This article is from the YL website found in the Distributor's resource section
Part II
Part II: Stephen Barrett's Bias and the Quackwatch Propaganda
The Power of the Negative
Phillip C. McGraw, Ph.D., author of the book Self Matters: Creating Your Life from the Inside Out, states, “Negative information can seem more vivid, more real, than even truthful information that is positive.” In our society today, we are barraged with a constant flow of information. We have been conditioned to accept that what we hear is truth and what we see is real. The publisher Robert Collier once said, “Any thought that is passed on to the subconscious often enough and convincingly enough is finally accepted.” In society today, we allow too much to pass through; we have become entranced by that which is sensational, cheap, and filled with flashy emotionalism.
One organization spreading much of this sensational, misinformation is called Quackwatch, which is an organization with questionable practices. Stephen Barrett, M.D., is the person behind the website Quackwatch. Barrett also serves as vice president and webmaster of an organization called the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), another “quackwatcher” website that attacks natural medicine and its practioners. It is often through this organization that Barrett files spurious lawsuits against natural health practitioners.
Why the Vendetta Against Natural Medicine?
Today, the success of alternative and complementary medicine has caught the attention of conventional medicine. This has been the focus of two important statistical studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine3 and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)4.
In fact, a search of PubMed, the website of The National Library of Medicine, turned up 7,712 peer-reviewed articles on complementary and alternative medicine. The November 11, 1998 JAMA article reported that “Estimated expenditures for alternative medicine professional services increased 45.2% between 1990 and 1997 and were conservatively estimated at $21.2 billion in 1997, with at least $12.2 billion paid out-of-pocket. This exceeds the 1997 out-of-pocket expenditures for all US hospitalizations.”
This study reported that more visits were made to unconventional practitioners in 1990 than to conventional—488 million unconventional visits compared to 388 million conventional visits to primary care physicians.
The surprising impact of alternative medicine in America led the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to organize the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) in 1998.
The Department of Health and Human Services of the United States oversees this institute with this important area of focus: “To integrate scientifically proven CAM [Complementary and Alternative Medicine] practices into conventional medicine, we announce published research results; study ways to integrate evidence-based CAM practices into conventional medical practice; and support programs to develop models for incorporating CAM into the curriculum of medical, dental, and nursing schools.”5 The director of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Stephen E. Straus,M.D., said, “We've moved into a whole new way of thinking about nutrition and dietary supplements.”6
The scientific documentation of the value of alternative and complementary medicine cannot be ignored. From articles in the premier peer-reviewed medical journals to the highest government agencies, natural medicine is becoming mainstream. With the growing awareness of the value of alternative and complementary medicine, those who view natural medicine as “competition” to conventional medicine are growing louder in their opposition.
The Price of Ensuring Freedom of Choice in Healthcare
Freedom of choice extracts a costly price. The pioneers of natural health are under unwarranted attack by front organizations with tremendous financial resources.
Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch is paid to testify as an “expert witness” in lawsuits he and associate Robert Baratz, president of the NCAHF, originate as they attack natural health practitioners with misinformation and innuendo. Barrett's and Baratz's many web pages and their vendetta against natural health seem to be enriching these men. The question is raised:Who is putting up the money for their many lawsuits? Are they being funded by pharmaceutical companies?
Pharmaceutical companies have the most to lose when people practice alternative medicine. According to the Smart Publications Health & Wellness Update, the United States' $100 billion drug industry is the most profitable industry in the nation, and has had enormous influence over the medical industry for years. The fact is that alternative medicine is drawing more and more money away from mainstream medical practice and even more significantly, from pharmaceutical corporations. When people use “natural” remedies instead of high-priced patented drugs, pharmaceutical companies lose money.
Consumer writer Tim Bolen believes that “Quackwatchers” such as Barrett and Baratz are being funded by the pharmaceutical companies, and he has written about the assault against those who offer alternatives to the drug/surgery medical paradigm. He believes that “Big Pharma” or the giant pharmaceutical corporations organized “quackbusters.” He writes that “26 drug companies banded together and funded it, put leaders and directors in place, and set it up as a business—one that would act as a mechanism to constantly damage, and discourage, competition to drug 'treatment.' Their primary target is the emerging 'healthcare' industry—those entities that propose 'alternatives' to the drug/surgery paradigm. The 'quackbusters' as a tactic, deride ALL new health ideas as 'quackery.'”
Bolen also explains Big Pharma's “propaganda gambit” of creating an information base. “Websites appeared, sounding authoritative, like Stephen Barrett's sleazy www.quackwatch.com and others. The questionable organization, the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), was to provide so-called 'expert witnesses' for testimony.”7
Bolen refers to Stephen Barrett's website “Quackwatchers” perhaps because it is the most well-known of the home pages for these attacks on natural health. On this website, several hundred natural healthcare professionals are being attacked. There are 164 names on Barrett's “Living” list of doctors, nurses, chiropractors, naturopaths, and even a United States Congresswoman, who support natural health ideas and are therefore targets for his attacks.
Among the people Stephen Barrett attacks on his website are D. Gary Young, Andrew Weil, M.D.; Julian Whitaker, M.D.; Deepak Chopra M.D.; Bernie Siegel, M.D.; Ralph Moss, Ph.D.; Earl Mindell, R.Ph.; and Gary Null, Ph.D. Also, the late Dr. John R. Lee, who questioned the wisdom of the now-proven-dangerous Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT), is on Barrett's list.
Some examples of Barrett's attacks include his criticism of Harvey Diamond's book Fit For Life because of its discussion of food combining. Barrett also criticizes Joe Weider, the bodybuilder, for believing that “athletes have special protein needs, that protein supplements have special muscle-building and health-giving powers, and that the most efficient way to get enough protein is by using supplements.”
In addition, Barrett criticizes U.S. Representative Diane Watson (D-CA) for her work in notifying the public about the mercury found in “silver” dental amalgams. Hundreds of scientific studies published in peerreviewed scientific journals document the dangers of this compound: “dental amalgam is most probably the major source of chronic mercury exposure in humans.” (Hahn LJ, et al., “Dental 'silver' tooth fillings: a source of mercury exposure revealed by whole-body image scan and tissue analysis,” FASEB J. 1989 Dec;3(14):2641-6.)
Rep. Watson was successful in getting a law enacted mandating this notice in all dental offices in California:
“WARNING: Amalgam fillings contain a chemical element known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.”
Furthermore, several distinguished doctors, including the late Linus Pauling, Ph.D., who was the only person to ever win two unshared Nobel prizes, are victims of Barrett's hostility toward natural medicine. Barrett derides the accomplishments of Dr. Pauling, whose theories continue to find vindication by researchers and scientists.
Clearly, Barrett's Quackwatch site takes jabs at those who disagree with his views. This includes the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy and Newsweek magazine for “promoting false notions about so-called complementary and alternative medicine.” It is therefore necessary to understand the background and motives of the man who maintains this site that is dedicated to assaulting alternative medicine and its practitioners.
A Critical Look at Stephen Barrett
It is important to look at the qualifications and motives of the man behind the vitriolic attack against Gary Young and so many others.
What is Barrett's motivation in attacking Gary Young? Gary has built an international company that is helping many people create a vital and healthy lifestyle. He has three herb farms, a park for families, and a clinic/fitness center. He employs approximately 300 people and his company,Young Living Essential Oils, has tens of thousands of dedicated distributors.
On the other hand, a careful look at Stephen Barrett, M.D., reveals some questions about his career, and ultimately about his character. Barrett's curriculum vitae is listed on the Internet in at least two places. He manages 8 or 9 websites and is currently involved in numerous lawsuits (as the instigator), but there is additional revealing resume information on his MLM Watch site. This resume shows what his Quackwatch resume doesn't: since the time that he claims he finished his 2-year Air Force active duty and a 23-month post as “Chief, psychiatric service” at Scott Air Force Base Hospital, he never again held a full-time psychiatric position. This resume reveals that all of his positions as a psychiatrist have been half-time or part-time. A timeline of Barrett's career path reveals he often worked as many as 6 parttime positions at once.
Is He a Board-Certified Expert?
