In a September 24, 2016 article titled WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE U.S. HEALTHCARE SYSTEM AND WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO FIX IT, attorney Richard Jaffe (JD, Columbia University School of Law) wrote about how skeptics and quackbusters are now "filing false advertising complaints" (with state medical boards) against integrative medicine physicians. The excerpt below is from Mr. Jaffe's thought-provoking article:

          "Physicians must be circumspect and vigilant about what they say about their services and products because the sceptics (sic) and quack busters are filing false advertising complaints    
           against CAM physicians based on their web site claims. Nasty stuff; no doctor-patient relationship required. Just a wacko zealot with a computer sitting a thousand miles away with too
          much time is all it takes to cause grief to a CAM practitioner. Medical boards love these complaints since it’s an easy and cheap way to get practitioners. No medical experts reviewing
          charts, Just a review of the web site.

          "The regulators’ position is that they are protecting the public from misinformation. But it seems that much of their efforts are truth inhibiting and are based on an outdated paternalistic
          view from the days when medical information only came from Marcus Welby, M.D. and Reader’s Digest. So for sure, the regulators are part of the problem, at least for the CAM part of
          health care.

          "Of course, the FDA is also in the process of shutting down the hundreds of clinics which offer autologous stem cell transplants to tens of thousands of patients, including post
          mastectomy patients doing breast reconstruction surgery. This is horrible, and for more details see my previous post, and other posts at"

As such, Something Amiss anticipates complaints being filed by medical boards against CAM physicians based on content on their websites they deem "false advertising" or "deceptive". It is almost axiomatic that "high profile" integrative medicine docs -- those on officialdom's radar -- will be first up on the proverbial hit parade.

Question for you, SA reader: Granted, deceptive or fraudulent claims are a legal no-no. But are some of the things the takes exception to actually information that might steer suffering people to therapies that offer relief, remediation or more? 

Share this page!