This Site & Free Speech are being investigated 100


In case you did not know… This blog and I are being investigated by the NC Board of Dietitians due to egads!!! … 

I tell people to eat like I do!!!!  …without a license!!  Horrors!!! 

Here’s my story if you don’t know it… I’m just a formerly obese, formerly insulin and drug dependent Type 2 Diabetic… who has normal blood sugar… and I’m drug and insulin FREE!

Note 1: Every single person that ‘eats like me’ or similarly improves health markers… every single one.

The point? … no one is ‘hurt’ by following my food recipes nor the meal plan I follow.

 

Note 2: Here is a link to the NC Law I am violating, “GUIDELINE A_6“. I still, to this day have not read it… maybe I will some day. :)

Note 3:  If you look on the emblem you see that the board was formed in 1992.  Since they were formed, obesity and diabetes has skyrocketed in the state, the nation and the world.  But yeah… don’t let me hurt someone …..

 

 

Facts

Fact #1- I attended a nutritional seminar January 12, 2012.  I spoke up against the normal deceptions and falsehoods that cause diabetics harm.

Fact #2- Someone took offense to my statements, found me on the internet and reviewed my site. They then reported me to the North Carolina Board of Dietitians.

Fact #3 - I received a phone call from the director of the State Board of Dietitians. To be fair and honest… she was very nice, polite and informative.

However…. She stated that I, as a non-licensed person could provide NO dietary or nutritional advice… period.   It makes no difference if I am giving the advice away or if it’s for a fee.

She also stated that having a ‘diabetes menu’ and or ‘diabetes meal plan’ was the equivalent of providing nutritional advice and was against the regulations.

Fact #4 - She stated that the full “complaint board” would review my site and provide a written review of the investigation, hopefully by the end of this month, January.  She added that even IF convicted, it would only be a misdemeanor but typically these cases end without litigation, if the person agrees to change their behaviors or websites.

 

Official Investigation Review

Before reading the review note:

1) My site had a disclaimer page but it was not on the ‘front page’, it was in a menu. It has since been made visible on every page.

2) I agreed to take down the ‘Diabetes Support” page.  It’s a page few people new about, I did not ‘promote it’ but people could become my client and I would assist them doing what I had done, for a fee.  My earnings were meager and I left the link up there just in case someone wanted my assistance.

As many of you know… I provide much more support… absolutely free. :)

I mention all this because you will see a reference in the review document (below) that it was not taken down.  I removed it from the menu and in my error, I thought that was enough but the ‘link’ was still live.  Someone would have had to know the full web address of the link to access it… and trust me, I was not earning enough money to even pay for site maintenance… it’s not a big deal to remove.

 

So … without further delay … here is the official investigation review link.  ( Website_Review_Cooksey_Jan._2012)

bg cover V 300

==============

I recently published my first book, “How to Reduce Blood Sugar”.  It shows people how to eat to reduce blood sugars and it tells them why.

This book applies not ‘just’ to diabetics… millions have elevated blood sugars.  According to the Medical Industry approximately 10 million diabetics are un-diagnosed.  Read my book and find out what to do!

 

Click on the button below, you will be given instant access to download the book once payment has been received.

Invest a few dollars on your health and let’s get BUSY!


100 thoughts on “This Site & Free Speech are being investigated

  • volleyballgranny

    I don’t know a lawyer who can help, but I don’t see how you could circumvent the law (no matter how silly that law may be). I think that the best solution would be to become a certified dietician. I know, I know, we have ‘real life’ to live.

    Could you change the ‘advice’ page to more of a ‘sharing experiences’ page? If you post the question and let others comment, it might not meet the definition of legal advice. You could say, “Check with your doctor first, but this is what worked for me…”

    I have a page on facebook–an Atkins support group page–and we have questions from diabetics (not, usually, their friends). We have to preface our replies with “I’m not a doctor, but this has worked for me…” We have to be very careful not to ‘advise’ someone to do specific treatments, too. I try to emphasize that we are throwing out options and that they need to discuss symptoms with their doctor. I also require that any Atkins advice given is references as to the Atkins book and year of publishing (page numbers, too). I realize that those may be unusual requirements for a facebook page, but I have a bit of a background in research and feel strongly about reputable references.

