With all the "Relay For Life" business that's going on I thought it
might be a good time to remind you all there's another side to that
story. It's available many places, but here's just one. :-)

Al

http://www.thehealthcrusader.com/pgs..._21_1827.shtml

You're right. The "Relay for Death" doesn't get nearly enough press.

-- Stinger
"Al Patrick" wrote in message
...
With all the "Relay For Life" business that's going on I thought it
might be a good time to remind you all there's another side to that
story. It's available many places, but here's just one. :-)

Al


http://www.thehealthcrusader.com/pgs..._21_1827.shtml




You're right. The "Relay for Death" doesn't get nearly enough press, does
it?

-- Stinger

Don't know about other parts of the country but around here they are
pretty good at promoting cross dressing and PURPLE commodes. The
churches, of all places, seem to be really getting behind the cross
dressing bit. Womanless beauty contests or something like that. Seems
a bit "strange" either way!

I've heard, over the radio, what's behind the purple commode. I'd like
someone to post the "rules" for it. Something like: $10 or $15 to get
it moved once it's on your property. About $5 to recommend it go to a
certain party's property. $20 for "insurance" to guarantee it doesn't
come to your property.

Al

======================

Stinger wrote:

You're right. The "Relay for Death" doesn't get nearly enough press.

-- Stinger
"Al Patrick" wrote in message
...

With all the "Relay For Life" business that's going on I thought it
might be a good time to remind you all there's another side to that
story. It's available many places, but here's just one. :-)

Al



http://www.thehealthcrusader.com/pgs..._21_1827.shtml




You're right. The "Relay for Death" doesn't get nearly enough press, does
it?

-- Stinger

http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...harmquack.html

How Quackery Harms Cancer Patients

William T. Jarvis, Ph.D.
There is an old saying: "The highwayman demands 'your money OR your life,' but
quacks demand 'your money AND your life!'" This statement is particularly true
when it comes to dubious cancer treatment. The harm done by quackery may be
categorized as economic, direct, indirect, psychological and societal.

Economic Harm

The amount of money wasted on cancer quackery is unknown but probably exceeds
one billion dollars per year -- the amount spent for cancer research. The
financial impact upon individuals and families can be catastrophic if they fall
into the trap of heroically "leaving no stone unturned" in their quest for a
remedy in hopeless cases. Some quacks are quite willing to bleed them dry
financially. I know of cases in which survivors were deprived of the family's
savings, were left with a large mortgage on a previously paid-for home, or even
lost their home.

Direct Harm

Dubious therapies can cause death, serious injury, unnecessary suffering, and
disfigurement. Cyanide poisoning from ingesting apricot pits or laetrile,
Salmonella dublin infection from drinking raw milk, electrolyte imbalance
caused by coffee enemas, internal bleeding from deep body massage, and brain
damage from whole-body hyperthermia have all caused needless death of cancer
patients. At clinics providing substandard care, intravenous infusions of
various concoctions have caused septicemia and malnutrition. And the
application of escharotics (corrosive chemicals) to the skin of cancer patients
has resulted in needless disfigurement.

Ruth Conrad, an Idaho woman, had a horrible experience as a result of
consulting one of the state's many unlicensed naturopaths. While seeking
treatment for a sore shoulder, she also complained of a bump on her nose. The
naturopath stated that it was cancer and gave her a black herbal salve to apply
directly. Within a few days, her face became very painful and she developed red
streaks that ran down her cheeks. Her worried phone call to the naturopath
brought the explanation that the presence of the lines was a good sign because
they "resemble a crab, and cancer is a crab." He also advised her to apply more
of the black salve. Within a week, a large part of her face, including her
nose, sloughed off. It took three years and 17 plastic surgical operations to
reconstruct her face.

Mrs. Conrad's experience illustrates another aspect of cancer quackery -- fake
diagnosis. She never had cancer in the first place. In addition to suffering
direct harm from a caustic treatment, she also suffered the mental anguish of
thinking she had a dread disease.

Indirect Harm

Some of the worst quackery-related tragedies result from delay or failure to
act. An example of a needless death involved an Oregon man who treated his
basal cell carcinoma of the mouth with a mail-order remedy for 15 years. What
makes this case especially tragic is that since this type of cancer almost
never metastasizes, he had many years in which to correct his folly. Although
badly disfigured by the growing tumor, he continued self-treatment.

Overreliance upon dietary treatment is a common means by which indirect harm
kills cancer sufferers. The appeal of dietary remedies is connected to folk
medicine. Nearly every culture, beginning with the ancient Egyptians, has
believed in the half-truth "you are what you eat." This implies that diseases
are caused by faulty diet and, conversely, can be cured by eating the "right"
foods. Publicity given to epidemiological speculations about "cancer-prevention
diets" encourages the belief that diet holds great promise for both prevention
and treatment of cancer. The fact is that, although nutrient deficiencies can
cause some diseases and dietary excesses can cause or aggravate several others,
the vast majority of diseases do not have a nutritional cause.

One food-as-medicine approach that is popular today is macrobiotics, which
received widespread publicity when Anthony Sattilaro, M.D., a Philadelphia
physician, concluded that the diet had helped him overcome prostatic cancer.
National magazine articles, a book and television appearances spread the belief
that macrobiotics had cured his cancer. Although Sattilaro had also undergone
conventional therapy, macrobiotics seemed to fulfill some emotional need unmet
by regular therapy. He eventually died of his disease, but this fact was not
mentioned in the macrobiotic press.

The macrobiotic diet bears some resemblance to currently recommended
cancer-prevention diets. However, because of its rigidity, low-fat content,
negligible use of simple sugars, and exclusive reliance upon vegetable rather
than animal protein, it is a poor one for cancer patients undergoing radiation
or chemotherapy. These patients need a high-quality, nutrient-dense diet
because the ability of their intestine to absorb nutrients is impaired.

"Natural" treatments that can delay proper care are often advocated by
well-meaning friends and relatives who are culturally conditioned to believe in
their value. This thinking is deeply rooted in many cultures and is as old as
written records themselves. The Book of Job, said to be the oldest in the
Bible, is a drama aimed at dispelling the notion that victims are responsible
for their own diseases. Job is a good man who suffers terribly. His friends
plead with him to confess his wrongdoings, but he is innocent. The message is
clearly that the presence of disease does not mean the sufferer is a sinful
person. However, moralistic approaches that blamed victims for their diseases
were prevalent until Pasteur proved the existence of germs that can strike the
innocent and immoral alike.

Pasteur's discovery was made more than a century ago. But even today, many
people perceive cancer as a modern-day "leprosy" and consider it "a curse by
God." The notion of a cancer-prone personality -- capable of self-healing with
psychological gymnastics that include visualization, laughter and excessive
optimism -- is unproven and may represent nothing more than elaboration of the
old folklore. Unfortunately, cancer sufferers who believe this and fail to cure
themselves may wind up with the added psychological burden of thinking that for
some mysterious reason, they really don't want to be cured.

The frequency of needless or premature death due to quackery is difficult to
ascertain. A survey of 166 California oncologists done for the National Council
Against Health Fraud in 1980 found 12 probable needless deaths and 14 other
adversely affected patients. Due to a low (7%) response rate, a second survey
of 65 randomly selected cancer specialists who agreed by telephone to
participate was done in 1981. Thirty-three respondents reported 7 probable
needless deaths, 6 premature deaths, and 14 cases of hopeless prognosis due to
diversion by quackery. These numbers are conservative because several doctors
who stated they had cases failed to reply, and others withheld reports because
of the difficulty of knowing whether certain patients would have survived
longer without quackery.

Psychological Harm

In addition to the unjustified guilt referred to above, cancer patients and
their loved ones can be psychologically harmed in several other ways.

Misplaced trust. In nearly every case of harm I have examined, misplaced trust
either preceded the use of a directly harmful procedure or prevented the
patient from obtaining effective care. The deadly message promoted by cancer
quackery is that "orthodoxy cannot be trusted." Undermining trust in the
research and therapeutic establishment, the government regulators, and the
American Cancer Society is crucial to the promotion of so-called "alternative"
approaches to cancer management.

A case I investigated from Oregon provides insight into the thinking and
actions of "true believers." A health food store owner discovered a lump in her
breast. After diagnosing it as cancer, she boasted to her health food friends
that she was "going to prove once and for all that diet cure works!"
Unfortunately, although at least 80% of self-discovered breast lumps are
benign, hers was cancerous.

