ND "Christopher Maloney is a Quack", Still [according to google.com]

well, when you do a google.com web search with the parameters >maloney quack<, you get these first-page results:

#1. 2010-12-08 - "Christopher Maloney is a Quack" at scienceblogs.com's Thoughts From Kansas;

#2. 2010-02-17 - "Christopher Maloney is a Quack" at scienceblogs.com's Pharyngula;

#3. 2010-02-18 - "Christopher Maloney: Still a Quack" at scienceblogs.com's Pharyngula;

#4. 2010-05-04 - "Christopher Maloney is still a QUACK!" at scienceblogs.com's Pharyngula;

#5. and #8. 2010-02-18 - "Christopher Maloney is a Quack" at A Hot Cup of Joe;

#6. 2010-02-17 - "Christopher Maloney Is A Quack. [edit] But Maybe Not Censorious" at Popehat;

#7. 2010-12-08 - "Christopher Maloney is a Quack" at Botswanna Skeptic;

#9. 2010-02-18 - "Naturopaths Can Silence Critics Too" at Neurologia;

#10. 2010-02-18 - "Christopher Maloney is a Quack – For SHAME WordPress. Epic Fail" at One Furious Llama.

Note: and it goes on and on.  

I don't even rank in the top 100! I have seven Naturocrit pages regarding Maloney, by the way [this is the eighth], and I never called him a quack therein. I cited those who did, surely.

I take it that Myers will not be gifting ND Maloney this holiday season with his desired 'cease and desist': the deadline was the 2010-12-14 if you use Myer's posting date of 2010-12-07, or it was 2010-12-07 if you use the letter's as written date of 2010-11-30.

I must also add, Maloney called Atwood a quack [by post title] regarding Atwood's Medline piece, and engaged in quite obvious ad hominem.  The Medline papers are rock solid, in my view, and Atwood didn't get into the pigpen -- in terms of ungrounded personal attacks on competence and integrity.  But Maloney went the muddy way -- possibly libeling Atwood's "level of knowledge within his own area" -- and doesn't seem to have even read the entire Medline Atwood-published arc.

The irony is killing me: NCNM ND -- a place that irrationally labels the science-exterior and the science-interior as all the some kind of science stuff [a level of knowledge akin to forth grade?] -- who claims defamation,  apparently doesn't have a problem dishing it out.

Will PZ Myers "Cease and Desist" Concerning ND Maloney? - We'll Know This Week

here, I list some of the relevant pages in the ND Maloney - Pharyngula issue somewhat organized chronologically [as near as I can tell]:

2010-02-17 - Myers posts "Christopher Maloney is a Quack":

"Maloney is a naturopath in the state of Maine, where quacks like him get to call themselves 'doctors' [...] a student, Michael Hawkins, dared to criticize him, pointing out that 'naturopathic medicine is pure bull' and stating that naturopaths are under-qualified and do not deserve the title of 'doctor' [...] Maloney took action to silence him [...] not only is Maloney a quack, but he's a stupid quack [...] now a much bigger blog is going to spread the word that Christopher Maloney is a quack [...] let the whole world know that Christopher Maloney is a cowardly quack."

2010-02-17 - Popehat posts "Christopher Maloney Is A Quack. [edit] But Maybe Not Censorious";

2010-02-18 - Myers posts "Christopher Maloney: Still A Quack":

"that quack, Christopher Maloney, has written to me now... with a nice little edge of hysteria and paranoia [...] 'u can call me an idiot and a quack, but when you repeat the fact that I am not a doctor and not qualified, that is a written lie or libel. I am a doctor under Maine state law and meet the qualifications of that title' [...] the plot thickens. Maloney denies getting Hawkins' site shut down."

Note: related to this, Myer's posted on 2010-02-18 "Andreas Moritz is a Cancer Quack", Steve Novella posted on 2010-02-18 "Naturopaths Can Silence Critics Too" with Maloney using the name Quackalicious in the comments, and fellow ScienceBlogs.com blogger Orac posted on 2010-02-19 "Andreas Moritz and Trying to Shut Down Valid Scientific Criticism: A Sine Qua Non of a Quack" and fellow ScienceBlogs.com blogger Joshua Rosenau posted on 2010-12-08 "Christopher Maloney is a Quack".

2010-07-27 Steve Novella posts "Maloney Declares Victory":

"made clear by this exchange is the difference between the science-based approach and Maloney’s approach, which is typical of naturopaths. I look at all the evidence for plausibility, safety, and the reasonable potential for benefit. If I am convinced that I can offer my patients the probability of benefit in excess of harm, I will use a treatment (no matter how it is labeled) with proper informed consent. But I will then closely follow the evidence and will stop using a treatment if good clinical evidence is negative. Or I will start using a treatment when new evidence shows that it is safe and effective. Maloney, on the other hand, appears to trade in wild speculation. In my opinion he has demonstrated sloppy, black and white thinking, an inability to understand the implications of published research, a bias against science-based medicine, and a willingness to prescribe treatments based upon the flimsiest of scientific justifications. He then accuses me of being 'dismissive' and has the stones to declare victory in our exchange because I eventually tired of his evasiveness and crank tactics."

Note: Maloney's compilation is here.

2010-10-14 - Maloney posts "Quack Attack: An Explanation of the Attacks on Dr. Christopher Maloney";

2010-12-07 - Myers posts "I Get Mail":

"some people just don't get it. Christopher Maloney wants to silence a message he doesn't like on the internet by serving a cease and desist order. The last time I mentioned Maloney was eight months ago, and even then it was to point and laugh at his page throwing crazy paranoid accusations at me. So now [...] he has decided to stir the pot and remind everyone that Christopher Maloney is a quack and that he keeps on quacking? [...] once again, the web will start echoing the Christopher Maloney is a quack message. It must be handy for a quack to marry a lawyer, but I don't think she's giving him good advice in this case. You might as well serve a writ on the tides to stop flowing as ask the internet to erase a piece of its data."

Note: Maloney's compilation is here.

2010-12-08 - Popehat posts "If It Walks Like a Duck, and Censors Like a Duck...";

---

The deadline for the cease and desist request is 2010-12-14.  We'll see what happens this week.

"Christopher Maloney Is a Cowardly Quack" - Pharyngula (2010-02-17):

here, I cite from Pharyngula [P.Z. Meyers] where we are told in "Christopher Maloney is a Quack" (2010-02-17):

"Maloney is a naturopath in the state of Maine where quacks like him get to call themselves doctors [...] Michael Hawkins, dared to criticize him, pointing out that 'naturopathic medicine is pure bull' [...] that naturopaths are underqualified and do not deserve the title of 'doctor' [...] Maloney complained to Wordpress, where Hawkins blog was located, and got them to shut it down [...] now not only is Maloney a quack, but he's a stupid quack [...] now a much bigger blog is going to spread the word that Christopher Maloney is a quack. I'm also going to ask all of you out there who reads this to echo the message: Christopher Maloney is a quack [...] Christopher Maloney is a cowardly quack."

Note: oh snap.

Addendum [2010-02-20]: P.Z. Meyers has advised civility in this matter per "Do Not Harass the Quacks!"[2010-02-18] here, that there are bigger fish to fry per "the prime quack has been identified: Andreas Moritz"[2010-02-18] here, and Orac has posted regarding A.M. in "Andreas Moritz and Trying to Shut Down Valid Scientific Criticism: A Sine Qua Non of a Quack" [2010-02-19] here.

Now, the historical joke is that N.D. stands for "not a doctor", but I also like P.Z.'s "N.D. is short for 'noisy duck.'"  Though, I must say, naturopathy operates actually very covertly.  After all, they are the ones who'll tell you their essential premise is scientific without ever speaking to the fact that their essential premise -- not transparently communicated in the first place -- is actually HUGELY / clearly science-ejected.