    My doctor does not ‘approve’ of Atkins. The dietician teaching the ‘diabetes classes’ teaches what she calls low carb (100 per day), but thought that my low carb was too low. Forget that it controlled my hypoglycemia for 32 years and I only became diabetic in the last 3 months. They don’t approve, but they left me alone about Atkins–and mine was the only menu turned in during the class that didn’t get any changes recommended (and some got major overhauls).

    I’m not being flippant about recommending that you go ahead and become a licensed dietician. I am considering it myself (and I already have several education degrees). I think that we need more registered dieticians that understand how carbs and diabetes work–instead of being content to accept ‘conventional wisdom.’

    The truth is that there are a lot of people out there who lack common sense. Organizations such as the one attacking you right now were put into place to protect the stupid (where is Darwin when you need him?). You know, and I know, that we should stop what doesn’t work for us–but many people blame the source when they don’t follow directions and end up with health problems.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thanks for taking the time to comment.

      It varies by state and I’ll explore my options re: certification … but that’s last on my list of options at the moment, not ruling it out…

      Re: Lawyer not being able to help – I agree as it applies to winning the case. I’m not expecting a victory. I’m more concerned about knowing the potential outcomes (fines etc ) and in assisting me with my options etc.

  • SteveParkerMD

    I’m sorry you have to deal with this, Steve.

    For what it’s worth, I’ve been scanning your website here for at least a year and don’t recall reading anything that would be dangerous to the general public or people with diabetes. But what do I know? I’m not a dietitian certified by the state of North Carolina. I’m just a physician who’s been treating diabetes for 30 years.

    Perhaps the NC Board of Medicine will come after you next.

    An issue like this comes down to how much time and money you want to spend fighting it. The Board of Dietitians has more time and money than most individuals, and they know it. That’s why most folks capitulate to the Board.

    The libertarian-leaning Institute for Justice might be interested in helping you since this appears to be a First Amendment issue. Here’s the link: http://www.ij.org/cases
    My sense is that the Institute for Justice works on some cases without charge.

    Good luck.

    -Steve

  • Adele

    I’m wondering how the NCBDN can regulate “the practice of nutrition” or whatever across state lines? If there is no money changing hands & there is no way for them to prove that you are giving nutritional information to citizens of NC, I’m not at all sure how they can regulate your speaking and writing about nutrition on the internet, whether or not someone takes you up on your suggestions. NCBDN’s scope of regulatory authority begins and ends in NC.

    I just completed an MPH/RD program at UNC-Chapel Hill. I can’t say enough good things about my program (from what I understand, it’s a bit different than other RD programs). I also completed an internship with the ADA last fall. That was a different story.

    Ultimately, we need these draconian laws changed . . .

  • Ashby

    It is hard to believe that they feel so threatened by what we know is the truth and want they defend their line knowing it is false that they would do this. It will just bring into the light the falsehood they proclaim. Sorry I cannot help Steve. This makes me ashame to also be from NC.

  • Stephanie

    Let us know if you set up some sort of Legal Defense Fund. I would make a PayPal donation to help you. I heard about this from the interview with Jimmy Moore. I think you will have the backing you need to fight this.
    Remember how the whole HFLC thing started in Sweden? The head of the board of nutritionists tried to take legal action to stop a Doctor from prescribing HFLC diets, the doctor won because she had the science on her side.

  • mc-oz

    I think the so-called North Carolina law prohibiting non-licensed persons to think let alone say anything about nutritional matters is absolutely, ie, 100% idiotic. At the outset let me say that I agree, No Food Network employee, no so called health educator preaching low fat nonsense would be questioned. It’s only those who even think about the possibility of an alternative, a better way who will be challenged.

    I cannot see a definitiion in this so-called law for “UNLICENSED PERSONS WHO ARE” OTHERWISE EXEMPT”. Maybe it’s there but who is otherwise excempt?

