http://www.internetwks.com/pauling/quack.html
Dear President
Behrens:
This letter
responds to yours of April 22 in which you responded to a written complaint I
submitted concerning facts and circumstances surrounding acts of suppression of
speech at a public forum held at Loma Linda University. As you know, the forum
was under the control of Loma Linda University professor William Jarvis, PhD.
The lecture entitled 'Cancer Quackery: What You Should Know!' was open to the
public and held at the University's Wong Kerlee Conference Center in the Cancer
Research Pavilion. Fliers announcing the event invited members of the public to
attend without charge. Microphones were available for members of the public who
wished to express a view or ask a question.
When I and
three others who shared a similar viewpoint rose to correct inaccuracies and
defamatory remarks made by Dr. Jarvis against Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski, Dr.
Jarvis refused to permit us to express these views and ordered University
security police to escort three of us from the lecture hall.
Your letter
explains that the matter is under investigation. In that regard, I wish to
supplement the record with additional information. As I pointed out in my
original complaint Dr. William Jarvis is the President of an entity known as
the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF). The University's address
property, and stationery have been by Dr. Jarvis in the performance of hi
duties for NCAHF. Records of the NCAHF are housed at his university office. Dr.
Jarvis holds NCAHF events at the University. He makes frequent reference to his
University affiliation while performing duties for his NCAHF.
Dr. Jarvis'
NCAHF is a controversial organization whose members crusade across the nation
against specific, named practitioners whom they condemn as 'quacks' or 'frauds'
in public forum, in print, on the air, and in judicial and administrative
proceedings. Indeed, Dr. Jarvis used the facilities of Loma Linda University
and its lecture hall to do precisely that at the recent Loma Linda event. He
defamed Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski by implying that he was a quack and a fraud.
Loma Linda
should be deeply concerned that one of its professors has elected to use its
property, its name, and his University affiliation to propagate rank character
assassination and defamation against health care practitioners.
Unfortunately,
the NCAHF's anti quackery crusade is subjective and results in defamation only.
Dr. Jarvis and other NCAHF members usually attack the character of their
opponents, rather than the merits of their views. Characteristically, as was
Dr. Jarvis' attack on Dr. Burzynski, NCAHF members harbor ignorance of key
facts and frequently lack a professional understanding of the science of the
matter.
At the Loma
Linda event, Dr. Jarvis identified Dr. Burzynski as a typical example of a
medical quack and fraud, but failed to mention that after a two month trial Dr.
Burzynski was acquitted of all fraud charges, and not a single witness brought
forth by the government to testify against Dr. Burzynski questioned Dr.
Burzynski's motives, character or integrity. He also failed to mention that for
almost six months Dr. Burzynski's antineoplaston therapy has been undergoing
study in several dozen FDA-approved clinical trials, with Dr. Burzynski as the
principal investigator.
Dr. Jarvis
chose to attack the honesty, character, integrity, and personal characteristics
of Dr. Burzynski. Such rank character assassination is not only unbecoming of a
professional but also antithetical to educational dialogue at a University. Dr.
Jarvis has brought disrepute upon Loma Linda. His crusade seeks not only to
stifle opposing views but also to label those who express them as frauds or
quacks - the very antithesis of higher education. His efforts convey the
impression that Loma Linda University is not a place where academic exchange of
ideas and information is encouraged but one where obvious overt bias and
intolerance for dissenting views predominate.
Unfortunately,
the recent incident involving defamation against Dr. Burzynski is not an
isolated event. I offer four items for your investigation that characterize the
intent, actions, and consequences of the NCAHF.
Those NCAHF
board members, Dr. Stephen Barrett and Ira Milner, RD, testified against Dr.
Lieberman at a hearing they themselves instigated before the American Dietetic
Association (ADA) which resulted in the ADA publicly stripping Dr. Lieberman of
her registered dietitian (RD) credential. As you would imagine, this caused her
loss of prestige and credibility, hurt her financially, and caused her public
humiliation. In their testimony to the ADA, the two represented themselves to
be knowledgeable about several specific aspects of nutrition science, yet
neither had academic training nor publication in those specific areas.
In the end,
after the falsity of their charges came to light, the ADA reinstated Dr.
Leiberman's RD credential and published a statement noting same in the ADA's
Journal and Courier.