Her first attempt at self-treatment was to apply the methods in the book The
Grape Cure. This book claims that grapes have "powerful" and "antiseptic
properties" to help "eliminate evil while building new tissues." According to
the book, "cleansing" and "purification" are accomplished by eating nothing but
grapes and grape juice until one stops losing weight. In the second stage,
fresh fruits, tomatoes and sour milk may be added to the grape diet. The third
stage introduces a wider variety of raw foods, and the fourth stage a " mixed
diet." After many months, it became apparent that the grape cure had not
prevented the tumor from growing.

Next, she turned to a popular herbalist in her community who treated her with
herbal remedies for about six months without avail. She then went to Mexico for
laetrile. Several weeks later, she asked her husband to take her home because
laetrile, too, had failed. Her husband looked after her for more than a year
before the lesion became so gross and her pain so unbearable that she asked to
be taken to a doctor for the first time. She died five days later.

The most shocking part of the story is that she went to her grave still
believing that she had done the right thing. Her husband, who provided me with
the details of the tragedy, also continued to believe in the value of diet
cure. He stated that he knows where she went wrong, and that if he gets cancer,
will use the dietary treatment correctly. He continued to operate the
health-food store, send people to the herbalist, and advocate laetrile.

Conversion to deviance. Cancer patients and/or loved ones who accompany them to
the cancer treatment underworld may become converted to antisocial behavior.
Often these people are encouraged to steer other cancer patients to the clinics
or urged to smuggle drugs across the border that cannot be legally marketed in
the United States. Even when the cancer patient dies, the loved ones may
continue to believe that the treatment is effective. Failures are commonly
blamed upon not getting treatment in time or to negative effects of
conventional treatment. Having met others who claim they were cured may cause
loved ones to determine to use it exclusively should cancer strike them. This
sets the stage for a future tragedy.

Untrained people should not be expected to realize that those who claim to have
been cured either may not have had cancer in the first place, may have been
successfully treated by conventional methods but not converted to believe in
them, or may still simply be surviving with their disease. The fact that some
cancers can take a long time to run their course or produce no symptoms for a
long period of time has misled many patients into believing that a quack remedy
had cured them.

Stealing time. By offering false hope, quackery steals the most precious thing
terminal cancer patients have -- the best use of what little time that they
have left. The notion that terminal patients have nothing to lose by turning to
quackery is dead wrong. Most people faced with a life-threatening disease can
make a reasonable psychological adjustment. Those who face reality experience
five classical stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
Those who accept their fate are in the best position to use their remaining
time wisely.

In the ABC-TV special "Who Will Love My Children" Ann Margret played an
impoverished Iowa mother with cancer who spent her last few months finding
homes for her ten children. I know of two similar cases. Quacks discourage
people from making the difficult adjustment by reinforcing their denial. Such
people usually die unprepared because preparation for death is an admission of
failure.

Distortion of perspective. Without proper perspective, people can be made to
"strain out gnats and swallow camels." Unable to tell good from bad, some
people shun "toxic" chemotherapy, but swallow cyanide (laetrile). Unable to
gauge how good a generally good thing is, they will overdose on vitamins,
essential minerals, or dietary fiber.

Harm to Society

Quackery can also harm our democratic society when large numbers of people hold
wrong beliefs about the nature of cancer and the best way to deal with it. The
results can be far-reaching. Limited resources can be wasted if funds are used
to follow leads based on data that are inadequate or faked. The public is
giving large amounts of money in response to mass mailings by fund-raisers who
extol dietary measures for preventing and treating cancer. When misinformation
based upon wishful thinking becomes popular, the mass media exacerbate the
problem with their power to spread ideas. These ideas can influence
decision-making by patients, judges, policy-makers, and legislators. During the
1970s, the very fabric of our sound consumer protection law was seriously
threatened by laetrile promoters who attempted to legalize its use.
Fortunately, although about half the states passed laws permitting its sale,
federal laws blocking interstate distribution were not changed. After the FDA
won a protracted court battle, the use of laetrile within the United States
became minimal.

Patients should be warned that when they patronize cancer quackery they face
economic exploitation, risk injury or death, place themselves beyond reach of
consumer protection laws, and help sustain quack operations that will exploit
other cancer sufferers in the future. In addition, they expose themselves and
their loved-ones to deception by some of the most persuasive con artists around
-- some of whom have criminal records. People who believe they are a match for
an experienced cancer quack would do well to recall P.T. Barnum's sage advice:
"Never try to beat a man at his own game."

What is Needed

Quackery is a society-wide public health problem. To cope with it adequately, a
more scientific approach is required. As with any other public health problem,
an epidemiologic strategy is needed to develop information on causal agents
(which people become quacks and why), host susceptibility and resistance
factors (the characteristics of people who do and do not turn to quackery), and
environmental aspects that favor or discourage the proliferation of quackery.
Vital statistics are needed on the morbidity, mortality, incidence and
prevalence of cancer quackery.

Presently, we have only isolated case reports. These are enough to indicate
that great harm is being done, but don't tell us how many people are being
harmed. I suggest that a system be developed for reporting quackery cases,
patterned after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's system in
which doctors report cases of communicable disease. This would enable us to
keep track of what is being promoted, where the "hot spots" are, and what legal
and educational efforts are needed for an effective response.

Health professionals have a duty to take action when the public is being abused
in an area in which they have special knowledge. The failure to take concerted
action against cancer quackery sends an unprofessional message. We should not
condone the "victim-blaming" ideology which says that if people are too dumb to
spot quackery on their own, they are probably too dumb to be worth saving. Nor
should we condone the attitude of law enforcement officials who feel that
quackery is "merely" a form of white collar crime" that takes money from its
victims. Through our actions, we need to convey that the exploitation of cancer
sufferers should not be tolerated by our society.

______________________________

Dr. Jarvis is Professor of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, School of
Medicine and Public Health, Loma Linda University, and President of the
National Council Against Health Fraud.

You're right. The "Relay for Death" doesn't get nearly enough press.

-- Stinger

http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...spotquack.html

Twenty-Five Ways to Spot
Quacks and Vitamin Pushers
Stephen Barrett, M.D.
Victor Herbert, M.D., J.D.

How can food quacks and other vitamin pushers be recognized? Here are 25 signs
that should arouse suspicion.

1. When Talking about Nutrients, They Tell Only Part of the Story.
Quacks tell you all the wonderful things that vitamins and minerals do in your
body and/or all the horrible things that can happen if you don't get enough.
Many claim that their products or programs offer "optimal nutritional support."
But they conveniently neglect to tell you that a balanced diet provides the
nutrients people need and that the USDA food-group system makes balancing your
diet simple.

2. They Claim That Most Americans Are Poorly Nourished.
This is an appeal to fear that is not only untrue, but ignores the fact that
the main forms of bad nourishment in the United States are obesity in the
population at large, particularly the poor, and undernourishment among the
poverty-stricken. Poor people can ill afford to waste money on unnecessary
vitamin pills. Their food money should be spent on nourishing food.

It is falsely alleged that Americans are so addicted to "junk" foods that an
adequate diet is exceptional rather than usual. While it is true that some
snack foods are mainly "naked calories" (sugars and/or fats without other
nutrients), it is not necessary for every morsel of food we eat to be loaded
with nutrients. In fact, no normal person following the U.S. Dietary Guidelines
is in any danger of vitamin deficiency.

3. They Recommend "Nutrition Insurance" for Everyone.
Most vitamin pushers suggest that everyone is in danger of deficiency and
should therefore take supplements as "insurance." Some suggest that it is
difficult to get what you need from food, while others claim that it is
impossible. Their pitch resembles that of the door-to-door huckster who states
that your perfectly good furnace is in danger of blowing up unless you replace
it with his product. Vitamin pushers will never tell you who doesn't need their
products. Their "be wary of deficiency" claims may not be limited to essential
nutrients. It can also include nonessential chemicals that nobody needs to
worry about because the body makes its own supply.

4. They Say That Most Diseases Are Due to Faulty Diet
and Can Be Treated with "Nutritional" Methods.
This simply isn't so. Consult your doctor or any recognized textbook of
medicine. They will tell you that although diet is a factor in some diseases
(most notably coronary heart disease), most diseases have little or nothing to
do with diet. Common symptoms like malaise (feeling poorly), fatigue, lack of
pep, aches (including headaches) or pains, insomnia, and similar complaints are
usually the body's reaction to emotional stress. The persistence of such
symptoms is a signal to see a doctor to be evaluated for possible physical
illness. It is not a reason to take vitamin pills.

5. They Allege That Modern Processing Methods and
Storage Remove all Nutritive Value from Our Food.
It is true that food processing can change the nutrient content of foods. But
the changes are not so drastic as the quack, who wants you to buy supplements,
would like you to believe. While some processing methods destroy some
nutrients, others add them. A balanced variety of foods will provide all the
nourishment you need.

Quacks distort and oversimplify. When they say that milling removes B-vitamins,
they don't bother to tell you that enrichment puts them back. When they tell
you that cooking destroys vitamins, they omit the fact that only a few vitamins
are sensitive to heat. Nor do they tell you that these vitamins are easily
obtained by consuming a portion of fresh uncooked fruit, vegetable, or fresh or
frozen fruit juice each day. Any claims that minerals are destroyed by
processing or cooking are pure lies. Heat does not destroy minerals.

6. They Claim That Diet Is a Major Factor in Behavior.
Food quacks relate diet not only to disease but to behavior. Some claim that
adverse reactions to additives and/or common foods cause hyperactivity in
children and even criminal behavior in adolescents and adults. These claims are
based on a combination of delusions, anecdotal evidence, and poorly designed
research.

7. They Claim That Fluoridation Is Dangerous.
Curiously, quacks are not always interested in real deficiencies. Fluoride is
necessary to build decay-resistant teeth and strong bones. The best way to
obtain adequate amounts of this important nutrient is to augment community
water supplies so their fluoride concentration is about one part fluoride for
every million parts of water. But quacks usually oppose water fluoridation, and
some advocate water filters that remove fluoride. It seems that when they
cannot profit from something, they may try to make money by opposing it.

8. They Claim That Soil Depletion and the Use of Pesticides and
"Chemical" Fertilizers Result in Food That Is Less Safe and Less Nourishing.
These claims are used to promote the sale of so-called "organically grown"
foods. If an essential nutrient is missing from the soil, a plant simply
doesn't grow. Chemical fertilizers counteract the effects of soil depletion.
Quacks also lie when they claim that plants grown with natural fertilizers
(such as manure) are nutritionally superior to those grown with synthetic
fertilizers. Before they can use them, plants convert natural fertilizers into
the same chemicals that synthetic fertilizers supply. The vitamin content of a
food is determined by its genetic makeup. Fertilizers can influence the levels
of certain minerals in plants, but this is not a significant factor in the
American diet. The pesticide residue of our food supply is extremely small and
poses no health threat to the consumer. Foods "certified" as "organic" are not
safer or more nutritious than other foods. In fact, except for their high
price, they are not significantly different.

9. They Claim You Are in Danger of Being "Poisoned"
by Ordinary Food Additives and Preservatives.
This is another scare tactic designed to undermine your confidence in food
scientists and government protection agencies as well as our food supply
itself. Quacks want you to think they are out to protect you. They hope that if
you trust them, you will buy their "natural" food products. The fact is that
the tiny amounts of additives used in food pose no threat to human health. Some
actually protect our health by preventing spoilage, rancidity, and mold growth.

10. They Charge That the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs)
Have Been Set Too Low.
The RDAs have been published by the National Research Council approximately
every five years since 1943. They are defined as "the levels of intake of
essential nutrients that, on the basis of scientific knowledge, are judged by
the Food and Nutrition Board to be adequate to meet the known nutrient needs of
practically all healthy persons." Neither the RDAs nor the Daily Values listed
on food labels are "minimums" or "requirements." They are deliberately set
higher than most people need. The reason quacks charge that the RDAs are too
low is obvious: if you believe you need more than can be obtained from food,
you are more likely to buy supplements.

11. They Claim That under Everyday Stress, and in Certain Diseases,
Your Need for Nutrients Is Increased.
Many vitamin manufacturers have advertised that "stress robs the body of
vitamins." One company has asserted that, "if you smoke, diet, or happen to be
sick, you may be robbing your body of vitamins." Another has warned that
"stress can deplete your body of water-soluble vitamins . . . and daily
replacement is necessary." Other products are touted to fill the "special needs
of athletes."

While it is true that the need for vitamins may rise slightly under physical
stress and in certain diseases, this type of advertising is fraudulent. The
average American -- stressed or not -- is not in danger of vitamin deficiency.
The increased needs to which the ads refer are not higher than the amounts
obtainable by proper eating. Someone who is really in danger of deficiency due
to an illness would be very sick and would need medical care, probably in a
hospital. But these promotions are aimed at average Americans who certainly
don't need vitamin supplements to survive the common cold, a round of golf, or
a jog around the neighborhood! Athletes get more than enough vitamins when they
eat the food needed to meet their caloric requirements.

Many vitamin pushers suggest that smokers need vitamin C supplements. Although
it is true that smokers in North America have somewhat lower blood levels of
this vitamin, these levels are still far above deficiency levels. In America,
cigarette smoking is the leading cause of death preventable by self-discipline.
Rather than seeking false comfort by taking vitamin C, smokers who are
concerned about their health should stop smoking. Suggestions that "stress
vitamins" are helpful against emotional stress are also fraudulent.

12. They Recommend "Supplements" and "Health Foods" for Everyone.
Food quacks belittle normal foods and ridicule the food-group systems of good
nutrition. They may not tell you they earn their living from such
pronouncements -- via public appearance fees, product endorsements, sale of
publications, or financial interests in vitamin companies, health-food stores,
or organic farms.

The very term "health food" is a deceptive slogan. Judgments about individual
foods should take into account how they contribute to an individual's overall
diet. All food is health food in moderation; any food is junk food in excess.
Did you ever stop to think that your corner grocery, fruit market, meat market,
and supermarket are also health-food stores? They are -- and they generally
charge less than stores that use the slogan.

By the way, have you ever wondered why people who eat lots of "health foods"
still feel they must load themselves up with vitamin supplements? Or why so
many "health food" shoppers complain about ill health?

13. They Claim That "Natural" Vitamins are Better than "Synthetic" Ones.
This claim is a flat lie. Each vitamin is a chain of atoms strung together as a
molecule. With minor exception, molecules made in the "factories" of nature are
identical to those made in the factories of chemical companies. Does it make
sense to pay extra for vitamins extracted from foods when you can get all you
need from the foods themselves?

14. They Suggest That a Questionnaire Can Be Used
to Indicate Whether You Need Dietary Supplements.
No questionnaire can do this. A few entrepreneurs have devised lengthy
computer-scored questionnaires with questions about symptoms that could be
present if a vitamin deficiency exists. But such symptoms occur much more
frequently in conditions unrelated to nutrition. Even when a deficiency
actually exists, the tests don't provide enough information to discover the
cause so that suitable treatment can be recommended. That requires a physical
examination and appropriate laboratory tests. Many responsible nutritionists
use a computer to help evaluate their clients' diet. But this is done to make
dietary recommendations, such as reducing fat content or increasing fiber
content. Supplements are seldom necessary unless the person is unable (or
unwilling) to consume an adequate diet.

Be wary, too, of questionnaires purported to determine whether supplements are
needed to correct "nutrient deficiencies" or "dietary inadequacies." These
questionnaires are scored so that everyone who takes the test is judged
deficient. Responsible dietary analyses compare the individual's average daily
food consumption with the recommended numbers of servings from each food group.
The safest and best way to get nutrients is generally from food, not pills. So
even if a diet is deficient, the most prudent action is usually diet
modification rather than supplementation with pills.

15. They Say It Is Easy to Lose Weight.
Diet quacks would like you to believe that special pills or food combinations
can cause "effortless" weight loss. But the only way to lose weight is to burn
off more calories than you eat. This requires self-discipline: eating less,
exercising more, or preferably doing both. There are about 3,500 calories in a
pound of body weight. To lose one pound a week (a safe amount that is not just
water), you must eat about five hundred fewer calories per day than you burn
up. The most sensible diet for losing weight is one that is nutritionally
balanced in carbohydrates, fats, and proteins. Most fad diets "work" by
producing temporary weight loss -- as a result of calorie restriction. But they
are invariably too monotonous and are often too dangerous for long-term use.
Unless a dieter develops and maintains better eating and exercise habits,
weight lost on a diet will soon return.

The term "cellulite" is sometimes used to describe the dimpled fat found on the
hips and thighs of many women. Although no medical evidence supports the claim,
cellulite is represented as a special type of fat that is resistant to diet and
exercise. Sure-fire cellulite remedies include creams (to "dissolve" it),
brushes, rollers, "loofah" sponges, body wraps, and vitamin-mineral supplements
with or without herbs. The cost of various treatment plans runs from a few
dollars for a bottle of vitamins to many hundreds of dollars at a salon that
offers heat treatments, massage, enzyme injections, and/or treatment with
various gadgets. The simple truth about "cellulite" is that it is ordinary fat
that can be lost only as part of an overall reducing program.

