In July 2006 the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a highly defamatory article alleging that Dr Matthias Rath, a leading vitamin researcher, was standing trial in a German court for “fraud” in relation to the death of a young cancer patient. The BMJ’s article also discredited Dr Rath and the effect of treatments which result from his research in the field of natural control of cancer.
None of these allegations were true.
Because the biased nature of the article clearly had only one benefactor - the multi-billion pound market for pharmaceutical cancer drugs, including chemotherapy - Dr Rath felt that he had no option but to file a lawsuit against the BMJ seeking a retraction, an apology and payment of damages for the harm done by its publication.
In September 2006, after a British judge stated that these false accusations were among the severest possible, the BMJ finally published a full retraction of the article and an apology to Dr Rath.
Subsequently, in early 2007 - perhaps fearing that the scientifically-established facts about the health benefits of vitamins would be heard in court and thereby widely publicised - the BMJ decided to file an application asking the court to rule that Dr Rath should accept an out-of-court settlement of £100,000.
As a result, and in return for the BMJ paying these staggering damages to Dr Rath, the court has now allowed it to avoid the full case being heard in front of a judge.
The Case of the British Medical Journal http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/bmj_timeline.htm