Barrett hasn't held a medical license since 1993 and was never board certified in his field of psychiatry. In one court document, he stated that it is not necessary to be boardcertified to practice psychiatry. Yet board certification is the criteria by which one can assess a doctor's ability as noted by the American Board of Medical Specialties:
The American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) is an organization of 24 approved medical specialty boards. The intent of the certification of physicians is to provide assurance to the public that those certified by an ABMS Member Board have successfully completed an approved training program and an evaluation process assessing their ability to provide quality patient care in the specialty. The ABMS serves to coordinate the activities of its Member Boards and to provide information to others concerning issues involving specialization and certification of medical specialists. (http://www.abms.org/)
The American Psychiatric Association states: “After completing their residency training, most psychiatrists take a voluntary examination given by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, to become a ‘board certified' psychiatrist.”(American Psychiatric Association website: http://healthyminds.org/whatisapsychiatrist.cfm) On Barrett's Quackwatch website he writes: “Medical specialty boards require high standards of training and performance and ensure them by rigid examinations. Successful applicants receive diplomas and are considered 'boardcertified.'” Barrett foregoes mentioning that he has never achieved board certification in his field, although he styles himself as an “expert” qualified to testify against natural health practitioners. Yet the psychiatric website of Barrett's home state, the Pennsylvania Psychiatry Expert Witnesses and Consultants (http://expertpages.com/experts.php/psychiatry_pennsylvania.htm), shows a directory of 16 individuals or firms and all but one specifically list board certification as an integral part of their credentials.
The only non-board-certified expert witness on the Pennsylvania expert witness listing is Dr. Brian Crowley, who has the following exemplary credentials to recommend him:
• Senior Attending Psychiatrist and Immediate Past Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland.
• Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association
• Associate Professor of Psychiatry (He teaches medical students at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland.)
• Fellow of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis
Also, Dr. Crowley received the Roeske Award for Excellence in Medical Student Education from the American Psychiatric Association.
Stephen Barrett lists no membership in any psychiatric association. He mentions having won a freshman chemistry prize when in college, a citizen award from his local dental society (possibly for his pro-fluoridation stance and support of mercury amalgams), and status as fellow of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.
Barrett also says he received an Honorary Member Award from the American Dietetic Association. This is the group that accepted $75,000 from NutraSweet® and then allowed NutraSweet to write its fact sheets.
In court testimony from one of his many anti-alternative medicine lawsuits, Barrett stated he gave up his medical license when he retired. Consumer writer Tim Bolen stated that Barrett said in court he had only seen nine patients in the last years of his practice and he was no longer working at the State Mental Hospital, where his part-time employment in a ward there comprised the longest stint of his psychiatric career. 8
Barrett's Associate—A Critical Look at Robert Baratz
Barrett has aligned himself with a man who has impressive academic letters behind his name: Ph.D., D.D.S., and M.D., yet this highly-educated man currently operates a hair removal and ear piercing salon in Braintree, Massachusetts.
Robert S. Baratz serves as president of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF) with Stephen Barrett as vice president.
Barrett and Baratz have found it lucrative to instigate lawsuits and then accept payment for their testimony (reputed to be $350 an hour). While this strategy worked for a while, the legal tide is beginning to turn against them.
Baratz provided the most stunning and ludicrous testimony when he was cross-examined as an “expert witness” in a trial in Wisconsin on July 15, 2003. The transcript, 46 pages in tiny, 8-point font, can be purchased from TextNet (888-839-8638) or found at www.ddslaw.com. (Click on “State Boards,” then “State of Wisconsin v. Eleazer M. Kadile, M.D.” and then transcript for “July 15, 2003.”)
In 3 days of cross examination to defend his credentials, Baratz's resume was found to be full of fabrications, and the following facts were shown to be true:
• Baratz is not now or ever was a consultant for the FDA.
• He is not a spokesperson for the American Dental Association.
• He has not published 150 medical papers.
• Baratz twice ran into the back of cars while jogging and filed lawsuits against the drivers, one of whom was the former dean of the Boston College Law School. (Baratz lost that case and had to pay the dean's legal expenses.)
• He filed a $3 million lawsuit against a 71-year-old woman, Dr. Florence Wilson, who allegedly pulled on his arm during an argument, and he has claimed to be disabled since then (December 1998).
• He filed ”breach of contract” suits against Harvard Community Health and Tufts University.
• Harvard Community Health accused Baratz in a memo of behavior that was “verbally aggressive and abusive” and included obscenities directed at Baratz's supervisee. The memo noted he was “suspended without pay and warned that he could be terminated.”
• He lied in saying he was recruited by Harvard Community Health to develop, open, and manage its urgent care facility.
• In his termination agreement with Harvard Community Health (page 37), Baratz agreed not to sue anyone at Harvard Community Health related to anything that happened during his employment there. Yet he sued Dr. Wilson, Ms. Vito, and Mr. Tumi.
• When asked if he was board certified, Baratz admitted he was “not currently.”
• The attorney said, “You have taken and failed [the board test] several times?” Baratz answered, “I have not passed the ABIM exam on a couple of occasions.” Question: “Is that the same as failed?” Baratz, “If you say so.”
