> Whenever I hear of an new (alternative or mainstream) treatment
for any medical concern in my life, the first thing I do is go over
to www.quackwatch.org and do a search on the treatment or the person
promulgating it.

I have done much research about Quackwatch and the people behind it. It
breaks my heart and infuriates me that they are misleading so many. They
almost kept my mother from receiving the care that has turned around a
serious health issue where the mainstream had failed. Below are excerpts
from emails I sent to her regarding Quackwatch and Stephen Barrett. (Long)

A website named quackwatch sounds pretty authoritative, doesn’t it? I’m
sure you realize that anyone can buy a domain and name it quackwatch.
You may find this interesting also:

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

April 23, 2003

A California Appeals Court, yesterday, April 22, 2003, bludgeoned the
National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), and their whole argument
about what constitutes good and bad health care. The quackbuster's operating
theme, the argument they use against alternative proponents, came under a
major American Court's scrutiny. The Court, basically, in their decision,
said the the quackbuster's arguments were hogwash, and they had no business
meddling in California's system.

The Court also declared that top quackbusters Stephen Barrett
(quackwatch.com), and Wallace Sampson MD (Scientific Review of Alternative
and Aberrant Medicine) "were found to be biased and unworthy of

The quackbusters lost in a PUBLISHED case. The quackbuster premise failed.
Not some of it, not most of it - but ALL of it. The "quackbuster" measuring
stick for how to evaluate health care has been completely discredited.
Official quackbuster credibility is now ZERO.

In a minute I'm going to give you a link to the Appeals Court decision. But
first let me give you a road map.

Here's what happened...

The quackbuster's flagship, the self-proclaimed National Council Against
Health Fraud (NCAHF) decided, one day, to sue about 43 "Alternative Medicine
proponents" in California, basically claiming that all of them were engaging
in health fraud "because what they were doing wasn't scientifically proven."

Their argument was that "the defendant has to PROVE their products work, or
it's health fraud."

California was the wrong place for them to try this stunt. Here, health
freedom bills tend to pass through the legislature UNANIMOUSLY. We like to
be healthy. It's our life style.

The very first case that came to trial was called NCAHF vs, King Bio (a
manufacturer of about 50 homeopathic products). The NCAHF lost badly. Los
Angeles Superior Court Judge Haley Fromholz wrote a long decision, virtually
battering the quackbusters for wasting the court's time with their silly
case. The quackbusters had accused King Bio of false advertising. At issue
was the credibility of the NCAHF's witnesses, Stephen Barrett, and Wallace
Sampson MD. The Judge thrashed their arguments. You can read the Judge's
words in this original case decision by clicking

You can find out who King Bio is by going to their website

The NCAHF appealed. And, boy did it cost them. You need to read the
decision. It is written in plain language, not legalese, and is clearly
understandable. Read the footnotes also. Pass this around to anyone under
attack by the quackbusters. Their attorneys will love this precedent setting

To me one of the more important statements is the last footnote in the
Appeal Court's decision, for it attacks the whole quackbuster operation It
says, "The trial court concluded NCAHF failed to prove a false or misleading
statement. King Bioâ??s expert testified the products were safe and
effective. The products were included in the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia and
complied with FDA guidelines. NCAHF presented no evidence that King Bioâ??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 Bioâ??s products, and who were found to be biased and unworthy of

But more occurred. "At trial, NCAHF proceeded on the theory that there is no
scientific basis for the advertised efficacy of King Bioâ??s products. NCAHF
performed no tests to determine the efficacy of King Bioâ??s products and
presented no anecdotal evidence. NCAHF instead argued that King Bioâ??s
products were drugs, and the scientific community required representations
regarding the efficacy of drugs to be supported by acceptable scientific
evidence. NCAHF asserted that the burden of proof should be shifted to King
Bio to prove its productsâ?? efficacy.
appeal, NCAHF acknowledges that, under current California law, a false
advertising plaintiff bears the burden of proving the defendantâ??s
advertising claim is false or misleading. NCAHF contends, however, that we
should shift the burden of proof to the defendant to facilitate the campaign
against health fraud. NCAHF argues that federal law shifts the burden to the
defendant in false advertising actions."

In response to the NCAHF's demands, the Court said: "We conclude there is no
basis in California law to shift the burden of proof to a defendant in a
representative false advertising and unlawful competition action. We
conclude further that the Legislature has indicated an intent to place the
burden of proof on the plaintiff in such cases. Finally, we conclude federal
authority is not apposite." What this means to the North American Health
Freedom Movement...

This is a PUBLISHED case. It is PRECEDENT setting. It can (and should) be
used in any case in the US where quackbusters are involved. The quackbusters
have been court tested - and they lost. Their whole argument against
alternative medicine has been thrown in the trash. Their credibility is

The case was handled, on our side, by famous California litigator, Carlos
Negrete. You can read his comments on the case at

You can read the whole case decision by clicking

What I want to know is "Who funded the quackbuster's lawsuits?"

