7 reviews for Quackwatch are not recommended
These reviews are not recommended because our content quality algorithms have determined them to be less useful for users researching this business. Our content quality algorithm makes decisions based on a number of proprietary evaluation factors, and is constantly updating and improving over time. Even though these reviews are not displayed by default, they still factor into the overall number of reviews and the average rating for the business.
GB
1 review
15 helpful votes

LIERS SPONSORED BY SELFISH BIG PHARMA
March 9, 2019

LIERS SPONSORED BY SELFISH BIG PHARMA
DONT TRUST THEM
THEY LIE ABOUT GOOD ALTERNATIVE DOCTORS AND WEBSITES

Date of experience: March 9, 2019
Ohio
2 reviews
52 helpful votes

QUACKWATCH IS GREAT FOR DUMMIES!
October 25, 2015

Quackwatch is good for telling dumb, naive, and/or desperate people not to buy snake oil, like magic water blessed by the Virgin Mary or expensive "healing crystals". I totally agree with him about those things. But he also dismisses and attacks people who advocate natural remedies, and PREVENTIVE health measures like healthy eating; STRESS MANAGEMENT techniques like meditation, yoga, tai chi, qigong, deep breathing, etc; and people who are critical of the DRUGS, DRUGS, DRUGS for every little thing approach to health like Harvard trained psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin who believes that therapy is better than toxic drugs with their myriad dangerous side effects that the drug companies routinely minimize.

His knee-jerk "QUACK!" labeling of so many people just because they recommend natural remedies that many people have found relief from for hundreds or thousands of years is extremely ignorant and irresponsible and makes me not trust him because he obviously lacks wisdom and a balanced perspective

Quackwatch also seems to have BLIND FAITH in anything that calls itself "science." Barrett constantly talks about "science" but I wonder why he never mentions things like what Harvard trained Dr. Richard Horton, the editor of the medical journal The Lancet said about "science": The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.

Or the similar statements made by Dr. John Ioannidis, director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center and adjunct professor at Tufts University School of Medicine, who wrote the paper "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False".

"Science" is just as corrupt as politics and everything else because it is being done by greedy, morally and intellectually fallible human beings. It's not all good or all bad. But Quackwatch's information is very one sided about that and his condemning of people who dare to question the old ways of doing things is backwards and scary.

It's also misleading about supplements because often "no scientific proof" a supplement works only means that there was no big money to be made on a natural herb so no one was going to pay money to have many large studies run on it. It can still help. Lots of herbs that many people use and get wonderful relief from like Tulsi, Triphala, Valerian, etc, were unheard of in the west until recent decades. Barrett's small minded reasoning seems to be that doctors who recommend natural supplements without tons of "scientific proof" or who question the old ways of doing things are going against science and therefore "QUACKS!"

There have been constant news stories saying doctors grossly over-prescribe antibiotics and the AMA warning them to stop because it damages gut flora (Hypocrites said disease begins in the gut!) and causes antibiotic resistance. Why aren't the doctors doing that and why isn't that info in Quackwatch? And another news story a few years ago where the AMA warned doctors to stop passing out Ritalin so often because of dangerous physical and mental side-effects, and because we have no idea what the long term side-effects are to kid's growing brains. Why aren't the doctors heading those warnings and why isn't that info in Quackwatch?

Date of experience: October 25, 2015
Texas
1 review
12 helpful votes

A bunch of quacks
October 16, 2015

A site such as quackwatch serves to propagate the misinformed dealings of the pharmaceutical industry and offer no other solutions to the sites they deem unsatisfactory. Imagine if you went to a doctor and he said only his way was the right way and that was that. Dr. Steven Barrett is a retired psychiatrist and one should not expect anything but a biased answer concerning the information he provides on the sites he berates. According to some sites that give an autobiography of the good doctor; Dr. Barrett has become a "lightning rod" for controversy as a result of his criticisms of alternative medicine theories and practitioners. Barrett says he does not criticize conventional medicine because that would be "way outside his scope. While there are organizations out there that are controversial in their operations and unaccredited institutions of education that succeed in their endeavors to fool and relive those who seek an education in the field of alternative medicine of their money, Dr. Barrett offers no solution for those seeking such an education. This leads others to speculate that he is biased to alternative medicinal practices. Here is a partial list of Dr. Barrett's' works Consumer Health:

A Guide to Intelligent Decisions, Barrett S, London WM, Kroger M, Hall H, Baretz R (2013). (textbook, 9th ed.) McGraw-Hill, ISBN **************

Dubious Cancer Treatment, Barrett SJ & Cassileth BR, editors (2001). Florida Division of the American Cancer Society

The Health Robbers: A Close Look at Quackery in America, Barrett SJ, Jarvis WT, eds. (1993). Prometheus Books, ISBN 0-*******-855-4

Health Schemes, Scams, and Frauds, Barrett SJ (1991). Consumer Reports Books, ISBN 0-*******-330-5

Reader's Guide to Alternative Health Methods, Zwicky JF, Hafner AW, Barrett S, Jarvis WT (1993). American Medical Association, ISBN 0-*******-525-1

The Vitamin Pushers: How the "Health Food" Industry Is Selling America a Bill of Goods, Barrett SJ, Herbert V (1991). Prometheus Books, ISBN 0-*******-909-7

Vitamins and Minerals: Help or Harm?, Marshall CW (1983). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins ISBN 0-397-*******-9 (edited by Barrett, won the American Medical Writers Association award for best book of 1983 for the general public, republished by Consumer Reports Books).

