Barrett also is against homeopathy and accupuncture!
Guys...he's against ANYTHING alternative--not just products like Juice Plus.
I found Pam Popper’s take on this. FYI, she runs The Wellness Forum (www.wellnessforum.com)
Dear Dr. Pam:
Who is Dr. Stephen Barrett and why does he hate alternative medicine so much?
Stephen Barrett is a non-practicing, non-licensed psychiatrist who maintains a web site that provides the public with his opinions about why alternative medicine and alternative practitioners are not effective. There is no real research to support his views, and he has lost several court cases recently based on his inability to support his positions. He does not disclose much about his own background or the source of the funding for his operations. In addition to his web site, he has appeared as an expert witness in several court cases against practitioners, and has filed several actions of his own on behalf of his organization, The National Council Against Health Fraud.
His stance is that almost everything but traditional western medicine is ineffective for the treatment of disease. These are a few of the people and practices that Dr. Barrett thinks are ineffective and/or incompetent:
Dr. Bernie Siegel, M.D.
Although traditional medicine has used Barrett and his information in an attempt to discredit alternative practice and natural alternatives to pharmaceutical drugs, the tide seems to be turning against Dr. Barrett.
Barrett and his organization, the National Council Against Health Fraud, filed a lawsuit against King Bio Pharmaceuticals, makers of homeopathic remedies, alleging that their products were ineffective and unsafe. The judge in the case ruled against Barrett and these are excerpts from the judge's opinion dismissing it:
Barrett lacks sufficient qualifications to be an expert in this field
He is not a lawyer, but has taken several correspondence courses in law, which does not qualify him as a legal expert
There was no real focus to his testimony with respect to any of the issues in this case
Little weight should be given to Barrett's testimony, as he is a long-time board member of the plaintiff and collects large fees for being a witness from the plaintiff. This presents a conflict of interest in that he has a direct financial interest in the outcome of this litigation - a positive outcome would be the basis for other suits of this type, which would require his services as an expert witness.
The case was appealed and King Bio prevailed again on appeal.
The Court of appeals found that Barrett "presented no evidence that King Bio's products were not safe and effective, relying instead on a general attack on homeopathy, made by witnesses who had no knowledge of or experience with King Bio's products and who were found to be biased and unworthy of credibility."
In another action, Stephen Barrett filed an action against Darlene Sherrell, a researcher who maintains a web site about the dangers of fluoridation in the water. Her information includes references to Barrett and his long-time stance that there is no danger resulting from fluoridating water. Her comments about him were less than kind.
Barrett filed a lawsuit against Sherrell for $100,000 in damages, stating that her statements about him were untrue. At the trial, Barrett could produce no studies demonstrating the safety of fluoridation and presented only himself and one other witness and no research to document his claim. The case was dismissed.
Century Press has filed a $10 million lawsuit against Barrett for filing frivolous lawsuits against some of the authors they publish.
A judge in Oakland California threw out a lawsuit filed by Stephen Barrett, Terry Polevoy and Christopher Grell against Ilena Rosenthal. The judge also ordered that Barrett et al pay Rosenthal's legal fees and expenses, stating that the plaintiffs had no evidence of wrongdoing and no evidence against Rosenthal when they filed their case. This decision was based on the California Strategic Lawsuits Against Participation statute, which seeks to prevent lawsuits that are "brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of free speech and petition for redress of grievances."
In response to recent losses in court, Barrett dropped his lawsuit against Joseph Mercola, an alternative doctor who Barrett rails against in his writings. Dr. Mercola had published information on his web site about Barrett, and Barrett alleged that this information was responsible for damage to his reputation.
Dr. Barrett's days as an "expert" are, in my opinion, numbered. People are starting to fight back using the court system and they are winning. This has cooled his propensity to get involved in some cases, and he has tempered his comments a great deal so as to avoid more lawsuits.
Stephen Barrett Gets What He Deserves
One of the biggest enemies of progress in medicine is Dr. Stephen Barrett, who operates numerous websites proclaiming that almost any form of treatment outside traditional medicine offered by medical doctors is quackery. Barrett has devoted his life to trying to discredit complementary and alternative medicine. His definition of alternative medicine is quite broad and includes many things considered mainstream by most, including chiropractic.
Barrett's reign of terror is coming to an end. The most recent chapter in the story is that on October 13, 2005, Pennsylvania Judge Brian Johnson threw out Barrett's defamation lawsuit against Dr. Ted Koren. Barrett's lawsuit sought damages against Koren and his company for statements he made in his newsletter about Barrett in 2001. Koren reported, among other things, that Barrett was de-licensed and in trouble due to a $10 million lawsuit. Koren stated that his comments were true.
Judge Johnson concluded after hearing the case that there was insufficient evidence to support Barrett's claim and directed the verdict before the case was given to the jury to decide.
For years, Barrett has held himself out as a medical expert on quackery and fraud in health care. In addition to appearing as an expert witness in numerous trials, he has been quoted in magazine articles and made several television appearances. He also has been busy filing lawsuits against those he deems to be quacks.
According to information in Koren's newsletter, Barrett has not been a licensed physician since the early 1990's. He was the subject of a $10 million lawsuit under the RICO statue that has since been withdrawn.
During the trial, Barrett admitted that he was not a Board Certified psychiatrist because he failed the certification exam. He also acknowledged that he had no legal training, even though he holds himself out as a legal expert.
Also at trial it was revealed that Barrett had filed similar defamation lawsuits against close to 40 people and did not win a single one at trial. He conceded that he had ties to the American Medical Association, the Federal trade Commission, and the FDA.
I do not often revel in other people's misfortunes, but this person has caused so much misfortune for others that it is hard not to be happy about what is happening to him now. What goes around comes around, and this guy is finally getting what he deserves.
For more information on the misfortunes of Dr. Stephen Barrett, visit the newsletter archives section of our website at www.wellnessforum.com
. You'll find another article under "Editorials" in 2004.