Quackwatch Sued For Suggesting Medical Lab Quackery
from the name-what's-wrong dept
Every so often we receive legal threats, almost always concerning claims of defamation. If it's content that we have written, we ask for clarification on specifically which statements are false and why, so that we can review them and fix them if they are, indeed, false. To date, no one who has threatened us has responded in any way to such a request. That is, none have actually provided us with the details of the false statement, or done anything like filing a lawsuit. It appears that Stephen Barrett, who runs the excellent site Quackwatch (which, as you'd suspect, tries to highlight medical practices that smack of quackery) has a similar policy on receiving defamation threats. Unfortunately, he's now been sued in response (thanks to JC for sending this story in).Barrett has written a few times about a medical lab named Doctor's Data, that he feels is helping certain medical practitioners defraud patients through misleading results. Here's one example of such a report. You'll notice that it's pretty detailed in explaining why Barrett has problems with the use of these reports.
Doctor's Data, understandably, did not take too kindly to all of this and sent a cease & desist letter at the beginning of June. I have to say, I've seen an awful lot of cease-and-desist letters sent to websites accusing them of defamation, but there's something about this one that just... sounds off. I can't quite place it, but the letter seems a bit less formal than the typical C&D. It also doesn't cite any laws or legal precedent, which is common, but certainly not always present. That said, Barrett was quick to respond politely (even "thanking" the lawyer for the letter), despite the legal threat:
I take great pride in being accurate and carefully consider complaints about what I write. However, your letter does not identify a single statement by me that you believe is inaccurate or "fraudulent." The only thing you mention is my article about how the urine toxic metals test is used to defraud patients: (http://www.quackwatch.org/t). The article's title reflects my opinion, the basis of which the article explains in detail.Rather than provide the details of what Doctor's Data felt was defamatory, another partner at the same law firm sent a shorter cease & desist, that again, has a somewhat less formal style than the usual C&D:
If you want me to consider modifying the article, please identify every sentence to which you object and explain why you believe it is not correct.
You have been making false statements about Doctor's Data and have damaged this company's business and reputation, and you have done so for personal gain and your own self-interest, disguised as performing a public service. ... Your writings and conduct are clearly designed to damage Doctor's Data. ... If you don't retract your false claims and issue a public apology, the lawsuit will be filed.Barrett responded, pointing out that he'd asked for specific evidence and hadn't been provided any. Instead of actually highlighting what Doctor's Data felt was wrong, the firm then filed the lawsuit instead. The lawsuit runs the gamut of the standard claims in these sorts of lawsuits: restraint of trade; trademark dilution; business libel; tortious interference with existing and potential business relationships; fraud or intentional misrepresetation; and violating federal and state laws against deceptive trade practices.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: defamation, facts, opinions, quackwatch
Companies: doctor's data, quackwatch
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Is it just more or is the Streisand effect getting up there with Murphy's law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gee, it sure looks like quackery to me, and probably anyone else with a brain
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gee, it sure looks like quackery to me, and probably anyone else with a brain
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Gee, it sure looks like quackery to me, and probably anyone else with a brain
You think the people falling for these scams are going to trust the government, when they won't even trust scientists or real doctors?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shameless plug
Donate to people who deserve money and will treat you to the best of their ability and are honest about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shameless plug
About health I would love to see people talking about things that work, all the bad things I know already not that they are not important there are many people who still don't see the ugly, but I would love to find a place where people are doing good things and making it work the government is just squeaking about how they don't have money and bla bla bla that means pretty soon a lot of people may find themselves in need of community initiatives and those people are not only the poor, it is a chance for people to seize the moment and start to rebuild the infra-structure that governments have squandered.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Response?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
crappy lawyer == cartoony lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: crappy lawyer == cartoony lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's the complaint
Case filed in Illinois. Illinois has an anti-SLAPP law, see here: http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-illinois
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's the complaint
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Like nearly everything you post about, your knowledge of anti-slapp statutes again appears to be, sadly, lacking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: please, enlighten us, mr masnick. dont forget to include information on your legal degree, and perhaps the date you were admitted to the illinois bar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: please, enlighten us, mr masnick. dont forget to include information on your legal degree, and perhaps the date you were admitted to the illinois bar.
The problem is the lawyers (and politicians for that mater) that DO want us to believe that they are the only ones that can understand the complexities of the law (fortunately that is not all of them). If everybody could do it why would we pay them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Of course, you never make those, right, TAM?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Are you a lawyer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Forget Anti-Slapp
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Example Report
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Barrett
Why don't you go ahead and file??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Want to provide some proof to those statements? Remember, the more you defend your real employer, the more attention they will get ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shill
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blogospheric reactions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stephen Barreet of Quackwatch will lose Doctor's Data Action
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Barrett is a hypocrite and a quack himself.
Mind you, I know there are alternative medicine quacks out there. I believe, for instance, that Hulda Clark's belief that "all cancer is caused by parasites," and that the way to get rid of them is to use something called a "zapper" to destroy the parasites, is ridiculous.
On the other hand, I have seen one of the treatmeents Barrett describes as dangerous put a close friend of mine in complete remission. It's called "insulin potentiated therapy, and it works on the premise that cancer cells are better at absorbing glucose than are normal cells. The process is simple, and is done right in the doctor's office. The doctor injects his client with enough insulin to bring his glucose level down significantly. He then injects a far smaller dose of chemotherapy, along with glucose, into the client. The result is that the cancer cells ingest considerably more of the chemo drug than the normal cells do, and more, incidentally, than when regular, higher doses are administered by oncologists, and the normal cells get far less of the chemotherapy, so that there is no hair loss, no vomiting, no neutropenia, no mouth sores, no neuropathy, (possibly no sterility---I am not sure about that), but in short, there are none of the horrible side-effects that happen with regular doses of chemotherapy.
The close friend I mentioned need emergency treatment because he had lymphoma tumors growing on the inside of his throat. The insulin potentiated therapy destroyed the lymphoma, and it has not returned in 14 years.
When Barrett says that insulin potentiated therapy could put someone into a coma, and that he could die, I have to laugh, because nowhere on his site does Barrett say anything about the terrible dangers of chemotherapy,(as well as radiation and surgery.) Interleukin-2, for instance, is so toxic and so damamging to the system that it has to be administered in a hospital intensive care unit!
No onE has gone into a coma or died from insulin potentiated chemotherapy,, but plenty of people have died or been seriously injured/debilated by chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. And chemotherapy, radiation and surgery have a dismal record for putting clients into remisson for any decent length of time.
Therefore, chemotherapy, radiation and surgery for cancer can certainly be termed quackery, but there is nothing on Barrett's site about the fact that chemotherapy is poison, and that in most cases, it is ineffective.
Quack! Quack! Quack, and hypocritical Quacks at that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a moron! I got bigger balls than you fucks ! This idiot isn’t even a licensed doctor. Haha he said something iscquackery . HE is the quackery himself. Probably plays with hiss little prune shriveled up balls when he goes home at night.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]