[Definition of 'quack' in the public debate on alternative medicine]

In May 1999 the Amsterdam Court of Justice decided that a retired internist and propagandist of his own alternative cancer therapy, could rightfully be called a quack by his critics. Recently this judgment was reversed on appeal. The first court used the medical definition of quackery: a treatment of which the supposed benefits are unsubstantiated. The court of appeal, however, took into consideration that to the general public calling someone a quack is an indication that this person is a swindler and practises medicine unlawfully. This definition is supported by the most authoritative Dutch dictionary. Apparently a different semantic interpretation of the term quack has led to these strongly diverging verdicts. The terms quack and quackery are indispensable in the public debate on alternative medicine.