Slashdot Mirror


North Carolina Threatens To Shut Down Nutrition Blogger

vvaduva writes "The North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition is threatening to send a blogger to jail for recounting publicly his battle against diabetes and encouraging others to follow his lifestyle... the state diatetics and nutrition board decided [Steve] Cooksey's blog — Diabetes-Warrior.netviolated state law. The nutritional advice Cooksey provides on the site amounts to 'practicing nutrition,' the board's director says, and in North Carolina that's something you need a license to do." If applied consistently, I think this would also clear out considerable space from the average bookstore's health section. (And it could be worse; he could have been offering manicures.)

10 of 515 comments (clear)

  1. Practicing nutrition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess this means I should stop reading the ingredients in my food and trying to eat healthy and balanced. Don't want to be jailed for "practicing nutrition"

    1. Re:Practicing nutrition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Citizen, don't you know that you're incapable of doing anything without government oversight?

  2. he was giving out business cards.... by iamhassi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FTFA:
    "After the meeting he handed out a couple of business cards pointing people to his website.

    Three days later, he got a call from the director of the nutrition board."


    once you go into the real world and hand out business cards you are operating a business, it's no longer free speech. Title is misleading.

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    1. Re:he was giving out business cards.... by iamhassi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The board also directed Cooksey to remove a link offering one-on-one support, a personal-training type of service he offered for a small fee. "

      He was selling his services. Yes, he was practicing without a license. That's not blogging, that's not free speech. I can't offer one-on-one personal legal advice for a small fee because... wait for it.... i'm not an attorney.

      “But if customers are paying $97 or $149 or $197 a month to have someone listen, that sounds a lot like life coaching, which doesn't require a license.”

      Then start a life coaching website and charge for that. Just like I can't start a legal blog and charge $197 a month "to listen" and then claim "it's life coaching!"

      I'm all for free speech, but this guy with clearly trying to practice without a license and when he got busted he cried "free speech! I have a disclaimer!" Come on, this guy gives free speech a bad name.

      Advice is free. Charging for advice, now you're running a business and you should have a license.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    2. Re:he was giving out business cards.... by SirWhoopass · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Is he collecting cash?"

      Yes.

      Obviously we don't know all the details...

      Except that we do. Especially if we read the state board's findings linked from his site and the article (6.3MB PDF).

      The state board provides a print-out of his site with annotations. People write in with symptoms, he assess their situation and provides specific advice. The board makes it clear that his is counseling, which requires a license. The note that he could describe what he did (meals, fitness, etc), but soliciting questions and advising is what crosses the line.

      In addition, he offered consulting services ranging from $98 to $197 per month. These services included phone consultation and email Q&As.

      The state board didn't just drop the hammer out of no where. They reviewed his site and advised him that he could not offer nutrition consulting services without a license. Which is clearly what he was doing. He has chosen to ignore them and cry "free speech!".

  3. good by geekoid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Lets bring this sort of thing to all the people that are effectively practicing medicine without a license.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. You Forgot the Part About the Money by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess this means I should stop reading the ingredients in my food and trying to eat healthy and balanced. Don't want to be jailed for "practicing nutrition"

    He makes money on ad revenue for this advice. And also from the article:

    McCullagh said the board may be on more solid ground in its complaint about the telephone support packages Cooksey offers. “But if customers are paying $97 or $149 or $197 a month to have someone listen, that sounds a lot like life coaching, which doesn't require a license.”

    So I think the board is trying to do Crooksey a favor because here's what's going to happen. Someone is going to die after telling their family members that they've stopped seeing a regular doctor and went holistic with Crooksey when they should have had their ankle amputated. The family is going to sue Crooksey probably with a number of things like practicing nutrition without a license, etc etc. And since Crooksey is making money off this operation it's going to be hard to tell the court that was just friendly advice over tea. Crooksey isn't going to have malpractice insurance and his first amendment rights aren't going to protect him from the lawsuits that follow regarding the repercussions of his preachings.

    Crooksey should be able to say whatever he wants and put it on his blog. That doesn't mean he shouldn't be held accountable for what he says. It's wrong for the board to try and shut him down now but if I were them I would just kindly let Crooksey know that the things he is saying might leaving him with serious liabilities in due time.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:You Forgot the Part About the Money by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That doesn't make it evil, that makes it a commercial enterprise. You telling your buddy the key to diabetes is drinking 3 cans of coke a day is different than you charging for advice that says the same, or generating revenue from ad sales on your website than promotes the same.

      In one case, your friend is being an idiot for listening to you. In the other you are fraudulently presenting the information commercially. Advice of various sorts (legal, medical, apparently nutritional in north caronlina) requires you be licenced so that people are protected from businesses selling snake oil to cure diabetes.

      IANAL, so consider this in the advice to a buddy category. But if you have a business where you practice medicine, law, or nutrition in north carolina expect them to come after you eventually.

    2. Re:You Forgot the Part About the Money by SirWhoopass · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are correct in that the First Amendment does apply to the states.

      I am not certain, however, that is applies to this situation. The summary is misleading. He was not merely blogging about what he did and encouraging others.

      He also diagnosing conditions and recommending treatment plans. And he was charging money for that service.

  5. Suddenly Slashdot Readers are Sheep? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading the comments here decrying the fact that an unlicensed person would write about nutrition is maddening.

    These license requirements are written by the same government that brought us the DMCA, the Patriot Act, and narrowly missed on SOPA. Also Vioxx, and school sponsored sugar bomb school lunches, with some whole grain. And apprently USDA inspections of student's brought lunches. It's the same. It's the same people, same motivations, same corruption, same everything.

    We know the MPAA and RIAA are self serving corps who will destroy anything and anyone to perserve their power and make another dollar. Everyone here knows that. But apparently we don't know enough about organizations like the AMA to realize that they are the same.

    They are out to protect the consumer or patient in the same way the MPAA is out to protect movie viewers. It's the same.