In particular regards to Lyme disease. This websites opinion shows strong bias against people experiencing advanced chronic lyme infection symptoms that test negative to the western blot, pcr and erisa tests. Johs Hopkins study showed none of these test were accurate enough to rule out lyme disease. And in combination were still not near 100% accurate. These were confirmed cases. Motive for the insensitive position can probably be compared to the clinical treatment of Polio before a NUN used heat therapy. She was debunked by a medical community that considers their opinion the only one that counts. Considering the amount of money these people make, perhaps their own investment returns would be better with little or no treatment protocols being paid for? I don't like this site at least in their stand on Lyme disease. And that discolors any other opinion they have for me.
One of the worst sites to receive your information.
This is a heavily biased website attacking anyone who is investigating alternative medicine. The owners are also on the board of directors for other organisations that receive direct funding from Big Pharma and Chemical companies. They also promote the use of Sodium Fluoride in drinking water, even though the Nazis used it in their concentration camps to keep prisoners docile.
"Dr" Barrett was also exposed in a lawsuit where he had to admit he had no certificate to give Psychiatric advice even though he had done so to unsuspecting people. He has also launched 40 lawsuits against what he calls ' quacks ' and he has not won a single case. There are far better sites out there and openly ask questions about alternative medicine rather than do what quackwatch does which is out right attack and dismiss with no proof.
Over 100,000 people die from the drugs they promote, can anyone provide a number close or more than that from people who have died using natural remedies to fight their illness?
The authors of this website are all insane. The just take some garbage paper and then feel scientific. Science? Bull $#*!
Quackwatch has totally FALSE information on their website. They have a webpage called Index to "Fad" Diagnoses, which claims that Chronic inflammatory Response Syndrome (CIRS) (aka biotoxin illness, aka mycotoxin illness) is not real. I have mycotoxin illness and it is REAL. I I tested positive on VCStest.com as well as positive for Ochratoxin A on the MycoTox Profile test through Great Plains Laboratory. Finally, I have an answer to all my joint pain, muscle pain, memory loss, etc. It is very frustrating when doctors tell you that there is nothing wrong, but yet you know there is something wrong. Barrett is a former psychiatrist, and is in no way qualified to claim that Chronic inflammatory response syndrome (CIRS) (aka biotoxin illness, aka mycotoxin illness) is not real. It IS REAL. Stop spreading false information on Quackwatch.
Notice that you can't contact anyone at the quackwatch.com website? You have to ask why it exists - but the answer is all too obvious. Big Pharma and too many medicos are feeling threatened by medicine that practices PREVENTION as well as TRUE HEALING. So they need websites like this to scare the mediocrity into thinking that ONLY big pharma and the bullying pocket lining medicos can treat them properly. Sadly that's why health insurance costs so much - we're all paying for the slashing, poisoning and burning all of which costs massive $'s and ensures the patients remain ill so they'll need on going so called therapies. It's not called "health care" called the SICKNESS INDUSTRY.
This site wants you to waste your money on pharmaceuticals with terrible side effects and people who like to make you more ill.
Misleading, biased, and part of the internet circus of self-proclaimed "experts". Who will call to question these sorts of quacky websites?
Quackwatch appears to be nothing more than a rag that promotes the GMO's, toxic chemicals & big pharma.
Dr. Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch Exposed In Court Cases
At trial, under a heated cross-examination by Negrete, Barrett conceded that he was not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist because he had failed the certification exam.
This was a major revelation since Barrett had provided supposed expert testimony as a psychiatrist and had testified in numerous court cases. Barrett also had said that he was a legal expert even though he had no formal legal training.
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).
Court Case: Stephen Barrett, M. D. vs. Tedd Koren, D. C. and Koren Publications, Inc.
Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County for the State of Pennsylvania
Court Case No.: 2002-C-1837
This article will explain what he is...
http://anhinternational.org/2008/01/18/quackbuster-stephen-barrett-md-loses-appeal-and-leaves-home-town/
I always get a good read at this site. I enjoy reading what they write.
Answer: God only knows, but they seem to have a narrow limited field of knowledge and also seem out of date.
Answer: I have a friend who had MS but now doesn't. He attributes Mannatech with and Ambratose with healing him. Depends what your problem is... as different problems require different solutions.
Answer: Presumably the documentary series? It's probably more of a spectrum... some of what the treatments they talk about probably work very well... and some not as well. Many of the treatments they highlight are being used and promoted by doctors, scientists and specialists all over the world. These people are all putting their personal credibility on the line by promoting these things... so they must believe they work... and they're much better positioned to judge the efficacy of a treatment than a member of the general public. Not all treatments are useful for all patients... so it's unreasonable to expect 100% success rates with anything? Cancer cure rates are quite low when using chemotherapy or radiotherapy... which is why targeted cancer therapies are so attractive. New therapies only have to be equally effective or slightly better to be a better option? The big advantage of most targeted cancer therapies is that they are usually not toxic. If you are inclined to try an alternative therapy make sure you match the proposed therapy to your cancer and check if there is some research validation? Some of these therapies are in clinical trials... which is generally a good sign. Ideally you want some way to rank the effectiveness of the proposed therapy compared to other therapies. That's probably the hardest thing to establish... as success rates are often quite hard to obtain. Disappointingly conventional treatments also rarely provide success rates... or side effects making it very hard to make an informed choice.:-)
Answer: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jul/15/herbalife-ftc-fine-200-million-pyramid-scheme-label Not a lot of people make money selling herbalife.:-)
Quackwatch has a rating of 2.1 stars from 59 reviews, indicating that most customers are generally dissatisfied with their purchases. Reviewers dissatisfied with Quackwatch most frequently mention big pharma, pharmaceutical industry and side effects. Quackwatch ranks 90th among Health Information sites.