Trick or Treatment—The Undeniable Facts about Alternative Medicine (Electronic book text)

Although he can no longer promote products on TV, freedom of speech means that he can still appear on TV to tout his books, sometimes topping the table of infomercial appearances in a single week. His bestselling book contains such dangerous nonsense as ‘The sun does not cause cancer. Sun block has been shown to cause cancer’, and ‘All over-the-counter non-prescription drugs and prescription drugs CAUSE illness and disease.’ In 2005, the New York State Consumer Protection Board issued a warning that Trudeau’s book ‘does not contain the “natural cures” for cancer and other diseases that Trudeau is promising’. The Board also cautioned the public that ‘Trudeau is not only misrepresenting the contents of his self-published book, he is also using false endorsements to encourage consumers to buy the book.’

Unfortunately, Trudeau seems like an unstoppable force, and he continues to sell alternative health products via his website. The New York journalist Christopher Dreher sees a clear strategy in Trudeau’s business ambitions: ‘In essence, the infomercial sells the book, which sells the Web site — which nets Trudeau tons of money.’ Alternative-health gurus nearly always promote health products from which they benefit financially, either directly or indirectly. Even the mild-mannered, avuncular Dr Weil does not shy away from a corporate approach to his role as a health guru, as demonstrated by his brand of alternative therapies sold under the banner of ‘Dr Weil Select’. On top of this, in 2003/4 he received $3.9 million in royalties, having signed a deal with Drugstore.com.

Similarly, American radio host and self-proclaimed health visionary Gary Null markets products through his own website. Part of his marketing policy is to trash conventional medicine in order to promote the alternative, but this leads to some particularly irresponsible and dangerous proclamations. In his book AIDS: A Second Opinion, Null states: ‘AIDS of the 90’s has become an iatrogenic disease brought on or made worse by immunosuppressive drugs.’ In other words, Null argues that conventional medicine harms rather than helps HIV/AIDS patients. Peter Kurth, a journalist infected with HIV, reviewed Null’s book and did not pull his punches:

Null’s blithe disregard of the evidence seems less blinkered than criminal…And when the late Michael Callen is quoted as if he were still alive, I nearly jumped out of my skin. (Callen, once famous as a long-term survivor of AIDS and adamantly opposed to the use of AZT, has been dead since 1993.)

Another health guru with a strange view on treating HIV is Patrick Holford, a British-based alternative nutritionist who is the author of twenty-four books, which have been translated into seventeen languages. In 2007, his latest book was accused of making dangerous claims about the treatment of HIV. When he was in South Africa, he even repeated his claims to the press: ‘What I have said in the latest edition of my book, the New Optimum Nutrition Bible…is that “AZT, the first prescribable anti-HIV drug, is potentially harmful and proving less effective than vitamin C.”’

Holford’s views have angered so many scientists over the years that he has even inspired a website entitled Holford Watch (www. holfordwatch.info) which seeks to highlight and correct his errors. Nevertheless, the University of Teeside judged Holford to be of sufficiently high standing to appoint him as a visiting professor. This links back to the problems highlighted in two of the previous subsections. First, some universities are acting in a peculiarly shoddy manner when it comes to alternative medicine. And second, medical researchers who should be making a fuss are not standing up for academic standards at their institutions.

5 The media

Newspapers, radio and television are, of course, hugely influential in any debate. However, the desire to attract readers, listeners and viewers means that the media are under pressure to sensationalize. This sometimes means not letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

This was demonstrated by a survey of Canadian print media by the Department of Community Health Sciences at the University of Calgary. Three researchers scanned nine publications for articles that appeared between 1990 and 2005, looking for any that linked CAM (complementary and alternative medicine) to cancer treatment. They found 915 articles in total, of which 361 had CAM treatment for cancer as the primary focus of the article. The main results confirmed previous, similar investigations:

CAM therapies were most often described in a positive fashion, and CAM use was most often (63 %) described as a potential cure for cancer. The majority of articles did not present information on the risks, benefits, and costs of CAM uses and few provided a recommendation to speak with a health care provider before use.