February 28, 2001

Opinion by Tim Bolen

The "Quackpot Menace" in the United States is floundering. Chief quackpot Stephen Barrett (www.quackwatch.com) has been lashing out in desperation, trying to save the remains of his internet business. Hate-mongering, in the new millenium, apparently, has a limited appeal. Barrett's internet business consists primarily of painting American leading-edge health humanitarians with the brush of "quackery." I believe him to be funded by some of the sleazier operators within the Medical-Industrial Complex.

Florida, I believe, is one of the last strongholds of "quackpottery" in the United States. The battle in Florida over the "Florida Dental Board vs. America (Phillips)" case is an important one... Barrett, and his minions can't afford to lose too many more battles in the US before their whole house of cards implodes. They are desperate to win Florida.

Florida could be their Waterloo. And, they are not winning...

The official Administrative Law Hearing in the case is over. All that's left now is the final presentations and summations to the judge. Then, of course, the judge makes his recommended decision to the Board.

That's where it's going to get interesting...

I think that, under the current policy administration, no matter what the judge recommends, or what the facts are, the Florida Dental Board will vote to revoke world-renowned leading-edge Dentist Doug Phillips' license. The people of Florida, at this time, have no control over Dental Board decisions.

I think so, because I believe that the decisions on whom to prosecute, and for what, by the Florida Dental Board, are being made by quackbuster king-pin; de-licensed MD Stephen Barrett, in his basement in Allentown, PA.

Phillips' support network is ready for such an action. Such an action on the part of the board is just exactly what Health Freedom Fighters throughout the US want this board to do - so they can use the case to remove ALL trials of leading-edge health practitioners from the hands of the quackbuster manipulated licensing boards - permanently - and, perhaps, demonstrate a RICO conspiracy.

Duplicating what's already happening, right now, in New York...



Establishing a legal precedent is an important social issue tool. And, this is the case to do it. Barrett's dirty little fingerprints are all over the Phillips' case. More so since the final prosecution "rebuttal" came to pass.

With the Prosecution floundering in the case, to the amazement (and amusement) of Phillips' support team, Barrett sent one of his top guns (Robert S. Baratz - MD, DDS, PhD) to Florida as a last minute "Emergency" rebuttal witness.

Boy, was that a hoot...

Baratz was so inept, and made such a total ass out of himself during testimony, that the Prosecutor leaped to her feet, screaming "this deposition is over!!!" while slamming books and papers all over the courtroom. I think, too, she was trying to save the remains of her prosecutorial career.

If there was any doubt in anyone's mind about a "quackbuster conspiracy" being behind the attack on Phillips, Robert S. Baratz, in a wild-eyed sweaty display, left no doubt in observer's minds. I wish we'd videotaped it. We did, however, audio-tape it, and there will soon be a transcript of Bobbie Baratz's demise on the witness stand.

What's unbelievable to me, is that people like Baratz were EVER given any credence in a courtroom ANYWHERE in this country.

Phillips' lawyer wiped up the floor with Baratz. So much so that Baratz, looking like he might be ready for a heart attack, shrieked to the courtroom "I'm not going to answer any more of your questions!"

Phillips' supporters, seated in the courtroom, got a belly laugh out of that. So did I...

Phillips attorney is insisting that the judge listen to every word of Baratz's deposition... Baratz, besides showing up as a fool, made Phillips' case.



Here is a litle bit of news you won't find on www.quackwatch.com. Stevie Barrett definitely doesn't want anyone to know this is happening.

In New York State, attorneys for leading-edge health professionals are targeting the relationship between New York quackpots and a notorious State Attorney General Prosecutor. Formal complaints have been filed, and the quackpot menace, in shock, is reeling under the assault.

We'll keep you posted...



Douglas Phillips DDS holds a unique position in American society. He has been brought to trial on charges for something he did not do, and the prosecution knows he didn't do it, but they’re prosecuting him anyway.

Not only that, but the prosecution knows who really did do the deed, and has no jurisdiction over the person that did do it. Even more, the person who did do what Phillips is accused of, did it legally in the State where it was actually done.

Confused? Don’t be. It’s just another "quackpot menace" persecution directed out of a basement in Allentown PA. It isn't supposed to make sense...

Monday, January 22, 2001 was the continuation of a trial (Florida Dental Board vs. Douglas Phillips DDS) that can be considered a landmark for consumer choice issues in Dentistry. Phillips is accused of using unorthodox methods on his patients. Phillip’s worldwide patient support network replies, “It’s because of those unorthodox (specialized) methods we travel this far.” Phillips handles unusual dental problems.

The case against Phillips is in itself “unorthodox.” He was selected for prosecution by the Florida Dental board during a ten-minute Probable Cause Hearing, of which he was not aware of, and did not attend, on the basis of a description of “an unorthodox test” that Phillips was accused of doing. Phillips never did this test, and has no idea of how to perform it. Nor does he understand how the case ever got this far.

