Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:39, 31 March 2019

Quackwatch

Available in	English, French, Portuguese
Editor	Stephen Barrett
URL	Template:Lang-en Template:Lang-fr Template:Lang-pt
Commercial	No
Registration	No
Launched	1996
Current status	Active
OCLC number	855159830

Quackwatch is a United States-based website, self-described as a "network of people" founded by Stephen Barrett, which aims to "combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct" and to focus on "quackery-related information that is difficult or impossible to get elsewhere". Since 1996 it has operated the alternative medicine watchdog website quackwatch.org, which advises the public on unproven or ineffective alternative medicine remedies. The site contains articles and other information criticizing many forms of alternative medicine.

Quackwatch cites peer-reviewed journal articles and has received several awards. The site has been developed with the assistance of a worldwide network of volunteers and expert advisors. It has received positive recognition and recommendations from mainstream organizations and sources. It has been recognized in the media, which cite quackwatch.org as a practical source for online consumer information. The success of Quackwatch has generated the creation of additional affiliated websites; as of 2019 there were 21 of them.

History

Quackwatch

Quackwatch logo
Formation	1969 (as the LVCAHF) 1970 (incorporated) 2008 (network of people)
Founder	Stephen Barrett
Type	Unincorporated association (1969-1970) Corporation (1970-2008) Network of people (2008-present)
Purpose	"Combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct" and focus on "quackery-related information that is difficult or impossible to get elsewhere"
Location	United States
Official language	English, French, Portuguese
Chairman	Stephen Barrett
Affiliations	National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF)
Website	www.quackwatch.org
Formerly called	Lehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud (LVCAHF; 1969-1997) Quackwatch, Inc. (1997-2008)

Barrett founded the Lehigh Valley Committee Against Health Fraud (LVCAHF) in 1969, and it was incorporated in the state of Pennsylvania in 1970. In 1996, the corporation began the website quackwatch.org, and the organization itself was renamed Quackwatch, Inc. in 1997. The Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation was dissolved after Barrett moved to North Carolina in 2008, but the network's activities continue. Quackwatch is closely affiliated with the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), of which it was a co-founder.

Mission and scope

Quackwatch is overseen by Barrett, its owner, with input from advisors and help from volunteers, including a number of medical professionals. In 2003, 150 scientific and technical advisors: 67 medical advisors, 12 dental advisors, 13 mental health advisors, 16 nutrition and food science advisors, 3 podiatry advisors, 8 veterinary advisors, and 33 other "scientific and technical advisors" were listed by Quackwatch. Since that time, many more have volunteered, but advisor names are no longer listed.

Quackwatch describes its mission as follows:

... investigating questionable claims, answering inquiries about products and services, advising quackery victims, distributing reliable publications, debunking pseudoscientific claims, reporting illegal marketing, improving the quality of health information on the internet, assisting or generating consumer-protection lawsuits, and attacking misleading advertising on the internet.

Quackwatch states that there are no salaried employees, and a total cost of operating all of Quackwatch's sites is approximately $7,000 per year. It is funded mainly by small individual donations, commissions from sales on other sites to which they refer, profits from the sale of publications, and self-funding by Barrett. The stated income is also derived from usage of sponsored links. The site focuses on combating health-related frauds, myths, fads, and fallacies that are hard to find elsewhere.

Site content

The Quackwatch website contains essays and white papers, written by Barrett and other writers, intended for the non-specialist consumer. The articles discuss health-related products, treatments, enterprises, and providers that Quackwatch deems to be misleading, fraudulent, or ineffective. Also included are links to article sources and both internal and external resources for further study.

The site is developed with the assistance from volunteers and expert advisors. Many of its articles cite peer-reviewed research and are footnoted with several links to references. A review in Running & FitNews stated the site "also provides links to hundreds of trusted health sites."

Related and subsidiary sites

Naturowatch is a subsidiary site of Quackwatch which aims to provide information about naturopathy that is "difficult or impossible to find elsewhere", and thereby functions as a skeptical guide to the topic. The site is operated by Barrett and Kimball C. Atwood IV, an anesthesiologist by profession, who has become a vocal critic of alternative medicine.