    For in North Carolina, this august board can come after the cook who dares mention the benefits of eating a faux rice made from cauliflower or the benefits of a oopsie roll compared with a bread roll. Why the cook cannot mention protein, carb or fat. Not even “low-fat” versus ‘high-fat” while demonstrating an omelet cooking because “demonstrating how to cook food” is defined as providing general nutritional information !
    I am horrified to see that along these lines, it is the sole providence of our poorly trained nutritionist/dietician to talk about any of the following
    1) information addressing the recommended amounts of essential nutrients for a healthy individual, as stated in scientific publications such as the Dietary Guidelines for Americans;
    2) healthy eating and healthy snacks;
    4) carbohydrates, proteins, fats, vitamins, minerals, and water as essential nutrients required by the body;
    5) statistical, scientific information, regarding the correlation between chronic disease and the excesses or deficiencies of certain nutrients
    As a scientist, I spend most of my days reading and assessing new studies and finding the best evidence for the concepts that seem to me to have the highest validation. I am a skeptic. I do not believe most media reports. I look at the original scientific publication. I am not impressed by nutritionists who quote media reports and have no knowledge of the validity of the specific results and conclusions of an actual scientific study.
    In any case, there are few journalists who have the ability to truly assess the scientific literature. Gary Taubes is one of the best but I have heard his work criticized, along with that of Denis Minger, because these people are not “trained scientists.” In my mind this criticism is sheer arrogance made by people who know that their so-called science is failing, and that they are not in fact helping their patients. They cannot in fact prove that the scandalous SAD is correct and that it helps anyone. They are unable to prove that their diet improves the life of a diabetic or any of the many others seeking their help eg, those with metabolic syndrome, obesity, irritable bowel syndrome etc. They must be ashamed that their diet does nothing to alleviate these patients’ symptoms and in fact that their “help” is most likely to result in failing blood pressure, blood glucose, and cholesterol control .
    It’s a sad fact that being a good health practitioner, a physician, a scientist, or a nutritionist should mean seeking answers, forever reassessing one’s beliefs not having set dogmatic, responses. Those people who hold steadfastly to their beliefs easily dismiss a scientific study on the basis that it only worked in that particular (study) group; heh! “everyone’s different, each to his own [diet, life-style]“. This breed of health practitioners knows the truth, they know that what they preach is 100% correct. End of story. They are so much more qualified to tell you what to eat than any mere skeptical scientist.

    And as for the arrogant dismissal of the thoughts of a journalist on the basis that the person is not a scientist, I have to say that this is the only country in the world where you go to a university to study packaging! It is also the only country in the world where you hear that one can’t become a [cook, a librarian, an artist, a writer..... etc, etc] without proper training. Yet how often does a non-trained chef win the Food Network’s Chopped show? How many successful restaurants are owned and run by a no-trained chef. How many good food critics were trained as chefs? And for years, a PhD in the UK, many European countries, and Australia was the result of your own reading, research, studies and discussions with learned masters and ended with you presented your conclusions on a particular topic as a thesis or a published book. You rarely if ever had to pass exams on a series of subjects, though you might have a final oral exam or presentation.
    I believe that Gary Taubes’ Good Calories, Bad Calories would more than have qualifie him for a PhD had he presented it in one of these countries.

    And one final comment more directly relating to the ADA of North Carolina’s charge of unlawful information of a general nutritional information relates to my concern about who is exempt from this funny law?
    Are the following North Carolinian physicians who provide low carb advice exempt?
    Dr. Stephen Freeland (Durham)
    Dr. Sheila Patterson (Raleigh)
    Dr. Bruce Wallace (Gastonia)
    Dr. Eric Westman (Durham)
    Dr. Jay Wrigley (Charlotte)
    I guess that irrespective of their nutritional advice (good or bad), physicians must be exempt? How else can they comment on eg, an individual’s lipid panel?

    It’s all too too ridiculous. This is insane and bring it on!

  • Malvolio

    So far as I know, and my knowledge is pretty extensive, the only people who will help you pro bono is the Institute for Justice. Some chapters of the ACLU might pitch in, but usually not.

    If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire … the A-Team.

  • Publius

    I think there is a pretty easy way around. Express everything as your opinion – free speech. Not presenting it as a doctor or a dietician. You are expressing it as a citizen and what you believe are good dietary habits. People are free to believe you or not because you have a right to free speech, but you are not wrapping yourself in the mantle of expertise, so they can’t go after your license, because you don’t need a license to express an opinion. Really, this is about competition – the docs and nutritionists don’t like somebody giving away the common sense advice…

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      “Really, this is about competition – the docs and nutritionists don’t like somebody giving away the common sense advice…”

      Agreed. They created a monopoly for nutritional/dietary advice…or so they believe. :)

  • LeeReynolds

    Official licensing systems are a conspiracy on the part of those who are licensed against those who are not. There are some fields, such as medicine, where such licensing is warranted, but in most other cases it is not.

