The Gary Null Show is here to inform you on the best news in health, healing, the environment. 

Dr. Beverly Rubik is an internationally renowned biophysicist investigating the role of consciousness in the physical world and complementary and alternative medicine, particularly the role of  the human biofield.  She is currently the founder of the Institute of Frontier Science, a nonprofit research laboratory in Emeryville California. Between 1988 and 1995, she was the Director of the Center for Frontier Sciences at Temple University and was a Congressionally appointed member of the National Institutes of Health advisory board for the Office of Alternative Medicine. Through her research the term "biofield" was accepted into the National Library of Medicine. Dr. Rubik serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine and the Journal of Vortex Science and technology. She holds a doctorate in biophysics from the University of California at Berkeley and is an adjunct faculty member of the California institute for Human Science, Saybrook University and the Energy Medicine University. Her present research is to investigate the effects of electromagnetic frequencies from wireless technology on human biology and the development of novel sensors for measuring Qi.  Her websites are FrontierSciences. org   and   BRubik.com

Study supports link between pollution and neuropsychiatric disorders University of Chicago, August 20, 2019

A new study led by University of Chicago researchers suggests a significant link between exposure to environmental pollution and an increase in the prevalence of neuropsychiatric disorders. Based on analysis of large population data sets from both the United States and Denmark, the study, published in PLoS Biology, found poor air quality associated with increased rates of bipolar disorder and major depression in both countries. "Our studies in the United States and Denmark show that living in polluted areas, especially early in life, is predictive of mental disorders," said computational biologist Atif Khan, PhD, the first author of the new study. "These neurological and psychiatric diseases--so costly in both financial and social terms--appear linked to the physical environment, particularly air quality."

Green space is good for your mental health -- the nearer the better!
University of Warwick (UK), August 20, 2019

First study to demonstrate relationship between green space and mental wellbeing at an individual level published Using data from 25,518 people, the researchers show that Londoners who live within 300m of green space have significantly better mental wellbeing
Proximity to green space was more important than lifestyle factors such as employment, income, and general health. It is hoped that planners will use the results to help create a healthier, happier and more productive urban landscape. The study, published in the August issue of Applied Geography, found:- Overall there is a very strong relationship between the amount of green space around a person's home and their feelings of life satisfaction, happiness and self-worth Green space within 300m of home had the greatest influence on mental wellbeing An increase of 1 hectare - about the size of an international Rugby Union pitch - within 300m of residents was associated with an increase of 8 percentage points in a life satisfaction, 7 in worth and 5 in happiness. Green space was less important for mental wellbeing in Central London and East London

(NEXT)

Study confirms cannabis flower is an effective mid-level analgesic medication for pain treatment University of New Mexico,
August 21, 2019

Using the largest database of real-time recordings of the effects of common and commercially available cannabis products in the United States (U.S.), researchers at The University of New Mexico (UNM) found strong evidence that cannabis can significantly alleviate pain, with the average user experiencing a three-point drop in pain suffering on a 0-10 point scale immediately following cannabis consumption. With a mounting opioid epidemic at full force and relatively few alternative painmedications available to the general public, scientists found conclusive support that cannabis is very effective at reducing pain caused by different types of health conditions, with relatively minimal negative side effects. Chronic pain afflicts more than 20 percent of adults and is the most financially burdensome health condition that the U.S faces; exceeding, for example, the combined costs of treating heart disease and cancer.

(NEXT)

Ginkgo Extract Lowers Oxidative Stress Leading to Reduced Amyloid Aggregation in Alzheimer Disease Dalian Medical University (China),
August 21, 2019

According to news reporting originating from Dalian, People’s Republic of China, research stated, “Abundant evidence demonstrates that oxidative stress may be not only an early event in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), but also a key factor in the pathogenesis of AD. Ginkgo Extract has a strong ability to scavenge oxygen free radicals and supply hydrogen.” Oxidative stress was assessed by measuring free radicals and the activities of antioxidant enzymes. Our studies showed that Ginkgo extract treatment reduced the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) significantly while total superoxide dismutase (T-SOD), catalase (CAT), and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) activities were enhanced “These findings suggest that Ginkgo extract can reduce oxidative stress by decreasing free radical and enhancing antioxidant status, further leading to reduced A aggregation; Ginkgo extract might be a potential therapeutic agent for Alzheimer’s disease (AD).”