The site is available in French and Portuguese, and formerly in German, as well as via several mirrors.

Influence

Some sources that mention Stephen Barrett's Quackwatch as a useful source for consumer information include website reviews, government agencies, various journals including an article in The Lancet and some libraries.

Mention in media, books, and journals

Quackwatch has been mentioned in the media, books and various journals, as well as receiving several awards and honors. It was praised by Clint Sprott, an emeritus professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The Journal of the American Medical Association mentioned Quackwatch as one of nine "select sites that provide reliable health information and resources" in 1998. It was also listed as one of three medical sites in U.S. News & World Report's "Best of the Web" in 1999.

Sources that mention quackwatch.org as a resource for consumer information include the United States Department of Agriculture, the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, The Lancet, the Journal of Marketing Education, the Medical Journal of Australia, the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the Skeptic's Dictionary, and the Diet Channel. In addition, several nutrition associations link to Quackwatch. An article in PC World listed it as one of three websites for finding the truth about Internet rumors, and WebMD listed it as one of eight organizations to contact with questions about a product. A Washington Post review of alternative medicine websites noted that "skeptics may find Quackwatch offers better truth-squadding than the Food and Drug Administration or the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine."

The books Handbook of Nutrition and Food (2001), Low-Carb Dieting for Dummies (2003), The Arthritis Helpbook (2006), Navigating the Medical Maze: A Practical Guide (2008), and Chronic Pain For Dummies (2008) recommend Quackwatch.

Citations by journalists

Quackwatch has also been cited or mentioned by journalists in reports on therapeutic touch, Vitamin O, Almon Glenn Braswell's baldness treatments, dietary supplements, Robert Barefoot's coral calcium claims, William C. Rader's "stem cell" therapy, noni juice, shark cartilage, and infomercials. The site's opinion on a US government report on complementary medicine was mentioned in a news report in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

Recommendations and endorsements

The American Cancer Society lists Quackwatch as one of ten reputable sources of information about alternative and complementary therapies in their book Cancer Medicine, and includes it in a list of sources for information about alternative and complementary therapies in an article about on-line cancer information and support. In a long series of articles on various alternative medicine methods, it uses Quackwatch as a reference and includes criticisms of the methods.

The Health On the Net Foundation, which confers the HONcode "Code of Conduct" certification to reliable sources of health information in cyberspace, directly recommends Quackwatch. Their website also uses Quackwatch extensively as a recommended source on various health-related topics. It also advises Internet users to alert Quackwatch:

If you come across a healthcare Web site that you believe is either possibly or blatantly fraudulent and does NOT display the HONcode, please alert Quackwatch. Of course, if such a site DOES display the HONcode, alert us immediately.

In a 2007 feasibility study on a method for identifying web pages that make unproven claims, the authors wrote:

Our gold standard relied on selected unproven cancer treatments identified by experts at http://www.quackwatch.org.... By using unproven treatments identified by an oversight organization, we capitalized on an existing high quality review.

Site reviews

Writing in the trade-journal The Consultant Pharmacist in 1999, pharmacist Bao-Anh Nguyen-Khoa characterized Quackwatch as "relevant for both consumers and professionals", and noted that some of its articles would be of interest to pharmacists. Nguyen-Khoa remarked that the "site makes an effort to cross-reference keywords with other articles and link its citations to the Medline abstract from the National Library of Medicine". Nguyen-Khoa said that the presence of so many articles written by Barrett left one with a sense of a lack of fair balance, but the site was taking steps to correct this: many reputable professionals had signed on to populate the site in their area of expertise. Nguyen-Khoa stated that the implementation of a peer review process would improve the site's legitimacy. According to The Consultant Pharmacist, Barrett often "inserts his strong opinions directly into sections of an article already well supported by the literature. Although entertaining, this direct commentary may be viewed by some as less than professional medical writing and may be better reserved for its own section."

