Court Victory for Chiropractors Against Quack Buster, First Amendment Rules
Dr. Stephen Barrett's Claims Did Not Hold Up
According to a verdict in the Appeals Court of the State of Pennsylvania, Barrett is the loser in his defamation case against chiropractor Tedd Koren, D.C. Barrett charged Koren with defamation of character and lost, according to a June 14 press release by the World Chiropractic Alliance.
Koren's company, Koren Publications, who markets educational pamphlets for chiropractors, once referred to Barrett as a "Quackpot" and that his vocal nemesis was "de-licensed," and "in trouble."
As a result, Barrett sued Koren for defamation in 2002 and a three-lawyer arbitration panel awarded Barrett damages in the amount of $16,500 and ordered Koren to retract his statements. In October of 2005, Judge J. Brian Johnson of the Pennsylvania court dismissed the lawsuit and ruled in favor of Koren and his First Amendment rights. The Pennsylvania Appeals Court upheld the original court's decision on June 14, 2007.
Barrett's quackery claims, found on his ten-year running web site Quackwatch.com, extend well beyond chiropractic care to many fields in both alternative and allopathic medicine, and include what Barrett deems as " Fad Diagnoses," such as Lyme disease, Gulf War Syndrome, Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome, and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
Additionally, far-reaching criticisms in position papers and forum discussions involve a plethora of well-known individuals such as Andrew Weil, twice Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling, and Deepak Chopra, among hundreds of others both respected and controversial in their respective fields.
Attorney Carlos Negrete, legal counsel for the World Chiropractic Alliance (WCA), said in a press release, "facts about Barrett's own credentials that shocked even his supporters" came out in the proceedings and "under intense cross-examination, Barrett admitted that he had not been a licensed physician for more than a decade and had failed the neurological exam, preventing him from being certified as a specialist."
"Barrett also admitted, under questioning, that he misrepresented himself as a licensed physician in a previous court case," said Negrette in the press release.
It is thought by many in the chiropractic industry that Barrett has made a career out of attacking chiropractors and their methods. Chiropractic care makes up a significant proportion of the Quackwatch web site. Yet, for better or worse, there are few health industries Barrett or his followers fail to attack in some form or fashion.
Of little dispute is the value of promoting public knowledge concerning true quackery, involving dangerous products or procedures, bogus health claims or outright fraud that seize both victims' health and pocketbooks. But many people in the health and private sector feel that Barrett has gone too far, is vindictive and that his status as an expert is over-inflated.
WCA President Terry A. Rondberg, DC, agreed with Negrete. "This is a turning point not only for Barrett, but for all unscientific and uninformed opponents who seek to impose the medical monopoly on the public."
Sources: This story was adapted in part by a press release from the World Chiropractic Alliance,
(http://media.prnewswire.com/en/jsp/latest.jsp?resourceid=3494905&access=EH), June 14, 2007
The American Journal of Clinical Chiropractic, (http://www.idealspine.com/pages/ajcc_october_2005_quackbuster_vs_ted_koren.htm), October 2005
Court Orders Quackbusters Barrett and Polevoy to Post $433,715.93 Bond, The Bolen Report (http://www.bolenreport.net/feature_articles/feature_article060.htm)
Published by Donna Porter
Writer / Journalist -- A Yahoo News! Contributor Donna began her writing and internet career in 1995 in the health industry and became an early dot-com entrepreneur soon after. Masters certified in Internet... View profile
- Our Wonderful Bill of Rights: The First AmendmentThe First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was intended to protect our right to practice our religious faith freely; and yet, the Supreme Court has often invoked this amendment to justify decisions restricting our...
- Do You Know Your Rights? An AC Experiment on the First AmendmentCan you name all five freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment? This is a look at how much the average American knows (or more often, doesn't know) about the First Amendment.
- Hair and Obscenity: First Amendment LawIn 2005, an anonymous group protested the performance of "Hair" at a local community college. The following was written in response, containing cites to the First Amendment law associated with any performance.
Obscenity, Internet Censorship and the First AmendmentPornography and other graphic materials existed before the Internet, but the technology's far-reaching capabilities have made this material more accessible and intrusive. Time w...- The First Amendment and Its Advantages Throughout HistoryThe following paper outlines the advantages of our First Amendment rights.
- Anti-alternative "Quackbusters" Have Giant Court Losses on Two Continents
- Quack or Cure: How to Tell If a Product is a Scam
- Tackling Overfeeding in Infants and Discovering the Short- and Long-term Effects,...
- The Impact of the First Amendment of Education
- Why I Love and Loathe the First Amendment
- Imus Hires Top Notch First Amendment Attorney
- Don Imus' Firing, the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech




18 Comments
Post a CommentFantastic reporting!
Donna, I agree with others' comments as well. Well very writen, informative article.
Five stars again, Donna!
Thanks for another professional article and excellent reporting.
Thanks for the great report. This will be an endless debate - but Barrett needs a more diplomatic approach. Weird dude.
Donna: Just when I believe you couldn't write any better, you get ...way better- this is fantastic writing. The links are great, the whole article smacks of excellence! Way to go! -Dana
Interesting case!
Great job in reporting.
Bravo to Donna Porter
In Barrett Vs Rosenthal, I recently defeated Stephen Barrett and others from this "quackbuster" gang in the Supreme Court of California.
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
One warning: They are very vindictive and will probably now come after Donna for daring to report the facts about this case.
Bravo to Donna Porter
Well done and scholarly article on this case. Excellent!