(NEXT)

Low Intake of Vitamin E Accelerates Cellular Aging In Patients With Established Cardiovascular Disease University of Cordoba (Spain),
August 21, 2019

According to news originating from Cordoba, Spain, esearch stated, “Leukocyte telomere length (LTL) shortening is a biomarker of cellular aging that can be decelerated by diet. We aimed to investigate the effect of dietary intake of vitamin E on biomarkers of cellular senescence in patients with established cardiovascular disease.” DNA from 1,002 participants was isolated and Leukocyte telomere length was measured by real-time PCR. We found that patients with an inadequate intake of vitamin E had shorter LTL than those with an adequate intake. Moreover, we observed a positive correlation between olive oil, fish consumption and LTL. Subjects who consumed more than 30 mL olive oil/day had longer LTL than subjects with lower consumption (p=.013). Furthermore, we observed higher glutathione peroxidase activity in subjects consuming less vitamin E (p=.031).” According to the news editors, the research concluded: “Our findings support the importance of an adequate consumption of the antioxidant vitamin E, and the value of the diet as a modulating tool of the senescence process.”

(NEXT)

N-acetylcysteine Prevents Osteoporosis By Inhibiting Oxidative Stress Caused by Testosterone Deficiency Nanjing Medical University (China),
August 21, 2019

According to news reporting from Nanjing, People’s Republic of China, research stated, “Oxidative stress is associated with many diseases and has been found to induce DNA damage and cellular senescence. Numerous evidences support the detrimental effects of oxidative stress or cellular senescence on skeletal homeostasis.” According to the news reporters, the research concluded: “The results from this study suggest that NAC could be considered as a potential therapeutic agent for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis caused by testosterone deficiency.”

(NEXT)

Lifelong study links early blood pressure change to poorer brain health University College London, August 20, 2019

Changes in blood pressure in those as young as 36 are linked to markers of poorer brain health in later life, finds UCL-led research involving participants of Britain's oldest running birth cohort study. The findings from the Insight 46 study are published in The Lancet Neurology.

(NEXT)

Antibiotic use linked to heightened bowel cancer risk Johns Hopkins University, August 20, 2019

Antibiotic use (pills/capsules) is linked to a heightened risk of bowel (colon) cancer, but a lower risk of rectal cancer, and depends, to some extent, on the type and class of drug prescribed, suggests research published online in the journal Gut. The findings suggest a pattern of risk that may be linked to differences in gut microbiome (bacteria) activity along the length of the bowel and reiterate the importance of judicious prescribing, say the researchers.

(NEXT)

Nicotine-free e-cigarettes can damage blood vessels University of Pennsylvania, August 20, 2019

Smoking e-cigarettes, also called vaping, has been marketed as a safe alternative to tobacco cigarettes and is rising in popularity among non-smoking adolescents. However, a single e-cigarette can be harmful to the body's blood vessels -- even when the vapor is entirely nicotine-free -- according to a new study by researchers in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. The results were published today in Radiology.

Joseph Sternberg is a member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal where he hosts a the Political Economics column for its European edition. Joe joined the Journal in 2006 and edited its Business Asia column in Hong Kong.  Previously he was a journalist for the New York Sun and The Public Interest.  He is the author of the recent book "The Theft of a Decade: How the Baby Boomers Stole the Millennials Economic Future" -- which is a searing narrative about poor policies that have contributed Millennials economic well being and stability precarious at best.  Mr Sternberg is a graduate of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg and is speaking to us from London in the UK.

Wikipedia Skeptics’ Mission to Suppress the Dissemination of Quality Health and Medical Studies

By Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD

Skeptics place an enormous amount of importance in the scientific research that appears in peer-reviewed publications. At the same time it is correctly critical of the quality of large amounts of clinical research that gets published. The same is true for Quackwatch, the Skeptics' first-stop resource for information to debunk non-conventional and alternative medical systems, practices and its leading practitioners and advocates. Unfortunately, as we have documented elsewhere, Quackwatch has also been recognized by Skeptic editors who control approximately 700 entries dealing with alternative health and parapsychology on Wikipedia, and likely Jimmy Wales himself, as a legitimate and authoritative reference. But assuming Quackwatch is a reliable source of information is far from the truth. Nevertheless, Quackwatch's founder Stephen Barrett is heralded as an authority throughout many of Wikipedia's health pages. Barrett has accused the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), a federally funded department within the CDC, of “wasting money sponsoring useless studies.” Barrett and his Quackwatch colleagues are adamant that tax dollars should not be spent to investigate Complementary and Alternative Medicine's (CAM) therapeutic successes. Skeptics already believe they have the answer for CAM's achievements; that is, patients are being duped into a placebo effect. Similarly, the folks over at Skeptic group Science-Based Medicine (SBM), founded by Steven Novella, have also made it part of its mission to lobby against public funding for non-conventional medical research. On Quackwatch, Barrett references his colleague the late Dr. Wallace Sampson as an authoritative voice in his accusations against public funds being spent on CAM. However, Wallace likewise cannot be acknowledged as an objective voice representing sound scientific views. The irony, and hypocrisy, we find in Quackwatch and SBM complaints about peer-reviewed journals publishing studies into alternative and complementary medicine is that its own attempt to launch its own peer-reviewed journal was a dismal failure. Wallace Sampson was the co-founder and editor of the now defunct journal The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine and Aberrant Medical Practices, later renamed the Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine (SRAM). He was also an editor for Novella's SBM blog. The journal defined itself as the “only peer-reviewed journal devoted exclusively to objectively analyzing the claims of "alternative medicine." However, objectivity was one virtue the journal was woefully deficient. At a glance many of its contributing authors are familiar to Quackwatch and SBM blog readers, notably Kimball Atwood, the co-founder of Barrett’s National Council Against Health Fraud William Jarvis and Wallace himself. Although there is no recognizable direct financial connection between SRAM and the Quackwatch network, the journal appears to have started with the intent of being a kind of quasi-peer-reviewed Quackwatch with a glossy cover as a means to more effectively penetrate the medical establishment. The fact is that Quackwatch, and its successor SBM, have remained on the fringes of modern medicine. SBM has yet to gain widespread acceptance and is held with considerable suspicion even in the medical profession. It can perhaps be best understood as a small cult within conventional medicine at large. The SRAM journal was evaluated on three separate occasions by the National Library of Medicine to judge whether its professional standards were high enough to be included in the Medline/Pub Med’s Index Medicus and was rejected each time. SRAM was only in print between 2000-2007. It is also worth noting that SRAM editorial administration operated out of the leading Skeptic organization Center for Inquiry through which all subscription and press inquiries were directed. Stephen Barrett, Wallace Sampson, Steven Novella, Kimball Atwood and David Gorski are all leading celebrities in the Center, especially its Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. What is particularly important is to recognize that SRAM was a product of a network of Skeptic entities who share a mission to discredit CAM and natural health therapies, and this same network today dominates the Wikipedia's health pages. In his Quackwatch article “Problems with CAM Peer-Review and Accreditation,” while praising the peer-review process, Barrett notes that simply being approved for the Index Medicus does not “guarantee quality” research. We would certainly agree with this observation because the quality of a high percentage of conventional medical and drug research finding its way into print is deeply flawed. In recent years this has become somewhat of a scandal within the entire business of medical peer-reviewed literature. But Barrett’s hypocrisy in criticizing the British Medical Journal and the Annals of International Medicine for a “poor job in keeping out junk CAM reports” is worth noting. Quackwatch's animosity towards practically all alternative medicine, despite CAM's growing popular and scientific acceptance, confirms its strong bias that would oppose any CAM scientific support from appearing in important medical journals. The irony is that in order to be rejected from inclusion into the Index, a medical publication has to be REALLY POOR! In the Scimago Institution ranking of peer-reviewed medical journals, which is based upon the quality of science being published as well as its impact and number of citations in the medical literature as a whole, SRAM received an H Index of 9, placing the journal in the bottom quarter of medical publications. Many journals specializing in a variety of alternative medical systems, such as the International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, Medical Acupuncture, Journal of Chinese Traditional and Herbal Drugs, International Journal of Phytomedicine, Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Akupunktur, and Alternative and Complementary Therapies were ranked higher than SCAM. Some CAM journals ranked in the upper quarter of reliable publications such as PhytoMedicine, Journal of Natural Products, Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Acupuncture in Medicine, Integrative Cancer Therapies, Planta Medica and the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. Even Skepticism’s primary nemesis homeopathy is represented by the Journal of the Faculty of Homeopathy with an H score notably higher than SRAM. Barrett's and SBM's larger mission is to marginalize CAM practices and push it as far as possible to the hinterlands. They believe that increasing mainstream acceptance of CAM is contaminating modern medical practice and clinical protocols for treating patients. For obvious commercial reasons, the pharmaceutical industry has no objections with Quackwatch's and SBM's agendas. The founding of NCCAM as a federally funded department in order to support research into alternative medicine and health therefore poses an enormous threat to Skepticism's bottom-line philosophy of scientific reductionism. Big Pharma makes every effort to gain hegemony on how medicine is practiced in the US by lobbying Washington, influencing federal health agencies and buying off corporate media. Ridding CAM and other non-conventional medical therapies means that patients are offered only a single option for treatment and that is corporate, pharmaceutical-based medicine. As we pointed out in a previous article, Barrett and the SBM group display many of the same characteristics leveled against conspiracy theorists. They view natural health as a conspiracy orchestrated by practicing charlatans to fool the public by offering false promises in non-drug therapies in order to gain profit. Paranoia runs rampant in the diatribes written by Barrett, Novella and Gorski. For example, Barrett writes, “The NCCAM can be appropriately characterized as a cancer that metastasizes misinformation throughout our medical education system.” There is no sound explanation to validate this claim except to accept Barrett's opinion that the federal health agencies have been infiltrated and overrun by CAM proponents. This is of course preposterous. CAM funding makes up only a tiny percentage of tax dollars going to medical research. The vast amount in billions of dollars goes to the pharmaceutical industrial complex. Today, the majority of the research and development costs that go into a given drug is funded by the American public. It is estimated that a company may only contribute about 35 percent of total costs in a drug's development; the remainder is picked up by outside sources, most being from federal health agencies. To the contrary, almost no federal funding is provided to develop new promising alternative medical treatments. In summary, it is time for the media to undertake deeper investigations into the Skeptic network and the operations being coordinated between Quackwatch, Science-Based Medicine, the Skeptic flagship organization the Center for Inquiry and Wikipedia. This cultist network hides behind the veneer of "promoting science and scientific inquiry, critical thinking, science education, and the use of reason in examining important issues" (from the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry's mission statement). Rather, Skepticism is an ideology with all the trappings of a faith-based philosophy with a sole mission to penetrate the scientific community (with bogus journals such as the Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine), the mainstream media, and the public via Wikipedia. The more the darker agenda of Skepticism's network is brought to light, the faster we can be rid of this dangerous dogma that has been a leading obstacle to medical advancements and a deeper understanding of human biology and health.

