'Self-Destructing Chiropractors'
Chiropractors are seemingly hell-bent on destroying themselves as a therapy.
This affluent discipline has now taken to throwing their legal weight around in two, very well reported and blogged about, legal cases.
Frustratingly, as fellow manipulators they are probably going to bring down manipulative physios and structural osteopaths too. (I use the term structural as society is not permitting us to drop the cranial/structural tag and, with regard to evidence, structural osteopathy is the only part of osteopathy that actually has some science behind it – not much I admit!).
I get the feeling that chiropractors have missed a golden opportunity here. Instead of demonstrating their legal might they should have used what little evidence there to parry the criticism plus given the scientific community the assurance that they would fund further research.
As a fully-fledged sceptic I want to add my opinion. It’s my blog after all.
Spinal manipulation has come a great distance in the last 100 years. The evidence suggests that spinal manipulation, used with other forms of therapy might offer an alternative to existing protocols. It is NOT better than existing protocols, just an ALTERNATIVE.
There is no evidence, that I know of (and I do not possess an encyclopaedic knowledge of such things so correct me if I’m wrong), that spinal manipulation helps more esoteric conditions such as IBS, PMS, infertility, colic in infants et cetera, et cetera.
Spinal manipulators have a place in healthcare. That place is NOT in an ivory tower. That place is in a health service, working alongside existing musculoskeletal practitioners doing what we can do better than them – manipulating spines. It is not the consultant post that some dream of but it is a position in a multidisciplinary team that the manipulator should value, as I do.
JH
5 comments
Unity over at the Ministry of Truth asks an interesting question: Can you libel woo? She has some plausible insights into what might be driving the chiropractors’ agenda in this action.
All of which does sound plausible particularly as further elaborated by Blue Wode on the Bad Science Forum.
It seems a reasonable strategy if one considers Get Well UK’s ’successful’ pilot programme in NI and what that has done towards promoting the uptake on CAM on the NHS.
You would be a very good person to comment on the plausibility, however.
Deal – I’ll post separately – feel free to debate/disagree/shoot me down in flames/kidnap my pets – after all, this is what CAMs are most frightened of. FFS – why? Surely, something positive might come of this if we all enter the same arena and hash this out!
JH
(PS – I don’t have a lawyer so you are safe. Actually, that’s not true – I had a lawyer once when I moved house but he was slower than Steve St. Slow when he was ‘a bit under the weather’ so you are safe to comment freely.)
We emphatically deny that we are the sort of people from whom others need to hide their pets (ICHC is a not-so-secret indulgence) or for whom legal barriers are appropriate.
We just thought that osteopaths must have already gone through the NHS-accreditation process (so to speak) so might have more of an insight into whether the chiropractic associations might be taking such matters into consideration. However, with this being a sensitive subject, we fully accept that this might not be something that is easy to discuss. Blue Wode makes some slightly chilling observations about the success rate of previous letters from the UK’s chiropractic organisations when complaining about press coverage.
No – bring it on – I hate the cats anyway. The dog is OK, so leave him out of it!
I challenge people to debate this – I really do. I’m way out of my depth already but I strongly believe that something needs to be done about this and the only way forward is to get some dialogue going.
I’ll do my best.
HolfordWatch,
It’s done…
Fire at will.
JH