Hubbry Logo
QuackeryQuackeryMain
Open search
Quackery
Community hub
Quackery
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Quackery
Quackery
from Wikipedia
WPA poster, 1936–38

Quackery, often synonymous with health fraud, is the promotion[1] of fraudulent or ignorant medical practices. A quack is a "fraudulent or ignorant pretender to medical skill" or "a person who pretends, professionally or publicly, to have skill, knowledge, qualification or credentials they do not possess; a charlatan or snake oil salesman".[2] The term quack is a clipped form of the archaic term quacksalver, derived from Dutch: kwakzalver a "hawker of salve"[3] or rather somebody who boasted about their salves, more commonly known as ointments.[4] In the Middle Ages the term quack meant "shouting". The quacksalvers sold their wares at markets by shouting to gain attention.[5]

Common elements of general quackery include questionable diagnoses using questionable diagnostic tests, as well as untested or refuted treatments, especially for serious diseases such as cancer. Quackery is often described as "health fraud" with the salient characteristic of aggressive promotion.[1]

Definition

[edit]
William Hogarth's The Inspection, the third canvas in his Marriage à-la-mode (The Visit to the Quack Doctor)
Pietro Longhi's The Charlatan (1757)

Psychiatrist and author Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch defines quackery as "the promotion of unsubstantiated methods that lack a scientifically plausible rationale" and more broadly as:

"anything involving overpromotion in the field of health." This definition would include questionable ideas as well as questionable products and services, regardless of the sincerity of their promoters. In line with this definition, the word "fraud" would be reserved only for situations in which deliberate deception is involved.[1]

In addition to the ethical problems of promising benefits that are not likely to occur, quackery might cause people to forego treatments that are more likely to help them, in favor of ineffective treatments given by the "quack".[6][7][8]

American pediatrician Paul Offit has proposed four ways in which alternative medicine "becomes quackery":[9]

  1. "by recommending against conventional therapies that are helpful."
  2. "by promoting potentially harmful therapies without adequate warning."
  3. "by draining patients' bank accounts ..."
  4. "by promoting magical thinking ..."

Since it is difficult to distinguish between those who knowingly promote unproven medical therapies and those who are mistaken as to their effectiveness, United States courts have ruled in defamation cases that accusing someone of quackery or calling a practitioner a quack is not equivalent to accusing that person of committing medical fraud. However, the FDA makes little distinction between the two. To be considered a fraud, it is not strictly necessary for one to know they are misrepresenting the benefits or risks of the services offered.[10][11]

Quacksalver

[edit]

Unproven, usually ineffective, and sometimes dangerous medicines and treatments have been peddled throughout human history. Theatrical performances were sometimes given to enhance the credibility of purported medicines. Grandiose claims were made for what could be humble materials indeed: for example, in the mid-19th century revalenta arabica was advertised as having extraordinary restorative virtues as an empirical diet for invalids; despite its impressive name and many glowing testimonials it was in truth only ordinary lentil flour, sold to the gullible at many times the true cost.

Even where no fraud was intended, quack remedies often contained no effective ingredients whatsoever. Some remedies contained substances such as opium, alcohol and honey, which would have given symptomatic relief but had no curative properties. Some would have addictive qualities to entice the buyer to return. The few effective remedies sold by quacks included emetics, laxatives and diuretics. Some ingredients did have medicinal effects: mercury, silver and arsenic compounds may have helped some infections and infestations; willow bark contains salicylic acid, chemically closely related to aspirin; and the quinine contained in Jesuit's bark was an effective treatment for malaria and other fevers. However, knowledge of appropriate uses and dosages was limited.

Criticism of quackery in academia

[edit]

The evidence-based medicine community has criticized the infiltration of alternative medicine into mainstream academic medicine, education, and publications, accusing institutions of "diverting research time, money, and other resources from more fruitful lines of investigation in order to pursue a theory that has no basis in biology."[12][13]

For example, David Gorski criticized Brian M. Berman, founder of the University of Maryland Center for Integrative Medicine, for writing that "There [is] evidence that both real acupuncture and sham acupuncture [are] more effective than no treatment and that acupuncture can be a useful supplement to other forms of conventional therapy for low back pain." He also castigated editors and peer reviewers at the New England Journal of Medicine for allowing it to be published, since it effectively recommended deliberately misleading patients in order to achieve a known placebo effect.[12][14]

History in Europe and the United States

[edit]
The Surgeon by Jan Sanders van Hemessen (1555)

With little understanding of the causes and mechanisms of illnesses, widely marketed "cures" (as opposed to locally produced and locally used remedies), often referred to as patent medicines, first came to prominence during the 17th and 18th centuries in Britain and the British colonies, including those in North America. Daffy's Elixir and Turlington's Balsam were among the first products that used branding (e.g. using highly distinctive containers) and mass marketing to create and maintain markets.[15] A similar process occurred in other countries of Europe around the same time, for example with the marketing of Eau de Cologne as a cure-all medicine by Johann Maria Farina and his imitators. Patent medicines often contained alcohol or opium, which, while presumably not curing the diseases for which they were sold as a remedy, did make the imbibers feel better and confusedly appreciative of the product.

The number of internationally marketed quack medicines increased in the later 18th century; the majority of them originated in Britain[16] and were exported throughout the British Empire. By 1830, British parliamentary records list over 1,300 different "proprietary medicines",[17] the majority of which were "quack" cures by modern standards.

A Dutch organisation that opposes quackery, Vereniging tegen de Kwakzalverij (VtdK), was founded in 1881, making it the oldest organisation of this kind in the world.[18] It has published its magazine Nederlands Tijdschrift tegen de Kwakzalverij (Dutch Magazine against Quackery) ever since.[19] In these early years the VtdK played a part in the professionalisation of medicine.[20] Its efforts in the public debate helped to make the Netherlands one of the first countries with governmental drug regulation.[21]

Dalby's Carminative, Daffy's Elixir and Turlington's Balsam of Life bottles dating to the late 18th and early 19th centuries. These "typical" patent or quack medicines were marketed in very different, and highly distinctive, bottles. Each brand retained the same basic appearance for more than 100 years.

In 1909, in an attempt to stop the sale of quack medicines, the British Medical Association published Secret Remedies, What They Cost And What They Contain.[22][a] This publication was originally a series of articles published in the British Medical Journal between 1904 and 1909.[24] The publication was composed of 20 chapters, organising the work by sections according to the ailments the medicines claimed to treat. Each remedy was tested thoroughly, the preface stated: "Of the accuracy of the analytical data there can be no question; the investigation has been carried out with great care by a skilled analytical chemist."[22]: vi  The book did lead to the end of some of the quack cures, but some survived the book by several decades. For example, Beecham's Pills, which according to the British Medical Association contained in 1909 only aloes, ginger and soap, but claimed to cure 31 medical conditions,[22]: 175  were sold until 1998. The failure of the medical establishment to stop quackery was rooted in the difficulty of defining what precisely distinguished real medicine, and in the appeals that quackery held out to consumers.

British patent medicines lost their dominance in the United States when they were denied access to the Thirteen Colonies markets during the American Revolution, and lost further ground for the same reason during the War of 1812. From the early 19th century "home-grown" American brands started to fill the gap, reaching their peak in the years after the American Civil War.[16][25] British medicines never regained their previous dominance in North America, and the subsequent era of mass marketing of American patent medicines is usually considered to have been a "golden age" of quackery in the United States. This was mirrored by similar growth in marketing of quack medicines elsewhere in the world.

Clark Stanley's Snake Oil

In the United States, false medicines in this era were often denoted by the slang term snake oil, a reference to sales pitches for the false medicines that claimed exotic ingredients provided the supposed benefits. Those who sold them were called "snake oil salesmen", and usually sold their medicines with a fervent pitch similar to a fire and brimstone religious sermon. They often accompanied other theatrical and entertainment productions that traveled as a road show from town to town, leaving quickly before the falseness of their medicine was discovered. Not all quacks were restricted to such small-time businesses however, and a number, especially in the United States, became enormously wealthy through national and international sales of their products.

In 1875, the Pacific Medical and Surgical Journal complained:

If Satan has ever succeeded in compressing a greater amount of concentrated mendacity into one set of human bodies above every other description, it is in the advertising quacks. The coolness and deliberation with which they announce the most glaring falsehoods are really appalling. A recent arrival in San Francisco, whose name might indicate that he had his origin in the Pontine marshes of Europe, announces himself as the "Late examining physician of the Massachusetts Infirmary, Boston." This fellow has the impudence to publish that his charge to physicians in their own cases is $5.00! Another genius in Philadelphia, of the bogus diploma breed, who claims to have founded a new system of practice and who calls himself a "Professor," advertises two elixers of his own make, one of which is for "all male diseases" and the other for "all female diseases"! In the list of preparations which this wretch advertises for sale as the result of his own labors and discoveries, is ozone!

— Pacific Medical and Surgical Journal Reprinted in the Boston Medical And Surgical Journal, vol. 91, p. 373

One among many examples is William Radam, a German immigrant to the US, who, in the 1880s, started to sell his "Microbe Killer" throughout the United States and, soon afterwards, in Britain and throughout the British colonies. His concoction was widely advertised as being able to "cure all diseases",[26] and this phrase was even embossed on the glass bottles the medicine was sold in. In fact, Radam's medicine was a therapeutically useless (and in large quantities actively poisonous) dilute solution of sulfuric acid, coloured with a little red wine.[25] Radam's publicity material, particularly his books,[26] provide an insight into the role that pseudoscience played in the development and marketing of "quack" medicines towards the end of the 19th century.

Cartoon depicting a quack doctor using hypnotism (1780, France)

Advertising claims similar[27] to those of Radam can be found throughout the 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. "Dr." Sibley, an English patent medicine seller of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, even went so far as to claim that his Reanimating Solar Tincture would, as the name implies, "restore life in the event of sudden death". Another English quack, "Dr. Solomon" claimed that his Cordial Balm of Gilead cured almost anything, but was particularly effective against all venereal complaints, from gonorrhea to onanism. Although it was basically just brandy flavoured with herbs, the price of a bottle was a half guinea (£sd system) in 1800,[28]: 155 [b] equivalent to over £38 ($47) in 2014.[23]

Not all patent medicines were without merit. Turlingtons Balsam of Life, first marketed in the mid-18th century, did have genuinely beneficial properties. This medicine continued to be sold under the original name into the early 20th century, and can still be found in the British and American pharmacopoeias as "Compound tincture of benzoin". In these cases, the treatments likely lacked empirical support when they were introduced to the market, and their benefits were simply a convenient coincidence discovered after the fact.

The end of the road for the quack medicines now considered grossly fraudulent in the nations of North America and Europe came in the early 20th century. 21 February 1906 saw the passage into law of the Pure Food and Drug Act in the United States. This was the result of decades of campaigning by both government departments and the medical establishment, supported by a number of publishers and journalists (one of the most effective was Samuel Hopkins Adams, who wrote "The Great American Fraud" series in Collier's in 1905).[29] This American Act was followed three years later by similar legislation in Britain and in other European nations. Between them, these laws began to remove the more outrageously dangerous contents from patent and proprietary medicines, and to force quack medicine proprietors to stop making some of their more blatantly dishonest claims. The Act, however, left advertising and claims of effectiveness unregulated as the Supreme Court interpreted it to mean only that ingredients on labels had to be accurate. Language in the 1912 Sherley Amendment, meant to close this loophole, was limited to regulating claims that were false and fraudulent, creating the need to show intent. Throughout the early 20th century, the American Medical Association collected material on medical quackery, and one of their members and medical editors in particular, Arthur J. Cramp, devoted his career to criticizing such products. The AMA's Department of Investigation closed in 1975, but their only archive open to non-members remains, the American Medical Association Health Fraud and Alternative Medicine Collection.[30]

"Medical quackery and promotion of nostrums and worthless drugs were among the most prominent abuses that led to formal self-regulation in business and, in turn, to the creation of the Better Business Bureau."[31]: 1217 

Contemporary culture

[edit]
Electro-metabograph machine on display in the "Quackery Hall of Fame" in the Science Museum of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, US

"Quackery is the promotion of false and unproven health schemes for a profit. It is rooted in the traditions of the marketplace", with "commercialism overwhelming professionalism in the marketing of alternative medicine".[32] Quackery is most often used to denote the peddling of the "cure-alls" described above. Quackery is an ongoing problem that can be found in any culture and in every medical tradition. Unlike other advertising mediums, rapid advancements in communication through the Internet have opened doors for an unregulated market of quack cures and marketing campaigns rivaling the early 20th century. Most people with an e-mail account have experienced the marketing tactics of spamming – in which modern forms of quackery are touted as miraculous remedies for "weight loss" and "sexual enhancement", as well as outlets for medicines of unknown quality.

India

[edit]

In 2008, the Hindustan Times reported that some officials and doctors estimated that there were more than 40,000 quacks practicing in Delhi, following outrage over a "multi-state racket where unqualified doctors conducted hundreds of illegal kidney transplants for huge profits."[33] The president of the Indian Medical Association (IMA) in 2008 criticized the central government for failing to address the problem of quackery and for not framing any laws against it.[33]

In 2017, IMA again asked for an antiquackery law with stringent action against those practicing without a license.[34] As of 2024, the government of India is yet to pass an anti-quackery law.[35]

Ministry of Ayush

[edit]

In 2014, the Government of India formed a Ministry of AYUSH that includes the seven traditional systems of healthcare. The Ministry of Ayush (expanded from Ayurveda, Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa and Homoeopathy), is purposed with developing education, research and propagation of indigenous alternative medicine systems in India. The ministry has faced significant criticism for funding systems that lack biological plausibility and are either untested or conclusively proven as ineffective. Quality of research has been poor, and drugs have been launched without any rigorous pharmacological studies and meaningful clinical trials on Ayurveda or other alternative healthcare systems.[36][37]

There is no credible efficacy or scientific basis of any of these forms of treatment.[38] A strong consensus prevails among the scientific community that homeopathy is a pseudo-scientific,[39][40][41][42] unethical[43][44] and implausible line of treatment.[45][46][47][48] Ayurveda is deemed to be pseudoscientific.[49][50][51] Much of the research on postural yoga has taken the form of preliminary studies or clinical trials of low methodological quality;[52][53][54] there is no conclusive therapeutic effect except in back pain.[55] Naturopathy is considered to be a form of pseudo-scientific quackery,[56] ineffective and possibly harmful,[57][58] with a plethora of ethical concerns about the very practice.[59][60][61]

Unani lacks biological plausibility and is considered to be pseudo-scientific quackery, as well.[62][63]

United States

[edit]
"Tho-radia powder" box, an example of radioactive quackery

While quackery is often aimed at the aged or chronically ill, it can be aimed at all age groups, including teens, and the FDA has mentioned[64] some areas where potential quackery may be a problem: breast developers, weight loss, steroids and growth hormones, tanning and tanning pills, hair removal and growth, and look-alike drugs.

In 1992, the president of The National Council Against Health Fraud, William T. Jarvis, wrote in Clinical Chemistry that:

The U.S. Congress determined quackery to be the most harmful consumer fraud against elderly people. Americans waste $27 billion annually on questionable health care, exceeding the amount spent on biomedical research. Quackery is characterized by the promotion of false and unproven health schemes for profit and does not necessarily involve imposture, fraud, or greed. The real issues in the war against quackery are the principles, including scientific rationale, encoded into consumer protection laws, primarily the U.S. Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. More such laws are badly needed. Regulators are failing the public by enforcing laws inadequately, applying double standards, and accrediting pseudomedicine. Non-scientific health care (e.g., acupuncture, ayurvedic medicine, chiropractic, homeopathy, naturopathy) is licensed by individual states. Practitioners use unscientific practices and deception on a public who, lacking complex health-care knowledge, must rely upon the trustworthiness of providers. Quackery not only harms people, it undermines the scientific enterprise and should be actively opposed by every scientist.[65]

Scientology's E-Meter, a quack device for measuring 'engrams'[66][67]

For those in the practice of any medicine, to allege quackery is to level a serious objection to a particular form of practice. Most developed countries have a governmental agency, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the US, whose purpose is to monitor and regulate the safety of medications as well as the claims made by the manufacturers of new and existing products, including drugs and nutritional supplements or vitamins. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) participates in some of these efforts.[68] To better address less regulated products, in 2000, US President Clinton signed Executive Order 13147 that created the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine. In 2002, the commission's final report made several suggestions regarding education, research, implementation, and reimbursement as ways to evaluate the risks and benefits of each.[69] As a direct result, more public dollars have been allocated for research into some of these methods.

The 1929 Revigator (sometimes misspelled Revigorator) was a pottery crock lined with radioactive ore that emitted radon.

Individuals and non-governmental agencies are active in attempts to expose quackery. According to John C. Norcross et al. less is consensus about ineffective "compared to effective procedures" but identifying both "pseudoscientific, unvalidated, or 'quack' psychotherapies" and "assessment measures of questionable validity on psycho-metric grounds" was pursued by various authors.[70]: 515  The evidence-based practice (EBP) movement in mental health emphasizes the consensus in psychology that psychological practice should rely on empirical research.[70]: 515, 522  There are also "anti-quackery" websites, such as Quackwatch, that help consumers evaluate claims.[71] Quackwatch's information is relevant to both consumers and medical professionals.[72]

Presence and acceptance

[edit]
The pee looker (Piskijker), David Teniers the Younger (1660)
A quack selling cards with a verse from the Quran which is supposed to protect the wearer from snakebites. Tabant, Aït Bouguemez valley, Central Morocco (2009).
The Quack Doctor, Jan Victors (c. 1635)

There have been several suggested reasons why quackery is accepted by patients in spite of its lack of effectiveness:[73]

Ignorance
Those who perpetuate quackery may do so to take advantage of ignorance about conventional medical treatments versus alternative treatments, or may themselves be ignorant regarding their own claims.[73] Mainstream medicine has produced many remarkable advances, so people may tend to also believe groundless claims.
Placebo effect
Medicines or treatments known to have no pharmacological effect on a disease can still affect a person's perception of their illness, and this belief in its turn does indeed sometimes have a therapeutic effect, causing the patient's condition to improve. This is not to say that no real cure of biological illness is effected – "though we might describe a placebo effect as being 'all in the mind', we now know that there is a genuine neurobiological basis to this phenomenon."[74] People report reduced pain, increased well-being, improvement, or even total alleviation of symptoms. For some, the presence of a caring practitioner and the dispensation of medicine is curative in itself.
Regression fallacy
Lack of understanding that health conditions change with no treatment and attributing changes in ailments to a given therapy.[75]
Confirmation bias
The tendency to search for, interpret, or prioritize information in a way that confirms one's beliefs or hypotheses. It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning.
Distrust of conventional medicine
Many people, for various reasons, have a distrust of conventional medicine, or of the regulating organizations such as the FDA, or the major drug corporations. For example, "CAM may represent a response to disenfranchisement [discrimination] in conventional medical settings and resulting distrust".[76]
Conspiracy theories
Anti-quackery activists ("quackbusters") are often falsely accused of being part of a huge "conspiracy" to suppress "unconventional" and/or "natural" therapies, as well as those who promote them. It is alleged that this conspiracy is backed and funded by the pharmaceutical industry and the established medical care system – represented by the AMA, FDA, ADA, CDC, WHO, etc. – for the purpose of preserving their power and increasing their profits. This idea is often held by people with antiscience views.[77]
Fear of side effects
A great variety of pharmaceutical medications can have very distressing side effects, and many people fear surgery and its consequences, so they may opt to shy away from these mainstream treatments.[77]
Cost
There are some people who simply cannot afford conventional treatment, and seek out a cheaper alternative. Nonconventional practitioners can often dispense treatment at a much lower cost. This is compounded by reduced access to healthcare.[73]
Desperation
People with a serious or terminal disease, or who have been told by their practitioner that their condition is "untreatable", may react by seeking out treatment, disregarding the lack of scientific proof for its effectiveness, or even the existence of evidence that the method is ineffective or even dangerous. Despair may be exacerbated by the lack of palliative non-curative end-of-life care. Between 2012 and 2018 appeals on UK crowdfunding sites for cancer treatment with an alternative health element have raised £8 million. This is described as "a new and lucrative revenue stream for cranks, charlatans, and conmen who prey on the vulnerable."[78]
Pride
Once people have endorsed or defended a cure, or invested time and money in it, they may be reluctant or embarrassed to admit its ineffectiveness and therefore recommend a treatment that does not work. This is a manifestation of the sunk cost fallacy.[79]
Fraud
Some practitioners, fully aware of the ineffectiveness of their medicine, may intentionally produce fraudulent scientific studies,[80] for example, thereby confusing any potential consumers as to the effectiveness of the medical treatment.

Deceased persons accused of quackery

[edit]

  • Thomas Allinson (1858–1918), founder of naturopathy. His views often brought him into conflict with the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh and the General Medical Council, particularly his opposition to doctors' frequent use of drugs, his opposition to vaccination and his self-promotion in the press.[81] His views and publication of them led to him being labeled a quack and being struck off by the General Medical Council for infamous conduct in a professional respect.[82][83]
  • Lovisa Åhrberg (1801–1881), the first Swedish female doctor. Åhrberg was met with strong resistance from male doctors and was accused of quackery. During the formal examination, she was acquitted of all charges and allowed to practice medicine in Stockholm even though it was forbidden for women in the 1820s. She later received a medal for her work.[84]
  • Johanna Brandt (1876–1964), a South African naturopath who advocated the "Grape Cure" as a cure for cancer.[85]
  • John R. Brinkley (1885–1942), a nonphysician and xenotransplant specialist in Kansas, US, who claimed to have discovered a method of effectively transplanting the testicles of goats into aging men. After state authorities took steps to shut down his practice, he retaliated by entering politics in 1930 and unsuccessfully running for the office of Governor of Kansas.[86]
  • Hulda Regehr Clark (1928–2009), was a controversial naturopath, author, and practitioner of alternative medicine who claimed to be able to cure all diseases and advocated methods that have no scientific validity.[87]
  • Max Gerson (1881–1959), was a German-born American physician who developed a dietary-based alternative cancer treatment that he claimed could cure cancer and most chronic, degenerative diseases. His treatment was called The Gerson Therapy. Most notably, Gerson Therapy was used, unsuccessfully, to treat Jessica Ainscough and Garry Winogrand. According to Quackwatch, Gerson Institute claims of cure are based not on actual documentation of survival, but on "a combination of the doctor's estimate that the departing patient has a 'reasonable chance of surviving', plus feelings that the Institute staff have about the status of people who call in".[88] The American Cancer Society reports that "[t]here is no reliable scientific evidence that Gerson therapy is effective ..."[89]
The quack, Jan Steen (c. 1650–60)
  • Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843), founder of homeopathy. Hahnemann believed that all diseases were caused by "miasms", which he defined as irregularities in the patient's vital force.[90] He also said that illnesses could be treated by substances that in a healthy person produced similar symptoms to the illness, in extremely low concentrations, with the therapeutic effect increasing with dilution and repeated shaking.[91][92][93]
  • Lawrence B. Hamlin (in 1916), was fined under the 1906 US Pure Food and Drug Act for advertising that his Wizard Oil could kill cancer.[94]
  • L. Ron Hubbard (1911–1986), was the founder of the Church of Scientology. He was an American science fiction writer, former US Navy officer, and creator of Dianetics. He has been commonly called a quack and a con man by both critics of Scientology and by many psychiatric organizations in part for his often extreme anti-psychiatric beliefs and false claims about technologies such as the E-meter.[95][96][97]
  • Linda Hazzard (1867–1938), was a self-declared doctor and fasting specialist, which she advertised as a panacea for every medical ailment. Up to 40 patients may have died of starvation in her "sanitarium" in Olalla, Washington, US. Imprisoned for one death in 1912, Hazzard was paroled in 1915 and continued to practice medicine without a license in New Zealand (1915–1920) and Washington, US (1920–1935). Died in 1938 while attempting a fasting to cure herself.[98]
  • William Donald Kelley (1925–2005), was an orthodontist and a follower of Max Gerson who developed his own alternative cancer treatment called Nonspecific Metabolic Therapy. This treatment is based on the unsubstantiated belief that "wrong foods [cause] malignancy to grow, while proper foods [allow] natural body defenses to work".[99] It involves, specifically, treatment with pancreatic enzymes, 50 daily vitamins and minerals (including laetrile), frequent body shampoos, coffee enemas, and a specific diet.[100] According to Quackwatch, "not only is his therapy ineffective,[101] but people with cancer who take it die more quickly and have a worse quality of life than those having standard treatment, and can develop serious or fatal side-effects. Kelley's most famous patient was actor Steve McQueen.
  • John Harvey Kellogg (1852–1943), was a medical doctor in Battle Creek, Michigan, US, who ran a sanitarium using holistic methods, with a particular focus on nutrition, enemas and exercise. Kellogg was an advocate of vegetarianism and invented the corn flake breakfast cereal with his brother, Will Keith Kellogg.[102]
  • John St. John Long (1798–1834) was an Irish artist who claimed to be able to cure tuberculosis by causing a sore or wound on the back of the patient, out of which the disease would exit. He was tried twice for manslaughter of his patients who died under this treatment.[103]
  • Franz Anton Mesmer (1734–1815), was a German physician and astrologist, who invented what he called magnétisme animal.
  • Theodor Morell (1886–1948), a German physician best known as Adolf Hitler's personal doctor. Morell administered approximately 74 substances, in 28 different mixtures to Hitler, including heroin, cocaine, Doktor Koster's Antigaspills, potassium bromide, papaverine, testosterone, vitamins and animal enzymes.[104][105] Despite Hitler's dependence on Morell, and his recommendations of him to other Nazi leaders, Hermann Göring, Heinrich Himmler, Albert Speer and others quietly dismissed Morell as a quack.
  • Daniel David Palmer (1845–1913), was a grocery store owner that claimed to have healed a janitor of deafness after adjusting the alignment of his back. He founded the field of chiropractic based on the principle that all disease and ailments could be fixed by adjusting the alignment of someone's back. His hypothesis was disregarded by medical professionals at the time and despite a considerable following has yet to be scientifically proven.[106] Palmer established a magnetic healing facility in Davenport, Iowa, styling himself 'doctor'. Not everyone was convinced, as a local paper in 1894 wrote about him: "A crank on magnetism has a crazy notion that he can cure the sick and crippled with his magnetic hands. His victims are the weak-minded, ignorant and superstitious, those foolish people who have been sick for years and have become tired of the regular physician and want health by the short-cut method … he has certainly profited by the ignorance of his victims … His increase in business shows what can be done in Davenport, even by a quack."[107]
  • Louis Pasteur (1822–1895), was a French chemist best known for his remarkable breakthroughs in microbiology. His experiments confirmed the germ theory of disease, also reducing mortality from puerperal fever (childbed), and he created the first vaccine for rabies. He is best known to the general public for showing how to stop milk and wine from going sour – this process came to be called pasteurization. His hypotheses initially met with much hostility, and he was accused of quackery on multiple occasions. However, he is now regarded as one of the three main founders of microbiology, together with Ferdinand Cohn and Robert Koch.[108]
  • Linus Pauling (1901–1994), a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, Pauling spent much of his later career arguing for the treatment of somatic and psychological diseases with orthomolecular medicine. Among his claims were that the common cold could be cured with massive doses of vitamin C. Together with Ewan Cameron he wrote the 1979 book Cancer and Vitamin C, which was again more popular with the public than the medical profession, which continued to regard claims about the effectiveness of vitamin C in treating or preventing cancer as quackery.[109] A biographer has discussed how controversial his views on megadoses of Vitamin C have been and that he was "still being called a 'fraud' and a 'quack' by opponents of his 'orthomolecular medicine'".[110]
  • Doctor John Henry Pinkard (1866–1934) was a Roanoke, Virginia businessman and "Yarb Doctor" or "Herb Doctor" who concocted quack medicines that he sold and distributed in violation of the Food and Drugs Act and the earlier Pure Food and Drug Act. He was also known as a "clairvoyant, herb doctor and spiritualist."[111] Some of Pinkard's Sanguinaria Compound, made from bloodroot or bloodwort, was seized by federal officials in 1931. "Analysis by this department of a sample of the article showed that it consisted essentially of extracts of plant drugs including sanguinaria, sugar, alcohol, and water. It was alleged in the information that the article was misbranded in that certain statements, designs, and devices regarding the therapeutic and curative effects of the article, appearing on the bottle label, falsely and fraudulently represented that it would be effective as a treatment, remedy, and cure for pneumonia, coughs, weak lungs, asthma, kidney, liver, bladder, or any stomach troubles, and effective as a great blood and nerve tonic." He pleaded guilty and was fined.[112]
  • Wilhelm Reich (1897–1957), Austrian-American Psychoanalyst. Claimed that he had discovered a primordial cosmic energy called Orgone. He developed several devices, including the Cloudbuster and the Orgone Accumulator, that he believed could use orgone to manipulate the weather, battle space aliens and cure diseases, including cancer. After an investigation, the US Food and Drug Administration concluded that they were dealing with a "fraud of the first magnitude". On 10 February 1954, the US Attorney for Maine filed a complaint seeking a permanent injunction under Sections 301 and 302 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, to prevent interstate shipment of orgone accumulators and to ban some of Reich's writing promoting and advertising the devices. Reich refused to appear in court, arguing that no court was in a position to evaluate his work. Reich was arrested for contempt of court, and convicted to two years in jail, a US$10,000 fine, and his Orgone Accumulators and work on Orgone were ordered to be destroyed. On 23 August 1956, six tons of his books, journals, and papers were burned in the 25th Street public incinerator in New York. On 12 March 1957, he was sent to Danbury Federal Prison, where Richard C. Hubbard, a psychiatrist who admired Reich, examined him, recording paranoia manifested by delusions of grandiosity, persecution, and ideas of reference. Nine months later, on 18 November 1957, Reich died of a heart attack while he was in the federal penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania.
  • William Herbert Sheldon (1898–1977), who created the theory of somatotypes corresponding to intelligence.[113][114]

Information Age Digital Quackery

[edit]

As technology has evolved, particularly with the advent and wide adoption of the internet, it has increasingly become a source of quackery. For example, writing in The New York Times Magazine, Virginia Heffernan criticized WebMD for biasing readers toward drugs that are sold by the site's pharmaceutical sponsors, even when they are unnecessary. She wrote that WebMD "has become permeated with pseudomedicine and subtle misinformation."[115]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Works cited

[edit]
  • Carroll, 2003. "The Skeptics Dictionary". New York: Wiley.
  • Della Sala, 1999. Mind Myths: Exploring Popular Assumptions about the Mind and Brain. New York: Wiley.
  • Eisner, 2000. The Death of Psychotherapy; From Freud to Alien Abductions. Westport, CT: Praegner.
  • Lilienfeld, SO., Lynn, SJ., Lohr, JM. 2003. Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology. New York: Guildford
  • Norcross JC; Garofalo A.; Koocher G. (2006). "Discredited Psychological Treatments and Tests; A Delphi Poll". Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 37 (5): 515–522. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.37.5.515. S2CID 35414392.
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Quackery denotes the promotion of fraudulent or unsubstantiated medical practices and remedies, typically by unqualified practitioners who assert efficacy without empirical validation or plausible mechanisms. The term originates from the Dutch kwakzalver, describing itinerant sellers of salves who loudly proclaimed their wares' miraculous properties in public markets, a practice rooted in medieval hawking traditions. Historically intertwined with the evolution of , quackery flourished in eras lacking systematic regulation and scientific scrutiny, preying on patients' vulnerabilities through exaggerated claims of cures for ailments from cancer to . Its defining characteristics include reliance on anecdotal testimonials over controlled trials, dismissal of causal evidence requirements, and exploitation of effects or natural remission to feign success, often resulting in direct physiological from toxic substances, financial depletion, and critical delays in accessing evidence-based interventions. In contemporary contexts, quackery persists via pseudoscientific modalities such as unverified herbal cures or energy therapies, underscoring ongoing challenges in distinguishing them from legitimate inquiry despite advancements in evidence-based standards. Notable controversies highlight its societal costs, including eroded in healthcare and amplified risks during health crises when desperate individuals forgo proven treatments for illusory hopes.

Definition and Terminology

Core Definition

Quackery denotes the fraudulent or pseudoscientific promotion of health products, services, or practices purporting to diagnose, treat, or cure diseases without a plausible biological mechanism or substantiation through empirical testing. Core to this phenomenon is the advancement of interventions that contradict verifiable causal pathways in human physiology, such as claims of universal cures for conditions like cancer or via untested herbal extracts or devices, often prioritizing profit over patient outcomes. Distinguishing quackery from genuine medical progress hinges on methodological rigor: legitimate innovations demand evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrating reproducible efficacy and safety via , whereas quackery substitutes testimonials, selective anecdotes, or unfalsifiable theories for such validation. This reliance on non-empirical appeals evades scrutiny of underlying mechanisms, frequently resulting in delayed effective care and direct harm, as evidenced by 19th-century tonics like Fowler's solution, which were touted for ailments from to but induced chronic poisoning, manifesting in gastrointestinal distress, , and elevated mortality from toxicity in prolonged users.

Etymology and Historical Terms

The term "quack" derives from the obsolete Dutch "quacksalver," first attested in the 1570s, literally meaning "hawker of " from "quacke" () and "salven" (to rub with ointment), with "quacke" implying boastful promotion akin to quacking. This referred to itinerant vendors who loudly touted mercury-based ointments and other unproven remedies, often applied to ailments, whose empirical inefficacy—evidenced by and lack of therapeutic effect—distinguished them from legitimate practitioners. By the early , "quack" shortened the term in English usage around the 1630s to denote "impudent and fraudulent pretender to medical skill," emphasizing deceptive salesmanship over any substantive knowledge. "Quackery," as the noun for such fraudulent practices, emerged concurrently in the 1630s, encapsulating the promotion of bogus treatments without verifiable , a connotation rooted in the observable failures of hawked nostrums to deliver claimed results. Historical synonyms evolved similarly from performative deception; for instance, "" entered English in the early via French from Italian "ciarlatano," derived from "ciarlare" (to prattle or chatter), originally describing loquacious street sellers who babbled exaggerated virtues of ineffective elixirs to attract crowds. Alternative etymologies link it to "cerretano," inhabitants of Cerreto known for peddling spurious wares, underscoring the term's association with unverifiable claims that crumbled under scrutiny. In legal and regulatory discourse by the early , "health " supplanted or paralleled "quackery" to denote deliberate misrepresentation of products' , particularly after exposures of medicines' baseless assertions, though the core linguistic emphasis remained on empirically unsubstantiated pretensions rather than mere error. These terms' reflects a consistent demarcation: promoters whose remedies failed causal tests of , as opposed to evidence-based methods, avoiding dilution into labels for unproven but non-fraudulent innovations.

Historical Origins and Evolution

Pre-Modern and Early Modern Periods

In ancient civilizations, medical practices often blended empirical observations with unverified claims, laying early foundations for quackery amid limited scientific validation. , such as the dating to around 1550 BCE, prescribed remedies like willow bark infusions for ailments including colic, , and earaches, derived from traditional uses without systematic efficacy testing. While willow bark contained —a precursor to aspirin with properties—its promotion as a broad cure-all lacked causal verification, exemplifying promotion of partially effective but overhyped treatments in an era of ritualistic healing. Similarly, in , itinerant healers and charlatans peddled unproven balms and potions to the populace, often exploiting the illiterate and poor, while gladiators' sweat was marketed as a medicinal despite no demonstrated therapeutic value beyond or coincidental effects. During the medieval period, quackery proliferated in response to catastrophic events like the (1347–1351), which killed an estimated 30–60% of Europe's population, creating vacuums filled by opportunistic itinerant healers. These charlatans sold amulets, herbs, and bogus cures—such as carrying toasted bread or wearing pouches of aromatic substances—claiming protection against the plague, even as physicians often fled cities, leaving desperate communities vulnerable to . Empirical outcomes underscored the inefficacy: despite widespread use of untested herbal concoctions, mortality rates remained devastatingly high, with no verifiable reduction attributable to these interventions, highlighting causal fallacies in attributing survival to superstitious or anecdotal remedies. In Renaissance and early modern Europe (roughly 1400–1700), itinerant mountebanks and empirics intensified quackery by performing theatrical demonstrations of dubious ointments and elixirs in public squares, particularly in Italy and France, where regulatory oversight was minimal. These practitioners, often self-proclaimed experts, capitalized on the era's medical pluralism—where humoral theory dominated but lacked rigorous testing—hawking treatments like mercury-based salves for syphilis, which caused more harm through toxicity than benefit, as evidenced by contemporary accounts of patient deterioration. Rare validations, such as willow bark's persistent folk use eventually informing salicylic acid isolation in the 19th century, contrasted with predominant fraud, where promoters exaggerated efficacy without empirical controls, perpetuating high failure rates in an age of pre-scientific medicine. This period's patterns of deceit persisted due to information asymmetries and societal tolerance for unproven healers amid genuine knowledge gaps.

19th and Early 20th Centuries

The 19th century saw a surge in patent medicines in the United States, driven by industrialization, expanded advertising, and limited regulation, transforming quackery into a mass-market enterprise. These proprietary remedies, often secret formulas sold without prescriptions, proliferated with claims to cure serious ailments like cancer, tuberculosis, and rheumatism, despite lacking empirical validation. By the late 1800s, the industry had become substantial, with manufacturers producing thousands of branded tonics, many containing high levels of alcohol—sometimes exceeding 40%—or opium derivatives like morphine, undisclosed to consumers and contributing to widespread addiction rather than therapeutic benefit. Such products exemplified consumer-targeted frauds, capitalizing on public desperation amid high disease mortality and nascent scientific medicine. Empirical harms were evident, as many tonics provided no curative effects for advertised conditions, instead masking symptoms through palliation or causing direct , including infant deaths from opium-laced "soothing syrups." Post-enactment analyses after revealed that the majority of these remedies were ineffective for their bold claims, with undisclosed addictive substances posing greater risks than benefits in most cases. The shift toward industrialized production amplified these dangers, as aggressive marketing via newspapers and almanacs reached millions, often preying on vulnerable populations without accountability. Key regulatory responses emerged in response to exposés, including Upton Sinclair's 1906 novel , which, while focused on meatpacking insanities, galvanized public outrage leading to the . This legislation mandated accurate labeling of ingredients and prohibited misbranded drugs in interstate commerce, curtailing the most egregious abuses by requiring disclosure of alcohol and narcotics content, though it fell short of banning false efficacy claims outright. Concurrently, the (AMA) intensified campaigns against pseudoscientific devices, such as ' "electronic reactions" machines introduced in the 1910s, which purported to diagnose diseases via vibrational analysis but were debunked as fraudulent through controlled tests revealing reliance on suggestion and sleight-of-hand. The 1910 further advanced scientific standards by critiquing substandard medical schools, resulting in the closure of numerous quack-oriented institutions and bolstering over empirical frauds.

Mid-20th Century to Present

In the post-World War II era, quackery adapted to stricter U.S. regulations, such as the 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendments requiring proof of efficacy for new drugs, by shifting toward unproven "natural" remedies and cancer treatments marketed outside formal approval processes. Despite these measures, fraudulent claims persisted, often leveraging and patient desperation; for instance, Krebiozen, promoted since 1951 as a cancer cure derived from horse serum, was analyzed by FDA chemist Alma LeVant Hayden in 1956, revealing it to be merely , a common muscle metabolite with no therapeutic value. Clinical investigations in the early , including controlled trials by the FDA and , confirmed its ineffectiveness against tumors, leading to fraud convictions against promoters like Stevan Durovic in 1966. The and also saw a surge in "health food" promotions, exemplified by figures like Gayelord Hauser advocating raw foods, yogurt, and yeast supplements as panaceas for chronic diseases, often without empirical support and criticized by authorities for overstating benefits amid rising consumer interest in preventive nutrition. By the 1970s, such fads intertwined with demands for access to unapproved therapies, as seen with laetrile ( from apricot kernels), aggressively marketed as B17 for cancer despite lacking ; the FDA banned interstate shipment in 1977 after preclinical showed from release without antitumor effects. A 1981 National Cancer Institute-sponsored trial involving 178 patients found no improvements in survival or symptom relief compared to controls, confirming inefficacy and prompting further restrictions. From the 1980s onward, quackery integrated into burgeoning wellness movements, adopting scientific veneer through terms like "holistic" and "complementary" while resisting rigorous testing; randomized controlled trials (RCTs) repeatedly demonstrated inefficacy for many claims, such as for , where a 2013 NIH trial of 1,708 patients showed no reduction in cardiovascular events versus . Globalization facilitated cross-border promotion, with treatments like laetrile clinics in drawing U.S. patients despite bans, underscoring regulatory challenges in tracking international . Persistence is evident in market data: U.S. spending on alternative therapies rose from $13.7 billion in 1997 to over $30 billion by 2012, often for unproven interventions amid toward pharmaceuticals. In recent decades, the highlighted quackery's resilience, with hyped in early 2020 based on antiviral data and small observational studies suggesting potential benefits. However, large-scale RCTs, including the UK's RECOVERY trial (over 11,000 patients) in June 2020 and the WHO's trial (later analyses), clarified no mortality reduction and possible cardiac risks, leading WHO and FDA to revoke emergency authorizations by mid-2020. These episodes reflect quackery's pattern of exploiting preliminary or misinterpreted data before empirical refutation, persisting globally despite enhanced .

Characteristics of Quackery

Common Methods and Tactics

Quackery often relies on anecdotal testimonials and personal success stories in place of controlled clinical trials or peer-reviewed evidence to promote treatments. These narratives, frequently presented as genuine user experiences, substitute subjective reports for empirical validation, ignoring effects, , and the absence of randomized, double-blind studies. Promoters commonly make sweeping promises of "miracle cures" or rapid remedies for complex, multifaceted such as cancer or , disregarding established pathophysiological mechanisms and the need for long-term data. Such claims bypass the inherent variability of progression and individual responses, asserting universal effectiveness without supporting mechanistic explanations or dose-response relationships. A hallmark tactic involves deploying scientific-sounding jargon—such as "," "bioenergetic fields," or "nanoparticle detoxification"—to confer an aura of legitimacy, despite lacking falsifiable hypotheses, reproducible experiments, or alignment with established physics and . This misuse of terminology exploits public unfamiliarity with technical concepts, evading scrutiny by invoking undefined or pseudoscientific constructs without empirical backing. Distribution frequently occurs through multi-level marketing (MLM) structures for supplements and devices, where recruitment of distributors generates revenue streams prioritizing sales volume over product safety or efficacy verification. These models incentivize exaggerated claims to drive downline expansion, often resulting in undisclosed financial conflicts and proliferation of unvetted products. Verifiable indicators include the consistent absence of independent, peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials demonstrating superiority over placebo or standard care, coupled with underreporting or concealment of adverse events. For instance, in the 2020s, the FDA has issued multiple recalls for dietary supplements adulterated with undeclared pharmaceuticals like sildenafil and sibutramine, highlighting tactics to mask risks while claiming natural safety.

Psychological and Marketing Appeals

Quackery persists partly due to psychological vulnerabilities, particularly among individuals facing desperation from chronic or terminal illnesses, where hope for cures overrides toward unproven claims. Patients in such states are susceptible to appeals promising rapid relief or reversal of dire prognoses, as evidenced by analyses of quack promoters exploiting human tendencies toward and . A key cognitive factor is the naturalness bias, wherein individuals prefer "natural" remedies over synthetic pharmaceuticals, even when the former lack superior efficacy or safety. This bias manifests in health decisions, with studies showing preferences for natural drugs or vaccines despite identical compositions to artificial counterparts, rooted in perceptions of purity and reduced risk. Such inclinations fuel quackery's appeal against perceived "Big Pharma" interventions, amplified by documented pharmaceutical scandals like the opioid crisis, which eroded trust and positioned alternative options as underdog solutions. Marketing tactics in quackery leverage fear-mongering about side effects of evidence-based treatments while downplaying risks of unverified alternatives, often through anecdotal testimonials that evoke emotional resonance over empirical data. Surveys indicate complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use has risen to 36.7% of U.S. adults by 2022, with distrust of pharmaceutical companies cited as a primary driver among users seeking autonomy from conventional systems. This dynamic is causally linked to market asymmetries, where regulatory barriers favor patented drugs, inadvertently enhancing the allure of unregulated "natural" products—some of which, like turmeric's curcumin, show preliminary anti-inflammatory evidence but are routinely oversold beyond validated limits.

Notable Historical Examples

Patent Medicines and Snake Oil

medicines, proprietary formulations marketed directly to consumers in the 19th and early 20th centuries, typically evaded ingredient disclosure and efficacy proof, relying on bold claims for ailments ranging from pain to chronic diseases. In the United States and , prior to regulatory interventions like the 1906 , these products often comprised alcohol, herbal extracts, or inert substances, with sales driven by testimonials and aggressive rather than clinical . The term "," emblematic of fraudulent remedies, traces to Clark Stanley's , launched circa 1893 after Stanley's demonstrations at the . Stanley asserted the , purportedly derived from fat learned from medicine men, instantly relieved , , , and lameness through external application. No controlled trials validated these assertions; the preparation's effects, if any, stemmed from capsaicin-like irritants rather than snake components. In 1917, federal analysis under the exposed its composition as 99% with beef fat, ammonia water, and , devoid of snake oil, resulting in a $4,000 fine and cessation of misbranded sales. Another prominent example, Lydia E. Pinkham's Vegetable Compound, debuted in 1875 as a tonic for "female complaints" including menstrual irregularities, cramps, and menopausal symptoms. Formulated with herbs such as black cohosh, life root, and root in a 20-28% alcohol base, it promised to restore ovarian function and alleviate . analyses post-regulation revealed no active therapeutic agents beyond the sedative and vasodilatory effects of alcohol, equating benefits to at best; the product's success hinged on via almanacs and Lydia Pinkham's as a sympathetic matron. Certain medicines inflicted direct harm through . Radium-laced waters, such as introduced around 1918, were distilled with radium-226 and radium-228 isotopes, marketed as invigorators for over 150 conditions including impotence and by stimulating . Empirical evidence of inefficacy emerged via radiation-induced pathologies; consumption led to jaw necrosis, , and organ failure, exemplified by ' death in 1932 after ingesting 1,400 bottles, with confirming poisoning as the cause. The American Medical Association's investigations from onward, detailed in Nostrums and Quackery volumes, cataloged hundreds of fatalities between 1900 and 1920 from elixirs contaminated with , undeclared opiates, or radioactive elements, underscoring the absence of testing.

Specific Fraudulent Practitioners

John R. Brinkley (1885–1942) gained notoriety for performing thousands of xenotransplantations of goat testicular glands into human patients, primarily claiming to treat male impotence and prostate issues, beginning around 1918 in Milford, Kansas. These procedures, priced at $750 each (equivalent to approximately $16,500 in 2024 dollars), often resulted in severe infections, hemorrhages, and deaths due to surgical incompetence and lack of sterile technique, with estimates of dozens of fatalities linked to complications. Physicians testifying in legal proceedings described the operations as fraudulent, noting no physiological basis for the claimed effects and highlighting Brinkley's use of diluted dyes passed off as proprietary medicines. Brinkley promoted his treatments via his radio station KFKB, established in 1923, where he broadcast testimonials and medical advice to attract patients nationwide, amassing significant wealth before regulatory intervention. In June 1930, the declined to renew KFKB's license, citing misuse for quackery promotion, and in September 1930, the Kansas State Medical Board revoked Brinkley's license for gross immorality and unprofessional conduct following patient complaints and investigations. Subsequent lawsuits for , wrongful death, and , alongside federal probes into mail fraud and , forced Brinkley to relocate operations to , where he continued via border-blaster station XER until his death. Wilhelm Reich (1897–1957) transitioned from to developing "" energy theory in , constructing accumulators—enclosed wooden cabinets lined with metal—for purportedly harnessing cosmic life energy to treat cancer and other diseases, claiming tumor shrinkage in observational cases without controlled validation. The U.S. initiated investigations in 1947 after reports of interstate sales, conducting laboratory tests from 1950–1952 that failed to detect measurable energy or therapeutic effects, leading to a 1954 federal injunction prohibiting manufacture, distribution, or promotion of the devices as curative. Reich's refusal to comply, viewing the injunction as suppression of truth, resulted in a 1956 contempt conviction and two-year prison sentence, during which over six tons of his publications and equipment were destroyed by court order on August 23, 1956. While Reich's early psychoanalytic contributions, including emphasis on muscular armoring and as extensions of Freudian theory, influenced subsequent somatic therapies, his orgone devices demonstrated no empirical in independent evaluations, with null results in and measurements undermining causal claims of biological influence. died of in on November 3, 1957, prior to completing his term, leaving therapy discredited in scientific circles despite anecdotal defenses from followers.

Early Legislative Efforts

In Britain, early efforts to curb quackery through legislation focused on restricting the sale of poisons and medicines by unqualified individuals. The Pharmacy Act of 1852 established a register of pharmaceutical chemists and restricted the sale of certain poisons to qualified practitioners, aiming to professionalize dispensing and reduce fraudulent sales. This was expanded by the Pharmacy Act of 1868, which created the Pharmaceutical Society's council with powers to regulate pharmacy practice and prosecute unqualified sellers of scheduled poisons, responding to widespread nostrum vending that often involved hazardous adulterated products. These acts targeted overt quackery by limiting access to dangerous substances but did not broadly prohibit false efficacy claims, allowing proprietary medicines to persist via rephrased advertising. Similar restrictions appeared in other European contexts, though enforcement varied. In during the mid-19th century, statutes under the Medical Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs imposed penalties for unlicensed practice and false therapeutic , building on Petrine-era edicts against charlatans; violators faced fines or , particularly for itinerant healers peddling unproven cures during epidemics. Pre-legislation data from the 1840s cholera outbreaks documented rampant unauthorized remedies, with post-statute reports indicating fewer public claims but continued underground distribution through informal networks. In the United States, the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 marked a pivotal federal response to patent medicine frauds exposed by investigations like Samuel Hopkins Adams' 1905 Collier's series, which revealed widespread adulteration and mislabeling in over 500 nostrums. The act prohibited interstate commerce of misbranded or adulterated drugs, mandating accurate ingredient labeling but exempting therapeutic claims from efficacy requirements, thus addressing composition fraud without verifying curative value. Analyses from the 1910s, including American Medical Association reviews, showed a measurable decline in overt advertisements claiming miraculous cures—magazine patent medicine promotions dropped by approximately 40% in volume from 1906 to 1912—yet fraudulent products endured through subtle rewording or local sales, underscoring the law's causal limitations in eradicating deceptive practices. This partial effectiveness prompted subsequent amendments, but early data confirmed persistence in non-interstate channels.

Modern Regulatory Frameworks

In the United States, the (FDA) and (FTC) enforce regulations against quackery primarily through oversight of unapproved products and deceptive advertising. The 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendments established requirements for drug manufacturers to demonstrate via adequate and well-controlled clinical investigations, shifting from mere safety assessments to evidence-based validation. The FDA targets health fraud by maintaining a database of over 1,000 violative products and issuing warning letters for related to diseases or conditions. During the early 2020s , the agencies intensified actions against unproven treatments, including seizures of fraudulent devices and injunctions against promoters of fake cures like unapproved supplements claiming viral prevention. The FTC complements this by challenging false claims, with over 200 enforcement actions since 1998 against dietary supplements and similar products lacking competent scientific support. Globally, regulatory frameworks vary, with the (WHO) providing guidelines to combat falsified medicines and fraudulent traditional remedies through enhanced and international cooperation. In countries like , the regulates alternative systems such as , , and Unani under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, requiring licensing for manufacture and sale while mandating compliance with quality standards like those in Drugs Rules 1945 Rule 158-B. This oversight aims to balance promotion of traditional practices with prevention, including requirements for claims and collaboration with bodies like WHO for . Enforcement data highlight compliance gaps and potential biases, as pharmaceutical firms have incurred $62.3 billion in U.S. settlements from 1991 to 2021 for offenses like off-label promotion, exemplified by Pfizer's $2.3 billion payment in 2009—the largest settlement to date—while penalties against fraud typically range in the low millions. Such disparities indicate uneven application, where large entities absorb fines without operational disruption, contrasting with more aggressive shutdowns of small-scale quack operations despite the FDA identifying thousands of ongoing fraudulent products.

Controversies and Debates

Harms and Empirical Evidence of Fraud

Quackery frequently results in delayed or abandoned conventional treatments, exacerbating outcomes for serious conditions. A 2017 cohort study of 1,290 cancer patients with nonmetastatic , , colon, or found that those selecting as initial treatment—such as special diets, , or —experienced a 2.5-fold higher of over five years compared to those receiving conventional care like , , or . This elevated mortality persisted across cancer types and after adjusting for factors like age, , and comorbidities, with five-year survival rates dropping from 86.6% for conventional treatment users to 54.7% for alternative-only users. Illustrative cases underscore causal links between quackery and adverse progression. Apple co-founder , diagnosed with a resectable in October 2003, deferred surgery for nine months, pursuing alternative modalities including vegan diets, , and bowel cleanses despite medical advice. Jobs later expressed regret to his biographer, stating the delay was a mistake that permitted ; the tumor, initially localized and surgically treatable with high survival odds, had spread by July 2004, contributing to his death from metastatic complications in October 2011. Financial exploitation compounds these risks, as quackery diverts resources from evidence-based care. The global complementary and market, encompassing quack remedies marketed with unsubstantiated claims, reached $179.17 billion in 2024. Regulatory interventions yield limited redress; for instance, U.S. actions against fraudulent health claims, including those in alternative therapies, have resulted in multimillion-dollar settlements, but these represent a fraction of consumer outlays on ineffective products. Empirical audits of quack schemes, such as deceptive homeopathic advertising, reveal systematic misrepresentation of efficacy, leading to unrecoverable losses without corresponding health benefits.

Accusations of Overreach and Suppression of Alternatives

Critics of mainstream medical regulation contend that labels of quackery have occasionally extended beyond fraudulent practices to suppress non-pharmaceutical alternatives, potentially stifling innovation and patient choice in favor of established interests. Historical instances include organized medicine's efforts to marginalize care, which originated in the late as a for musculoskeletal issues. The (AMA) initiated a coordinated campaign in the 1960s, known as the "Iowa Plan," aimed at containing chiropractic's growth through professional boycotts, ethical restrictions on physician referrals, and portrayal of practitioners as unscientific competitors. This culminated in the 1976 antitrust lawsuit , where a federal court ruled in 1987 (upheld on appeal in 1990) that the AMA had violated the by conspiring to eliminate chiropractic as a viable healthcare option, reflecting elements of by incumbent providers. Such opposition persisted into the mid-20th century despite emerging evidence, with the AMA maintaining policies against collaboration until court-mandated changes. Subsequent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated spinal manipulative therapy's efficacy for , yielding moderate short-term pain relief comparable to or recommended conventional treatments, based on analyses of over 1,000 patients across multiple studies. Detractors argue this delay illustrates paternalistic overreach, prioritizing guild protection over empirical validation and , where low-risk interventions could complement standard care without undermining pharmaceutical revenues. Similar accusations arise regarding , a traditional needle-based technique long dismissed by Western authorities as despite its low adverse event profile. Early regulatory skepticism, influenced by biomedical paradigms favoring drug interventions, limited integration until systematic reviews aggregated data from dozens of RCTs showing acupuncture's superiority over sham controls for conditions, with effect sizes indicating meaningful relief in musculoskeletal and neuropathic cases involving thousands of participants. Proponents of alternatives claim economic incentives drive such suppression, as pharmaceutical lobbying—exceeding $300 million annually in recent U.S. sessions—focuses on extending monopolies and restricting competitor pathways, indirectly marginalizing non-patentable options like herbal or manual therapies that challenge high-margin synthetics. This dynamic, critics assert, favors causal mechanisms rooted in market incumbency over patient-centered evidence, where viable low-cost alternatives are preemptively branded quackery to maintain revenue streams from approved modalities.

Cases of Mainstream Errors vs. Alternative Validations

The withdrawal of (Vioxx) by Merck on September 30, 2004, followed clinical evidence linking the COX-2 inhibitor to increased risks of and , with FDA estimates indicating approximately 27,000 to 60,000 excess heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths in the United States from 1999 to 2004. This occurred despite initial approval in 1999 and promotion as a safer alternative to traditional NSAIDs, highlighting failures in post-market surveillance and within pharmaceutical development. Similarly, the aggressive marketing of extended-release (OxyContin) by starting in 1996, backed by claims of low addiction risk, contributed to the U.S. , resulting in over 760,000 opioid-involved overdose deaths from 1999 through 2022 according to CDC data. In contrast, , derived from the sweet wormwood plant () through screening of ancient Chinese herbal texts during in the 1970s, emerged as a highly effective antimalarial agent, earning the 2015 in Physiology or Medicine for its discovery rooted in . Initially overlooked by Western , artemisinin-based combination therapies now form the WHO-recommended first-line treatment for Plasmodium falciparum , saving millions of lives annually in endemic regions. Likewise, , long classified as a Schedule I substance under the 1970 with no accepted medical use, saw validation through FDA approval of Epidiolex ( oral solution) in June 2018 for seizures in Lennox-Gastaut and Dravet syndromes, following rigorous clinical trials demonstrating efficacy. This shift reflects empirical overturning of prior dismissals, with ongoing rescheduling proposals to Schedule III acknowledging therapeutic potential amid historical stigmatization as quackery. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on psychedelics further illustrate reevaluations of previously marginalized substances; received FDA designation in 2017 for severe PTSD after phase 2 trials showed 67% of participants no longer meeting diagnostic criteria post-treatment, prompting phase 3 studies in the early 2020s that reported significant symptom reductions despite subsequent regulatory hurdles. These cases underscore instances where empirical data from controlled studies challenged initial orthodox rejections, questioning rigid categorizations of quackery and emphasizing the need for causal evidence over institutional priors in distinguishing valid therapies from fraud.

Modern and Digital Manifestations

Global Prevalence in Developing Regions

In developing regions, quackery persists due to limited regulatory oversight, widespread reliance on traditional healers amid scarce modern healthcare infrastructure, and cultural preferences for affordable, accessible alternatives. According to (WHO) estimates, approximately 80% of populations in rural areas of low- and middle-income countries depend on for primary needs, often turning to herbal remedies and healers when formal systems are overburdened or distant. This reliance, driven by economic barriers and trust in indigenous practices, creates fertile ground for fraudulent interventions, where unverified claims of blend with genuine cultural traditions, exacerbating risks without empirical validation. In and , government-promoted traditional systems like , , Unani, , and (AYUSH) and (TCM) face infiltration by adulterated products and unsubstantiated cures. A 2023 FDA analysis identified harmful levels of such as lead, mercury, and in unapproved Ayurvedic preparations, leading to documented cases of , including fatal lead toxicity reported in as recently as 2023. Similarly, surveys of TCM products in have revealed widespread adulteration with undeclared pharmaceuticals or contaminants, with authenticity checks showing deliberate mislabeling to mimic legitimate remedies, undermining claims of safety and efficacy. These issues stem from lax enforcement in vast informal markets, where economic incentives prioritize volume over . Africa and Latin America exhibit high vulnerability during health crises, with herbal scams proliferating amid outbreaks. During the 2014 Ebola epidemic in West Africa, scammers promoted unproven "cures" like oils and extracts, exploiting panic and limited access to verified treatments, as warned by health authorities. WHO data indicate that over 80% of Africans rely on traditional healers, with substandard or falsified products comprising up to 10-30% of circulating medicines in low-income settings per global surveys, often lacking active ingredients or containing toxins. In Latin America, similar patterns emerge with informal markets, though quantitative data on rates remain sparse; economic pressures and regulatory gaps sustain these practices, delaying evidence-based interventions. Overall, WHO reports highlight that at least 1 in 10 medical products in these regions is substandard or falsified, correlating with traditional medicine's dominance and posing causal risks of untreated progression of diseases.

Digital Platforms and Social Media Scams

Digital platforms have facilitated the proliferation of quackery by enabling influencers to promote untested products to vast audiences, often using deceptive testimonials and endorsements. In 2023, the U.S. (FTC) charged a supplement marketer with manipulating Amazon reviews to inflate ratings for unproven products, misrepresenting consumer feedback to drive sales. This case highlighted how platforms like Amazon and amplify fraudulent claims through algorithmic promotion of high-engagement content, where false endorsements can reach millions rapidly. The FTC's subsequent 2024 final rule explicitly bans the creation, purchase, or dissemination of fake reviews and testimonials, imposing civil penalties up to $50,120 per violation to curb such practices. Wellness influencers in the have frequently endorsed dietary supplements lacking clinical validation, contributing to consumer harm through unsubstantiated efficacy claims. A 2024 analysis of posts by German influencers from 2021–2023 found widespread promotion of supplements with ingredients like unproven extracts, often ignoring safety data and regulatory warnings. Similarly, U.S. influencers have faced scrutiny for hawking products such as peptides and detox regimens without evidence of benefits beyond effects, exploiting platform algorithms that prioritize viral, anecdotal "success stories" over peer-reviewed studies. These tactics scale deception exponentially, as social media's shareable format allows to diffuse 6–10 times faster than on traditional media, per diffusion models of content spread. The exemplified social media's role in quackery, with platforms hosting rampant promotion of as an unproven antiviral treatment despite insufficient evidence. A 2023 U.S. survey of over 13,000 cases linked ivermectin self-use to endorsement of , with 6% of respondents reporting its ingestion influenced by online claims ignoring regulatory rejections by bodies like the FDA. analyses revealed politicized echo chambers accelerating false narratives, where initial hype from anecdotal reports overshadowed meta-analyses showing no mortality benefit. This led to poison control surges from improper dosing, underscoring causal risks of unverified digital endorsements. Emerging AI technologies pose escalating threats, with deepfakes enabling personalized scams by fabricating endorsements from trusted figures. In 2024, scammers deployed AI-generated videos impersonating physicians to advertise unapproved supplements, targeting vulnerable users via targeted ads on platforms like . Such tactics, which bypass human verification, have driven losses exceeding $200 million in early 2025 from deepfake-enabled schemes, including fake medical claims for benefits redirection. Unlike traditional quackery, AI scales fabrication at low cost, evading detection and amplifying through hyper-realistic content that exploits users' trust in visual .

Societal and Economic Impacts

Health and Financial Consequences

Individuals who forgo evidence-based treatments in favor of unproven alternative therapies for treatable conditions experience significantly elevated risks of adverse outcomes, primarily due to opportunity costs associated with delayed or absent conventional care. A longitudinal of over 1.2 million U.S. adults with nonmetastatic cancers (, , colorectal) found that those opting exclusively for had a 2.5-fold higher all-cause mortality (adjusted 2.50, 95% CI 1.88-3.27) compared to those receiving conventional treatments, with five-year survival rates dropping to 58.1% versus 86.6% for patients. Similar patterns emerge in other treatable diseases, where reliance on quackery correlates with progression to advanced stages, as patients miss windows for effective interventions like or . Financially, quackery imposes substantial direct costs on consumers through expenditures on ineffective products and services, diverting resources from validated medical care. In the United States, annual out-of-pocket spending on exceeded $34 billion in 2024, encompassing therapies and supplements often lacking rigorous evidence of efficacy beyond effects. These costs represent opportunity losses, as funds spent on quack remedies—such as unproven cures or devices—cannot be redirected toward proven diagnostics or treatments, exacerbating personal financial strain particularly among vulnerable populations. Quackery's propagation of further erodes public trust in established medicine, amplifying indirect health and economic burdens through behaviors like . The 1998 Wakefield study, later exposed as fraudulent, triggered a decline in UK MMR coverage from approximately 92% pre-1998 to 80% by 2003-2004, resulting in over 1,100 cases that year and subsequent outbreaks requiring costly responses. This distrust spillover effect heightens morbidity from preventable diseases, with longitudinal data linking such hesitancy to resurgences in vaccine-preventable illnesses and associated treatment expenses.

Role in Fostering Medical Skepticism

Exposure of quackery has historically catalyzed institutional reforms that elevate medical standards, thereby cultivating a disciplined toward unverified claims. The 1910 , authored by educator under the Carnegie Foundation, documented pervasive quackery in American medical education, where many of the 155 existing schools lacked scientific rigor, admitted unqualified students, and propagated pseudoscientific practices. This critique prompted the closure of over half of U.S. medical schools by 1923, enforced stricter licensing, and shifted curricula toward laboratory-based, evidence-driven training, reducing the prevalence of fraudulent therapies and restoring professional credibility. Such reforms demonstrated that confronting systemic flaws through empirical scrutiny strengthens medicine's foundations, encouraging practitioners and the public to prioritize verifiable outcomes over anecdotal promises. By systematically debunking fraudulent practices, efforts against quackery instill a broader epistemic discipline that demands causal evidence for all interventions, countering both overt scams and unsubstantiated mainstream assertions without eroding faith in validated science. Organizations dedicated to this pursuit, such as , analyze pseudoscientific claims using principles of scientific plausibility and controlled trials, equipping individuals to evaluate therapies independently. This approach fosters resilience against overpromising pharmaceuticals—evident in cases like the 2004 Vioxx withdrawal after hidden cardiovascular risks emerged—by promoting uniform standards of proof that apply across alternative and conventional modalities. Empirical scrutiny thus builds public capacity for discerning valid innovations from hype, as seen in regulatory responses like the FDA's 2000 rules clarifying permissible structure/function claims on dietary supplements, which require substantiation to mitigate misleading labels. Transparency measures post-exposure further aid trust restoration by institutionalizing , enabling to evolve into informed discernment rather than wholesale . For instance, post-Flexner correlated with a decline in frauds, as state boards adopted uniform competency exams, verifiable through licensure data showing improved physician training outcomes by the 1930s. Similarly, ongoing anti-quackery advocacy has supported laws mandating for health claims, reducing the marketplace dominance of unproven remedies and reinforcing causal realism in patient . This dynamic underscores how vigilance against quackery refines medical , yielding a populace adept at questioning orthodoxy while upholding empirical benchmarks.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.