Comments on: Chiropractors bend over backwards to screw up

By: Friday Links (23-Oct-09) -- a Nadder!

Friday Links (23-Oct-09) -- a Nadder! — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:36:48 +0000

[...] British Chiropractor’s Association screwed-up majorly in their ludicrous libel suit against Simon Singh. They publish a comment that could itself be [...]

By: Austin L

Austin L — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:36:50 +0000

Oh these guys crack me up

By: StuartB

StuartB — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:56:21 +0000

@Damon

“Chiropractic clinics don’t stay open based on “anecdotal evidence”, bub.”

There’s a palm-reader in the fair down the road. Same one for twelve years. I take it we can apply the same levels of warrant and deduce that palmistry works too?

Commercially viable != true

“Human experience trumps some experiments a nerd performs under highly controlled conditions any day of the week.”

Umm, that may be something of a minority opinion around this neck of the interwebs.

By: Tony Lloyd

Tony Lloyd — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:02:36 +0000

@ Damon

“Chiropractic clinics don’t stay open based on ‘anecdotal evidence”, bub.”

1. There is actual evidence that chiropractic helps with back pain. This was stated by Singh in the article complained of by the BCA. Singh mentioned specific ailments, all unrelated to the spine, for which claims of efficacy had been made. He criticised the BCA’s actions in respect of those, and only those, treatements for which there is insufficient evidence. I’m glad your back has cleared up, I’m sure you are delighted: but you’ll agree that something helping your back is evidence for it curing asthma in the same way that a burger giving you energy is evidence that you can run a space shuttle on quarter pounders.

2. The claims of Hinduism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity form a “coherent whole” based on the sayings and writings on others, a whole load of “anecdotal evidence”. At least three of them are complete bunk. Yet their “clinics” remain open.

“Clinics” do stay open on “anecdotal evidence”. Bub.

By: Pieter Kok

Pieter Kok — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:10:16 +0000

Damon, I believe there is ample evidence that chiropractors provide real relief for back-related issues, albeit temporary. I am too lazy to look up the links right now. However, some (many?) chiropractors overstep their mark and claim that their techniques have healing power beyond simple back adjustments. That’s the pseudoscience Singh is fighting against.

By: Damon

Damon — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:04:07 +0000

“Anecdotal Evidence” my ass. If you take the overwhelming majority of satisfied patients and break them down case by case, it’s easy to fall back on “anecdotal”. Unfortunately the sum of satisfied Chiropractic patients forms a coherent whole, regardless of supporting scientific evidence (assuming you don’t count x-rays as evidence for some reason.)

Chiropractic clinics don’t stay open based on “anecdotal evidence”, bub. Any more than laws stay in effect based only on the legal contracts that created them. Human experience trumps some experiments a nerd performs under highly controlled conditions any day of the week.

But I guess my back just straightened itself magically after 20 years AT THE EXACT SAME TIME I started seeing a Chiropractor. Just a big coincidence, right?

By: Michael Kingsford Gray

Michael Kingsford Gray — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 00:52:18 +0000

The delicious irony!
Should Simon choose to sue the BCA for libel, the current misconceived case against him by the BCA would be dropped immediately!
Could they have put both feet further down their big mouth?