    I would do legal research and find out which states either do not license dieticians, or where licensed dieticians do not have a state-granted monopoly.

    If such a state exists, and you can move there, do so.

    If you cannot, then there may be some way for you to officially move your website to that location from a legal standpoint, such as creating a corportion in the state in question, moving your hosting service to that state, and posting everying under auspices of your newly formed company.

    But I’m not lawyer, so I do not know if this would mean anything.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thanks Lee… your comment and offer for support are very generous. I have made contact with people who could give me that information in minutes regarding the licensing regulations, so please hold off for now.

      A neighboring state, SC is a state that has -0- certification required, I am told. I have not verified that but the state line is only 30 miles away. :)

      People are battling the monopolizing of nutritional information in several states at the moment including Hawaii, Colorado, New Jersey, Virginia and West Virginia… if I remember correctly.

  • akivam

    Steve,
    The law has to prove jurisdiction. For example, North Carolina law may say you can’t practice medicine without a license… _in North Carolina_. What if you’re practicing medicine on the internet for people in China?

    One defense you could use is they haven’t proven web surfers from North Carolina have accessed your site! They’d have to subpoena your web logs to prove otherwise.

    You could shortcut their concerns by putting in a filter against North Carolina access. This would require some technical addition to your site and use of a GeoIP city or region database or service.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thank you sir, that could be a ‘way out’ if the situation become …dicey.

      At the moment, not saying victory is inevitable but … I like the potential battle lines that have been drawn. Free Speech and Paleo vs ADA Way… thanks again! :)

  • JY

    This reminds me of the North Raleigh man who was investigated for practicing Engineering without a license because he disagreed with the DOT’s report about a road project, and had responded with excellent 8 page anaylsis documenting the neighborhood’s concerns.. http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/03/964781/citizen-activist-grates-on-state.html When this made the news, the NCDOT received international criticism, even Rush Limbaugh weighed-in on it. http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2011/feb/15/ncdot-engineer-getting-international-criticism-fil-ar-786667/ Two months later:” the review committee of the North Carolina Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors looked over the allegations by the DOT engineer. As a result of its investigation into Cox and the allegations, the committee told the board to close the case due to a lack of evidence.”
    You will have some powerful voices in the Low Carb and Free Speech world behind you, in addition to all the people whose health has been improved with a low carb, Paleo way of eating.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thank you for the comment JY! :) The government’s ability to squash free speech could obviously impact us all… in all areas of our lives.

      Nothing has driven this home more than this attempt to ‘shut me up’. I would LOVE for this to become a “Carb Up, Shoot Up” vs Low Carb/Paleo battle … I really would.

      Free Speech, Ability for government to create a monopoly ….and Paleo vs ADA-way … it’s a perfect storm. :)

  • SugCain

    The law seems to state that it’s purpose is to “protect the public from being harmed…”and as far as I can tell, there is zero proof that anyone has been harmed by what you write on your website.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      ABSo-freaking-lutely! :) … bring it on!! Let’s have a public debate about …

      a) Monopolizing of Nutrition Info
      b) The Outcomes of a ‘low carb paleo’ vs “carb up, shoot up” diabetes treatment plans…. BRING – IT – ON!

  • Paul Magnussen

    I did read Guideline A_6, and I suggest you do too, Steve: it’s only 4 pages long and the wording is clear, not legal gobbledegook.

    1) It certainly looks unconstitutional to me, but that’s beyond my competence.

    2) The clause you seem (to me) to be accused of violating is:

    a. Assessing the nutritional needs of individuals and groups

    Diabetics, of course, are a group. (On the other hand, are you assessing the nutritional needs of individuals?)

    3) There is also a list of things you can do and still be in compliance. The troublesome one seems to be:

    (3) The person provides nutrition information on or about food, food materials, or dietary supplements, and does not provide nutrition information on the nutritional needs of the consumer;

    (Emphasis in original).

    Maybe you can work around it?

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thank you Paul. Like you and others are suggesting… there are work arounds. I just don’t want to do them. :) Especially since I believe I have a right to say them… they are after all true and all can be proven.

