Prior to the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, medicine in the United States was in a deplorable state. Predatory patent medicine hucksters preyed on a medically unsophisticated population, hawking worthless and dangerous remedies that promised to cure every disease known to man, including cancer. The practice of selling unproven remedies was known as “quackery.” Quackery was once a well-respected and widely understood term. Virtually all legitimate health professionals deplored quackery, often understanding that it contained elements that were intentionally fraudulent in nature. In 1906, the legal machinery to stop quackery was put into place with the Pure Food and Drug Act. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continued to gain the power necessary to control quackery during the ensuing century. However, since the 1990s, unproven products have had an unparalleled resurgence of popularity among the American public. This is partly due to the 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), a law that granted unprecedented legitimacy to “dietary supplements,”a broad group of heterogeneous products that had not gone through the prestigious and well-respected FDA OTC review process, and therefore, were wholly lacking in sufficient proof of safety and efficacy. The FDA is the leading agency charged with determining safety and efficacy of nonprescription products, but one of the effects of DSHEA was to nullify its powers in regard to unproven products. FDA cannot require that dietary supplements be proven safe or effective. These unproven products would once have been held up as prime examples of quackery by pharmacy journals and professional organizations. However, in the years since DSHEA, pharmacy’s journals and professional organizations often embrace these products through several means. For instance, they seldom address the issue of quackery in regard to dietary supplements, they recommend their use in editorials and related articles, they help boost their sales by accepting their advertising revenue, they allow their manufacturers to rent booth space at their conventions, and they publish textbook chapters that present uncritical, one-sided, biased views of