Dr. Thomas R. Eng, director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health, stated in 1999 that while "the government doesn't endorse Web sites", ..." is the only site I know of right now looking at issues of fraud and health on the Internet."

Donna Ladd, a journalist with The Village Voice, said in 1999 that Barrett relies heavily on negative research in which alternative therapies are shown to not work. Barrett said to Ladd that most positive case studies are unreliable. Barrett says that "a lot of things don't need to be tested they simply don't make any sense."

In a 2002 book, Ned Vankevitch, associate professor of communications at Trinity Western University, places Barrett in a historical tradition of anti-quackery, embracing such figures as Morris Fishbein and Abraham Flexner, which has been part of American medical culture since the early-twentieth century. Acknowledging that Quackwatch's "exposé of dangerous and fraudulent health products represents an important social and ethical response to deception and exploitation", Vankevitch criticizes Barrett for attempting to limit "medical diversity", employing "denigrating terminology", categorizing all complementary and alternative medicine as a species of medical hucksterism, failing to condemn shortcomings within conventional biomedicine, and for promoting an exclusionary model of medical scientism and health that serves hegemonic interests and does not fully address patient needs.

Waltraud Ernst, professor of the history of medicine at Oxford Brookes University, commenting on Vankevitch's observations in 2002, agrees that attempts to police the "medical cyber-market with a view to preventing fraudulent and potentially harmful practices may well be justified." She commends "Barrett's concern for unsubstantiated promotion and hype," and states that "Barrett's concern for fraudulent and potentially dangerous medical practices is important," but she sees Barrett's use of "an antiquarian term such as 'quack'" as part of a "dichotomising discourse that aims to discredit the "'old-fashioned', 'traditional', 'folksy' and heterodox by contrasting it with the 'modern', 'scientific' and orthodox." Ernst also interprets Barrett's attempt to "reject and label as 'quackery' each and every approach that is not part of science-based medicine" as one which minimizes the patient's role in the healing process and is inimical to medical pluralism.

A 2003 website review by Forbes magazine stated:

Dr. Stephen Barrett, a psychiatrist, seeks to expose unproven medical treatments and possible unsafe practices through his homegrown but well-organized site. Mostly attacking alternative medicines, homeopathy and chiropractors, the tone here can be rather harsh. However, the lists of sources of health advice to avoid, including books, specific doctors and organizations, are great for the uninformed. Barrett received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for fighting nutrition quackery in 1984. BEST: Frequently updated, but also archives of relevant articles that date back at least four years. WORST: Lists some specific doctors and organizations without explaining the reason for their selection.

A 2004 review paper in the Annals of Oncology identified Quackwatch as an outstanding complementary medicine information source for cancer patients.

Helen Pilcher, writing for Nature News in 2004, believes "Up to 55% of the Internet's 600 million users gather medical information from it. Patients with life-threatening diseases, such as cancer, often use the web to seek out alternative therapies, but with over half a million sites offering advice, the quality of that information varies greatly." Edzard Ernst says, "Good websites do exist, and the majority of those tested provided useful and reliable information. Two sites, Quackwatch and Bandolier, stood out for the quality of the information they provide.

In 2005, Wallace and Kimball described the site as "objective" in the Medical Journal of Australia.

The Good Web Guide said in 2006 that Quackwatch "is without doubt an important and useful information resource and injects a healthy dose of scepticism into reviewing popular health information", but "tends to define what is possible or true only in terms of what science has managed to 'prove' to date".

The Rough Guide To The Internet, published in 2007, says "don't buy anything until you've looked it up on Quackwatch, a good place to separate the docs from the ducks."

Journalist John MacDonald, writing for the Khaleej Times in 2009, called Quackwatch "a voice of reason on everything from the efficacy of alternative medicine to the validity of advice from best-selling diet gurus, and the various forms of medical quackery being perpetrated on gullible consumers".

The 2009 Internet Directory advised that "Have you ever read a health article or had a friend suggest a remedy that sounded too good to be true? Then check it out on Quackwatch before you shell out any money or risk your health to try it. Here you will find a skeptical friend to help you sort out what's true from what is not when it comes to your physical well-being."