16. They Promise Quick, Dramatic, Miraculous Results.
Often the promises are subtle or couched in "weasel words" that create an
illusion of a promise, so promoters can deny making them when the "feds" close
in. False promises of cure are the quacks' most immoral practice. They don't
seem to care how many people they break financially or in spirit -- by elation
over their expected good fortune followed by deep depression when the
"treatment" fails. Nor do quacks keep count -- while they fill their bank
accounts -- of how many people they lure away from effective medical care into
disability or death.

Quacks will tell you that "megavitamins" (huge doses of vitamins) can prevent
or cure many different ailments, particularly emotional ones. But they won't
tell you that the "evidence" supporting such claims is unreliable because it is
based on inadequate investigations, anecdotes, or testimonials. Nor do quacks
inform you that megadoses may be harmful. Megavitamin therapy (also called
orthomolecular therapy) is nutritional roulette, and only the house makes the
profit.

17. They Routinely Sell Vitamins and Other
"Dietary Supplements" as Part of Their Practice.
Although vitamins are useful as therapeutic agents for certain health problems,
the number of such conditions is small. Practitioners who sell supplements in
their offices invariably recommend them inappropriately. In addition, such
products tend to be substantially more expensive than similar ones in
drugstores -- or even health-food stores. You should also disregard any
publication whose editor or publisher sells dietary supplements.

18. They Use Disclaimers Couched in Pseudomedical Jargon.
Instead of promising to cure your disease, some quacks will promise to
"detoxify," "purify," or "revitalize" your body; "balance" its chemistry or
"electromagnetic energy"; bring it in harmony with nature; "stimulate" or
"strengthen" your immune system; "support" or "rejuvenate" various organs in
your body; or stimulate your body's power to heal itself. Of course, they never
identify or make valid before-and-after measurements of any of these processes.
These disclaimers serve two purposes. First, since it is impossible to measure
the processes quacks allege, it may be difficult to prove them wrong. Moreover,
if a quack is not a physician, the use of nonmedical terminology may help to
avoid prosecution for practicing medicine without a license -- although it
shouldn't.

Some approaches to "detoxification" are based on notions that, as a result of
intestinal stasis, intestinal contents putrefy, and toxins are formed and
absorbed, which causes chronic poisoning of the body. This "autointoxication"
theory was popular around the turn of the century but was abandoned by the
scientific community during the 1930s. No such "toxins" have ever been found,
and careful observations have shown that individuals in good health can vary
greatly in bowel habits. Quacks may also suggest that fecal material collects
on the lining of the intestine and causes trouble unless removed by laxatives,
colonic irrigation, special diets, and/or various herbs or food supplements
that "cleanse" the body. The falsity of this notion is obvious to doctors who
perform intestinal surgery or peer within the large intestine with a diagnostic
instrument. Fecal material does not adhere to the intestinal lining. Colonic
irrigation is done by inserting a tube up to a foot or more into the rectum and
pumping up to 20 gallons of warm water in and out. This type of enema is not
only therapeutically worthless but can cause fatal electrolyte imbalance. Cases
of death due to intestinal perforation and infection (from contaminated
equipment) have also been reported.

19. They Use Anecdotes and Testimonials to Support Their Claims.
We all tend to believe what others tell us about personal experiences. But
separating cause and effect from coincidence can be difficult. If people tell
you that product X has cured their cancer, arthritis, or whatever, be
skeptical. They may not actually have had the condition. If they did, their
recovery most likely would have occurred without the help of product X. Most
single episodes of disease end with just the passage of time, and most chronic
ailments have symptom-free periods. Establishing medical truths requires
careful and repeated investigation -- with well-designed experiments, not
reports of coincidences misperceived as cause-and-effect. That's why
testimonial evidence is forbidden in scientific articles, is usually
inadmissible in court, and is not used to evaluate whether or not drugs should
be legally marketable. (Imagine what would happen if the FDA decided that
clinical trials were too expensive and therefore drug approval would be based
on testimonial letters or interviews with a few patients.)

Never underestimate the extent to which people can be fooled by a worthless
remedy. During the early 1940s, many thousands of people became convinced that
"glyoxylide" could cure cancer. Yet analysis showed that it was simply
distilled water! [1] Many years before that, when arsenic was used as a
"tonic," countless numbers of people swore by it even as it slowly poisoned
them.

Symptoms that are psychosomatic (bodily reactions to tension) are often
relieved by anything taken with a suggestion that it will work. Tiredness and
other minor aches and pains may respond to any enthusiastically recommended
nostrum. For these problems, even physicians may prescribe a placebo. A placebo
is a substance that has no pharmacological effect on the condition for which it
is used, but is given to satisfy a patient who supposes it to be a medicine.
Vitamins (such as B12 shots) are commonly used in this way.

Placebos act by suggestion. Unfortunately, some doctors swallow the advertising
hype or become confused by their own observations and "believe in vitamins"
beyond those supplied by a good diet. Those who share such false beliefs do so
because they confuse coincidence or placebo action with cause and effect.
Homeopathic believers make the same error.

20. They Claim That Sugar Is a Deadly Poison.
Many vitamin pushers would have us believe that refined [white] sugar is "the
killer on the breakfast table" and is the underlying cause of everything from
heart disease to hypoglycemia. The fact is, however, that when sugar is used in
moderation as part of a normal, balanced diet, it is a perfectly safe source of
calories and eating pleasure. Sugar is a factor in the tooth decay process, but
what counts is not merely the amount of sugar in the diet but how long any
digestible carbohydrate remains in contact with the teeth. This, in turn,
depends on such factors as the stickiness of the food, the type of bacteria on
the teeth, and the extent of oral hygiene practiced by the individual.

21. They Display Credentials Not Recognized
by Responsible Scientists or Educators.
The backbone of educational integrity in America is a system of accreditation
by agencies recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education or the Council on
Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), which is a nongovernmental coordinating
agency. "Degrees" from nonaccredited schools are rarely worth the paper they
are printed on. In the health field, there is no such thing as a reliable
school that is not accredited.

Unfortunately, possession of an accredited degree does not guarantee
reliability. Some schools that teach unscientific methods (chiropractic,
naturopathy, acupuncture, and even quack nutritional methods) have achieved
accreditation. Worse yet, a small percentage of individuals trained in
reputable institutions (such as medical or dental schools or accredited
universities) have strayed from scientific thought.

Since quacks operate outside of the scientific community, they also tend to
form their own "professional" organizations. In some cases, the only membership
requirement is payment of a fee. We and others we know have secured fancy
"professional member" certificates for household pets by merely submitting the
pet's name, address, and a check for $50. Don't assume that all groups with
scientific-sounding names are respectable. Find out whether their views are
scientifically based.

Some quacks are promoted with superlatives like "the world's foremost
nutritionist" or "America's leading nutrition expert." There is no law against
this tactic, just as there is none against calling oneself the "World's
Foremost Lover." However, the scientific community recognizes no such titles.
The designation "Nobel Prize Nominee" is also bogus and can be assumed to mean
that someone has either nominated himself or had a close associate do so.

Some entrepreneurs claim to have degrees and/or affiliations to schools,
hospitals, and/or professional that actually don't exist. The modern champion
of this approach appears to be Gregory E. Caplinger, who claims to have
acquired a medical degree, specialty training, board certification, and scores
of professional affiliations -- all from bogus or nonexistent sources.

Even legitimate credentials can be used to mislead. The American Medical
Association's "Physician's Recognition Award" requires participation in 150
hours of continuing education over a three-year period and payment of a small
fee. Most practicing physicians meet this educational standard because it is
necessary to study to keep up-to-date. Accredited hospitals require this amount
of continuing education to maintain staff privileges, and some states require
it for license renewal. However, most physicians who do this don't bother to
get the AMA certificate. Since the award reflects no special accomplishment or
expertise, using it for promotional purposes is not appropriate behavior.

22. They Offer to Determine Your Body's Nutritional State
with a Laboratory Test or a Questionnaire.
Various health-food industry members and unscientific practitioners utilize
tests that they claim can determine your body's nutritional state and -- of
course -- what products you should buy from them. One favorite method is hair
analysis. For $35 to $75 plus a lock of your hair, you can get an elaborate
computer printout of vitamins and minerals you supposedly need. Hair analysis
has limited value (mainly in forensic medicine) in the diagnosis of heavy metal
poisoning, but it is worthless as a screening device to detect nutritional
problems [2]. If a hair analysis laboratory recommends supplements, you can be
sure that its computers are programmed to recommend them to everyone. Other
tests used to hawk supplements include amino acid analysis of urine,
muscle-testing (applied kinesiology), iridology, blood typing,
"nutrient-deficiency" and/or lifestyle questionnaires, and "electrodiagnostic"
gadgets.

23. They Claim They Are Being Persecuted by Orthodox Medicine
and That Their Work Is Being Suppressed Because It's Controversial.
The "conspiracy charge" is an attempt to gain sympathy by portraying the quack
as an "underdog." Quacks typically claim that the American Medical Association
is against them because their cures would cut into the incomes that doctors
make by keeping people sick. Don't fall for such nonsense! Reputable physicians
are plenty busy. Moreover, many doctors engaged in prepaid health plans, group
practice, full-time teaching, and government service receive the same salary
whether or not their patients are sick -- so keeping their patients healthy
reduces their workload, not their income.

Quacks also claim there is a "controversy" about facts between themselves and
"the bureaucrats," organized medicine, or "the establishment." They clamor for
medical examination of their claims, but ignore any evidence that refutes them.
The gambit "Do you believe in vitamins?" is another tactic used to increase
confusion. Everyone knows that vitamins are needed by the human body. The real
question is "Do you need additional vitamins beyond those in a well-balanced
diet?" For most people, the answer is no. Nutrition is a science, not a
religion. It is based upon matters of fact, not questions of belief.

Any physician who found a vitamin or other preparation that could cure
sterility, heart disease, arthritis, cancer, or the like, could make an
enormous fortune. Patients would flock to such a doctor (as they now do to
those who falsely claim to cure such problems), and colleagues would shower the
doctor with awards -- including the extremely lucrative Nobel Prize! And don't
forget, doctors get sick, too. Do you believe they would conspire to suppress
cures for diseases that also afflict them and their loved ones? When polio was
conquered, iron lungs became virtually obsolete, but nobody resisted this
advancement because it would force hospitals to change. And neither will
scientists mourn the eventual defeat of cancer.

24. They Warn You Not to Trust Your Doctor.
Quacks, who want you to trust them, suggest that most doctors are "butchers"
and "poisoners." They exaggerate the shortcomings of our healthcare delivery
system, but completely disregard their own -- and those of other quacks. For
the same reason, quacks also claim that doctors are nutrition illiterates.
This, too, is untrue. The principles of nutrition are those of human
biochemistry and physiology, courses required in every medical school. Some
medical schools don't teach a separate required course labeled "Nutrition"
because the subject is included in other courses at the points where it is most
relevant. For example, nutrition in growth and development is taught in
pediatrics, nutrition in wound healing is taught in surgery, and nutrition in
pregnancy is covered in obstetrics. In addition, many medical schools do offer
separate instruction in nutrition.

A physician's training, of course, does not end on the day of graduation from
medical school or completion of specialty training. The medical profession
advocates lifelong education, and some states require it for license renewal.
Physicians can further their knowledge of nutrition by reading medical journals
and textbooks, discussing cases with colleagues, and attending continuing
education courses. Most doctors know what nutrients can and cannot do and can
tell the difference between a real nutritional discovery and a piece of quack
nonsense. Those who are unable to answer questions about dietetics (meal
planning) can refer patients to someone who can -- usually a registered
dietitian.

Like all human beings, doctors sometimes make mistakes. However, quacks deliver
mistreatment most of the time.

25. They Encourage Patients to Lend Political
Support to Their Treatment Methods.
A century ago, before scientific methodology was generally accepted, valid new
ideas were hard to evaluate and were sometimes rejected by a majority of the
medical community, only to be upheld later. But today, treatments demonstrated
as effective are welcomed by scientific practitioners and do not need a group
to crusade for them. Quacks seek political endorsement because they can't prove
that their methods work. Instead, they may seek to legalize their treatment and
force insurance companies to pay for it. One of the surest signs that a
treatment doesn't work is a political campaign to legalize its use.

References
Young JH, McFayden RE. The Koch Cancer Treatment. Journal of the History of
Medicine 53:254-284, 1998.
Hambidge KM. Hair analyses: Worthless for vitamins, limited for minerals.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 36:943-949, 1983.
Portions of this article appeared in The Vitamin Pushers: How the Health Food
Industry Is Selling Americans a Bill of Goods.

Excellent posts, Soames.

If you get the pay channel "Showtime," Penn & Teller have done a couple of
excellent expose's on quackery in our society. Their show's called
"Bull****," and I love the irreverant way they expose fraud, hype, quackery,
and theft.

-- Stinger

"Soames123" wrote in message
...

You're right. The "Relay for Death" doesn't get nearly enough press.

-- Stinger

http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...spotquack.html

Twenty-Five Ways to Spot
Quacks and Vitamin Pushers
Stephen Barrett, M.D.
Victor Herbert, M.D., J.D.

How can food quacks and other vitamin pushers be recognized? Here are 25
signs
that should arouse suspicion.

1. When Talking about Nutrients, They Tell Only Part of the Story.
Quacks tell you all the wonderful things that vitamins and minerals do in
your
body and/or all the horrible things that can happen if you don't get
enough.
Many claim that their products or programs offer "optimal nutritional
support."
But they conveniently neglect to tell you that a balanced diet provides
the
nutrients people need and that the USDA food-group system makes balancing
your
diet simple.

2. They Claim That Most Americans Are Poorly Nourished.
This is an appeal to fear that is not only untrue, but ignores the fact
that
the main forms of bad nourishment in the United States are obesity in the
population at large, particularly the poor, and undernourishment among the
poverty-stricken. Poor people can ill afford to waste money on unnecessary
vitamin pills. Their food money should be spent on nourishing food.

It is falsely alleged that Americans are so addicted to "junk" foods that
an
adequate diet is exceptional rather than usual. While it is true that some
snack foods are mainly "naked calories" (sugars and/or fats without other
nutrients), it is not necessary for every morsel of food we eat to be
loaded
with nutrients. In fact, no normal person following the U.S. Dietary
Guidelines
is in any danger of vitamin deficiency.

3. They Recommend "Nutrition Insurance" for Everyone.
Most vitamin pushers suggest that everyone is in danger of deficiency and
should therefore take supplements as "insurance." Some suggest that it is
difficult to get what you need from food, while others claim that it is
impossible. Their pitch resembles that of the door-to-door huckster who
states
that your perfectly good furnace is in danger of blowing up unless you
replace
it with his product. Vitamin pushers will never tell you who doesn't need
their
products. Their "be wary of deficiency" claims may not be limited to
essential
nutrients. It can also include nonessential chemicals that nobody needs to
worry about because the body makes its own supply.

4. They Say That Most Diseases Are Due to Faulty Diet
and Can Be Treated with "Nutritional" Methods.
This simply isn't so. Consult your doctor or any recognized textbook of
medicine. They will tell you that although diet is a factor in some
diseases
(most notably coronary heart disease), most diseases have little or
nothing to
do with diet. Common symptoms like malaise (feeling poorly), fatigue, lack
of
pep, aches (including headaches) or pains, insomnia, and similar
complaints are
usually the body's reaction to emotional stress. The persistence of such
symptoms is a signal to see a doctor to be evaluated for possible physical
illness. It is not a reason to take vitamin pills.

5. They Allege That Modern Processing Methods and
Storage Remove all Nutritive Value from Our Food.
It is true that food processing can change the nutrient content of foods.
But
the changes are not so drastic as the quack, who wants you to buy
supplements,
would like you to believe. While some processing methods destroy some
nutrients, others add them. A balanced variety of foods will provide all
the
nourishment you need.

Quacks distort and oversimplify. When they say that milling removes
B-vitamins,
they don't bother to tell you that enrichment puts them back. When they
tell
you that cooking destroys vitamins, they omit the fact that only a few
vitamins
are sensitive to heat. Nor do they tell you that these vitamins are easily
obtained by consuming a portion of fresh uncooked fruit, vegetable, or
fresh or
frozen fruit juice each day. Any claims that minerals are destroyed by
processing or cooking are pure lies. Heat does not destroy minerals.

6. They Claim That Diet Is a Major Factor in Behavior.
Food quacks relate diet not only to disease but to behavior. Some claim
that
adverse reactions to additives and/or common foods cause hyperactivity in
children and even criminal behavior in adolescents and adults. These
claims are
based on a combination of delusions, anecdotal evidence, and poorly
designed
research.

7. They Claim That Fluoridation Is Dangerous.
Curiously, quacks are not always interested in real deficiencies. Fluoride
is
necessary to build decay-resistant teeth and strong bones. The best way to
obtain adequate amounts of this important nutrient is to augment community
water supplies so their fluoride concentration is about one part fluoride
for
every million parts of water. But quacks usually oppose water
fluoridation, and
some advocate water filters that remove fluoride. It seems that when they
cannot profit from something, they may try to make money by opposing it.

8. They Claim That Soil Depletion and the Use of Pesticides and
"Chemical" Fertilizers Result in Food That Is Less Safe and Less
Nourishing.
These claims are used to promote the sale of so-called "organically grown"
foods. If an essential nutrient is missing from the soil, a plant simply
doesn't grow. Chemical fertilizers counteract the effects of soil
depletion.
Quacks also lie when they claim that plants grown with natural fertilizers
(such as manure) are nutritionally superior to those grown with synthetic
fertilizers. Before they can use them, plants convert natural fertilizers
into
the same chemicals that synthetic fertilizers supply. The vitamin content
of a
food is determined by its genetic makeup. Fertilizers can influence the
levels
of certain minerals in plants, but this is not a significant factor in the
American diet. The pesticide residue of our food supply is extremely small
and
poses no health threat to the consumer. Foods "certified" as "organic" are
not
safer or more nutritious than other foods. In fact, except for their high
price, they are not significantly different.

9. They Claim You Are in Danger of Being "Poisoned"
by Ordinary Food Additives and Preservatives.
This is another scare tactic designed to undermine your confidence in food
scientists and government protection agencies as well as our food supply
itself. Quacks want you to think they are out to protect you. They hope
that if
you trust them, you will buy their "natural" food products. The fact is
that
the tiny amounts of additives used in food pose no threat to human health.
Some
actually protect our health by preventing spoilage, rancidity, and mold
growth.

10. They Charge That the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs)
Have Been Set Too Low.
The RDAs have been published by the National Research Council
approximately
every five years since 1943. They are defined as "the levels of intake of
essential nutrients that, on the basis of scientific knowledge, are judged
by
the Food and Nutrition Board to be adequate to meet the known nutrient
needs of
practically all healthy persons." Neither the RDAs nor the Daily Values
listed
on food labels are "minimums" or "requirements." They are deliberately set
higher than most people need. The reason quacks charge that the RDAs are
too
low is obvious: if you believe you need more than can be obtained from
food,
you are more likely to buy supplements.

11. They Claim That under Everyday Stress, and in Certain Diseases,
Your Need for Nutrients Is Increased.
Many vitamin manufacturers have advertised that "stress robs the body of
vitamins." One company has asserted that, "if you smoke, diet, or happen
to be
sick, you may be robbing your body of vitamins." Another has warned that
"stress can deplete your body of water-soluble vitamins . . . and daily
replacement is necessary." Other products are touted to fill the "special
needs
of athletes."

While it is true that the need for vitamins may rise slightly under
physical
stress and in certain diseases, this type of advertising is fraudulent.
The
average American -- stressed or not -- is not in danger of vitamin
deficiency.
The increased needs to which the ads refer are not higher than the amounts
obtainable by proper eating. Someone who is really in danger of deficiency
due
to an illness would be very sick and would need medical care, probably in
a
hospital. But these promotions are aimed at average Americans who
certainly
don't need vitamin supplements to survive the common cold, a round of
golf, or
a jog around the neighborhood! Athletes get more than enough vitamins when
they
eat the food needed to meet their caloric requirements.

Many vitamin pushers suggest that smokers need vitamin C supplements.
Although
it is true that smokers in North America have somewhat lower blood levels
of
this vitamin, these levels are still far above deficiency levels. In
America,
cigarette smoking is the leading cause of death preventable by
self-discipline.
Rather than seeking false comfort by taking vitamin C, smokers who are
concerned about their health should stop smoking. Suggestions that "stress
vitamins" are helpful against emotional stress are also fraudulent.

12. They Recommend "Supplements" and "Health Foods" for Everyone.
Food quacks belittle normal foods and ridicule the food-group systems of
good
nutrition. They may not tell you they earn their living from such
pronouncements -- via public appearance fees, product endorsements, sale
of
publications, or financial interests in vitamin companies, health-food
stores,
or organic farms.

The very term "health food" is a deceptive slogan. Judgments about
individual
foods should take into account how they contribute to an individual's
overall
diet. All food is health food in moderation; any food is junk food in
excess.
Did you ever stop to think that your corner grocery, fruit market, meat
market,
and supermarket are also health-food stores? They are -- and they
generally
charge less than stores that use the slogan.

By the way, have you ever wondered why people who eat lots of "health
foods"
still feel they must load themselves up with vitamin supplements? Or why
so
many "health food" shoppers complain about ill health?

13. They Claim That "Natural" Vitamins are Better than "Synthetic" Ones.
This claim is a flat lie. Each vitamin is a chain of atoms strung together
as a
molecule. With minor exception, molecules made in the "factories" of
nature are
identical to those made in the factories of chemical companies. Does it
make
sense to pay extra for vitamins extracted from foods when you can get all
you
need from the foods themselves?

14. They Suggest That a Questionnaire Can Be Used
to Indicate Whether You Need Dietary Supplements.
No questionnaire can do this. A few entrepreneurs have devised lengthy
computer-scored questionnaires with questions about symptoms that could be
present if a vitamin deficiency exists. But such symptoms occur much more
frequently in conditions unrelated to nutrition. Even when a deficiency
actually exists, the tests don't provide enough information to discover
the
cause so that suitable treatment can be recommended. That requires a
physical
examination and appropriate laboratory tests. Many responsible
nutritionists
use a computer to help evaluate their clients' diet. But this is done to
make
dietary recommendations, such as reducing fat content or increasing fiber
content. Supplements are seldom necessary unless the person is unable (or
unwilling) to consume an adequate diet.

Be wary, too, of questionnaires purported to determine whether supplements
are
needed to correct "nutrient deficiencies" or "dietary inadequacies." These
questionnaires are scored so that everyone who takes the test is judged
deficient. Responsible dietary analyses compare the individual's average
daily
food consumption with the recommended numbers of servings from each food
group.
The safest and best way to get nutrients is generally from food, not
pills. So
even if a diet is deficient, the most prudent action is usually diet
modification rather than supplementation with pills.

15. They Say It Is Easy to Lose Weight.
Diet quacks would like you to believe that special pills or food
combinations
can cause "effortless" weight loss. But the only way to lose weight is to
burn
off more calories than you eat. This requires self-discipline: eating
less,
exercising more, or preferably doing both. There are about 3,500 calories
in a
pound of body weight. To lose one pound a week (a safe amount that is not
just
water), you must eat about five hundred fewer calories per day than you
burn
up. The most sensible diet for losing weight is one that is nutritionally
balanced in carbohydrates, fats, and proteins. Most fad diets "work" by
producing temporary weight loss -- as a result of calorie restriction. But
they
are invariably too monotonous and are often too dangerous for long-term
use.
Unless a dieter develops and maintains better eating and exercise habits,
weight lost on a diet will soon return.

The term "cellulite" is sometimes used to describe the dimpled fat found
on the
hips and thighs of many women. Although no medical evidence supports the
claim,
cellulite is represented as a special type of fat that is resistant to die
t and
exercise. Sure-fire cellulite remedies include creams (to "dissolve" it),
brushes, rollers, "loofah" sponges, body wraps, and vitamin-mineral
supplements
with or without herbs. The cost of various treatment plans runs from a few
dollars for a bottle of vitamins to many hundreds of dollars at a salon
that
offers heat treatments, massage, enzyme injections, and/or treatment with
various gadgets. The simple truth about "cellulite" is that it is ordinary
fat
that can be lost only as part of an overall reducing program.

16. They Promise Quick, Dramatic, Miraculous Results.
Often the promises are subtle or couched in "weasel words" that create an
illusion of a promise, so promoters can deny making them when the "feds"
close
in. False promises of cure are the quacks' most immoral practice. They
don't
seem to care how many people they break financially or in spirit -- by
elation
over their expected good fortune followed by deep depression when the
"treatment" fails. Nor do quacks keep count -- while they fill their bank
accounts -- of how many people they lure away from effective medical care
into
disability or death.

Quacks will tell you that "megavitamins" (huge doses of vitamins) can
prevent
or cure many different ailments, particularly emotional ones. But they
won't
tell you that the "evidence" supporting such claims is unreliable because
it is
based on inadequate investigations, anecdotes, or testimonials. Nor do
quacks
inform you that megadoses may be harmful. Megavitamin therapy (also called
orthomolecular therapy) is nutritional roulette, and only the house makes
the
profit.