As the
attached transcript from the Barrett deposition indicates, NCAHF is a loose
cannon that poses distinct liability risks for the University. Under cross
examination, Dr. Barrett admitted that he was not in fact, an expert in
nutrition science, describing himself instead as an expert in 'consumer
strategy' and a "journalist.' This deposition clearly showed that Dr.
Barrett did not have a thorough grounding in the scientific research relevant
to the serious charges he made against Dr. Lieberman that caused her
substantial harm.
Victor
Herbert, MD, a long-time board member of NCAHF, apparently implemented judicial
proceedings against Warren Levin, MD, in New York State. The proceedings were
initially opened in 1980, apparently due to a complaint by Dr. Herbert against Dr.
Levin. The case was finally adjudicated in Dr. Levin's favor, 14 years later in
November 1994. Dr. Levin was forced to declare personal and professional
bankruptcy as a result of the legal costs, but he remained in medical practice
the entire time, and is in full-time medical practice at this time.
Dr. Herbert
apparently was the only one who complained about Dr. Levin. There were no
patient complaints. As President of Loma Linda University, you should have
particular interest in the findings of fact, opinions, and adjudication of the
Regents of the University of the State of New York. Their harsh assessment of
Dr. Victor Herbert should cause you considerable concern, as it did me.
Dr. Herbert,
long-term NCAHF Board member, was virtually uncontrollable in a court of law.
The Regents noted that "Dr. V.H. many times in his testimony used
inflammatory language, volunteered characterizations and editorials, offered
information which was beyond and not responsive to the questions posed,
subjected respondent and his attorney to ad hominem attacks, and
utilized other tactics to show that respondent was guilty by association with
others.' In spite of numerous sustained objections from Dr. Levin's attorney,
Victor Herbert repeatedly and inappropriately used slanderous terms such as
'liar," 'quack,' 'obnoxious,' "vicious,' and "scumbag." He
frequently used the term "fraud,' according to the Regents, 'regardless of
whether he was answering a question posed by the respondent's attorney, petitioner's
attorney, or the hearing committee or whether it was responsive to the question
posed.' As the Regents pointed out, these "personal attacks on respondent
and characterizations [while] testifying to the ultimate issue in dispute were
improper.' That these proceedings were allowed to continue in this vein should
concern anyone who values the basic tenets of a free society.
I received an
amusing letter from Richard Hart, MD, Dean of the School of Public Health that
concluded that armed security police were necessary because I was "rather
disruptive and forceful in trying to obtain control of the microphone....'
Nothing could
be further from the truth. Offering an informed opinion through an open mike is
certainly not disruptive. An open lecture that invites public comments cannot
lawfully deny contrary views under California's constitution. I suspect that
Dr. Hart's finding of fact and opinion would be difficult to sustain under
judicial scrutiny. Please inform Dr. Hart that he is to preserve all documents,
recordings, and other materials that he used to come to his conclusion, and
that their loss would be neither appropriate nor helpful.
You might wish
to send Dr. Hart the Regents of the University of the State of New York's
assessment of Victor Herbert, Board Member of the NCAHF, to broaden his (Dr.
Hart's) under-standing of the word "disruptive.'
Obviously,
considering the number of physicians listed, the only criteria for being added
to this defamatory list would be the 'opinions' of those within the NCAHF.
Please note that the list includes 1,137 MDs, 167 PhDs, 236 DOs, 79 DDSS, 228
DCs, and 441 others (BS, RN, ND, HMD, CSW, MSN). There are 52 double doctorates
on the list, with two or more of the following degrees, MD, PhD, DO, DDS, DVM,
DMD. Many have university affiliation, have published in the peer-review literature,
and are respected authors of books or even textbooks.
Please note
that this 'quack' list includes Linus Pauling, PhD.
Linus Pauling
is the only individual to have won two unshared Nobel Prizes, and virtually
every other award for scientific achievement, both national and international.
In the 1970s the editors of the British New Scientist listed Dr. Pauling as one
of the top 20 scientists of all time. Albert Einstein was the only other
scientist in the 20th century listed along with Aristotle, Gallileo, Isaac
Newton, and Michael Faraday.
In the
recently published book, Scientific Genius, The 20 Greatest Minds of All Time,
by Jim Glenn (Crescent Books, 1996). Linus Pauling is again listed along with
Archimedes, Gregor Mendel, William Harvey, Charles Darwin, and Rend Descartes.