The organization has often been challenged by supporters and practitioners of the various forms of alternative medicine that are criticized on the website.

See also

• Consumer protection
• Evidence-based medicine
• Medical ethics
• Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine
• Scientific skepticism
• List of topics characterized as pseudoscience

References

1. ^ Barrett, SJ (April 18, 2016). "Who Funds Quackwatch?". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
2. Barret, SJ (December 21, 2016). "Stephen Barrett, M.D., Biographical Sketch". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
3. ^ Barret, SJ (May 2, 2007). "Quackwatch Mission Statement". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
4. Baldwin, FD (July 19, 2004). "If It Quacks Like a Duck. ..." MedHunters. Archived from the original on February 6, 2008. Retrieved February 1, 2008. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
5. ^ Barret, SJ. "Quackwatch.org main page". Quackwatch. Retrieved February 12, 2007.
6. ^ Arabella Dymoke (2004). The Good Web Guide. The Good Web Guide Ltd. p. 35. ISBN 978-1-903282-46-5. Retrieved September 4, 2013. Quackwatch is without doubt an important and useful information resource and injects a healthy dose of scepticism into reviewing popular health information. Its aim is to investigate questionable claims made in some sectors of what is now a multi-million pound healthcare industry.
7. Politzer, M (September 14, 2007). "Eastern Medicine Goes West". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved September 14, 2007.
8. ^ "Awards Received by Quackwatch". Quackwatch.
9. ^ "Complementary Therapies — Evaluating CAM Information on the Internet". The Breast Cancer Review. Archived from the original on May 9, 2008. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
10. Jaroff, L (April 22, 2001). "The Man Who Loves To Bust Quacks". Time. Retrieved August 16, 2007.
11. ^ Nguyen-Khoa, Bao-Anh (July 1999). "Selected Web Site Reviews — Quackwatch.com". The Consultant Pharmacist. Archived from the original on March 18, 2009. Retrieved June 24, 2013. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
12. There are 21 other web sites affiliated with Quackwatch. "Together, these have over 4,600 pages and cover thousands of topics."
13. "NCAHF's History". Retrieved October 29, 2007.
14. Rosen, M. (October 1998). "Biography Magazine Interviews: Stephen Barrett, M.D." Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017. Original published in Biography Magazine.
15. Barrett, SJ (January 28, 2003). "Scientific and technical advisors". Quackwatch. Archived from the original on April 16, 2003. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
16. Barrett, SJ (March 20, 2011). "How to Become a Quackwatch Advisor". Quackwatch. Retrieved January 13, 2017.
17. Chris Sherman (2005). Google Power: Unleash the Full Potential of Google (1st ed.). McGraw-Hill Osborne Media. p. 268. ISBN 978-0-07-225787-8.
18. "Let's check in with the skeptics! (They're way more fun than the credulous)". Los Angeles Times. February 5, 2010.
19. "Quackwatch". FactCheckED.org. Archived from the original on September 21, 2007.
20. "Cutting through the haze of health marketing claims". Thomson Gale. Running & FitNews. September–October 2007. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
21. Atwood IV, Kimball C. (2004). "Bacteria, ulcers, and ostracism? H. pylori and the making of a myth". Skeptical Inquirer. 28 (6): 27.
22. "Naturowatch". Retrieved April 28, 2017.
23. ^ Parascandola, Mark (2008). "Alternative medicine trial suspends recruitment". Research Practitioner. 9 (6): 193.
24. Quackwatch en Français
25. Quackwatch em Português
26. Quackwatch auf Deutsch (archived)
27. ^ Forbes.com, Best of the Web website reviews: Quackwatch. Archived January 14, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
28. "Diet Channel Award Review Of Quackwatch". Retrieved September 18, 2007. Quackwatch is a very informative site which informs you about health fraud and gives you advice on many decisions.
29. U.S. News & World Report: The Best of The Web Gets Better Archived January 2, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
