UK reporter gains ground in chiropractor libel suit
Filed under: Europe, Government, Health journalism, Hot Health Headline
UK journalist Simon Singh has gained ground in his ongoing defense against a libel suit leveled by British chiropractors, with the reversal of a ruling that had said his words were (potentially libelous) fact instead of (protected) commentary. The words in question included the assertion that the British Chiropractic Association “happily promotes bogus treatments.” The dispute has been over whether or not his words imply that the BCA was being consciously dishonest and deceptive.
Covering Health has written about UK libel cases in the past, and this case has received a fair amount of attention, but those who haven’t been following the Singh case can find a competent primer on Wikipedia.
The BBC calls it a “landmark ruling,” then explains:
BBC News science correspondent Pallab Ghosh says that, had Justice Eady’s ruling stood, it would have made it difficult for any scientist or science journalist to question claims made by companies or organisations without opening themselves up to a libel action that would be hard to win.
The BBC reported that Singh praised the ruling and said the legal wind finally seemed to be at his back, but that he bemoaned the fact that it had cost £200,000 to get to that point.
“The Court of Appeal’s made a very wise decision, but it just shouldn’t be so horrendously expensive for a journalist or an academic journal or a scientist to defend what they mean.
“That’s why people back off from saying what they really mean.”
(Hat tip to Knight Science Journalism Tracker)
GE uses UK libel law to silence Danish researcher
Filed under: Europe, Health journalism, Hot Health Headline
Following in the footsteps of several other device manufacturers and medical interests, GE Healthcare is using UK libel laws, which some describe as “draconian,” to attempt to muzzle a Danish physician who helped discover links between the GE drug Omniscan and the debilitating and sometimes fatal disease nephrogenic systemic fibrosis.
ProPublica’s Jeff Gerth, who has been all over the Omniscan story for a while now, reports in The Sunday Times (and on ProPublica) on the lawsuit and the science, economics and politics behind it. The prominent Danish researcher, who noticed the link after a number of his patients came down with NSF, delivered a 15-minute PowerPoint presentation in Oxford in 2006 in which he referred to Omniscan as a potential “medical hurricane.” To date, GE has spent more than $600,000 fighting the claims with a libel suit.
British skeptics rethink drug policy over a few beers
On BMJ.com, guest blogger Annabel Bentley relates the proceedings of a local chapter of “Skeptics In The Pub” (their Facebook page is here) in which they heard the ex-chairman of the UK government’s Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs speak in favor of an evidence-based approach to drug policy.
Saying that alcohol is one of that country’s greatest drug problems, the ex-chairman (who lost his job for making similar remarks [PDF]) argued that drugs should be classified based on their relative harms.
Bentley also links to a fun Skeptics in the Pub piece in The Economist, this one about Skeptics coming together in defense of a journalist being sued by the British Chiropractic Association over a piece he did considering the effectiveness of their profession.