Linus Pauling's achievements should be lauded, not besmirched with this
outrageously inexcusable label of quack. As President of Loma Linda University,
does it concern you that Dr. Jarvis' NCAHF, a small group of about four men of
no significant distinction in ,the scientific arena, would 'secretly' list Dr.
Pauling as a 'quack,' and would actually send or sell this list to others in
the scientific or health field? Does it concern you that the NCAHF is housed on
the Loma Linda campus and by implication, this clandestine and highly
defamatory practice is condoned by the University?
I will be
communicating with each individual on this list, informing them that this list
or data similar to it is maintained and updated by John Renner, MD, board
member of NCAHF, and that the offices of NCAHF are housed-on the campus of Loma
Linda University. I will be instructing each person contacted to address any
questions or concerns they may have concerning their defamatory labeling to you,
the President of Loma Linda University. I have already contacted the Linus
Pauling Institute and the Pauling family.
Benjamin R.
Wilson, MD, working with John H. Renner, MD, compiled a list of 1,500 which he
called the 'Condensed Quack List.' After the practitioner's degree, or degrees,
Dr. Wilson lists two indices called the NI and DDL. NI stands for 'Notoriety
Index' which is a function of the number of 'quack' organizations or academic
groups the individual has joined. Thus "guilt by association' is elevated
to new heights in that it is now numerically quantified and recorded. The DDI
is the Ding Dong Index' - a score reflecting the most nonsensical or dangerous
dubious procedures and/or illnesses they treat.
Please note that
one way to get on the quack list is to simply join or donate to any group or
organization that the NCAHF deems to be quack. Of course, the legality and
charter of the group is irrelevant to the NCAHF. The fact that the group may be
for professionals only and puts on regular scientific sessions that are
approved for CME educational credit for MDs and DOs is irrelevant to those
marching with the NCAHF.
Incredibly,
Dr. Wilson will put you on the 'quack list' if you are listed as a donor to the
National Health Federation, a chartered and legal organization. This qualifies
'the quack' for the highest Notoriety Index: a 10. Whereas the donor list of
the NHF is public, the 'quack list' with its additional indices is clandestine,
and is meant to cause harm.
Your letter
stated that you were going to investigate this matter. I believe that it is
inappropriate to look upon the action of Dr. Jarvis as an isolated incident. I
believe that the action of Dr. Jarvis is typical of the NCAHF. I trust that
this material will enhance your understanding of the NCAHF and their potential
liability for the University.
I am
requesting two things from Loma Linda University.
First, an
Opportunity for Counterspeech.
Under
California constitutional law, a private establishment that opens a forum to
the public may not engage in viewpoint discrimination. Loma Linda (through the
agency of Dr. Jarvis) violated the rights of those who wished to express a
viewpoint contrary to Dr. Jarvis when Dr. Jarvis refused to permit such views
during the question-and answer segment of the lecture. I respectfully request
that the University correct this injustice by holding another forum to permit
each of those ejected from the lecture hall to express their contrary
viewpoints.
The forum
should be held at the same time, for the same length as the original one, and
at the same location (a larger room will likely be necessary). It should again
be open to the public, and it should be promoted and advertised in the same
manner as the first, inviting members of the public to attend and hear a
rebuttal.
Secondly, A
letter of clarification. I respectfully request a letter from you, - President
of Loma Linda University, clarifying the status of the NCAHF at the University.
Please be specific in answering the following questions. Does the University
authorize the. use of its property, stationery, name and reputation by the
NCAHF and by Dr. Jarvis in connection with and in support of the NCAHF's
activities? Does the University condone Dr. Jarvis' use of his University
office to house files and property to traffic in lists of "quacks'
substantiated by no objective evidence other than the .opinions' of those
aligned with NCAHF?
Does the
University agree that it was appropriate to give Linus Pauling, PhD, this pejorative
label, and that such files defaming Dr. Pauling and others could possibly be
kept by Dr. Jarvis at the University, or flow through his hands, in his
University office? Does the University condone Dr. Jarvis' reliance on the
University reputation to promote the NCAHF, an organization that is essentially
run by four irrational zealots whose obvious agenda is to cleanse the medical
profession of 'undesirables' and to purge society of all other healing arts?
Please respond
to these queries at your earliest convenience. Please be assured that I hold
the University responsible for the actions of NCAHF both past and present.
Julian M.
Whitaker, MD
The Whitaker Wellness Institute
4321 Birch, Suite 100
Newport Beach, California 92660 USA
714-851-1550
Fax 714-955-3005
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.