It is my opinion that Dr. Barrett could be a bit more open minded and stop reporting on that which is the obvious and report on those alternative and healthy lifestyle choices that in fact do help others. Don't worry we are not trying to put the pharmaceutical companies out of business, we are just trying to help people to find healthier lifestyles Dr. Barrett.

Date of experience: October 16, 2015
Nevada
1 review
51 helpful votes

Stephen Barrett owns & operates Quackwatch.com
October 11, 2014

Stephen Barrett owns & operates Quackwatch.com

IMO this website is so dangerous it should be illegal. I don't even know where to start, but everything on the site is harmful & anyone w/ a brain needs to do the exact opposite of whatever he is saying. His arguments are so ridiculous it's laughable & really scary to me anyone takes this seriously. Come on, nobody profits off of telling people to eat healthy, get exercise or to take herbs which I know from suffering from depression for 30 years is the only thing that has helped me... medicine the doctors gave me made me worse w/ numerous side effects requiring even more medication & turned moderate depression into severe psychotic depression & bipolar disorder. They didn't cure anything. It's really common sense once you study & learn about how our bodies work & what they actually need to function.

I found this from http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm but after googling his name it's definitely not hard to figure out who the real quack is.

Stephen Barrett - Professional Crackpot...
The Internet needs health information it can trust. Stephen Barrett doesn't provide it...

Barrett is one of those people whose ambitions and opinions of himself far exceeds his abilities. Without ANY qualifications he has set himself up as an expert in just about everything having to do with health care - and more.

And this from a man who is a professional failure.

Records show that Barrett never achieved any success in the medical profession. His claim to being a "retired Psychiatrist" is laughable. He is, in fact, a "failed Psychiatrist," and a "failed MD."

The Psychiatric profession rejected Barrett years ago, for Barrett could NOT pass the examinations necessary to become "Board Certified." Which, is no doubt why Barrett was, throughout his career, relegated to lower level "part time" positions.

Barrett, we know, was forced to give up his medical license in Pennsylvania in 1993 when his "part-time" employment at the State Mental Hospital was terminated, and he had so few (nine) private patients during his last five years of practice, that he couldn't afford the Malpractice Insurance premiums Pennsylvania requires.

In a job market in the United States, where there is a "doctor shortage," Stephen Barrett, after his termination by the State mental Hospital, couldn't find employment. He was in his mid-50s at the time. He should have been at the top of his craft - yet, apparently, he couldn't find work.

It is obvious, that, after one humiliation after another, in 1993 Barrett simply gave up his medical aspirations, turned in his MD license, and retreated, in bitterness and frustration, to his basement.

It was in that basement, where Barrett took up "quackbusting" - which, in reality, means that Barrett attacks "cutting-edge" health professionals and paradigms - those that ARE achieving success in their segment of health care.

And there, in "quackbusting" is where Barrett finally found the attention and recognition he seems to crave - for, a while, that is, until three California Judges, in a PUBLISHED Appeals Court decision, took a HARD look at Barrett's activities, and declared him "biased, and unworthy of credibility."

Bitterness against successful health professionals is Barrett's hallmark. To him they're all "quacks." In this, his essays are repetitive and pedestrian.

Barrett, in his writings, says the same things, the same way, every time - change the victim and the subject, and still you yawn your way through his offerings. It's like he's filling out a form somebody gave him...

Take an overactive self importance, couple it with glaring failure and rejection in his chosen profession, add a cup of molten hatred for those that do succeed, pop it in the oven - and out comes Stephen Barrett - self-styled "expert in everything."

Barrett, we know, along with his website, was 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."

Barrett's Funding - TOP SECRET...

Barrett was cornered in a Federal case in the State of Oregon not long ago, and asked about his income. He testified that over the past two years he made a TOTAL of $54,000.

How then does he afford to carry on fourteen (14) separate legal actions at one time?

If each legal action cost him $100,000, that would come to 1.4 million dollars ($1,400,000).

How do you squeeze 1.4 million out of a $54,000 total income?

Good question...

Date of experience: October 11, 2014
Virginia
1 review
1 helpful vote

Mot much
June 13, 2013

Mot much

Date of experience: June 13, 2013
Germany
1 review
16 helpful votes

This site claims poisons to the healthy
December 18, 2012

This site claims poisons to the healthy

Date of experience: December 18, 2012
35 reviews
137 helpful votes

The medical truth behind diets, anti-aging medicine,...
April 13, 2008

The medical truth behind diets, anti-aging medicine, chiropractors, alternative medice and quacks. - Anyone who has tried diet pills, chiropractors, or even skin care products should read this site. This is the attempt of a single physician and his team to educate the public about what is "real" evidence based medicine and what is "quackery".

I found some interesting "quacks" that really seem mainstream. A good example is Dr. Perricone, read how they believe he is a quack just getting rich:
http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/perricone.html

How chirpractors are causing strokes and not reporting them;
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirostroke.html

The Vitamin C myth;
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pauling.html

This site is great reading for anyone who is interested in healthcare and wants to know the real evidence behind all the claims that celebrity doctors make to sell their products and services.

Date of experience: April 13, 2008
Loading...
7 reviews for Quackwatch are not recommended