It's a very thorny subject with charlatan like 'nutritionists' (a meaningless title) hiding behind the law whilst peddling worthless and in some cases dangerous treatments.

Whilst honest purveyors of genuine magic potions like the excellent KrisDel^TM range of products have to go through endless slug trials (We put a drop on a slug, if it survives we market the product)

But seriously I eagerly await the outcome, it would be nice if law actually supported reality for a change.
Del

If I read this right, it seems that the three seniormost judges have reached a good decision,even if not the best possible decision.

The comments by Tracey Brown at the end are very disturbing. If a corporate entity (or group with enough money) can press lawsuits to keep legitimate scientific criticism from being published... obviously science is under attack by people who want to buy the rights to "truth" and call it what they will.

This is very similar to the tactics used in Canada by conservative politicians: called here the "SLAPP" suits that is "strategic litigation against public participation". It is anti-democratic sabotage.

Whoever has the most money can tie up anyone in their way in the courts! Cheers for this ruling, I'll be waiting to hear an echo in our justice system...

Update from Sile Lane, pointing out that this is only a step in the right direction. There's still a long way to go to get the law changed .....

---------------------------------------------

Dear friends

A very quick note to make sure you heard that Simon Singh's appeal in his case with the BCA was upheld today. It means that Simon can now defend his article as comment rather than as fact, as Justice Eady had originally ruled.

Simon said today: "It is ridiculous that it has cost £200,000 to establish the meaning of a handful of words. I am delighted that my meaning has been vindicated by three of the most powerful judges in the country, and I relish the opportunity to defend this meaning in court. However, I am still angry that libel is so horrendously expensive. That is just one of the reasons why the battle for libel reform must continue."

You can read more comments from campaigners and supporters at www.libelreform.org/news/450-judgement-in-simon-singh-libel-case

And the judgment and Simon's lawyer's notes on what this means for Simon's case and for libel reform is here: http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/index.php/site/project/473/

Jack of Kent has blogged on the ruling here: http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/

The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/01/simon-singh-wins-libel-court

The Daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7543685/Science-writer-Simon-Singh-wins-Court-of-Appeal-libel-battle.html

BBC Radio 4 World at One http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rlff7

BBC online http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8598472.stm

And check here for updated lists of press coverage: www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/index.php/site/project/473/

Keep an eye out for Simon, his lawyer Robert Dougans and members of the libel reform campaign on Channel 4 news, the BBC News channel, Sky News and BBC radio stations this evening.

Simon, and the campaign for libel reform, both still have a very long fight ahead of us. We are very pleased the three most powerful members of the Judiciary in England have recognised the need for libel law reform. We need to make sure everyone else does too.

Best

Sile