Robert Baratz, D.D.S, etc., was called to testify about the “safety” of mercury in dental amalgams in Florida in January 2001. Following Baratz's testimony, Dr. Ralph Dougherty of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Florida State University, wrote:
“I have qualified as an expert witness in chemistry and toxicology in both federal and state courts. I have conducted extensive research in analytical toxicology. I have more than 100 papers published in refereed journals. To allege that there is no mercury in mercury amalgam as Dr. Baratz has done in his sworn testimony before the Florida Dental Board is either a reflection of ignorance, or intent to deceive.”
Dr. Boyd E. Haley, Chair, Department of Chemistry, University of Kentucky, wrote, “With my personal knowledge of numerous outstanding and productive academic research scientists available to the FDA for consultation I am somewhat perplexed that they would select someone with such weak credentials—unless they were searching for someone who would adamantly support their preconceived position of amalgams being totally safe. Dr. Baratz is evidently well known for taking that position. Finally, his statements concerning amalgams and chemistry in general are so pathetic that they almost defy sensible analysis.” [Emphasis added] Toxic Exposure Study Trust Foundation, http://www.testfoundation.org/baratztestimony.htm
The “Experts”—Barrett and Baratz—Exposed
In California Superior Court on December 17, 2001, Judge Haley J. Fromholz dismissed Stephen Barrett's case against King Bio Pharmaceuticals, noting that witnesses Barrett and Wallace I. Sampson, M.D., (another quackman) were not neutral or dispassionate witnesses. Judge Fromholz wrote: “Both witnesses' fees, as Dr. Barrett testified, are paid from a fund established by Plaintiff NCAHF [National Council Against Health Fraud] from the proceeds of suits such as the case at bar” and that “both men have a direct, personal financial interest in the outcome of this litigation…[I]t can fairly be said that Drs. Barrett and Sampson are themselves the client, and therefore their testimony should be accorded little, if any, credibility on that basis alone.”
Judge Fromholz also scorned Barrett's credibility as a so-called expert witness on the FDA, saying:
“While Dr. Barrett appears to have had several past conversations with FDA representatives, these appear to have been sporadic, mainly at his own instigation, and principally for the purpose of gathering information for his various articles and Internet web-sites. He has never testified before any government panel or agency on issues relating to FDA regulation of drugs. Presumably his professional continuing education experiences are outdated given that he has not had a current medical license in over seven years. For these reasons, there is no sound basis on which to consider Dr. Barrett qualified as an expert on the issues he was offered to address.”
Judge Fromholz ruled that “NCAHF failed to prove a false or misleading statement. King Bio's expert testified the products were safe and effective. The products were included in the Homeopathic Pharmacopeia and complied with FDA guidelines. NCAHF presented no evidence that King Bio's products were not safe and effective, relying instead on a general attack on homeopathy, made by witnesses who had no knowledge of, or experience with, King Bio's products, and who were found to be biased and unworthy of credibility.” 9
In an appeal of the King Bio lawsuit (which was upheld by Justice Margaret Grignon, filed 4/22/2003), Justice Grignon awarded King Bio a protective order against NCAHF and $900 in sanctions for exceeding the 35-question limitation on requests for admission and interrogatories by almost 1,000 questions. She ordered that NCAHF “bear King Bio Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s and Frank J. King's costs on appeal.” 10
The attorney chosen for Barrett's appeal of the King Bio case, Morse Mehrban, has made an unsavory reputation for himself in California by filing meritless lawsuits. One such suit against the Miramar Sheraton Hotel in Santa Monica was dismissed on a demurrer by Judge Brett C. Klein. Judge Klein wrote: “This case is brought in the private interest, not in the public interest. There are many nouns that one might attempt to use, metaphorically, to describe what this case is about,” Judge Klein said. “The most appropriate metaphorical term would be 'racketeering.'” 11
The Los Angeles Times published the following in an article on Quackwatch attorney Mehrban:
“Earlier this year, Mehrban filed 400 separate claims against makers of candles, charging that the common table ornaments emit toxic fumes. He's currently in court with more than a dozen manufacturers and retailers of artificial fireplace logs, which he claims emit toxic fumes when lit. He once sued dozens of hotel chains for allegedly failing to post warnings about the hazards of cigarette smoke in lobby and pool areas. A Los Angeles judge who dismissed one of the cases — against the Miramar Sheraton — likened the lawsuit to 'racketeering.' Such criticism does not faze Mehrban. Though he bills his time at as much as $400 an hour and drives a Mercedes roadster, he says he's not in it for the money.” (Los Angeles Times, November 3, 2002, article by Monte Morin.)