17. They Routinely Sell Vitamins and Other
"Dietary Supplements" as Part of Their Practice.
Although vitamins are useful as therapeutic agents for certain health
problems,
the number of such conditions is small. Practitioners who sell supplements
in
their offices invariably recommend them inappropriately. In addition, such
products tend to be substantially more expensive than similar ones in
drugstores -- or even health-food stores. You should also disregard any
publication whose editor or publisher sells dietary supplements.

18. They Use Disclaimers Couched in Pseudomedical Jargon.
Instead of promising to cure your disease, some quacks will promise to
"detoxify," "purify," or "revitalize" your body; "balance" its chemistry
or
"electromagnetic energy"; bring it in harmony with nature; "stimulate" or
"strengthen" your immune system; "support" or "rejuvenate" various organs
in
your body; or stimulate your body's power to heal itself. Of course, they
never
identify or make valid before-and-after measurements of any of these
processes.
These disclaimers serve two purposes. First, since it is impossible to
measure
the processes quacks allege, it may be difficult to prove them wrong.
Moreover,
if a quack is not a physician, the use of nonmedical terminology may help
to
avoid prosecution for practicing medicine without a license -- although it
shouldn't.

Some approaches to "detoxification" are based on notions that, as a result
of
intestinal stasis, intestinal contents putrefy, and toxins are formed and
absorbed, which causes chronic poisoning of the body. This
"autointoxication"
theory was popular around the turn of the century but was abandoned by the
scientific community during the 1930s. No such "toxins" have ever been
found,
and careful observations have shown that individuals in good health can
vary
greatly in bowel habits. Quacks may also suggest that fecal material
collects
on the lining of the intestine and causes trouble unless removed by
laxatives,
colonic irrigation, special diets, and/or various herbs or food
supplements
that "cleanse" the body. The falsity of this notion is obvious to doctors
who
perform intestinal surgery or peer within the large intestine with a
diagnostic
instrument. Fecal material does not adhere to the intestinal lining.
Colonic
irrigation is done by inserting a tube up to a foot or more into the
rectum and
pumping up to 20 gallons of warm water in and out. This type of enema is
not
only therapeutically worthless but can cause fatal electrolyte imbalance.
Cases
of death due to intestinal perforation and infection (from contaminated
equipment) have also been reported.

19. They Use Anecdotes and Testimonials to Support Their Claims.
We all tend to believe what others tell us about personal experiences. But
separating cause and effect from coincidence can be difficult. If people
tell
you that product X has cured their cancer, arthritis, or whatever, be
skeptical. They may not actually have had the condition. If they did,
their
recovery most likely would have occurred without the help of product X.
Most
single episodes of disease end with just the passage of time, and most
chronic
ailments have symptom-free periods. Establishing medical truths requires
careful and repeated investigation -- with well-designed experiments, not
reports of coincidences misperceived as cause-and-effect. That's why
testimonial evidence is forbidden in scientific articles, is usually
inadmissible in court, and is not used to evaluate whether or not drugs
should
be legally marketable. (Imagine what would happen if the FDA decided that
clinical trials were too expensive and therefore drug approval would be
based
on testimonial letters or interviews with a few patients.)

Never underestimate the extent to which people can be fooled by a
worthless
remedy. During the early 1940s, many thousands of people became convinced
that
"glyoxylide" could cure cancer. Yet analysis showed that it was simply
distilled water! [1] Many years before that, when arsenic was used as a
"tonic," countless numbers of people swore by it even as it slowly
poisoned
them.

Symptoms that are psychosomatic (bodily reactions to tension) are often
relieved by anything taken with a suggestion that it will work. Tiredness
and
other minor aches and pains may respond to any enthusiastically
recommended
nostrum. For these problems, even physicians may prescribe a placebo. A
placebo
is a substance that has no pharmacological effect on the condition for
which it
is used, but is given to satisfy a patient who supposes it to be a
medicine.
Vitamins (such as B12 shots) are commonly used in this way.

Placebos act by suggestion. Unfortunately, some doctors swallow the
advertising
hype or become confused by their own observations and "believe in
vitamins"
beyond those supplied by a good diet. Those who share such false beliefs
do so
because they confuse coincidence or placebo action with cause and effect.
Homeopathic believers make the same error.

20. They Claim That Sugar Is a Deadly Poison.
Many vitamin pushers would have us believe that refined [white] sugar is
"the
killer on the breakfast table" and is the underlying cause of everything
from
heart disease to hypoglycemia. The fact is, however, that when sugar is
used in
moderation as part of a normal, balanced diet, it is a perfectly safe
source of
calories and eating pleasure. Sugar is a factor in the tooth decay
process, but
what counts is not merely the amount of sugar in the diet but how long any
digestible carbohydrate remains in contact with the teeth. This, in turn,
depends on such factors as the stickiness of the food, the type of
bacteria on
the teeth, and the extent of oral hygiene practiced by the individual.

21. They Display Credentials Not Recognized
by Responsible Scientists or Educators.
The backbone of educational integrity in America is a system of
accreditation
by agencies recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education or the Council
on
Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), which is a nongovernmental
coordinating
agency. "Degrees" from nonaccredited schools are rarely worth the paper
they
are printed on. In the health field, there is no such thing as a reliable
school that is not accredited.

Unfortunately, possession of an accredited degree does not guarantee
reliability. Some schools that teach unscientific methods (chiropractic,
naturopathy, acupuncture, and even quack nutritional methods) have
achieved
accreditation. Worse yet, a small percentage of individuals trained in
reputable institutions (such as medical or dental schools or accredited
universities) have strayed from scientific thought.

Since quacks operate outside of the scientific community, they also tend
to
form their own "professional" organizations. In some cases, the only
membership
requirement is payment of a fee. We and others we know have secured fancy
"professional member" certificates for household pets by merely submitting
the
pet's name, address, and a check for $50. Don't assume that all groups
with
scientific-sounding names are respectable. Find out whether their views
are
scientifically based.

Some quacks are promoted with superlatives like "the world's foremost
nutritionist" or "America's leading nutrition expert." There is no law
against
this tactic, just as there is none against calling oneself the "World's
Foremost Lover." However, the scientific community recognizes no such
titles.
The designation "Nobel Prize Nominee" is also bogus and can be assumed to
mean
that someone has either nominated himself or had a close associate do so.

Some entrepreneurs claim to have degrees and/or affiliations to schools,
hospitals, and/or professional that actually don't exist. The modern
champion
of this approach appears to be Gregory E. Caplinger, who claims to have
acquired a medical degree, specialty training, board certification, and
scores
of professional affiliations -- all from bogus or nonexistent sources.

Even legitimate credentials can be used to mislead. The American Medical
Association's "Physician's Recognition Award" requires participation in
150
hours of continuing education over a three-year period and payment of a
small
fee. Most practicing physicians meet this educational standard because it
is
necessary to study to keep up-to-date. Accredited hospitals require this
amount
of continuing education to maintain staff privileges, and some states
require
it for license renewal. However, most physicians who do this don't bother
to
get the AMA certificate. Since the award reflects no special
accomplishment or
expertise, using it for promotional purposes is not appropriate behavior.

22. They Offer to Determine Your Body's Nutritional State
with a Laboratory Test or a Questionnaire.
Various health-food industry members and unscientific practitioners
utilize
tests that they claim can determine your body's nutritional state and --
of
course -- what products you should buy from them. One favorite method is
hair
analysis. For $35 to $75 plus a lock of your hair, you can get an
elaborate
computer printout of vitamins and minerals you supposedly need. Hair
analysis
has limited value (mainly in forensic medicine) in the diagnosis of heavy
metal
poisoning, but it is worthless as a screening device to detect nutritional
problems [2]. If a hair analysis laboratory recommends supplements, you
can be
sure that its computers are programmed to recommend them to everyone.
Other
tests used to hawk supplements include amino acid analysis of urine,
muscle-testing (applied kinesiology), iridology, blood typing,
"nutrient-deficiency" and/or lifestyle questionnaires, and
"electrodiagnostic"
gadgets.

23. They Claim They Are Being Persecuted by Orthodox Medicine
and That Their Work Is Being Suppressed Because It's Controversial.
The "conspiracy charge" is an attempt to gain sympathy by portraying the
quack
as an "underdog." Quacks typically claim that the American Medical
Association
is against them because their cures would cut into the incomes that
doctors
make by keeping people sick. Don't fall for such nonsense! Reputable
physicians
are plenty busy. Moreover, many doctors engaged in prepaid health plans,
group
practice, full-time teaching, and government service receive the same
salary
whether or not their patients are sick -- so keeping their patients
healthy
reduces their workload, not their income.