      It would take time for me to re-write the blog… time that I need to spend in other areas of my life.

      Lastly, I want to fight this… I want to use this to educate and inform others that a group of people are trying to ‘monopolize nutrition’ and publicize the benefits of a low carb paleo style meal plan for diabetics.

      Thank you again for your response.

  • Paul Magnussen

    Steve,

    I’ve now looked at their website review as well. Again, their comments re quite clear: you‘re allowed to make general statements, but not to counsel individuals, which you’ve done.

    My personal opinion is that discretion is the better part of valour here. After all, do you know the full medical history of these people? If they take your advice and something goes wrong (whether or not it’s your fault), are you prepared to be sued?

    And if you were (say) to win your case, what would prevent anyone else from doing the same thing, however ignorant they were?

    The medical system certainly provides a lot of misinformation about diabetes. I see no problem with documenting that, with references; nor with documenting your own experiences and (clearly labelled) opinions. If they still give you trouble with that, then by all means fight it. Because what it would mean is that no one can criticise the medical establishment (or if they do, they can‘t give the reasons).

    But, myself, I would take down the individual counselling, and I would cease and desist. You should still be able to recommend useful books, such a Dr. Bernstein’s.

    If you still intend to continue, perhaps you’d better call the lady (I assume you have her number?) and ask what the maximum penalty is.

    Just my $0.02 worth.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Again, thank you very much Paul.

      When I do ‘personal’ counseling it’s almost almost always a situation such as … ‘Steve, how do you do it?” … in which case I play more of a motivational role.

      When I do ‘counsel’ people on NUTRITIONAL matters… its’ always… “eat mostly meats and veggies” …. I know of no illness that requires the eating of Monsanto’s grains, the Sugar Industry’s sugar nor hydrogentated veggie oils… to survive… or thrive. :)

      I do not provide medical counseling… in the gall bladder situations, it’s more of a ‘brainstorming’ session to try to determine what’s missing. Ditto for the Blood Sugar ‘counseling’… it’s not Rocket Science, it’s just trial and error experimentation to see what activities, foods or exercises work best for you and reduce inflammation the most.

      • arlojeremy

        I signed up just to comment. What is considered counselling?

        If I tell the kid at work with Crohn’s to read The Specific Carbohydrate diet and follow it, am I giving unlicensed nutritional counselling? Or is it only if I put it into a public space?

  • Galina L.

    I am sure Dr.Bernstein book “The diabetic solution” provides similar diet advice. As far as I know he still practice medicine and organizes web-seminars . I hope the book is still in public libraries in NC. Did you contact the Weston Price foundation? http://www.westonaprice.org/ They have filed some low-suits and have lawyers working for them. I believe they defend public rights to get really healthy nutrition, and I think your case may fit their agenda.

  • Steve K

    Steve,

    Sorry for your problem. Have you considered defying the law? You say it is a simple misdemeanor. That probably means a small fine. And if you refuse to pay the fine, a short jail sentence. No, I don’t joke in suggesting this. How much press have you gotten so far from this issue? Quite a lot, I think. Your readership has likely risen dramatically. And if you refuse to comply? A lot more of the same. I read a lot of low-carb/paleo oriented blogs, and there is a strong libertarian presence there, which is understandable given the demonstrably false dietary information forced on the public and school kids in the school lunches, etc. But you can’t change much by complying with the law and complaining about it. Every protest movement is only successful when it forces the authorities to abuse their authority. Look at the occupy movement, as a recent example. When the police pepper-spray people, the protesters get their message out. When they peacefully apply for permits, no press. This is an opportunity to gain traction for your message that you never would have had if only people who found your message were those who already agreed with you. You succeed when you force them to act. That is the essence of civil disobedience. I’m not suggesting rolling over legally. Defend yourself, and argue your free speech rights. But when you lose, refuse to pay. They expect you to acknowledge their authority and stop doing what you are doing. If you think they’re wrong, force them to act. They will call attention to themselves by doing so, and will likely regret how they look in the press that results. If you’re not interested in challenging the law, them be careful about the wording of your blog posts to avoid being specific about individuals’ situations, until you have the accepted credentials. Personally, I think the law is reasonable, in that you can have a general opinion but not offer specific medical advice. The question is whether you want to gain attention for your message.

