Quote
rrmoderator
Alternative medicine can be destructive if someone either delays or doesn't seek medical treatment in favor of an unproven alternative.
In this area Stephen Barrett has performed a public service by exposing quacks.
Look, if Stephen Barrett legitimately went after specific "quacks" who were actively harming people, then I might have more respect for him. Randi, at least, seems to focus on those people who are downright frauds.
But Stephen Barrett does not, nor has he ever, focused solely on frauds in the alternative health profession.
He has systematically run a disinformation campaign to discredit the entire alternative health profession. He is not about exposing specific frauds. He labels the entire alternative health movement "quackery."
Acupuncture is one of his big targets. Acupuncture is a respected treatment protocol from China that has been around for thousands of years. From a Chinese perspective, acupuncture is considered to be mainstream and sound.
To Stephen Barrett, it is simply quackery, and there's no value to it. He will conveniently ignore any studies that show acupuncture is effective (and YES, I did email him once to point out a study that was announced widely in the news heralding SCIENTIFIC PROOF that acupuncture helped alleviate urinary tract infections).
Barrett completely ignores this type of data.
As a person who has had certain health problems that were not helped by conventional medicine, acupuncture has been invaluable to me personally. I would swear by it. And no, it's not an instant cure-all.
And no, it's not a placebo effect either. The acupuncturist will stick a needle in your leg and you will literally feel the chi energy running up it sometimes. If you think I'm making this up, why don't you go experience it for yourself instead of just dismissing it?
I am interested in results. Personal results. I try certain alternative therapies and if they work, I continue to use them. If they don't, I won't.
It's that simple.
I am not a victim or blindly giving my money away to someone who is a fraud. And you know what? Even if I were, the "fraud" makes me feel better, even if it's just a placebo effect, and that has value to me.
In my mind, praising Barrett in the same breath as Randi does a discredit to Randi. Randi, at least, is open enough to ask for proof. Barrett will dismiss proof even when given to him. The two are not in the same league whatsoever.
PS As for Barrett's "CV," of course he'll post a great copy of his resume online. I don't care. The man is a close-minded mean-spirited person who wants to destroy people's careers. And getting into the "Who's Who" of anything is no big deal - those companies will add almost anyone to the guide just to sell it to you.