The Thermocap was an apparatus for the treatment of the scalp to regrow hair. Inventor Aloise A. Merke, a Frenchman living in New York, was awarded a patent for this devise on September 22, 1925 though the patent was assigned to the Thompson Barlow Company. The Thermocap was eventually produced by the Allied Merke Institutes, Inc. of New York. It was nothing more than a cap with a socket at the top in which any standard light bulb could be screwed. The bulb was supposed to relax and open the pores thus stimulating hair growth.

The cure for baldness! The concept of this quack device, advertised widely just before the Food & Drug Act of 1906, was that suction applied at the top of the head would draw blood up to feed the roots of the hair, and result in luxuriant hair growth. Right. Thirty days of free trial, and the Jefferson Bank of St. Louis will hold your money and give you a genuine certificate promising to return the money if you are not satisfied. Right. This device would also give a man's (bald) scalp a healthy glow and a pleasant tingling sensation.

Hair Loss Treatments And Quackary

Pseudo treatments for hair loss go as far back as recorded history. Everything from incantations to bird droppings have been sold and used in an attempt to reclaim lost hair. Of course none of these “remedies” had any chance of working and in time they stopped making money. However, new “treatments” with at least some tenuous connection to science began to emerge- several of which are with us to this day. Below are some of the modern day “treatments” that I have found to be completely useless and even damaging.

Platelet Rich Plasma for hair loss  (Quackary)

PRP is not a drug manufactured by a pharmaceutical company. Rather, it is a method of processing blood that is designed to allow one component of that blood, platelets, to be isolated and concentrated. Once prepared, the PRP is transferred into a syringe to be injected into the thinning and balding areas of scalp. The theory is that “dying” follicles will somehow be rejuvenated or reanimated by the properties of concentrated platelets. There may be some truth to this, but there is no solid evidence to support that there is really any clinical advantage to using PRP. In fact, we argue the opposite. We believe it is inappropriate to use PRP in the scalp for two reasons:

The first is that it has not been shown to actually work

In order for PRP to “function” or be “activated” the skin needs to be injured. This means stabbing the thinning and balding areas with a needle several hundred times. The problem with this method, however, is that over time all that stabbing causes fibrosis which actually accelerates hair loss. At Feller and Bloxham we do not recommend PRP and give it a 3 duck rating for quackary:

Steroid injection for hair loss (Quackary)

It’s amazing how many patients have visited for consultation over the years who have been given steroid injections for hair loss by their dermatologist. They almost never work. While some hair loss may be attributed to medical factors that may respond to steroid treatment, normal male pattern baldness (MPB) isn’t one of them. So how is such treatment justified ? It really isn’t. But here is the so-called “reasoning”: Hair doesn’t just fall or rot out of people’s heads. Rather, hair loss is a sophisticated process of steps. One of these steps includes an “inflammation” stage. So the “theory” is that if the inflammation stage can be halted or retarded, so will the hair loss. This is also one of the justifications for using PRP as well.  Since steroid reduce inflammation they should reduce hair loss. At Feller and Bloxham we believe this reasoning is not only false, but irresponsible. A dermatologist who can plainly see that the progressive hair loss of their patient follows the Norwood classification should know better than to inject steroid needlessly. At Feller and Bloxham we do not recommend steroid injection for hair loss and give it a 2 duck rating for quackary:

Low Light Laser Therapy for hair loss (Quackary)

Also known as LLLT. It was all the rage when first seriously introduced in the late 1990s. No matter what hype you read online this “treatment” is pure quackary. Dr. Feller of Feller and Bloxham debated the owner of the largest laser hair comb manufacturer in the world and exposed this man as having no medical or scientific background and disproved right on the air that a major claim he was making about his product was pure nonsense. A few days after the debate the shows host reported that the man said he would never debate Dr. Feller again.  Feller and Bloxham do not recommend the use of LLLT in any form.

Expensive Shampoos for hair loss (Quackary)

Many shampoo manufactures advertise that their shampoo will bring “life” back to the dying hair of customers who purchase and use their product.  There’s just one small problem: hair isn’t alive. It never was. Only the hair follicles are alive. It doesn’t matter if there are herbs and vitamins in the shampoos. Unless there is “fountain of youth” water in that shampoo it isn’t going to work.  All that will happen is that it will wind up in the drain of the shower. No shampoo is going to help hair roots which are deep in the skin. The only possible exception are shampoo companies who include Minoxidil in the shampoo. The problem with this scheme, however,  is that for minoxidil to work it needs to be left on the scalp. Obviously shampoo is washed out of the hair during the shower and the minoxidil competent goes right out along with it into the floor drain. These shampoos usually cost more than what minoxidil could be picked up for on its own in any pharmacy or big box store. Because of this, some of these manufacturers have gotten clever and don’t identify that they’ve put minioxidil in the bottle. Rather, they state on the bottle that their product “contains an FDA approved ingredient to treat hair loss”. And rather than writing minioxidil in the ingredients section they use the chemical formula name of minoxidil instead. Would you recognize ”  6-piperidin-1-ylpyrimidine-2,4-diamine 3-oxide” ? Of course not, but that’s the actual chemical formula for minoxidil.   At Feller and Bloxham we do not recommend the use of such shampoos. The best shampoo for hair loss sufferers to use in our opinion are thickening shampoos that coat each hair shaft with product that makes the hair appear thicker. The cost of these shampoos are nominal.

Vitamins for hair loss (Quackary)

The benefits and effects of vitamins have been exaggerated to the point of near criminality for decades. Their use in the “treatment” of hair loss has been no exception. Most people living in the western world are not malnourished nor vitamin deficient. Eat a burger, a piece of pizza, or enjoy an ice cream cone and you are most likely getting vitamins.  Therefore, taking vitamins for hair loss is going to be pointless. When the body is not deficient in vitamins any excess vitamins introduced into the body are simply excreted as waste. The bottom line is that vitamins and supplements sold for hair loss does not produce better hair, only expensive urine. At Feller and Bloxham we do not recommend any more than the normal daily dose of vitamins.

Quackery, often synonymous with health fraud, is the promotion 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". The term quack is a clipped form of the archaic term quacksalver, from Dutch: kwakzalver a "hawker of salve". In the Middle Ages the term quack meant "shouting". The quacksalvers sold their wares on the market shouting in a loud voice.

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.

Definition

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

In addition to the ethical problems of promising benefits that can not reasonably be expected to occur, quackery also includes the risk that patients may choose to forego treatments that are more likely to help them, in favor of ineffective treatments given by the "quack".

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

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. To be both quackery and fraud, the quack must know they are misrepresenting the benefits and risks of the medical services offered (instead of, for example, promoting an ineffective product they honestly believe is effective).

Quacksalver

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

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."

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.

History in Europe and the United States

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.^[12] 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 and were exported throughout the British Empire. By 1830, British parliamentary records list over 1,300 different "proprietary medicines", 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. It has published its magazine Nederlands Tijdschrift tegen de Kwakzalverij (Dutch Magazine against Quackery) ever since. In these early years the VtdK played a part in the professionalisation of medicine. Its efforts in the public debate helped to make the Netherlands one of the first countries with governmental drug regulation.

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. This publication was originally a series of articles published in the British Medical Journal between 1904 and 1909. 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."^? 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, 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. 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.

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", 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. Radam's publicity material, particularly his books, provide an insight into the role that pseudoscience played in the development and marketing of "quack" medicines towards the end of the 19th century.

Similar advertising claims 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, equivalent to over £38 ($52) in 2014.

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). 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.

"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.

Contemporary culture

"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". Quackery is most often used to denote the peddling of the "cure-alls" described above. Quackery continues even today; it 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.

United States

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 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.

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. 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. As a direct result, more public dollars have been allocated for research into some of these methods.

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.^? The evidence-based practice (EBP) movement in mental health emphasizes the consensus in psychology that psychological practice should rely on empirical research.^? There are also "anti-quackery" websites, such as Quackwatch, that help consumers evaluate claims. Quackwatch's information is relevant to both consumers and medical professionals.