  • mgd

    Steve, you are a menace to society.

    Just kidding. Came here via theagitator.com.

    NC seems to have a thing about people living their lives without what the state considers to be proper license: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/03/964781/citizen-activist-grates-on-state.html

    Anyway, someone else brought up jurisdiction. Seems to me that NC has no say in activities that are performed in other states. I might be wrong but it appears to me that your site is physically hosted in Utah. I’d be tempted to tell them to sod off.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thanks for the advice and I believe you are correct … but attorney’s can settle that issue for me.

      The thing is… I don’t want this to go away. The NC law in wrong in my opinion. Dietetics and Nutritionists, with the help of many others have MUCKED up the Nutritional Guidelines so badly…. NOW they want to ‘own’ nutritional ‘speech’.

      Pardon my language but… hell NO! Not without a fight. :)

  • factotum

    It would be nice if you wnt someont eo contact you, if you had a means of contact other than logging in. But since I am here,

    I think that a way out is the following: maybe you do this already and I missed it.

    State that everyone is different, and that what works for one person may not work for another.
    Tell people about yourself and what you have done
    Put in links to other sites that may fit with their problem.
    Report what others who have written to you have done or are doing, and what results that they got
    Tell them to get informed.

    You can report information that you found online. You can say what you do. You can report what others have done

    At my site there is a link to a nutritional supplement that changes the immune system. Among other things it has gotten people off of insulin. In any case it is an all around wonderful product. go do dnusbaum.com and click on the food supplement link. Call me if you have any questions.

    One more note. Inflammation is a component of most disease. Normal CRP is 1 to 3 Mine is .4
    CRP is c-reactive protein a measure inflammation

    I think that your modifications will please the bureaucrats. You can tweak their noses by telling people what you can not tell them :-) As in I can not tell you not to get falling down drunk every day because this would be advising.

    Also, I can not tell you to exercise, and to eat less high fructose corn syrup, but you may wish to watch this video. Then link to the video on sweet poison from the university of california :-)

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Great point re: contact … thanks. :)

      As for the ‘tweaks’ … there are many options and those you suggested would probably work, however…

      I didn’t ask for this ‘investigation’ … but now that it’s begun, I’m emboldened by the support I’ve received and comments from others.

  • LadyLifeGrows

    READ THAT LEGAL REFERENCE

    I have been tortured by a different US BigGuv agency and when they told me what legal reference superseded the Constitution, I didn’t think I should read it either. After I lost the case because my divorce from my sister (I’m female) was so acrimonious (no, I didn’t make that up–they did), I looked at that law. It was actually reasonable, in line with the Constitution, and I would have won my case easily if I had read the law.

    READ THE LAW THEY GAVE YOU. Most laws are written in English these days.

  • Robert

    See if NC, like NJ, has an exemption for faith healing. In NJ if you’re not charging money and not using medicinal drug substance in your art, you’re allowed to practice it as “faith healing”.

  • alan_s

    Steve, I am astounded and very concerned by this. I do something very similar to you. I blog (Type 2 Diabetes – A Personal Journey) about diet and type 2 diabetes and I also published a book on the subject. I am also active on many diabetes forums offering dietary suggestions to new diabetics. Our methods are similar but not the same; I suggest dietary modification via feedback from our meters but the result is very similar: lower carbs and more good oils.

    The issue here is not just free speech but the right of all people to publicly question established authority, in this case dietary authority, without fear of punishment. If this draconian law is allowed to stand and to be used to silence and punish you, every non-dietician blogger and writer from anywhere in the world who is read by a North Carolina resident is open to prosecution. Despite being Australian, copies of my book have sold in NC, so I could also be in the firing line. So would many others in the diabetes blogging and writing world.

    I wish I could help with legal advice or support, but obviously I am in the wrong system for that. For what it’s worth you have a supporter from the far side of the world.

    Alan Shanley, author of “What on Earth Can I Eat”.

  • primalup

    “It is a crime for one or more persons acting under color of law willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive anothe rperson of any right protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. (18 U.S.C. Section 241, 242). “Color of law” simply means that the person doing the act is using power given to him or her by a governmental agency (local, State or Federal). A law enforcement officer (no Peace) acts “under color of law” even if he or she is exceeding his or her rightful power. The types of law enforcement misconduct covered by these laws include excessive force, sexual assault, intentional false arrests, or the intentional fabrication of evidence resulting in a loss of liberty to another. Enforcement of these provisions does not require that any racial, relgious, or other discriminatory motive existed.

