Skip to main content

Dr. David Gorski for 2016 Maddox Prize

Today is the last day to nominate someone for the Maddox Prize, a recognition that goes to the scientist that continues to operate at the public interface despite adversity.  I have watched the vicious and defamatory attack on Dr. David Gorski, and I submitted a nomination recognizing his contributions, despite the hostility he faces in defending science.

The harsh treatment of Dr. Gorski has littered internet searches with false and defamatory information about him. Front-page recognition of his efforts with this award would bolster his reputation as a scientist and physician, and counter the claims made by those that wish to silence his efforts. 



I submitted my nomination for Dr. David Gorski. Learn his story, the defamation that has happened in the last year, and consider writing a letter of support.  Submit here. 


David Gorski is a Professor of Surgery at Wayne State University School of Medicine, and a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Kamanos Cancer Institute.  He is a prolific author in the medical literature, present as an author on over thirty peer-reviewed journal articles and his work cited 1230 times in the last five years. His work centers on the genetics and biochemical mechanisms in breast cancer, along with elements of patient care. He also publishes frequent reviews and opinion pieces targeting physicians and medical researchers, in the same medical journals. These topics are strong scholarly criticisms of homeopathy, acupuncture, and alternative/complementary medicine. His career and impacts would be notable simply from his university-level efforts.

But Dr. Gorski is known best to most of us for his work at the public interface. He is also a prolific blogger, placing meaningful, complete, and scientifically dense-but-approachable information online about topics of social interest. In particular, he does a lot of mythbusting, a lot of discussion of fraudulent medical claims and the people that promote them. He is the Managing Editor at Science Based Medicine, a popular blog that examines medical claims. He also writes for the blog. In addition, his work appears in Science Blogs where he publishes the blog Respectful Insolence under the nom de plume “Orac”.  On this latter blog he publishes articles almost daily.  These are not trivial reads. He publishes well-researched and deep articles that are well written and thought provoking.

Provoking is the operative term. Because of his effective advocacy and outreach Dr. Gorski has been targeted by non-scientists with agendas.  Gorski has always been appropriately critical of “complementary and alternative” medical approaches, and has been an outspoken critic of vaccine denialism.

This raises the ire of the folks in the alternative medicine communities, along with all of the others that see an indictment of alternative medicine as a threat to their medical or lifestyle beliefs.  He has been the target of Generation Rescue, Age of Autism, and others that have created false controversies to try to get him fired from his job.  He has been a target for almost two decades, but the onslaught has certainly ramped up since 2010, only to massively explode in the last several months.

Most recently Gorski criticized the anti-vaccine movie Vaxxed, a movie supported by Hollywood heavyweights like Robert DeNiro.  The website Natural News embarked on a massive smear campaign that would post defamatory messages almost daily (go there and search for his name!). The articles imply associations between him and pharmaceutical companies, as well as associations with an oncologist that committed Medicare fraud. They have posted fake patient reviews on associated websites and reported him to the FBI and state medical board.  This is the tip of the iceberg.  The incredible online defamation is unbelievably dense. As happens, those that follow these credulous sources are ignited by the fury, leading to personal, hateful attack and threats.

The effects of such relentless and horrifying personal and professional attacks are real.  While Gorski’s regular readers and colleagues undoubtedly brush off such nonsense, the potential damage is real.  The internet has a long memory.  A cancer patient referred to an oncologist will immediately investigate their credentials, and dig on the web for complaints.  Cancer care is serious business, and vetting your health care provider is the first step.


But a Google search of his name brings well optimized smear in conjunction with his blogs, credentials and other credible work.  Again, to those that understand how these hateful organizations work, it is easy for us to ignore such claims-- but to a potential patient looking for health care?  If there is any controversy, even the word “fraud” mentioned in association with the physician’s name, a potential patient is likely to seek medical advice elsewhere, which is bad for Gorski, but is really bad for the patient, who might miss exceptional treatment by a top teaching hospital physician and scholar.

Also appearing on the front page is the “Truth Wiki” a search-engine-optimized slanderous hellhole of defamatory information.  On this page Gorski is picked apart and branded as a “vaccine industry frontman”, a “shill for pharma” and deep commitment to “fraud”.  He is constantly barraged by claims of conflicts of interest, even though just about all of his funding comes from federal sources or foundations. Despite all of the allegations, no evidence of misconduct has ever been alleged. He has stated clearly that he has never received personal compensation from any medical or pharmaceutical company.


The baseless indictment of a physician and scholar is difficult to watch, and the reverberations through the internet are intolerable. For these reasons I prepared my nomination, and urge you to do the same. 

While he has undergone this brutal public beating I have watched him only respond with tact and class. My hope is that our nominations will resonate with the committee and he will be recognized for his outstanding work, even in the face of bitter adversity that seeks to tarnish his fine reputation as a science communicator and potentially threaten his career as a leading surgical oncologist.

Popular posts from this blog

Scientific American Destroys Public Trust in Science

This is a sad epitaph, parting words to an old friend that is now gone, leaving in a puff of bitter betrayal. 
When I was a kid it was common for my mom to buy me a magazine if I was sick and home from school.  I didn't want MAD Magazine or comic books.  I preferred Scientific American
The once stalwart publication held a unique spot at the science-public interface, bringing us interesting and diverse stories of scientific interest, long before the internet made such content instantly accessible.  It was our trusted pipeline to the new edges of scientific discovery, from the mantle of the earth to the reaches of space, and every critter in between.
But like so much of our trusted traditional science media, Scientific American has traded its credibility for the glitz of post-truth non-scientific beliefs and the profits of clickbait.The problem is that when a trusted source publishes false information (or worse, when it hijacked by activists) it destroys trust in science, trust in s…

Chipotle's Ag-vertising to Fix their Anti-Ag Image

After years of anti-farmer rhetoric, disgusting anti-agriculture videos, and trashing farmer seed choice, Chipotle now seems to have found a love for the American farmer that is as warm and inviting as the gooey core of a steak burrito.  Their new "Cultivate the Future of Farming" campaign raises awareness of the hardship being experienced in agriculture, and then offers their thoughts and some seed grants in order to reverse it. 

But are they solving a problem that they were instrumental in creating? 

The crisis in agriculture is real, with farmers suffering from low prices, astronomical costs, and strangling regulation.  Farmer suicides are a barometer of the crisis.  Farms, from commodity crops to dairies, are going out of business daily. It is good to see a company raising awareness. 


From Chipotle's website- The "challenge is real" and "It's a hard living"-- and companies like Chipotle were central in creating those problems. 

However, Chipotle&#…

Mangling Reality and Targeting Scientists

Welcome to 2019, and one thing that remains constant is that scientists engaging the public will continue to be targeted for harassment and attempted reputation harm.  

The good news is that it is not working as well as it used to.  People are disgusted by their tactics, and only a handful of true-believers acknowledge their sites as credible. 

But for those on the fence I thought it might be nice to post how a website like SourceWatch uses a Wikipedia-mimic interface to spread false and/or misleading information about public scientists. 

Don't get me wrong, this is not crying victim.  I'm actually is screaming empowerment.  I spent the time to correct the record, something anyone can check.  Please look into their allegations and mine, and see who has it right. 

This is published by the Center for Media and Democracy.  Sadly, such pages actually threaten democracy by providing a forum for false information that makes evidence-based decisions in policy issues more challenging.  It…