Dr. Mercola is NOT a quack. Far from it. I have been studying health since 1992. That's 22 years. I started receiving health newsletters back then (that took no advertising) and have learned from the likes of Dr. David Williams, Dr. Jonathon Wright, Dr. William Campbell Douglas, Dr Russell Blaylock, Dr. Julian Whitaker, Dr. Andrew Weil, and Dr. Stephen Sinatra. I’ve also read countless books, and have traveled the world attending health seminars. I started following Dr. Mercola in 1999, before he sold a thing.

I have found the information and interviews that Dr. Mercola puts out on his website invaluable and completely inline with these other doctors.

The problem is people that what you read in mainstream media is MANIPULATED by the advertisers (follow the money!) The same is true of this article!

Do not believe the negative comments here. And do NOT believe Stephen Barrett of quackwatch. The very fact that they site him in this article is a joke! He is no authority and his website is SOLELY dedicated to bashing anything natural. That is NOT truthful reporting. That is BIASED reporting with an agenda, If he could he would bash Mother Nature!

Rumor has it that big pharma has paid for his court appearances when he has been sued and each time he has lost!

The MOST IMPORTANT thing to understand about Stephen Barrett is that...

It is common knowledge that Stephen Barrett has been Officially Declared by the US Court System, in a PUBLISHED Appeals Court Decision (NCAHF v King Bio), to be "Biased, and unworthy of credibility."

What that statement means, in layman's terms, simply, is that it is common knowledge that OFFICIALLY - NOTHING HE SAYS CAN BE LEGALLY RELIED UPON.

Frequently, unethical attorneys use Barrett's writings to discredit victims in a courtroom, or administrative hearing, situation. This activity is, literally, a "Fraud on the Court" and should be dealt with in the harshest manner possible - including a request for Sanctions and a complaint to the local Bar Association against the attorney's license to practice law.

Should the attorney using Barrett's writings, be an employee of a government agency, acting in that capacity, then this activity is cause for discipline, including termination. Use this situation to stop any, and all, proceedings, and make the "use of Barrett" the issue immediately. Every government agency has an internal investigative branch - go there immediately and file a complaint against the employee, and the employee's supervisor. Also, file a complaint to the local Bar Association against the attorney's license to practice law.

Sometimes, but not as often as before, journalists quote Barrett. This activity constitutes outright libel, every time, and is actionable immediately. Start by filing a formal complaint to the top Editor or Publisher of the media.

"Quackbusting" - is a Profitable Business...

Frankly, "quackbusting" is a profitable industry, and Stephen Barrett plays it to the hilt.

In a Canadian lawsuit (see below) Barrett admitted to the following:

"The sole purpose of the activities of Barrett & Baratz are to discredit and cause damage and harm to health care practitioners, businesses that make alternative health therapies or products available, and advocates of non-allopathic therapies and health freedom."

Stephen Barrett testifies for money. He claims he's an "expert" in virtually everything. Those "expert witness" fees seem to be a significant part of Barrett's existence.

In a California Court case, former Barrett peer, and fellow Board Member of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), William Jarvis PhD, testified, under oath, that Stephen Barrett and Robert Baratz conspired to use the NCAHF, without Board permission, as a Plaintiff in over 40 cases in California, where Barrett and Baratz were to testify as "expert witnesses," and get expert witness fees. The NCAHF Board was never consulted.

However, sometimes their plans fail.

One of those cases caused the NCAHF to be saddled with over $100,000 in legal fees awarded their victim - and the NCAHF doesn't have the money to pay that debt. In fact, the NCAHF is SO DESPERATE for funds it is being run out of a cardboard box in the back room of Robert Baratz's Braintree, Massachusetts hair removal and ear piercing salon.

Those type of cases Barrett involved the NCAHF in were considered so heinous that the people of California just passed an initiative (Proposition #64) banning this kind of lawsuit for all time.

Barrett's claim to be a Consumer Advocate is an insult to American consumers.

Organized Stupidity is the Hallmark of the Quackbuster Conspiracy...

Barrett, and his vacuous minions, like to spout off other stupid "rules" that they think should apply to health care - the application of which, has to make the scientific community shudder.

One of the other totally BRAINLESS statements Barrett, and his parrotts, like to to screech out is "It hasn't been double-blind studied!!"

The "double-blind study" is one of about 45 different kinds of scientific studies used, and approved for use, within the scientific community. It was designed for, and is usually restricted to, testing new dangerous drugs for the claims drug companies wish to make about their new laboratory produced products. Generally, in this type of study, you give half of the group the new pill, and the other half gets a sugar pill that looks just like the original. This type of study simply does not apply to new research. Never has, never will.

And worse, the "double-blind study" is considered to be heinous, and was banned by world government during the Helsinki Accord in 1964.

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

http://www.raysahelian.com/qua...
http://www.naturalnews.com/041...
http://educate-yourself.org/cn...
http://www.anh-europe.org/news...