduate of the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and completed his psychiatry residency in 1961. In 1967 and 1968 he followed part of a correspondence course in American Law and Procedure at La Salle Extension University (Chicago). He was a licensed physician until retiring from active practice in 1993, and his medical license is currently listed as "Active-Retired" in good standing. Longtime resident of Allentown, Pennsylvania, Barrett now resides in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

In addition to webmastering his websites, Barrett is a co-founder, vice-president and a board member of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF). He is an advisor to the American Council on Science and Health, and a Fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI). From 1987 through 1989, he taught health education at Pennsylvania State University.

Barrett is the consulting editor for the Consumer Health Library at Prometheus Books and has been a peer-review panelist for at least two medical journals. According to his website, he "has written more than 2,000 articles and delivered more than 300 talks at colleges, universities, medical schools, and professional meetings. His media appearances include Dateline, the Today Show, Good Morning America, Primetime, Donahue, CNN, National Public Radio, and more than 200 other radio and television talk show interviews."

Barrett has received a number of awards and recognition for his consumer protection work against quackery. Quackwatch received the award of Best Physician- Authored Site by MD NetGuide, May 2003. In 1984, he received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for Public Service in fighting nutrition quackery. He received multiple votes or at least one first-place vote in "10 outstanding skeptics of the 20th century by Skeptical Inquirer magazine. In 1986, he was awarded honorary membership in the American Dietetic Association. Barrett has been profiled in Biography Magazine (1998) and in Time Magazine (2001).

The magazine Spiked-online included Barrett in a survey of 134 persons they termed "key thinkers in science, technology and medicine." When he was asked: "What inspired you to take up science?" he replied that his appreciation of medical science:

"probably began when I took a college course in medical statistics, and learned what makes the difference between scientific thought and poor reasoning. Medical school brought me in touch with the rapid and amazing strides being made in the understanding and treatment of disease. My anti-quackery activities have intensified my interest and concern in distinguishing science from pseudoscience, quackery and fraud."

Online activism

The Quackwatch website is Barrett's main platform for describing and exposing for what he considers to be quackery and health fraud. The website is part of Quackwatch, Inc., a nonprofit corporation that aims to "combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct." Barrett's writing is supplemented with contributions from 150+ scientific, technical, and lay volunteers. Barrett defines quackery as "anything involving overpromotion in the field of health," and reserves the word fraud "only for situations in which deliberate deception is involved."

Barrett has criticized numerous forms of alternative medicine and other practices he considers questionable, for example: Template:MultiCol

| class="col-break " |

| class="col-break " |

Template:EndMultiCol On his main website he also maintains public lists of sources, individuals, and groups which he considers questionable and non-recommendable. The list includes two-time Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling (for his claims about mega-doses of Vitamin C), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Center for Alternative and Complementary Medicine, as well as integrative medicine proponent Andrew Weil.

Criticism

Barrett has become a "lightning rod" for controversy as a result of his criticisms of alternative medicine theories and practitioners. Barrett says he does not criticize conventional medicine because that would be "way outside scope." He states he does not give equal time to some subjects, and has written on his web site that "Quackery and fraud don't involve legitimate controversy and are not balanced subjects. I don't believe it is helpful to publish "balanced" articles about unbalanced subjects.

Barrett's objectivity to critique alternative medicine has been challenged by several different people.

  • According to Village Voice journalist Donna Ladd, Barrett relies mostly on negative research to criticize alternative medicine, rejecting most positive case studies as unreliable. She further writes that Barrett insists that although most alternative therapies are under-researched, they should be disregarded because they are illogical. Peter Barry Chowka, a former adviser to the National Institutes of Health's Office of Alternative Medicine, describes this as "putting down trying to be objective."
  • Joel M. Kauffman, professor emeritus at University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, and author of Malignant Medical Myths has "turned his attention to exposing fraud in medicine." In a website review of Quackwatch, published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration,, Kauffman analyzed eight Quackwatch articles, including five written by Stephen Barrett, and found them to be "contaminated with incomplete data, obsolete data, technical errors, unsupported opinions, and/or innuendo." Kauffman wrote in conclusion that it was "very probable that many...visitors to the website have been misled by the trappings of scientific objectivity."
  • Analyzing and reviewing a book, Vitamin Pushers, by Stephen Barrett and Victor Herbert, Michael Colgan, whose Colgan Institute was criticized by Barrett as "questionable", states, "Most of their book does not discuss supplements at all. It is filled with derisive statements about individuals and organizations in the health care and natural foods industries."
  • The Chiropractic in New Zealand report of 1979 was a government inquiry of chiropractic services within New Zealand. Of Barrett's writing on chiropractic the investigators reported: It is plainly propaganda. What we have seen of the rest of his writings on chiropractic has the same tone. Nothing he has written on chiropractic that we have considered can be relied on as balanced.