    “There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice…” – U.S. v Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982)

    Pssst… Statutes, Codes, Regulations, Rules, etc are NOT law! Anything repugnant to the Constitution is null and void, no law at all. – Supreme Court ruling (actual Case Law notation escapes me at this moment).

  • Bill Strahan

    Wow, I think you’re underestimating what they claim to be their powers. This is straight from the law you linked to:

    “Further, General Statute § 90-365 provides that a license is required to do any of the following:
    (1) Engage in the practice of dietetics/nutrition.
    (2) Use the title “dietitian/nutritionist”.
    (3) Use the words “dietitian,” “nutritionist,” or “licensed ietitian/nutritionist”

    So apparently, you can’t even use the word dietitian. It doesn’t specify as part of a title, business name, whatever. You just can’t use that word. Oops, I guess I violated that provision when I said dietitian. Doh, two counts now.

    For the record, I am not a dietitian, nutritionist, or a dietitian/nutritionist. And I just got 3 more counts against me!

  • summitday

    As of April 26, your story is making the rounds of conservative news sites. Outrage is mounting. I don’t see an update as to how things are going. Do you have an attorney yet? If not, try the ACLJ. They tend to deal more with free speech issues than ACLU.

    If you need a legal defense fund, a lot of conservatives who read your story would probably help. Any example of government assaulting freedom of speech and freedom of individual choice makes us crazy!

  • Blayne

    Hi Steve,

    Saw your site mentioned on another board. One angle you might not have thought of is where the server for this board is located. If it is not in NC then they have no jurisdiction.

    Also your disclaimer needs to be more specific that you are not giving nutritional advice that it is your story and for information purposes only and if people decide to try any of it it is at their own risk etc.

    Also Instead of telling people when they ask “you need to do this or that etc” Instead say something like I can’t tell you what to do but here is what I did or what I would do if it was me. Simply changing the wording slightly will take all the wind out of their sales. These people just want money like in License fees or fines etc. They are the mafia better to avoid them then to fight them. Just my 3 cents.

    • Steve Cooksey Post author

      Thanks Blayne. I don’t disagree with anything you said… and I may end up doing that at some point but…

      .. I believe I have every right to suggest to people what they should do to obtain better health, reduce blood sugars etc.

      Their highly trained and well paid doctor and diabetes educators will not… There are a small % of doctors and diabetes educators who tell the truth… but not many.

      • Blayne

        Understood however they have unlimited resources they stole from you and me. You can waste a lot of time and money fighting them or you can focus on helping people. People understand they are the mafia and your slight wording changes won’t throw them off one bit people know whats going on. I spent a lot of years fighting the government mafioso and it did nothing but waste years of my life trying to prove a point. Anyway you have to do what you feel best. Good luck to you.

  • dwhtimsdw1970

    Have you considered moving out of North Carolina?

    If so, write NC back and say:

    “Congratulations! Thanks to your overbearing nanny-statism, you’ve lost a taxpayer forever. I’ve relocated to another state and am no longer under your jurisdiction. Your review notes have been appropriately ignored.”

    Don’t tell them where you’ve gone, and make sure the website is hosted with a cloud provider. Speaking of which, if your website is not hosted in NC, it’s possible that they don’t have jurisdiction over the content to begin with, regardless of where you personally reside.

    Fight back! Don’t give in, don’t change your ways, don’t bow down.

  • JustTim

    Forget the lawyers and defensive tactics. They are expensive, with positive results hard to come by, But don’t give up either.

    Go on the offensive. When you are done the board may have to beg to keep their little fiefdom alive.

    Write every member of your state legislature as well as those that represent you at the federal level.

    Heck, write the US Senate and House Committees on Health Education (you fit into both topics), Labor and Pensions. http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?site=congressmerge&lang=&commcode=happrop_labor http://www.help.senate.gov/

    I’d avoid the FDA as they probably would fight hard to keep their General Mills food pyramide scheme.

    I know, I know… this can’t be done. But before I knew things like this can’t be done, a small handful of friends and I legislatively overturned a WI Supreme Court decision we did not like.