Opinion by Dr. David Macallan
Stephen Barrett is a retired psychiatrist who spends his time zealously propagandizing against any progressive approaches to health care, including nutritional supplementation. Were it not for the power of the internet, he’d be unknown, but because his opinionated writings are many, and he’s learned how to use search engines ranking systems to get placed near the top, he’s now able to interfere with the activities of thousands of alternative health care professionals, supplement companies and the like - and in many cases, I suspect, steer people away from health care approaches that may have helped them.
Of course, the only ones that would turn away are those who take him at his word and don’t research further. The ones that take time to do so will quickly find out that Barrett simply doesn’t have the credentials or education to set himself up as the “expert” he claims to be. In fact, in a recent court case in California (which he lost) a panel of judges declared him biased and unworthy of credibility. No surprise there. I’ll post the judges’ opinion shortly so you can read it for yourself.
I’ll write further on Barrett and his ilk, but meanwhile here are a couple of links that will be helpful. Both items were written by our Director of Research and Development, Denise Autry, and while she was much more conciliatory than I would have been in the earlier submission (I don’t think his site is in any way “laudable”), they are both excellent summaries of why anyone that’s thoughtful and reasoning should view Barrett’s biased rhetoric as precisely that: extreme opinions disguised as “fact”.
For Denise Autry’s 2001 letter to Barrett click here.
For Denise Autry’s 2007 article on Barrett, click here.