Neither Phillips, nor his attorney, were ever informed of the specifics of the complaint until a trial date to consider removal of Phillips’ license to practice Dentistry had been set. During the discovery phase of the case, Phillips found out that accusations had been brought against him for conducting a test ACTUALLY PERFORMED BY A NATUROPATHIC DOCTOR IN CALIFORNIA, on a patient; two years after the patient had left his care, and moved to California.

The Florida State Prosecutor came to court, last October, (1) unaware that Phillips had never conducted the test described in the Probable Cause Hearings, and (2) began her case against Phillips by claiming that a test that Phillips DOES DO (Autonomic Response Testing) was quackery - because an internet website says so.

The prosecutor’s case is apparently based on the dubious claims of one Stephen Barrett, a de-licensed MD who operates an Internet website called www.quackwatch.com out of his basement in Allentown, PA. Barrett claims that Autonomic Response Testing is “Quackery.” Other Internet sites, like the Mayo Clinic, and the University Hospitals of Cleveland, plus other world experts, laud the benefits of these tests as a diagnostic tool.

It is no surprise to me that de-licensed MD Stephen Barrett claims to know more than the Mayo Clinic, or the University Hospitals of Cleveland. His lies, misrepresentations, and distorted reality views are his source of income.

A Florida State Attorney, in the original Probable Cause Hearing (which Phillips was not invited to) had downloaded Barrett’s writings on Autonomic Response Testing, and submitted them as evidence. Barrett has no professional qualifications that would make him an expert on this subject. In fact, Barrett, who claims to be a retired Psychiatrist, in a recent a court case, was forced to admit under oath, that he had never completed the requirements to become Board Certified as a Psychiatrist.

Phillips support group is looking into the process to file formal complaints against the Florida State employees involved in this colossal blunder. Supporters are angry about the legal costs incurred, the damage the unwarranted accusations have caused against Phillips, and the use of www.quackwatch.com as an expert resource.

Quackwatch.com owner Barrett, deluged with lawsuits nationwide, is scrambling to protect his Internet business. He has already lost four cases in actions with well-known health leaders, and a social activist, who questioned his actions. Florida State employees, apparently, made no investigation of Barrett’s credibility before presenting downloads from his site as “evidence.”


INTERESTING SIDENOTE: The test that Phillips did not do, that was actually done by a Naturopath in California, is also known worldwide, and has its basis in Oriental Medicine.



www.talkinternational.com -“What’s New”

www.altavista.com - Type in the words “Autonomic Response Testing.”

www.dentalpatientfreedom.com. - Phillips’ support group website

http://mediswww.cwru.edu/dept/neurology/autonomic/autonomic_test.html - The University Hospitals of Cleveland gives, I think, the simplest explanation of the science at the web address. It is written for the layman.

www.halcyon.com/www3/iasp/TC98NovDec.html - The Mayo Clinic article, written by Paola Sandroni, MD, PhD, at their website is much more detailed, and is written for the scientist.

www.quackwatch.com - Search this website to find Barrett’s claims at expertise in areas he has no training or qualifications to discuss. When Barrett’s writings were presented to the government of New Zealand in a discussion of Chiropractic, the Investigatory committee found Barrett’s writings to be “propaganda, and of no evidentiary value.”


Stay Tuned...


Tim Bolen

JuriMed - Public Relations and Research Group

FDA "Backs Down(?)" Over Deadly Mercury Amalgams...

Opinion by Consumer Advocate  Tim Bolen  

Monday, March 19th, 2007

One of the biggest scandals in American health care is coming to a head this March 27th, 2007.  In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, a case, called "Moms Against Mercury, et al., v. FDA" will get its time in the sunlight, and the Defendant, the United States Food & Drug Administration (FDA) isn't doing well in its Defense.

The case is simple.  Citizens are suing the FDA for NOT, during the last THIRTY YEARS, ruling on the safety, or danger, of mercury amalgam tooth fillings.  The Plaintiffs want mercury amalgam tooth fillings banned completely, and forever.

And, the FDA has virtually no defense...

The US anti-amalgam movement, an aggressive division of the North American Health Freedom Movement, has for years, chipped away at "official dentistry's" promotion of mercury amalgam tooth fillings, pointing out, correctly, their inherent dangers.  But "official dentistry" doesn't  listen, and in fact, actively punishes dentists that shy away from, or actively advertise the removal of, mercury amalgam fillings.  The war has been active for a long time.

With this legal assault the anti-amalgams have adopted an effective offense.  In essence, you might say, the anti-amalgam people, armed with silver bullets, have found the secret entrance to the FDA's dungeon, climbed down into the sanctuary during the daylight hours, opened the coffins of the FDA's sleeping staff dentists, sprinkled holy water over them, and driven wooden stakes through their hearts.  So to speak.

