Below is my complete correspondence with Dr. Robert H.

Eckel on the evening of November 29, 2015 re: his

decision to remove his name from the November 5, 2015 retraction request letter sent by CSPI to the BMJ. For
clarity, I've simplified the e-mail headers PMH
#####
To: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@UCDenver.edu>
From: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: blogger inquiry
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Dear Dr. Eckel,
I'd appreciate your answer to a quick question for an item I'm reporting for my blog about this November 5, 2015
letter from the Committee for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) to the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that you
co-signed: http://cspinet.org/bmj-retraction-letter.html
Before I get to my question, I wanted to explain that my item is not about medical or scientific issues. In fact,
until recently I'd never heard of the U.S Dietary Guidelines. I first learned about the Guidelines via Dr. David L.
Katz about whom I was reporting an unrelated story: http://www.the-sidebar.com/2015/11/what-katz-hearsafter-being-busted-for.html
That led me to the CSPI letter which interests me strictly from a journalism perspective. That is, 180+
credentialed professionals asked the BMJ to retract an article by a journalist. That made me curious to learn
more.
Anyway, a number of the co-signers of the CSPI letter work at institutions that are subject to public records laws.
So, as I often do in the course of reporting a story, I filed public records requests with those institutions
(including your university) in search of any related records. Last week I received a November 25 reply letter from
CU, Denver Associate University Counsel Chris Puckett which included:
Robert Eckel has stated that he intends to remove his name from the November 5, 2015 letter to the
British Medical Journal.
I'm curious to know why you chose to remove your name from the letter plus any other information you might
wish to add. I'll publish your comments unedited and without comment. Also, I'd welcome copies of any
correspondence you've sent (or plan to send) to CSPI and/or the BMJ in regards to your decision.
Thanks much for your time/consideration. The holidays slow everything down, of course, but if you can get back
to me in the next couple of days, that would be greatly appreciated. If you need more time, please advise and I'll
do my best to accommodate.
Cheers and best of the season -- Peter
Peter M. Heimlich
Atlanta
ph: (208)474-7283
website: http://medfraud.info
blog: http://the-sidebar.com
e-mail: peter.heimlich@gmail.com

From: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>

To: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: blogger inquiry
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Peter:
When Im told that there are criminal actions if I dont reply by as certain date on something like this
Im out of here.
Dr. Eckel

Subject: Re: blogger inquiry

To: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>
From: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Robert,
Honestly, I haven't a clue what you mean. What "criminal actions" are you referring to?
Cordially, Peter

From: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>

To: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: blogger inquiry
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
I was out of town and that's what the University legal office voice mail message indicated if I didn't
respond by a certain date. When I finally reached them my decision was to withdraw my name.

Subject: Re: blogger inquiry

To: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>
From: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Robert,
This is the first I've heard about this. All I know is that I filed a records request on November 11 and I received
the attached November 25 letter from Chris Puckett. So I'm still fuzzy and trying to comprehend the situation.
My understanding is that the University legal office informed you you'd be liable for some sort of "criminal
actions" if you didn't respond by a certain date about some matter. That resulted in you choosing to withdraw
your name from the CSPI letter. Is that correct? If so, what matter were you supposed to respond to? Does it have
anything to do with my records request or is it something else?
My objective is to accurately report the information and to accurately represent you. Any help you can provide in
that regard is sincerely appreciated.
And if you have any questions for me, fire away -- Peter
Click here for Chris Puckett's letter PMH

From: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>

To: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: blogger inquiry
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Exactly as you have stated Peter.

Subject: Re: blogger inquiry

To: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>
From: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Thanks, Robert -- just one more question and I promise I'll get out of your hair!
My understanding is that the "criminal actions" had to do with the processing of my records request. Is that
correct?
Good night and big thanks for your help -- Peter

From: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>

To: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: blogger inquiry
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
No, in my failure to respond I guess by a certain date. It wasn't clear

Subject: Re: blogger inquiry

To: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>
From: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
You mean failure to respond by a certain date re: my records request?

From: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>

To: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: blogger inquiry
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Yes

Subject: Re: blogger inquiry

To: Robert Eckel <Robert.Eckel@ucdenver.edu>
From: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015
Thanks.