30. "Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health". U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). July 11, 2002. Archived from the original on June 20, 2001. Retrieved September 12, 2007. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
31. "U.S. Department of Health & Human Services". healthfinder.gov. National Health Information Center. Retrieved September 12, 2007.Quackwatch is available from their database.
32. Pray, W. S. (2006). "Ethical, Scientific, and Educational Concerns with Unproven Medications". American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 70 (6): 141. doi:10.5688/aj7006141. PMC 1803699. PMID 17332867.
33. Chonko, Lawrence B. (2004). "If it Walks Like a Duck...: Concerns about Quackery in Marketing Education". Journal of Marketing Education. 26: 4–16. doi:10.1177/0273475303257763.
34. ^ Sampson, W.; Atwood k, 4th (2005). "Propagation of the absurd: Demarcation of the absurd revisited". The Medical Journal of Australia. 183 (11–12): 580–1. PMID 16336135.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
35. Cunningham, Eleese; Marcason, Wendy (2001). "Internet Hoaxes". Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 101 (4): 460. doi:10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00117-1.
36. ^ "Click here: How to find reliable online health information and resources". JAMA. 280 (15): 1380. 1998. doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1380.
37. Larkin, Marilynn (1998). "Medical quackery squashers on the web". The Lancet. 351 (9114): 1520. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)78918-2.
38. "National Network of Libraries of Medicine". Evaluating Health Web Sites, Consumer Health Manual. National Library of Medicine. Archived from the original on October 12, 2007. Retrieved September 12, 2007. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
39. "VCU Libraries". Complementary and Alternative Medicine Resource Guide — Fraud and Quackery Resources. Virginia Commonwealth University. Archived from the original on May 24, 2008. Retrieved September 12, 2007. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
40. "Rutgers University Libraries". Finding What You Want on the Web: A Guide. Rutgers University Libraries. Retrieved September 12, 2007.
41. "USC Libraries — Electronic Resources — Quackwatch". University of Southern California. Archived from the original on December 15, 2012. Retrieved September 12, 2007. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
42. "Medical Center Library". University of Kentucky Libraries. Archived from the original on November 3, 2007. Retrieved September 12, 2007. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
43. Sprott's Spots Award Winners
44. "U.S. News & World Report: The Best of The Web Gets Better". US News. November 7, 1999. Archived from the original on May 24, 2006. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
45. Sources that mention quackwatch.org as a resource for consumer information:
    • "Fraud and Nutrition Misinformation". Food and Nutrition Information Center. United States Department of Agriculture. Retrieved March 31, 2019.
    • Pray, W. S. (2006). "Ethical, Scientific, and Educational Concerns with Unproven Medications". American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 70 (6): 141. doi:10.5688/aj7006141. PMC 1803699. PMID 17332867. Quackwatch is named as a reliable source together with Skeptical Inquirer, specifically for pharmacy course on unproven medications and therapies.
    • Larkin, Marilynn (1998). "Medical quackery squashers on the web". The Lancet. 351 (9114): 1520. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)78918-2.. Names Quackwatch as the premier site for exposing purveyors of health frauds, myths, and fads.
    • Chonko, Lawrence B. (2004). "If it Walks Like a Duck...: Concerns about Quackery in Marketing Education". Journal of Marketing Education. 26: 4–16. doi:10.1177/0273475303257763. Chonko states "Many of the thoughts on which this article is based are adapted from materials found on this site." (referring to Quackwatch)
    • Sampson, W.; Atwood k, 4th (2005). "Propagation of the absurd: Demarcation of the absurd revisited". The Medical Journal of Australia. 183 (11–12): 580–1. PMID 16336135.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link). Sampson states that "CAM source information tends to exclude well known critical and objective web pages such as those found on Quackwatch (www.quackwatch.org)."