Defamation lawsuits

Stephen Barrett was criticized in a series of newsletters and emails by Patrick "Tim" Bolen. Bolen falsely claimed that Barrett had been "de-licensed," among other things. Barrett has filed libel suits against several website operators and USENET posters who reposted Bolen's letters online. Barrett explained his lawsuits this way:

"None of us are thin-skinned or care when people attack our ideas. But unjustified attacks on our character or professional competence are another matter. As Bolen's campaign unfolded, my colleagues and I have notified him and many of the people spreading his messages that libel is a serious matter and that they had better stop. Some did, but it soon became clear that others would not. To defend ourselves, several of us have filed suit for libel."

Barrett filed lawsuits in several forums, including Illinois, California, and Pennsylvania. Many of these were dismissed on summary judgment under anti-SLAPP statutes, for failing to establish the evidentiary burden for libel, or because of an interpretation of Communications Decency Act ("CDA") that gives users immunity from lawsuits when reposting material online, such that courts need not determine whether Bolen's remarks constituted libel. Barrett v. Rosenthal, a lawsuit that Barrett initiated with another doctor in California, was appealed to that state's supreme court. Though the California Supreme Court did not rule on whether or not the material in question was indeed libelous, they did adopt the predominant interpretation of Section 230 of the CDA, which grants immunity to defendants for reposting libelous material online. At least one of Barrett's lawsuits is still pending in federal court.

Barrett's involvement in the legal system has also spawned controversy about his objectivity to pass judgment on those he deems "quacks." He or NCAHF has initiated a number of lawsuits against those engaged in what he considers unscientific medical practices. He has also offered testimony on psychiatry, FDA regulatory issues, homeopathy, and other areas of alternative medicine.

Selected publications

  • In 1985, Barrett was the author of an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association that exposed commercial laboratories performing multimineral hair analysis. He concluded that "commercial use of hair analysis in this manner is unscientific, economically wasteful, and probably illegal." His report has been cited in later articles, including one which concluded that such testing was "unreliable."

A partial list of his (co)authored and (co)edited books include:

  • Consumer Health: A Guide to Intelligent Decisions - Barrett SJ, Jarvis WT, Kroger M, London WM (2006). (textbook, 8th ed.) McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07-248521-3
  • Dubious Cancer Treatment - Barrett SJ & Cassileth BR, editors (2001). Florida Division of the American Cancer Society
  • The Health Robbers: A Close Look at Quackery in America - Barrett SJ, Jarvis WT, eds. (1993). Prometheus Books, ISBN 0-87975-855-4
  • Health Schemes, Scams, and Frauds - Barrett SJ (1991). Consumer Reports Books, ISBN 0-89043-330-5
  • Reader's Guide to Alternative Health Methods - by Zwicky JF, Hafner AW, Barrett S, Jarvis WT (1993). American Medical Association, ISBN 0-89970-525-1
  • The Vitamin Pushers: How the "Health Food" Industry Is Selling America a Bill of Goods - Barrett SJ, Herbert V (1991). Prometheus Books, ISBN 0-87975-909-7