My advice to you: If you are the subject of derogatory remarks on top
quackbuster Stephen Barrett's website http://www.quackwatch.com or Robert
Baratz's website http://www.nachf.org you might want to consider showing
this newsletter, and the court decision papers, to your attorney. This might
be a good time for your attorney to send them a letter pointing out their
new legal problems - and demanding removal of the information from their
website within 24 hours... Your attorney might want to ask for

Stay tuned...

Tim Bolen - Consumer Advocate

This "Millions of Health Freedom Fighters - Newsletter" is about the battle
between "Health and Medicine" on Planet Earth. Tim Bolen is an op/ed writer
with extensive knowledge of the activities of a subversive organization
calling itself the "quackbusters," and that organization's attempts to
suppress, and discredit, any, and all health modalities that compete with
the allopathic (MD) paradigm for consumer health dollars.
focus of the newsletter is on the ongoing activities, battles, politics, and
the victories won by members of the "Health Freedom Movement"
the "quackbusters" It details "who the quackbusters are, what they are,
where they are operating, when they appear, and how they operate - and how
easy it is to beat them..."

A copy of THIS newsletter, and older ones, are viewable at the website

“The most damning testimony before the jury, under the intense
cross-examination by Negrete, was that Barrett had filed similar defamation
lawsuits against almost 40 people across the country within the past few
years and had not won one single one at trial. During the course of his
examination, Barrett also had to concede his ties to the AMA, Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) and Food & Drug Administration (FDA).”


This NCAHF represents the kind of danger that Ron Paul is fighting against.
“It is believed that Dr. Whittaker's letter, and the actions of the
California Health Freedom Movement team, were responsible for the REMOVAL of
the NCAHF from the Loma Linda University campus….For years the NCAHF had
used Loma Linda University's address in a manner designed to make it appear
that the University endorsed their bizarre health positions.”

International Advocates for Health Freedom:
Main website: http://www.iahf.com/. Their opinion of NCAHF: “Bolen
holds the view that Baratz is about to be massacred in the courtroom and
that NCAHF will go down in flames around him. All I can say is it's about

Read the whole thing, but I have provided a quote below:

‘Quackbusters run over 70 websites. Millions of people go to them every
year. Look up chiropractic, acupuncture, homeopathy or even vitamin C, as
well as almost every other natural health topic, on the Internet and you
(and the public) will be led to Quackbuster sites advising you of natural
health “dangers.” In all these forums Barrett and the Quackbusters
relentlessly attack the consumer right to informed choice. These activities
continue the AMA’s anti-quackery committee’s activities that were struck
down by federal courts as an illegal restraint of trade in a landmark
lawsuit brought by Illinois chiropractor Chester Wilk. They also help
insurance companies deny consumer reimbursement claims.
At the same time, Barrett flacks for products like aspartame (NutraSweet),
which is the subject of tens of thousands of consumer complaints. Question
(asked on Barrett’s web site): “An email message is being circulated with
many statements to the effect that aspartame is dangerous. How worried
should I be?” Answer (from Barrett): “Not at all. The message is pure

Bush To Impose Psychiatric Drug Regime:
“…The petrochemical model is in a de facto monopoly position, maintained
through AMA and similar licensing schemes, persecution of alternatives by
so-called quackbusters, and now this monopoly is being reinforced through
restrictive legislation designed to relegate the biological sector to a
marginal existence. The increased cost in terms of injury and loss of life
as well as the financial expenditure is born by consumers all over the
world, because governments elect to spend our taxes on one and only one of
the two health systems. The petrochemical health model is a commercial
cartel, a monopoly that has become so pervasive as to compromise both our
health and our financial ability to pay for it. According to the State of
Nevada's attorneys it uses what amounts to racketeering practices in
securing its profits.
Vigorous action against this Great Medical Monopoly on all levels is
probably the only way left to protect our health.
In closing, let me give you here the postscript of the Allen Jones
whistleblower report, a document which I highly recommend for study. Jones
appeals to all of us when he says:
"The pharmaceutical industry has methodically compromised our political
system at all levels and has systematically infiltrated the mental health
service delivery system of this nation. They are poised to consolidate their
grip via the New Freedom Commission and the Texas Medication Algorithm
Project. The pervasive manipulation of clinical trials, the nonreporting of
negative trials and the cover-up of debilitating and deadly side effects
render meaningful informed consent impossible by persons being treated with
these drugs. Doctors and patients alike have been betrayed by the
governmental entities and officials who are supposed to protect them. To the
millions of doctors, parents and patients who are affected: PLEASE: suspend
disbelief and realize you are on your own. Educate yourselves. The Internet
has many sites that will help you. The Alliance for Human Research
Protection, www.ahrp.org would be a good place to start.”


Quackbuster Overview (and how they manipulate):

Tim Bolen in good company:
This is the organization that published the last Tim-Bolen opinion that I
sent to you. http://www.thenhf.com/about_us.html. At the bottom of this
link is a list of the Board of Governors along with the details of their
professional backgrounds.