This case can be the decisive blow - for the FDA attorneys don't have very good answers.   The case reads:


Thirty years after being directed to classify all devices, 20 years after classifying all other dental fillings materials, 13 years after being mandamused to classify but winning on exhaustion grounds, nine years after specifically promising (in writing) to classify, four years after pleading no excuses to Congress for not classifying, it’s clear that FDA’s policy is not to classify encapsulated mercury amalgam. To say FDA ignores this issue is incorrect: FDA’s public relations machine is has been in high gear, as the Center for Devices bobs and weaves about its duty to classify through three “literature reviews,” three “consumer updates,” one “white paper,” and a plethora of sound bites.

The decision not to classify – a plain violation of the statute – is thus a reviewable decision.

FDA’s choice of cheerleader for amalgam, instead of regulator of amalgam, is not acceptable. FDA otherwise bans, limits, and warns against other products, drugs, or foods containing mercury, while other federal health agencies and the health regulators of other nations condemn mercury amalgam.

FDA not only ducks classifying, but also refuses to do an environmental assessment, which would plainly indicate the need for an environmental impact statement. Nor will FDA seek a timely and valid panel recommendation – the previous one being too old (1994), procedurally invalid (no statement for departing from Class III), and sub silentio overruled in September 2006. The writing is on the wall in both cases: An environmental assessment will plainly indicate the need for an environmental impact statement, which report would show alternatives to toxic mercury can be used in fillings, thereby eliminating the major source of mercury in the nation’s wastewater – amalgam. In September, the FDA panel decisively rejected the FDA staff’s pseudo-science about amalgam (e.g., it is safe because it’s been used for a long time), so FDA ducks asking the panel for formal action.

FDA keeps amalgam on the market via a sham substantial equivalence test, pretending that a powder half-device containing no mercury equates to a full device capsule that is 50% toxic mercury. When asked by Senator Kennedy why this practice is allowed, Commissioner Von Eschenbach in writing denied that FDA considers the two devices to be substantially equivalent. Since the staff has ten times approved amalgam under this test in the past six years (and many times before that), perhaps the Center for Devices is engaged in rogue activity unknown to the Commissioner’s office.

The correct recourse is not a mere order to classify, allowing an unclassified, unregulated device – with 50% mercury and for which substitute materials are legal and available for any dentist to place – to remain in commerce, but to remove it from commerce temporarily until FDA complies with its legal duties.


This Court must direct FDA to start being amalgam’s regulator instead of amalgam’s cheerleader. Whether by intention or lethargy, FDA’s Center for Devices has protected the marketing of mercury fillings by doing none of its regulatory duties – neither classifying nor requiring proof of safety nor doing an environmental assessment nor seeking a valid recommendation from the scientific panel. Since they have ducked and dodged classifying encapsulated amalgam after classifying all other dental filling materials in the 1980s, the mercury apologists at the Center for Devices by now realize that completing any of these tasks will lead straight to the end of mercury in dentistry.

Thus, an order to classify is not enough. The legal prerequisites (environmental impact statement and Panel referral) mean the process will take months; the record of bad faith suggests it will take years. Amalgam is illegally in commerce. It must be removed from commerce forthwith, temporarily, until FDA chooses to complete its regulatory duties.

What was the FDA's response to this legal action?

Not much.

Charlie Brown, two-time elected Attorney General for the State of West Virginia, and now attorney for the Plaintiffs, says of the case:

Our case, filed April 27, 2006, by 9 petitioners (names below)* charges FDA with illegally allowing the sale of mercury fillings.  For thirty years, FDA has defiantly refused to classify amalgam -- even though this step is required as the legal prerequisite to sale of any implants.  Even the repudiation of its pseudo-science by two FDA Scientific Panels on September 7, 2006 has not deterred FDA, who is making false and deceptive claims to mask the vote of these Panels.

Faced with standing before a federal court, FDA now departs from its role as chief cheerleader for mercury fillings.  In its brief, FDA admits, five times, that it does not know if mercury amalgam is safe or unsafe!

The nine petitioners who sued FDA:  Four organizations: Moms Against Mercury (Amy Carson, Angela Medlin), Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice (Mark Mitchell, M.D.), Oregonians for Life (Mary Starrett), and California Citizens for Health Freedom (Frank Cuny);  two state officials: California Dental Board Public Member Kevin J.Biggers, and Arizona State Senator Karen Johnson;  three individuals: Dr. Andy Landerman, Linda Brocato, and Anita Vazquez Tibau.

This is a breakthrough not thought possible a year ago.  To repeat, FDA now admits that the evidence is “changing,” thus the safety of mercury fillings is not “definitive” and is “the subject of intense disagreement.”  Quotations from FDA’s brief, containing those admissions, are below.**

FDA’s admissions in its brief to the US Court of Appeals:  “there is a lack of conclusive evidence regarding the health effects of mercury fillings”;  “constantly changing scientific evidence” exists on mercury amalgam;  “complex issues and intense disagreement [exist] about the scientific evidence regarding mercury and its potential health effects”;  “the complexity of the issue and the lack of conclusive scientific evidence on the health effects of dental amalgams”;  “the lack of … definitive scientific evidence.”

Let's see what happens next. 

Stay tuned...

Tim Bolen  - Consumer Advocate