Chiropractors sue Simon Singh – prefer legal action to evidence
Posted by gimpy on August 17, 2008
Via Holfordwatch and the Quackometer I have learnt that the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) are attempting to sue Simon Singh for libel due to allegations contained in an article he wrote “Beware the Spinal Trap”. This follows attempts by chiropactors in New Zealand to sue David Colquhoun after he criticised their lack of evidence in the New Zealand Medical Journal.
BCA member Dr (quack doctor) Antoni Jakubowski has claimed that:
It wasn’t a decision taken lightly, I know that a lot of thought went into this. It’s a terrible shame he made those comments and he has been given a full opportunity to take them back. However, he hasn’t.
According to the Quackometer the claims that Mr Jakubowski objects to are in the following excerpts from the original article that has now been taken down from the Guardian’s website
You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact they still possess some quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything. And even the more moderate chiropractors have ideas above their station. The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.
…But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic
…
I will leave you with one message for Chiropractic Awareness Week – if spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.
These claims are expounded on in Dr Singh’s and Professor Ernst’s book ‘Trick or Treatment‘ that devotes a whole chapter to chiropractic therapy. The discussion and conclusions in this chapter are evidence based, something which does not bode well for the BCAs legal action
The decision to conduct arguments under the cloak of libel threats and silence evidence based arguments using legal muscle is a damning indictment of quack therapies. We have seen time and time again how unscrupulous quacks, when presented with compelling evidence that their therapies are baseless and actions dangerous, resort to legal threats to silence criticism. This is contemptible. Science and medicine rely on evidence to ensure that patients receive treatment that is both effective and has the risk minimised. The willingness of quacks to prevent patients from getting this information betrays a contempt for the best interests of their customers and suggests that reputation and financial reward are more important to them than the welfare of the public.
I hope that this action proves ruinous for the BCA and forces quacks to come to terms with evidence based debate.
British Chiropractors Join the Legal Intimidation Party « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science said
[...] Chiropractors sue Simon Singh – prefer legal action to evidence « gimpy’s blog // August 17, 2008 at 10:26 am [...]
The libellous Simon Singh article on chiropractors « gimpy’s blog said
[...] Chiropractors sue Simon Singh – prefer legal action to evidence [...]
Dr* T said
“Let’s hear your evidence, not your legal muscle” – Frank Frizelle.
I liked this line:
“It wasn’t a decision taken lightly, I know that a lot of thought went into this”.
Something like -
Quack 1: Hmmm, if we try to provide evidence we’ll be proved to be charlatans
Quack 2: You’re right. But people might think we’re assholes, suing people for no real reason.
Quack 3: It’s a risk we have to take. We must silence the dissent.
I’d love to think that conversation took place
Jack of Kent said
Hi there – I am following this case on my Blog. I have also added a brief guide on English libel law which may be helpful: http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2008/08/on-english-libel-law-brief-guide-for.html
Quick update on Simon Singh vs the back quacks « gimpy’s blog said
[...] by gimpy on March 25, 2009 You may remember that the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) took legal offence to an article by Simon Singh that cast doubt on the efficacy of their therapies, well Jack of Kent [...]
Simon Singh’s “Beware the Spinal Trap” said
[...] by The Guardian, of Simon Singh’s article that was critical of chiropractors and is subject to legal threats by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) as reported by Holfordwatch and the Quackometer. [...]
Long Time Chiro Patient said
Speaking strictly as a chiropractic patient, I can inform you that chiropractic has “fixed” problems that the conventional medical profession weren’t able to. I had an accident almost 30 years ago where I injured my neck and thoracic spine. The result was the range of movement of my neck was severely limited, I couldn’t bend forward at all, severe weakness and pain in the right arm, along with the constant pain in my neck and between the shoulder blades.
My GP and orthopedic surgeon gave up and decided I was to be treated symptomatically. If I had followed their advice I would probably be completely drug dependent today. However, with the help of treatment by various chiropractors over the years, I have led a full and active life playing sport, running and cycling over the 29 years since the accident.
I was a complete skeptic before I visited the chiropractor, but figured I had nothing to lose. After the first visit, the pain in the thoracic area (between the shoulder blades) was gone, my arm was regaining some strength, and my neck was well on the way to regaining something like full range of movement. Subsequent visits built on this early success.
I am also an asthmatic and suffer from sinus problems. While the these diseases haven’t been cured, chiropractic has definitely helped keep them under control.
For those who insist that double blind trials are the only way to “test” claims, I have no idea how this could be applied to chiropractic. It may be possible to keep some patients in the dark when receiving a treatment, but how is the person administering either the real adjustment or a placebo “adjustment” to be kept in the dark, since they have to know what is going on. Also, patients such as myself know if an adjustment has been successful or not almost immediately.
So, anecdotal evidence needs to be accepted, but for some reason that’s not acceptable to those spouting the “scientific evidence” mantra.
From my experience, the results speak for themselves. To my knowledge, chiropractors have never killed anyone, but there are plenty of “mistakes” buried by the conventional medical profession. So get off the chiropractors backs and try and come up with constructive suggestions on how the chiropractic vs conventional medicine can work together to complement each other, rather than the so called “scientific” community rubbish what they don’t understand.