Dr. Weeks’ Comments: Name calling is to be avoided at all costs because, while certainly preferable to using the proverbial “sticks and stones” it is still silly to resort to name calling or ad hominem attacks, when reasonable people can simply debate the actual merits (risks and benefits) of various protocols. That said, I was recently slandered by a professional colleague (who was irritated by our mutual patient preferring my corrective protocols to his) and so I decided to review the term “quack”. You would be surprised to learn that in the English language, this term derives from “quarksilber”, the German word for quicksilver, otherwise known as the toxic heavy metal, mercury.
The original “quacks” were the “innovative” dentists who proposed filling dental cavities with quicksilver / mercury amalgams (“silver fillings”). Due to its lucrative (albeit toxic) nature, the original quacks therefore are the “fathers” of modern dentistry.
So, is your doctor a “quack”?
Interesting question…. so let’s look at a dictionary definition of the term “quack”.
1. a fraudulent or ignorant pretender to Medical skill.
2. a person who pretends, professionally or publicly, to skill,knowledge, r qualifications he or she does not possess; acharlatan.
3. being a quack: a quack psychologist who complicates everyone’s problems.
4. presented falsely as having curative powers: quackmedicine.
5. of, pertaining to, or befitting a quack or quackery: quackmethods.
-verb (used with object)
6. to treat in the manner of a quack.
7. to advertise or sell with fraudulent claims.
To summarize: If your doctor’s treatments are consistently harming you, he or she can be considered “a quack”
What is NOT directly stated but which can be deduced is that the only rightful person who can call another a quack is NOT the jealous and insecure competing doctor whose potions and spells fail his patient but uniquely bu the actual consumer: the patient alone can call a doctor a quack!
On the tombstone of one of history’s greatest physicians, Paracelsus, (called by his colleagues a “quack” ) were the potent words:
“I pleased only my patients.”
Today, 400 years later, those remain inspiring words to practice by!”
REAL LIFE EXAMPLE:
Stephen Barrett’s Personal Attorney (David Wilzig) Sued For Malicious
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
Saturday, June 11th, 2011
Attorneys that work with, or for, Stephen Barrett do not do well.
David Wilzig, one of Barrett’s latest personal attorneys, is
developing significant problems. He was suing, obviously working with
Barrett, a slew of Biological Dentists, each case mirroring the last,
with the same tired refrain – that “Biological Dentistry is quackery,
blah, blah, blah, blah.” Although Wilzig doesn’t call bobbie baratz
(Robert S. Baratz MD, DDS, PhD) as his main witness anymore (insert a
rude noise here), he has continued the same style attacks. But, one of
Wilzig’s victims, a California Dentist named Alireza Panahpour, DDS,
has had enough and is coming after Wilzig in a California Superior
Court – and he is coming hard.
The current lawsuit against Wilzig is filed in Orange County Superior
Court. Because of how this case came to be, there could be seven more
similar cases filed. Just below is the summary of the first case:
To read the entire article click on http://www.bolenreport.com or