See also

References

  1. Barrett, Stephen (June 24, 2007). "Curriculum Vitae". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-07-18.
  2. Barrett, Stephen. "License Verification". Pennsylvania Department of State, Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs. Retrieved 2007-07-18.
  3. Wlazelek, Ann (June 13, 2007). "Allentown critic of quacks moves to 'milder winters'". The Morning Call. Retrieved 2007-07-21.
  4. "Prometheus Books Spring-Summer 2007 Trade Catalog" (PDF). pp. p. 63. Retrieved 2007-03-29. {{cite web}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  5. ^ Barrett, Stephen (June 4, 2007). "Stephen Barrett, M.D., Biographical Sketch". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-08-12.
  6. Williams, Elaine S (April 21, 1999). "The JAMA 1998 Editorial Peer Review Audit". Journal of the American Medical Association. Retrieved 2007-08-12.
  7. "Thanks to Reviewers-2001". Annals of Internal Medicine. December 18, 2001. Retrieved 2007-08-12. {{cite news}}: Text "Pages 1098-1106" ignored (help); Text "Volume 135 Issue 12" ignored (help)
  8. ^ Pass the Envelope, Please...: Best Physician- Authored Site MDNetGuide, May/June 2003.
  9. ^ Joel R. Cooper. Consumer Health Fraud...don't be a victim! Interview with Stephen Barrett, M.D., The Medical Reporter
  10. "Ten Outstanding Skeptics of the Century". Scientifically Investigating Paranormal and Fringe Science Claims. Skeptical Inquirer. Retrieved 2007-08-12.
  11. ^ Rosen, Marjorie (October 1998). "Interview with Stephen Barrett, M.D". Biography Magazine. Retrieved 2007-08-16. Cite error: The named reference "rosen" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  12. ^ Jaroff, Leon (April 30, 2001). "The Man Who Loves To Bust Quacks". Time Magazine. Retrieved 2007-08-16.
  13. "What Inspired You? — Index of Survey responses". Spiked-Online. Retrieved 2007-07-23.
  14. "What Inspired You? — Introduction". Spiked-Online. Retrieved 2007-07-23.
  15. ^ Barrett, Stephen. "What Inspired You? — Survey responses — Dr Stephen Barrett". Spiked-Online. Retrieved 2007-07-23.
  16. Barrett, Stephen, MD. "150+ Scientific and Technical Advisors". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. Barrett, Stephen, MD. "Quackery: How Should It Be Defined?". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  18. Barrett SJ, Jarvis WT. "Quackery, Fraud and "Alternative" Methods: Important Definitions". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  19. ^ Barrett, Stephen. "Quackwatch — listing criticisms of several practices". Your Guide to Quackery, Health Fraud, and Intelligent Decisions. Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-07-17.
  20. Barrett, S. "Algae: False Claims and Hype" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  21. Barrett, S. "The "Mercury Toxicity" Scam: How Anti-Amalgamists Swindle People" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  22. Barrett, S. "Be Wary of "Alternative" Health Methods" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  23. Barrett, S. "Be Wary of Acupuncture, Qigong, and "Chinese Medicine"" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  24. Barrett, S. "Subluxation: Chiropractic's Elusive Buzzword" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  25. Barrett, S. "Gastrointestinal Quackery: Colonics, Laxatives, and More" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  26. Barrett, S. ""Dietary Supplements," Herbs, and Hormones" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  27. ^ Barrett, S. "The Shady Side of Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  28. Barrett, S. "The Herbal Minefield" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  29. Barrett, S. "Homeopathy: The Ultimate Fake" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  30. Barrett, S. "A Close Look at Naturopathy" Retrieved 17 July 2007
  31. Barrett SJ. "Nonrecommended Sources of Health Advice". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  32. Barrett SJ. "Questionable Organizations: An Overview". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  33. Barrett SJ. "The Dark Side of Linus Pauling's Legacy". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  34. Relamn AS. "A Trip to Stonesville: Some Notes on Andrew Weil". New Republic. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  35. ^ Dr. Who? Diagnosing Medical Fraud May Require a Second Opinion. by Donna Ladd, Village Voice, June 23 - 29, 1999. Retrieved September 2, 2006
  36. Barrett SJ. "How do you respond to accusations that your writing is unbalanced?". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  37. USP - Faculty
  38. Joel Kauffman, Malignant Medical Myths: Why Medical Treatment Causes 200,000 Deaths in the USA each Year and How to Protect Yourself. Infinity Publishing (January 30, 2006) ISBN 0-7414-2909-8
  39. Curriculum Vitae, Joel M. Kauffman.avaliable online
  40. The primary goal of the international Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE) is to provide a professional forum for presentations, criticism, and debate concerning topics which are for various reasons ignored or studied inadequately within mainstream science., "Mission Statement", Journal of Scientific Exploration available online
  41. Hufford DJ. David J Hufford, "Symposium article: Evaluating Complementary and Alternative Medicine: The Limits of Science and Scientists." J Law, Medicine & Ethics, 31 (2003): 198-212. Hufford's symposium presentation was the counterpoint for another doctor's presentation, which argued that "alternative medicine" is not medicine at all. See Lawrence J. Schneiderman, "Symposium article: The (Alternative) Medicalization of Life." J Law, Medicine & Ethics, 31 (2003): 191-198.