In this eye-opening talk, veteran investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson shows how astroturf, or fake grassroots movements funded by political, corporate, or other special interests very effectively manipulate and distort media messages. Sharyl Attkisson is an investigative journalist based in Washington D.C. She is currently writing a book entitled Stonewalled (Harper Collins), which addresses the unseen influences of corporations and special interests on the information and images the public receives every day in the news and elsewhere. For twenty years (through March 2014), Attkisson was a correspondent for CBS News.

Leonard Lopate is a popular American radio personality who currently hosts the talk show Leonard Lopate at Large on WBAI, where he first started his broadcasting career in 1977 and ran until the mid 1980s. Until 2017, The Leonard Lopate Show was aired daily on WNYC-FM, New York City’s premier public radio station.  Leonard is best known for his interviewing guests on a very wide range of topics, from politics and currents events, modern science, history and literature, film and theater to food and wine. He has received three James Beard Awards for his coverage of food. Leonard studied art and painting at Brooklyn and Hunter colleges where he studied with the famous American artists Mark Rothko and Ad Reinhardt.  His current program can be heard every weekday from 1-2 pm on WBAI following this broadcast. 

Quackwatch’s Conspiratorial Theory Against Alternative Medicine

Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD

Progressive Radio Network, August 15, 2019

A trend that is increasingly becoming accepted in mainstream, conventional medicine has been the acceptance of complementary and alternative medical theories and practices. Since 1997, Quackwatch has been the nation’s leading voice opposing the growing popularity in alternative medicine and funding for research into its efficacy. Portending to be a consumer protection resource, the organization believes it is serving public health. But Quackwatch is only one faction of a much larger movement and effort to stamp out non-conventional medicine. In the world of the scientific materialism promulgated by Quackwatch and Wikipedia, all roads lead to the ideological movement known as modern Skepticism. Each is a player within a self-reinforcing feedback loop that deceives the public and distorts the very core of the life sciences. For those who are exceptionally critical of Skepticism’s radical reductionist view of medicine and health, it has become evident that this loose confederacy of groups—Quackwatch, Science Based Medicine, Skeptic organizations, and Wikipedia—have sacrificed objectivity for groupthink. 