Quacks also claim there is a "controversy" about facts between themselves
and
"the bureaucrats," organized medicine, or "the establishment." They clamor
for
medical examination of their claims, but ignore any evidence that refutes
them.
The gambit "Do you believe in vitamins?" is another tactic used to
increase
confusion. Everyone knows that vitamins are needed by the human body. The
real
question is "Do you need additional vitamins beyond those in a
well-balanced
diet?" For most people, the answer is no. Nutrition is a science, not a
religion. It is based upon matters of fact, not questions of belief.

Any physician who found a vitamin or other preparation that could cure
sterility, heart disease, arthritis, cancer, or the like, could make an
enormous fortune. Patients would flock to such a doctor (as they now do to
those who falsely claim to cure such problems), and colleagues would
shower the
doctor with awards -- including the extremely lucrative Nobel Prize! And
don't
forget, doctors get sick, too. Do you believe they would conspire to
suppress
cures for diseases that also afflict them and their loved ones? When polio
was
conquered, iron lungs became virtually obsolete, but nobody resisted this
advancement because it would force hospitals to change. And neither will
scientists mourn the eventual defeat of cancer.

24. They Warn You Not to Trust Your Doctor.
Quacks, who want you to trust them, suggest that most doctors are
"butchers"
and "poisoners." They exaggerate the shortcomings of our healthcare
delivery
system, but completely disregard their own -- and those of other quacks.
For
the same reason, quacks also claim that doctors are nutrition illiterates.
This, too, is untrue. The principles of nutrition are those of human
biochemistry and physiology, courses required in every medical school.
Some
medical schools don't teach a separate required course labeled "Nutrition"
because the subject is included in other courses at the points where it is
most
relevant. For example, nutrition in growth and development is taught in
pediatrics, nutrition in wound healing is taught in surgery, and nutrition
in
pregnancy is covered in obstetrics. In addition, many medical schools do
offer
separate instruction in nutrition.

A physician's training, of course, does not end on the day of graduation
from
medical school or completion of specialty training. The medical profession
advocates lifelong education, and some states require it for license
renewal.
Physicians can further their knowledge of nutrition by reading medical
journals
and textbooks, discussing cases with colleagues, and attending continuing
education courses. Most doctors know what nutrients can and cannot do and
can
tell the difference between a real nutritional discovery and a piece of
quack
nonsense. Those who are unable to answer questions about dietetics (meal
planning) can refer patients to someone who can -- usually a registered
dietitian.

Like all human beings, doctors sometimes make mistakes. However, quacks
deliver
mistreatment most of the time.

25. They Encourage Patients to Lend Political
Support to Their Treatment Methods.
A century ago, before scientific methodology was generally accepted, valid
new
ideas were hard to evaluate and were sometimes rejected by a majority of
the
medical community, only to be upheld later. But today, treatments
demonstrated
as effective are welcomed by scientific practitioners and do not need a
group
to crusade for them. Quacks seek political endorsement because they can't
prove
that their methods work. Instead, they may seek to legalize their
treatment and
force insurance companies to pay for it. One of the surest signs that a
treatment doesn't work is a political campaign to legalize its use.

References
Young JH, McFayden RE. The Koch Cancer Treatment. Journal of the History
of
Medicine 53:254-284, 1998.
Hambidge KM. Hair analyses: Worthless for vitamins, limited for minerals.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 36:943-949, 1983.
Portions of this article appeared in The Vitamin Pushers: How the Health
Food
Industry Is Selling Americans a Bill of Goods.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...harmquack.html

How Quackery Harms Cancer Patients

William T. Jarvis, Ph.D.
There is an old saying: "The highwayman demands 'your money OR your life,' but
quacks demand 'your money AND your life!'" This statement is particularly true
when it comes to dubious cancer treatment. The harm done by quackery may be
categorized as economic, direct, indirect, psychological and societal.


Direct Harm

Dubious therapies can cause death, serious injury, unnecessary suffering, and
disfigurement.

Ruth Conrad, an Idaho woman, had a horrible experience as a result of
consulting one of the state's many unlicensed naturopaths. While seeking
treatment for a sore shoulder, she also complained of a bump on her nose. The
naturopath stated that it was cancer and gave her a black herbal salve to apply
directly. Within a few days, her face became very painful and she developed red
streaks that ran down her cheeks. Her worried phone call to the naturopath
brought the explanation that the presence of the lines was a good sign because
they "resemble a crab, and cancer is a crab." He also advised her to apply more
of the black salve. Within a week, a large part of her face, including her
nose, sloughed off. It took three years and 17 plastic surgical operations to
reconstruct her face.


Indirect Harm

Some of the worst quackery-related tragedies result from delay or failure to
act. An example of a needless death involved an Oregon man who treated his
basal cell carcinoma of the mouth with a mail-order remedy for 15 years. What
makes this case especially tragic is that since this type of cancer almost
never metastasizes, he had many years in which to correct his folly. Although
badly disfigured by the growing tumor, he continued self-treatment.



"Natural" treatments that can delay proper care are often advocated by
well-meaning friends and relatives who are culturally conditioned to believe in
their value. This thinking is deeply rooted in many cultures and is as old as
written records themselves.

Pasteur's discovery was made more than a century ago. But even today, many
people perceive cancer as a modern-day "leprosy" and consider it "a curse by
God." The notion of a cancer-prone personality -- capable of self-healing with
psychological gymnastics that include visualization, laughter and excessive
optimism -- is unproven and may represent nothing more than elaboration of the
old folklore.

The frequency of needless or premature death due to quackery is difficult to
ascertain. A survey of 166 California oncologists done for the National Council
Against Health Fraud in 1980 found 12 probable needless deaths and 14 other
adversely affected patients.

Psychological Harm

In addition to the unjustified guilt referred to above, cancer patients and
their loved ones can be psychologically harmed in several other ways.

Misplaced trust.
A case I investigated from Oregon provides insight into the thinking and
actions of "true believers." A health food store owner discovered a lump in her
breast. After diagnosing it as cancer, she boasted to her health food friends
that she was "going to prove once and for all that diet cure works!"
Unfortunately, although at least 80% of self-discovered breast lumps are
benign, hers was cancerous.

Her first attempt at self-treatment was to apply the methods in the book The
Grape Cure. the tumor from growing.

Next, she turned to a popular herbalist in her community who treated her with
herbal remedies for about six months without avail. She then went to Mexico for
laetrile.

The most shocking part of the story is that she went to her grave still
believing that she had done the right thing.

"Stinger" wrote in message
. ..
Excellent posts, Soames.

If you get the pay channel "Showtime," Penn & Teller have done a couple of
excellent expose's on quackery in our society. Their show's called
"Bull****," and I love the irreverant way they expose fraud, hype,
quackery,
and theft.

-- Stinger


Good thing for Penn & Teller they aren't listening to shortwave. Their BS
detectors would be so overloaded their heads would explode.

Frank Dresser

I don't know about those products but somewhere, maybe in my old computer,
which is still operational, I have photocopies of the actual labs reports from
NIH that shows one non-toxic stuff did better than all the toxic
chemotherapies, but the published report,that I also have a copy of, shows the
opposite.

Sure the pharmaceutical industry is in bed with the military-industrial
complex, and all the three-letter Federal agencies.

Bill, K5BY

"WShoots1" wrote in message
...
I don't know about those products but somewhere, maybe in my old computer,
which is still operational, I have photocopies of the actual labs reports
from
NIH that shows one non-toxic stuff did better than all the toxic
chemotherapies, but the published report,that I also have a copy of, shows
the
opposite.

Sure the pharmaceutical industry is in bed with the military-industrial
complex, and all the three-letter Federal agencies.

Bill, K5BY

Bill,

I don't think that it's as sinister as you paint it.

The fact is that AFTER an MD graduates from medical school, completes his
internship, and joins the medical workforce, their main source for the
latest information on medicine is going to be pharmaceutical salesmen. It's
that simple.

It's not in the pharmaceutical companies' best interests to promote generics
or various other therapies -- they're in the pill business.

The pharmaceutical companies sponsor free junkets to "conferences" in
various resort areas that are little more than presentations of their latest
drugs. The doctor learns of the therapy, and prescribes the drugs, thinking
that he is following the state of the medical arts.

-- Stinger