{"id":2783,"date":"2012-07-26T07:56:19","date_gmt":"2012-07-26T06:56:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.quackometer.net\/blog\/?p=2783"},"modified":"2012-07-26T07:56:19","modified_gmt":"2012-07-26T06:56:19","slug":"the-dirty-tricks-of-alternative-medicine","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.quackometer.net\/blog\/2012\/07\/the-dirty-tricks-of-alternative-medicine.html","title":{"rendered":"The Dirty Tricks of Alternative Medicine"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last week, I wrote about<\/a> how German Homeopathy pill\u00a0manufacturers\u00a0were paying a writer who was using his blog post to smear and attack academic Edzard Ernst. The journalist who wrote the original article<\/a> in the German newspaper\u00a0S\u00fcddeutsche Zeitung has agreed to allow the\u00a0article\u00a0to be published in English on this web site and I do so as it provides the full context around the scandal.<\/p>\n

———————————————————————————————————————–<\/p>\n

Drug manufactures finance a journalist who pillories critics of their products. For any\u00a0<\/em>conventional pharmaceutical company this would be regarded as a scandal. But the\u00a0<\/em>globules manufacturers see no problem in that, rather a “constructive dialogue”.<\/em><\/p>\n

by Jens Lubbadeh<\/a><\/p>\n

It is simple to use Google to pillory someone: all it needs is a professional-looking\u00a0Web page in which a person\u2019s credibility is undermined. Then the name of the person\u00a0to discredit should be mentioned in the text as often as possible. The page will be\u00a0automatically ranked in the top results when someone searches for the person. For people\u00a0whose credibility is their capital, such as journalists and academics, this digital character\u00a0assassination is particularly devastating.<\/p>\n

If you google the journalist Max Rauner, one of the first search results you get is the blog\u00a0of the German Central Association of Homepathic Physicians (Deutscher Zentralverein\u00a0hom\u00f6opathischer \u00c4rzte, DZVh\u00c4). Title of the article: “Max Rauner’s sciolism on Edzard\u00a0Ernst” (http:\/\/dzvhae-homoeopathie-blog.de\/?p=4484). There Rauner, multiple award-\u00a0winning journalist, is accused of bad research and violation of journalistic due diligence.\u00a0Rauner, so the article alleges, sacrificed the truth for a good story.<\/p>\n

What was Rauner’s misdemeanor? He published a portrait of Edzard Ernst in the\u00a0magazine ZEIT WISSEN. (“Edzard vs. Charles”, www.zeit.de\/zeit-wissen\/2012\/01\/Portrait-Ezard-Ernst). Ernst, professor of Alternative Medicine at the University of Exeter, does
\nresearch on the benefits and risks of alternative therapies, including homeopathy. Like\u00a0many scientists in the past he came to the same conclusion: the sugar pills are no more\u00a0effective than placebos. Consequently, Ernst has been a red rag to homeopaths, as everybody\u00a0who has criticized the sugar pills or their proponents.<\/p>\n

The person responsible for the article about Max Rauner is Claus Fritzsche. If you criticize Fritzsche’s\u00a0articles he will respond in the same manner and publishes the next “news”: “Jens\u00a0Lubbadeh criticizes DZVh\u00c4”. (www.esowatch.org\/esowatch-blog\/505-max-rauner-jens-
\nlubbadeh-kritisiert-dzvha-eine-interessante-diskussion-die-auch-esowatch-com-betrifft)<\/p>\n

The masthead of Fritzsche’s webpage (www.claus-fritzsche.de) states him as science and\u00a0medical journalist, but he also writes flyers and brochures for companies. Fritzsche holds\u00a0a master of B.A. and studied with the help of a scholarship of Karstadt AG. On his page\u00a0he stresses his longyear working experience in marketing of industry products in need of\u00a0explanation.<\/p>\n

For the association of german homeopathic physicians (DZVh\u00c4) his job seems to be the\u00a0pilloring of homeopathy-critics. For this he is supported by the homeopathic lobby and\u00a0globules manufacturers. On request DZVh\u00c4 and several manufacturers admitted that they\u00a0finance his personal blogs and the articles on blogs for whom he acts as editor in chief.<\/p>\n

43.000 Euro annually from the manufacturers<\/h4>\n

Fritzsche himselfs openly admits the “sponsorship” of his CAM-Media.Watch-blog\u00a0(www.cam-media-watch.de) by the manufacturers. In august 2011 he wrote for the sake\u00a0of “transparency”: “The companies Deutsche Hom\u00f6opathie-Union (DHU) [the biggest German pill manufacturer] and Biologische Heilmittel Heel (www.heel.de) support\u00a0CAM Media.Watch financially”. Other sponsors include: Staufen Pharma (www.staufen-pharma.de), WALA Heilmittel (www.wala.de\/english\/), Weleda (www.weleda.com), Hevert\u00a0(www.hevert.de\/_#\/). In total, Fritzsche receives 43.000 Euro annually from these six\u00a0manufacturers of homeopathic products.<\/p>\n

Manufacturers of medicinal products finance a journalist who pillories critics of their\u00a0products. For any conventional pharmaceutical company this would be a huge scandal.\u00a0An example is the case of lobbyist Adel Massaad, who was on the payroll of several\u00a0pharmaceutical companies. In 2006 he tried to discredit the former chief of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health IQWiG<\/em> (www.iqwig.de\/institute-for-quality-and-efficiency-in-health.2.en.html), Peter Sawicki.<\/p>\n

Fritzsche’s sponsors are the popular manufacturers of homeopathic pills. Market\u00a0leader is DHU, (www.dhu.com) a subsidiary of Schwabe (www.schwabepharma.com)\u00a0(well-known products are Kytta, Prostagutt, Tebonin). 500 employers work in DHU\u00a0headquarters in Karlsruhe. As market leader and company with a long tradition DHU\u00a0regards itself as a “guard of homeopathy”, CEO Franz Stempfle told the news magazine\u00a0DER SPIEGEL in 2010. The sums they are dealing with are not peanuts: Total sales of\u00a0all manufacturers amounts to 400 million Euro, 100 alone on behalf of DHU. No comment\u00a0from DHU about their profits though.<\/p>\n

Fritzsche sees no problem in the sponsorship: “Nearly identical contracts exist with\u00a0every sponsor”, he openly writes. “These contracts oblige me to respect relevant laws, to\u00a0remain a neutral position regarding ideology, science and politics. Moreover they provide\u00a0independency of my editorial work and my scientific advisory board.” Also advertising of\u00a0products is strictly excluded.<\/p>\n

But for a publisher of a journalistic blog also the Codex of the Press applies. “For\u00a0the responsibility of the press towards the public it is common courtesy that editorial\u00a0publications must not be biased by private or economical interests of third parties or\u00a0personal economical interests of journalists.” Furthermore, “Anyone who lets himself\u00a0be bribed for the publishing or suppressing of news acts dishonorable and against the\u00a0values of his profession.\u201c How he reconciles this with his sponsoring Fritzsche was asked.
\nNo answer to these questions from him, though several emails were written in which he\u00a0criticized the “leading questions” and threatened to instigate legal measures.<\/p>\n

Fritzsche has several more websites on which he recommends esoteric therapies that are\u00a0not scientifically acknowledged. Moreover he denigrated several journalists from SPIEGEL\u00a0ONLINE, DER SPIEGEL, ZEIT, S\u00dcDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG, S\u00dcDDEUTSCHE.DE. And
\nof course Edzard Ernst, again and again. The allegations are always the same: frivolous\u00a0research, incompetence, lopsided and biased presentation of facts. Fritzsche counterlinks\u00a0his sites to each other in order to improve their google ranking. Besides CAM Media.Watch
\nFritzsche also holds the websites www.psychophysik.com, www.neuraltherapie-blog.de\u00a0and www.esowatch.org.<\/p>\n

Promotion of dangerous therapies<\/h4>\n

Neural therapy works through injections of local anaesthetics to help the body to heal\u00a0itself. The side effects of this dubious and scientifically unapproved method can be lethal.\u00a0On Psychophysik.com Fritzsche deals with esoteric phenomenons such as spiritual
\nhealing, also there he has a homeopathy blog in which he denigrates critics.<\/p>\n

On all these sites the same scientists appear – in different roles. On neuraltherapie-blog.de Imke Plitschko interviews Claus Fritzsche on his editorial work for CAM Media-Watch. Plitschko practices neural therapy in Munich. Moreover she also criticizes Max\u00a0Rauner’s portrait, not forgetting to mention Fritzsche’s pillory. Another persistent guest\u00a0on these sites is Harald Walach, who leads the controversial Institute for Transcultural Health Sciences at the Europa University Viadrina in Frankfurt (Oder). Walach is member of\u00a0Fritzsche’s scientific adisory board of CAM Media.Watch-blog.<\/p>\n

The university is subject to heavy criticism since it conducts studies on clairvoyance and\u00a0esoterical therapies. In one experiment a masters student researched, if his machine\u00a0could facilitate the contact with extraterrestrials and dead persons. Walach’s endowed\u00a0professorship is financed by Heel, one of the companies that also finance Fritzsche’s\u00a0CAM-Media.Watch-blog. In the Institute’s blog Walach also links to CAM Media.Watch.<\/p>\n

Network of denigration<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Fritzsche, Walach, Plischko and others \u2013 \u00a0a whole network that supports itself. An\u00a0internal email that was revealed to S\u00fcddeutsche Zeitung proves that. In this mail Fritzsche\u00a0sent a draft of the Max Rauner pillory to his network, requesting them to check on “content
\nand style”. He particularly adresses Walach, because of his great “background knowledge\u00a0on the matter”, helpful syilistical suggestions highly approved. Sincere journalism that\u00a0the self-proclaimed science and medical journalist Fritzsche always demands from his\u00a0colleagues looks different.<\/p>\n

How do Fritzsches sponsors see his engagement? For DZVh\u00c4 it is no problem to support\u00a0a journalist: “If journalists write obviously wrong or biased articles about homeopathy, we\u00a0take our right to ask them and report about it in our own publications”, DZVh\u00c4 responded
\nto S\u00fcddeutsche Zeitung. “Journalists have the opportunity to demonstrate their point of\u00a0view. But for us one journalistic virtue is eminent: speech and objection.” The journalistic\u00a0virtue not to take money from companies or associations seems insignificant to DZVh\u00c4
\nhowever.<\/p>\n

Does Fritzsche act on behalf of the companies? Interestingly DHU, Heel, Weleda, Wala\u00a0and Hevert responded in nearly identical statements to this question: “We support\u00a0the constructive dialogue in\u00a0complementary\u00a0medicine.” No one is pillored on CAM\u00a0Media.Watch, “this allegation we cannot understand. And we would not want to support it. \u201cTo finance journalists is ok, is the answer of the companies. Because the financing is transparent and it only accounts for the operation of the blog. Importantly the editorial\u00a0independence is guaranteed by contract. There is no mandate and no economical benefit\u00a0is gained through Fritzsche’s work.<\/p>\n

The question remains if the companies still would sponsor Fritzsche if he suddenly would\u00a0make up his independent editorial mind and praised critics of homeopathy.<\/p>\n

Original article:<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.sueddeutsche.de\/wissen\/homoeopathie-lobby-im-netz-schmutzige-
\nmethoden-der-sanften-medizin-1.1397617<\/p>\n

Copyright:<\/p>\n

S\u00fcddeutsche Zeitung Digitale Medien GmbH \/ S\u00fcddeutsche Zeitung GmbH<\/p>\n

Update (july 25th 2012)
\nIn response to the article there was an outrage on the facebook page of Weleda.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Weleda.Deutschland\/posts\/471509942877985<\/p>\n

Shortly thereafter Weleda stopped sponsoring Claus Fritzsche. His annual income shrank
\nto 38.000 Euros. (www.cam-media-watch.de\/?page_id=2)<\/p>\n

Today (july 25th) Edzard Ernst twittered that DHU stopped their sponsoring:<\/p>\n

\n

VERY GOOD NEWS about homeopathic character assassin Fritzsche: i was reliably informed that another sponsor[DHU] stopped paying him<\/p>\n

— Edzard Ernst (@EdzardErnst) July 25, 2012<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n