Barrett's Bias
Quackwatcher Stephen Barrett's bias has been clearly documented in court, as well as in his numerous conversations concerning healthcare issues. Young Living Distributor Dean Berenz wrote Barrett and posed some questions, and the following are his answers:
Dean Berenz: “Where can I find statistics on deaths caused by hospital error and diseases contracted from hospital admission and unrelated to the condition at the time of admission?”
Stephen Barrett: “I don't know of any reliable statistics on this subject.”
Documentation and statistics do exist on “iatrogenic” causes of death. Iatrogenic means “induced in a patient by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy.” It is used especially as a complication of treatment.
Dr. Joseph Mercola has these statistics from the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Institute of Medicine (part of the National Academy of Sciences, a private organization chartered by Congress to advise the government on scientific matters) on his website: www.mercola.com. (Search his website for “Death by Medicine” and “Doctors Are the Third Leading Cause of Death in the US.”) This information has also been widely disseminated by news agencies.
Dean Berenz: “I also need to have statistics on pharmaceutically-induced deaths from mis-prescribed drugs and/or their side effects.”
Stephen Barrett: “I don't know of any reliable statistics on this subject.” 12
As was stated in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) study quoted above, every year 106,000 people die from non-error, negative effects of drugs (adverse reactions). (Kohn L, ed, Corrigan J, ed. Donaldson M, ed. “To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System.” Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.)
The report of the Institute of Medicine said the total cost of medical mistakes, lost income and production, cost of disability and health care, totals $17 to $29 billion a year.
Stephen Barrett claims to be unaware of these statistics, even though he is the medical editor for Prometheus Books, a publishing house known for biblical criticism, alternative lifestyle books, and 12-step programs such as How to Stay Sober: Recovery Without Religion and SOS Sobriety by James Christopher, founder of the “Save Ourselves Movement.”
Furthermore, in his book, The Vitamin Pushers, he wrote: “It is falsely alleged that Americans are so addicted to 'junk' foods that an adequate diet is exceptional rather than usual.“ Scientific research has shown that most Americans do not have adequate or nutritious diets. The explosion of obesity and diabetes are proof. On June 2, 2004, Reuters News reported that a study from the June issue of the Journal of Food Chemistry and Analysis showed that junk food makes up almost one-third of the U.S. diet.
Barrett also wrote: “Poor people can ill afford to waste money on unnecessary vitamin pills.” 13 In answer to that, Reuters News reported on March 23, 2004, “Dietary shortages of crucial vitamins and minerals like zinc and iron may be keeping as many as a third of the world's people from reaching their full potential, researchers told a U.N. panel on Tuesday. Simple remedies that have worked well in the industrialized world such as fortifying flour or milk with key vitamins or minerals or distributing supplements to children or pregnant women are so inexpensive and widely available that they should be applied worldwide, said UNICEF chief Carol Bellamy.“ [Emphasis added.]
Barrett's bias against any natural approach to medicine is further evidenced by his attacks on the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, and even the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM).
On page 34 of The Vitamin Pushers, Barrett lists: “Thirty Ways to Spot Quacks and Pushers.” Number 29 reads: “They Sue to Intimidate Their Critics.” It is interesting to note that Barrett himself has been involved in numerous lawsuits, and he solicits people to join his legal harassment on his Quackwatch website: “Plaintiffs Wanted for Consumer Protection Suits! (posted 9/19/99).”
Clearly, Barrett and his Quackwatch associate will use any means to push their anti- alternative medicine agenda, including false and misleading information and withholding of truthful evidence that strongly supports their opponent's position. With this in mind, it casts a fairly dense shadow of doubt as to the veracity of anything the Quackwatch group has written.
How does one separate fact from fiction? It is important to look at the facts that are on record concerning Stephen Barrett:
He does not hold a current medical license
He was never board certified in his chosen profession
He operates Quackwatch out of his Allentown, Pennsylvania basement
He makes his living “testifying” in frivolous lawsuits
By responding to the allegations made against Young Living Essential Oils, its founder and products, individuals and groups will clearly see that opponents are motivated by money more than integrity. Natural medicine is meeting a tremendous need in our current healthcare crisis, and Young Living Essential Oils will continue to benefit people's lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment