David Colquhoun an anti-CAM pharmaceutical only supporter has admitted that he “mistakenly” published an article in a conventional medical journal giving false references in an attempt to seriously malign the chiropractic profession as harmful.
Now he features an article by a skeptic from the United States, Stephen Barrett who has been proven in a court of law to be a money grubbing fraud who has made money from his skepticism. And the article that Colquhoun features on his web site is one of the main articles for prompting law suits that had financially benefited Stephen Barrett’s career as a skeptic.
I have stated before that for the like of Randi, Ben Goldacre, Sense about Science and others this anti- CAM stuff is a profit orientated business. And the skeptics’ claims of being anti-suing in scientific matters is a load of hypocritical nonsense.
According to Tim Bolan a consumer health advocate in the United States, Stephen Barrett and his associates would create a barrage of negative “scientific opinion” (mainly their own) and bad publicity for a particular alternative health modality or product.
And then they would prompt a lawsuit against either the manufacturer or a particular practitioner to reap the benefits of becoming expert witnesses in the trial. This was very lucrative until Tim Bolan took action.
This type of situation continues today. If you actually look carefully at the source for the negative opinions and serious accusations, as in David Colquhoun’s case they suddenly vanish. Stephen Barrett would also work in a nefarious way for other organizations and companies who have a stake in attacking alternative health practices. The stoppage of fair trade is a federal offense in the United States.
Barrett, we know, along with his website, is currently named, among other things, in a racketeering (RICO) case in Federal Court in Colorado.
He’s also being sued for his nefarious activities in Ontario, Canada.
Barrett, in the Canadian case, has formally admitted, according to Canadian law, to a number of situations put to him by the Plaintiff, including:
“The sole purpose of the activities of Barrett & Baratz are to discredit and cause damage and harm to health care practitioners, businesses that make alternative health therapies or products available, and advocates of non-allopathic therapies and health freedom.”
“Barrett has interfered with the civil rights of numerous Americans, in his efforts to have his critics silenced.”
“Barrett has strategically orchestrated the filing of legal actions in improper jurisdictions for the purpose of frustrating the victims of such lawsuits and increasing his victims costs.”
“Barrett failed the exams he was required to pass to become a Board Certified Medical Doctor.”
We can only hope that the RICO laws apply to the likes of the skeptics here in the UK- certainly to their blogs and web sites.