For several decades, the website Quackwatch, founded by former psychiatrist Dr. Stephen Barrett, has been a one-stop shopping center for negative critiques and reviews about practically every kind of medical therapy and practice that falls under the umbrella of alternative medicine. It has been memorialized by Skeptics who have in turn infected many of Wikipedia’s entries with Quackwatch references under the false pretense that it is a scientifically reliable resource. 

To be fair, not all of Quackwatch’s criticisms are unwarranted; there are certainly charlatans and entrepreneurs practicing in both conventional and alternative medical camps. Magnetic bracelets, magnetizing beverages, calorie blockers, multilevel marketing for various supplemental products, magic muscle pills, cellulite removers, among others we regard as nonsense as well. And pharmaceutical executives notoriously fool federal health officials with only partial or fake science to get ineffective and toxic drugs through hurdles at the FDA. Yet on numerous other counts, Barrett is flatly wrong. This not only concerns his limited knowledge and highly biased analysis of the scientific literature supporting many common alternative medical practices and natural nutritional protocols, but also many commercial products Americans use or are exposed to on a daily basis. 

In his book Chemical Sensitivity: The Truth About Environmental Illness, Barrett states that we live in a time “when our food supply is the world’s safest and our antipollution program is the best we have ever had.” He argues that those who fear chemical- and food-related sensitivities, or who believe they are being poisoned by cosmetic ingredients, pesticides, household cleaning and petrochemical products, fast foods and the average American meat-based diet, food preservatives, fluoride, mercury amalgams, and other environmental toxic substances, are simply delusional. Barrett’s books and Quackwatch articles repeatedly deny that chemical exposure and our industrial processed foods are associated with any diseases.  But scientific consensus strongly disagrees. Barely a day goes by without a new study appearing in the scientific literature about a recently discovered health risk regarding any one of these issues. 

The question we ask ourselves is why, and perhaps how, can Barrett categorically deny the enormous body of peer-reviewed scientific evidence that confirms Americans are living in an unhealthy toxic environment every day in their lives? Twenty years ago, Cornell scientists estimated that 40 percent of diseases were environmentally caused, and our planet has become far more noxious since then. The World Health Organization has released dire warnings regarding this trend and estimated that 1 in 4 global deaths are due to air, water, soil pollution and chemical exposure. In 2016, Dr. Stephen Rappaport at the University of California at Berkeley published his research in PLoS One showing that environmental factors, and not genetics, are the major causes of chronic diseases. High sodium, alcohol, low omega-3 fatty acids, lead exposure high trans fatty acids, occupational chemicals and calcium, Vitamin A, iron and zinc deficiencies ranked among the top 15 causes. However, Barrett would rebuff these findings; they do not fit into the corporate-science paradigm he espouses.

During an August 26, 2018 podcast interview on the Skeptic Zone in Australia, Barrett denied receiving support from the pharmaceutical industry, a charge his critics frequently level upon him. Of course, it is not necessary to receive funds or remuneration in order to also serve the financial interests of large multinational corporations. Barrett’s role as a Board member of Scientific Advisers to the American Committee on Health Science (ACHS) for almost 4 decades however provides a strong case for his strong biases that would explain his favoritism towards many drugs and commercial products that have been proven to carry high health risks. 

ACHS is a corporate-funded consumer advocacy organization that makes the false claim that it supports evidence-based medicine. However practically every Trustee member of the organization has direct ties to large corporations, which is why ACHS advocates for genetically modified foods and industrial agriculture, nuclear power and natural gas, vaccine mandates, cosmetic chemicals, the deregulation of environmentally unsafe toxic chemicals and FDA fast-tracking of drugs. Mother Jones reported that in 2012, ACHS’s donors including Chevron, Coca-Cola, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer Cropscience, Procter and Gamble, big ag giant Syngenta, McDonalds and the tobacco industry. It has also received funding to lobby on behalf Pepsi, Monsanto, Exxon-Mobil and British American Tobacco as well as receiving funds from the Koch family and major forces within the Randian pro-industry American Legislative Exchange Council. 

Finally, it should be noted that the watchdog organization Center for Science in the Public Interest issued a report concluding that ACHS promotes fraudulent science to whitewash the health risks of some our most dangerous commercial products. The report stated that the organization is “a consumer fraud; as a scientific group, ACSH seems to arrive at conclusions before conducting studies. Through voodoo or alchemy, bodies of scientific knowledge are transmogrified into industry-oriented position statements.”

Therefore, after four decades of fraternizing with ACHS’s executives and providing scientific advice on projects for its corporate clients, how can one accept Barrett’s scientific objectivity?  He has been repeatedly wrong on most of his positions about industrial food and chemical safety. Arguments against Barrett and Quackwatch serving the private corporate interests of some of our nation’s largest polluters, the pharmaceutical cartel and major contributors to environmentally-caused diseases hold absolutely no merit. Therefore, why should anyone believe his assessment of alternative health is scientifically plausible?   

This may explain why Barrett has had a career that has been largely out of touch with America’s declining health trends now that iatrogenic or medical-based error is the third leading cause of mortality in the US. The weeds of bias have overgrown any light from reality. However, this does not explain why Quackwatch is obsessively determined to undermine complementary, alternative, non-conventional medical therapies. While the site pretends to be protecting public health by attempting to discredit effective, cost-saving health practices, we observe that it is serving the economic interests of the pharmaceutical industry. By discrediting every alternative medical therapy or supplemental nutrient or botanical medicine a patient may seek out for relief or treatment for a health condition or disease, Quackwatch in effect diverts their queries back into our broken drug-based medical system as the only recourse of treatment available. 

In an ingenious way, Barrett has created a perfect distraction. In his estimation, those who place their faith in Chiropractic, acupuncture, homeopathy, Chinese and Ayurveda medicine, nutritional therapy, etc. are mentally unsound. On occasion he has labeled patients who turn towards these therapies as “paranoid,” “hysterical” and subject to “certain psychological factors.”  As for practitioners of these healing arts, he would prefer to see them facing a judge in a courtroom. Therefore, Quackwatch has given birth to a wild conspiracy theory. And this has contaminated the entire Skeptic movement and Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia have drunk deep from the gully of this conspiratorial Kool aid. 

We must realize that the vast majority of people seeking relief for any disease will begin with conventional medicine. In many cases that is sufficient and we compliment that. Orthodox approaches are especially beneficial in emergency medicine and surgery. However, most patients who turn towards alternative therapies do so because the predominantly drug-based treatments either failed or they suffered the drugs’ adverse effects. So where is the study that enables Quackwatch and Skeptics to confirm that these patients have not benefitted from alternative approaches?  

Over the years we have interviewed hundreds of board-certified physicians who only started to explore complementary and alternative medical modalities after their orthodox approaches to treat patients were found limited. Not only did they discover many of these protocols ineffective, but often in fact harmful. Many physicians reported that it was a lonely journey they undertook. It was fraught with criticism and personal attacks.  In the case of California and New York, some early physicians in the 1960s and 1970s were brought up on charges of fraud: the fraud being that they were not using accepted medical protocols at that time, despite their clinical experience that their patients benefitted. Today physicians are permitted to practice with informed consent without the fear of being harassed or the loss of their medical license. One example is the second largest medical group, the Chiropractors. Upon reviewing the scientific literature, there is a growing body of literature that supports Chiropractic practice. Chiropractic’s success is simply because patients find relief and this is not due to any placebo effect as Skeptics would force us to believe. The same is true for acupuncture, homeopathy, naturopathy and other approaches to natural health. Therefore, the scientific literature has kept pace with consumer interest and these alternative medical therapies.  Yet Quackwatch and the Skeptics remain frozen in a mindset similar to the AMA’s Committee on Quackery back in the 1950s. 

Nevertheless, if you search on Google, you will be taken to Wikipedia, which reflects Skepticism’s biases against alternative medicine’s efficacy. This is one among other reasons why Quackwatch, the Skeptics and Science-Based Medicine must be challenged for propagandizing unscientific and biased opinions.

Join the Wellness Way for internationally-known Dr. Sherri Tenpenny's groundbreaking presentation about the scientific truth behind vaccines. This talk is only a small part of her larger mission to deliver reliable vaccine information that is rarely reported in the mainstream media, combined with practical tips for natural health and healing.

The Gary Null Show is here to inform you on the best news in health, healing, the environment