    • Cunningham, Eleese; Marcason, Wendy (2001). "Internet Hoaxes". Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 101 (4): 460. doi:10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00117-1.
    • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: "U.S. Department of Health & Human Services". healthfinder.gov. National Health Information Center. Retrieved September 12, 2007.Quackwatch is available from their database.
    • U.S. National Institutes of Health: Health Quackery: Spotting Health Scams Archived September 15, 2009, at WebCite - U.S. National Institutes of Health
    • Carroll, Robert Todd (January 29, 2008). ""alternative" health practice". Skeptic's Dictionary. Retrieved February 2, 2008.
    • Diet Channel: "Diet Channel Award Review Of Quackwatch". Diet Channel. Retrieved September 18, 2007. Quackwatch is a very informative site which informs you about health fraud and gives you advice on many decisions.
46. "Research". Texas Dietetic Association. November 6, 2007. Archived from the original on December 22, 2007. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
     •"Nutrition Resources". Illinois Dietetic Association. 2005. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
     •"Links". Greater New York Dietetic Association. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
     •"Nutrition Links". Maryland Dietetic Association. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
     •"Professional Resources — Health Quackery". American Dietetic Association. Diabetes Care and Education. 2007. Retrieved February 1, 2008.
47. Robert Luhn, "Best Free Stuff on the Web," PC World June 30, 2003 Archived September 18, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
48. Health Quackery: Spotting Health Scams -- WebMD Public Information from the National Institutes of Health" WebMD
49. Leslie Walker. Alternative Medicine Sites. Washington Post, March 26, 1999
50. Carolyn D. Berdanier (2001). "More Ploys That Can Fool You". In Elaine B. Feldman; William P. Flatt; Sachiko T. St. Jeor (eds.). Handbook of Nutrition and Food (1st ed.). CRC Press. p. 1506. ISBN 978-0-8493-2705-6.
51. Katherine B. Chauncey (2003). Low-Carb Dieting For Dummies. For Dummies. p. 292. ISBN 978-0-7645-2566-7.
52. Kate Lorig; James Fries (2006). The Arthritis Helpbook. Da Capo Press. p. 335. ISBN 978-0-7382-1070-4.
53. Steven L. Brown (2008). "How Can I Tell If The Evidence Is Any Good?". Navigating the Medical Maze: A Practical Guide (2nd ed.). Brazos Press. p. 191. ISBN 978-1-58743-207-1.
54. "Ten or So Web Sources for People with Chronic Pain". Chronic Pain For Dummies. For Dummies. 2008. p. 327. ISBN 978-0-471-75140-3.
55. Journalist mentions of Quackwatch criticisms of:
    • Therapeutic touch: Kolata, Gina (April 1, 1998). A Child's Paper Poses a Medical Challenge. The New York Times
    • Vitamin O: Siwolop, Sana (January 7, 2001). Back Pain? Arthritis? Step Right Up to the Mouse. The New York Times
    • Almon Glenn Braswell's baldness treatments: Eichenwald, Kurt and Michael Moss (February 6, 2001), Pardon for Subject of Inquiry Worries Prosecutors. The New York Times
    • Almon Glenn Braswell: Associated Press (September 13, 2004). Man Once Pardoned By Clinton Again Faces Prison.
    • Almon Glenn Braswell: Another Dubious Pardon Archived March 24, 2012, at the Wayback Machine - U.S. News & World Report
    • Dietary supplements: Fessenden, Ford with Christopher Drew (March 31, 2000). Bottom Line in Mind, Doctors Sell Ephedra. The New York Times
    • Robert Barefoot's coral calcium claims: Leon Jaroff, (March 14, 2003), Coral Calcium: A Barefoot Scam, Time magazine
    • William C. Rader's "stem cell" therapy: Brian Vastag (September 2, 2008), Injections of Hope: Doctors Promote Offshore Stem Cell Shots, but Some Patients Cry Foul Washington Post
    • Noni juice: Noni Juice Might Lower Smokers' Cholesterol. Forbes magazine
    • Shark cartilage: Leon Jaroff, (September 29, 2004), Medical Sharks, Time magazine
    • Infomercials: Damon Darlin, (April 8, 2006), Words to Live By in Infomercial World: Caveat Emptor, The New York Times
56. Reynolds, T. (2002). "White House Report on Alternative Medicine Draws Criticism". Cancerspectrum Knowledge Environment. 94 (9): 646–648. doi:10.1093/jnci/94.9.646.
57. Reputable Sources of Information about Alternative and Complementary Therapies - American Cancer Society
58. Cancer Information & Support Available Online Archived February 11, 2009, at the Wayback Machine - American Cancer Society. Archived version at Internet Archive, Aug. 4, 2008. Accessed Sept. 4, 2013
59. A list of articles on many forms of alternative medicine on the American Cancer Society website that use Quackwatch as a source. Oxygen Therapy, "Archived copy". Archived from the original on June 28, 2010. Retrieved July 26, 2016. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) Metabolic Therapy, Kirlian Photography, Crystals, Psychic Surgery, Folic Acid, Craniosacral Therapy, Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Questionable Practices In Tijuana, Breathwork, Moxibustion, Faith Healing, Cancer Salves, Qigong, Osteopathy, Imagery, Qigong, Magnetic Therapy.
60. Can you give some examples of charlatans and fraud on the health Internet? Health On the Net Foundation
61. Search of Health On the Net Foundation website for use of Quackwatch
62. How to be a vigilant user. Health On the Net Foundation
63. Aphinyanaphongs, Y.; Aliferis, C. (2007). "Text categorization models for identifying unproven cancer treatments on the web" (PDF). Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 129 (Pt 2): 968–72. PMID 17911859.
64. ^ Ladd, Donna (June 22, 1999). "Dr. Who? Diagnosing Medical Fraud May Require a Second Opinion". The Village Voice. Retrieved August 5, 2017.
65. "Ned Vankevitch". Trinity Western University. Archived from the original on September 27, 2012. Retrieved March 4, 2013. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
66. Vankevitch, Ned (2002). "Limiting Pluralism". In Ernst, Waltraud (ed.). Plural medicine, tradition and modernity, 1800-2000. New York: Routledge. pp. 219–244. ISBN 978-0-415-23122-0. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)
67. "Waltraud Ernst". Oxford Brookes University. Retrieved May 8, 2012.
68. Ernst, Waltraud (2002). "Plural medicine, tradition and modernity". In Ernst, Waltraud (ed.). Plural medicine, tradition and modernity, 1800-2000. New York: Routledge. pp. 1–18. ISBN 978-0-415-23122-0. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)
69. Schmidt, K. (2004). "Assessing websites on complementary and alternative medicine for cancer". Annals of Oncology. 15 (5): 733–742. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdh174.
70. Helen Pilcher. "Unreliable websites put patients at risk - Expert in complementary medicine criticizes bogus cancer advice". BioEd Online. Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
71. The Good Web Guide. Archived November 3, 2007, at the Wayback Machine Retrieved on September 14, 2007.
72. Peter Buckley; Duncan Clark (2007). "Thing to do online". The Rough Guide To The Internet (13th ed.). Rough Guides. p. 273. ISBN 978-1-84353-839-4.
73. "The shame of SHAM". Khaleej Times. February 13, 2009. Retrieved May 1, 2009.
74. Vince Averello; Mikal E. Belicove; Nancy Conner; Adrienne Crew; Sherry Kinkoph Gunter; Faithe Wempen (2008). The 2009 Internet Directory: Web 2.0 Edition (1st ed.). Que. p. 236. ISBN 978-0-7897-3816-5.
75. Hufford, David J. (2003). "Evaluating Complementary and Alternative Medicine: The Limits of Science and of Scientists". The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 31 (2): 198–212. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00081.x.. Hufford's symposium presentation was the counterpoint for another doctor's presentation, which argued that "alternative medicine" is not medicine at all. See Schneiderman, Lawrence J. (2003). "The (Alternative) Medicalization of Life". The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 31 (2): 191–197. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00080.x.

Further reading

• Paranormal Claims: A Critical Analysis, 2007, edited by Bryan Farha, University Press of America, ISBN 978-0-7618-3772-5. Three of the eighteen chapters are reprints of Quackwatch articles.

External links

• Official website

• Skeptic organizations in the United States
• Medical websites
• Scientific skepticism media