Anti-alternative “Quackbusters” Have Giant Court Losses on Two Continents: Holland, Pennsylvania & California Courts Rule Against Them

PRESS RELEASE:

Recent rulings in Amsterdam, Pennsylvania and the Supreme Court of California are heavy blows to the Quackwatch anti-chiropractic and anti-alternative medicine organizations.

After years of being labeled a”quack,” defamed and ridiculed professionally, ” Dr. Maria Sickesz won a great victory in Amsterdam, Holland early June 2007.

The Netherlands Appeals Court ordered the “Vereniging tegen de Kwalzalverij” (Association Against Quackery, which is the Dutch version of the so-called “Quackbusters” ) to cease and desist from using the demeaning, subjective and pejorative term “quack.” This group is linked extensively on their website with the American “quackwatch” headed by Stephen Barrett, who also has suffered several legal defeats recently.

The Justices recognized that this group’s affinity for giving demeaning labels to doctors with whose practices they disagreed was a way of shutting down emerging science. They were also ordered to publish a public retraction in two widely circulated newspapers,  which is estimated to cost around thirty thousand euro dollars and has been said will bankrupt this highly controversial association.

Dr. Sickesz developed a kind of healing called orthomanual therapy which integrates chiropractic practices. For several decades the “quackbuster” organizations around the world have waged legal and public relations wars against chiropractors and other non traditional practitioners, demonizing them with their biased campaigns.

In June, for the second time, Barrett lost a case in a Pennsylvania Appeals Court against a local and respected chiropractor. Suing Dr. Tedd Koren has definitely backfired on the longtime head of the quackwatch empire. During this case, Barrett had to reveal that he had failed his psychiatric medical board tests and was never board certified for the decades he practiced. Board certification protects patients.

Barrett Vs Rosenthal
was decided in November, 2006 against Barrett and his co-plaintiffs, Terry Polevoy and Christopher Grell. Though Barrett had claimed he was “defamed” and “libeled,” the Supreme Court Justice’s final words in the decision were, “As the lower courts correctly concluded, however, none of the hostile comments against Dr. Barrett alleged in the complaint are defamatory.” In May, 2007, Barrett and Polevoy were ordered to post bonds of over $433,000 in this case.

In an earlier court loss, Barrett and fellow “National Council Against Health Fraud” member, Wallace Sampson, were ruled to be “biased and unworthy of credibility” in a case they lost against King Bio, a homeopathtic remedy company.

Sources:  http://www.volkskrant.nl/wetenschap/article433699.ece/Wie_zalft_er_dan_wel_kwak
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
http://www.HumanticsFoundation.com/kingbio.htm
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/282560/court_victory_for_chiropractors_against.html

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: