Quackwatch

Quackwatch I love this!
There is certainly nothing wrong with investigating all points of view, and claims of scientific evidence. I like some information at this site, and disagree heartily with other information here, such as: " The pesticide residue of our food supply is extremely small and poses no health threat to the consumer. Foods "certified" as "organic" are not safer or more nutritious than other foods. In fact, except for their high price, they are not significantly different." http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/spotquack.html
When one gathers information in order to form and test theories based on that collection of data, it is always wise to consider and understand the interests of the sources perused.

Even funnier-This organisation  was initiated by a retired psychiatrist. So, how well are the mechanisms of actions for all of the various psychiatric medications understood or identified? Remember how Freud loved his remedy of cocaine for his very real medical problem. Many scientific studies are conducted in dubious fashions as well.

My theory is: Whenever healing and profit are connected, or profit is derived from efforts of healing, the ancient concept of primum non nocere is destined to be negated and abused. So-where is the greater potential for harm? A pharmaceutical with a host of undesirable side effects, or a supplement with no scientifically proven benefits? Follow the money trail, and those that hew and maintain the trail.