  42. Kauffman 2001. Joel M. Kauffman, "Alternative Medicine: Watching the Watchdogs at Quackwatch", Website Review, J. Scientific Exploration 16(2), 312-337 (2002). available online (PDF)
  43. Barrett, S. "Questionable Organizations" Retrieved 12 August 2007
  44. Dr. Michael Colgan, The Vitamin Pushers, Townsend Letter for Doctors, October, 1992, p. 126.
  45. Inglis BD, Fraser B, Penfold BR. Chiropractic in New Zealand report: commission of inquiry into chiropractic. 1979; 105-106.
  46. Barrett SJ. "A Response to Tim Bolen". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  47. Barrett v. Mercola, against Joseph Mercola, case refiled on July 30, 2001 at Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Case No. 01 L 009026.
  48. See Barrett v. Fonorow, filed July 2001 against Owen R. Fonorow, and Intelisoft Multimedia, Inc, 18th Cir., DuPage County, Illinois, No. 01 L 820. Barrett alleged that Fonorow reposted ten articles by Tim Bolen mischaracterizing him with several disparaging claims. Ted Gregory (2001-09-18). "Suits may redefine Internet libel law". Chicago Tribune. p. L1. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  49. Barrett v. Clark, filed November 2000. Barrett and Polevoy sued Hulda Regehr Clark, Tim Bolen, Jan Bolen, David P. Amrein, Ilena Rosenthal, and unknown defendants for libel, libel per se, and conspiracy. "Barrett's case filing". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
  50. Barrett v. Koren, filed against Tedd Koren, D.C. alleging that Koren made libelous remarks about him in his newsletter. Stephen Barrett, "My Libel Suit against Tedd Koren, D.C.," last revised on October 13, 2005.
  51. E.g. the trial court rulings in Barrett v. Clark, where on July 25, 2001 the court granted Rosenthal's motion to strike under California's anti-SLAPP provision, and ruled that the statements made by Rosenthal were opinion, and not statements of fact. Monica Dias, "Court ruling gives free-speech protections to reposting messages on Internet boards", The News Media & The Law, Fall 2001 (Vol. 25, No. 4), Page 21. Plaintiffs additionally failed to provide any evidence of damage, as required in a defamation lawsuit. "Order Granting Defendant's Special Motion to Strike, (Barrett v Clark)," California Anti-SLAPP Project. Perkins Coie, "Barrett v. Clark," Internet Case Digest, July 25, 2001.
  52. See Barrett v. Koren, dismissed by a Pennsylvania judge who found that Barrett had provided insufficient evidence to prove his claim. Civil Action 2002-c-1837, Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County. The dismissal was affirmed June 2007, SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA, June 11, 2007. See also the trial court in Barrett v. Clark, supra. The Illinois court in Barrett v. Mercola reached the opposite conclusion, and the parties settled. Case dismissed by mutual agreement on April 17, 2003. Judge: Casciato, Joseph N..
  53. Barrett v. Fonorow, dismissed in 2003. Barrett v. Fonorow, No. 2--02--0886. Ted Gregory (2002-03-09). "Internet libel suit is tossed out; Decency Act protection cited by DuPage judge". Chicago Tribune. p. D13. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help) Dismissal affirmed in Barrett v. Fonorow, 799 N.E.2d 916, 343 Ill. App. 3d 1184 (Ill. App. 2003). This was the predominant—though criticized—interpretation of the CDA; the 2004 appellate decision in Barrett v. Rosenthal was one of the few authorities suggesting that the CDA did not extend immunity to individuals reposting material online. Peter M. Katsaros; Fredrick S. Rhine (2004-01-27). "Court gives go-ahead to defamation on the Web". Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) See also the California Supreme Court's eventual ruling in Barrett v. Rosenthal.
  54. On January 21, 2004, a California court of appeals vacated the trial court's order in Barrett v. Clark as it applied to Dr. Polevoy. Barrett v. Rosenthal, 9 Cal.Rptr.3d 142 (Cal. App. 2004). The court found that Rosenthal's claims of Dr. Polevoy stalking a talk show host constituted libel per se, so did not require proof of damages and was not covered by California's anti-SLAPP statute, and refused to extend Rosenthal immunity from Section 230 of the CDA. See Michael L. Rustad, Thomas H. Koenig Rebooting Cybertort Law, 80 Wash. L. Rev. 335 (2005).
  55. Howard Mintz, Justices hand victory to free speech online, San Jose Mercury News, November 21, 2006. The issue of defamation against Barrett was not before the court, as lower courts had ruled that Rosenthal had not defamed Barrett. Eric J. Sinrod, Perspective: How Web providers dodged a big legal bullet, CNET News.com, December 20, 2006.
  56. Barrett v. Negrete, a suit against Negrete and Clark which the Ninth Circuit remanded, reversing the district court's dismissal. Barrett SJ. "Appeals Court Upholds Malicious Prosecution Suit against Hulda Clark and Attorney Carlos Negrete, (Mem,. No. 04-55193 D.C. No. CV -02-0221 O-JML; No. 03-56663 D.C. No. CY -02-0221 O-JML March 14, 2005". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.. Barret v. Negrete, 126 Fed.Appx. 816 (9th Cir. 2005) (unpublished).
  57. Barrett SJ (August 23, 1985). Commercial hair analysis. Science or scam? JAMA Vol. 254 No. 8.
  58. Assessment of Commercial Laboratories Performing Hair Mineral Analysis, Seidel S, et al. , JAMA. 2001;285:67-72.
  59. Barrett SJ. "Books and book chapters". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2007-02-12.

External links

Categories: