> While there may be a lot of useful information at
> one of the underlying themes there seems to be that all nutrients and drugs
> should be controlled by terrocrats, and that terrocrats should require
> medical licensing and have the authority to approve or deny the sale of
> certain substances...
Yes, quackwatch.com is overly regulation-friendly. Many libertarian sites are quack-friendly. While neither of those is a great combination, both nonetheless contain valuable information. I don't think extropians will have any trouble ignoring the political undertones of Quackwatch. As a libertarian, I would not choose to use state force to shut down a naturopath or a supplement seller or even a psychic--but that doesn't mean I approve of them or would want my daughter to marry one. I would not call the cops on a homeopath, nor would I prevent neo-Nazis from publishing a newsletter, but I would not allow either one in my house. Libertarian politics do not preclude moral judgment.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC