British Chiropractic Association tell their members to hide their sins from prying eyes

Via BlueWode I have come across the text of this letter, posted on ex- General Chiropractic Council (GCC) board member Richard Lanigan’s blog*, sent out by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) on the 4th June.

The BCA would remind members of their obligations under the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) section 50 (relating to Health & Beauty Products and Therapies: see

Members are strongly encouraged to review their current marketing materials (whether they are paper- or web-based to ensure that they are compliant with both ASA and GCC requirements. Note that the ASA has no jurisdiction over editorial materials placed on members own websites.

When reviewing your materials it may be helpful to consider the following:

1. Are there any claims made that cannot be justified by reference to evidence? Remember, the GCC requires chiropractors to practice evidence based care, which is defined as “clinical practice that incorporates the best available evidence from research, the preferences of the patient and the expertise of practitioners (which includes the individual chiropractor himself).

2. Be mindful of making promises that you cannot be sure of delivering on;

3. Be wary of listing conditions that are controversial and away from mainstream chiropractic care e.g. dyslexia/dyspraxia unless you have research to back this up. If you have made references to prolonged crying, sleep and feeding problems, breathing difficulties and frequent infections, as these are symptoms rather than condition specific, we suggest you remove these references.

4. Do not refer to yourself as a specialist in any particular form of chiropractic;

5. Do not use unfamiliar words for common conditions;

6. Do not unjustly criticise other healthcare professionals;

7. If you refer to subluxations, provide information to explain what they are.

8. Take care in the use of the Doctor title. Ensure that there is no way there can be any doubt that you are a chiropractor, and not a registered medical practitioner. Do not use the doctor title in paper advertising without explicitly stating that you are a chiropractor.

It is great to see the BCA finally taking responsibility to moderate the excess of their members but it is a shame it is a cowardly and pitiful PR exercise in response to their spectacular misjudgement in suing Simon Singh.  One of the reasons professional organisations, such as the BCA, should exist is to make sure professional values are upheld, there has clearly been a monumental failure in this regard if people are finding reason to complain to the ASA, GCC and Trading Standards.  Such failure is unsurprising however, the BCA point out to their members that “the ASA has no jurisdiction over editorial materials placed on members own websites”, which read as an implicit acceptance of members making false claims on their websites.  No wonder the BCA prefer to silence criticism through the courts.  False claims and misrepresentation seem to have been the bedrock of the profession since at least 1913

*update*

As Mojo in the comments points out, although the BCA claim that “the ASA has no jurisdiction over editorial materials placed on members own websites.”, the GCC’s code (C1.6) states that:

[chiropractors] may publicise their practices or permit another person to do so consistent with the law and the guidance issued by the Advertising Standards Authority.

Therefore BCA members (who must be GCC registered) are obliged to uphold ASA rulings, even on their websites.  So are the BCA endorsing their members posting claims on their websites that the GCC prohibit?  Maybe, maybe not – but this does make the BCA look even more incompetent.

[BPSDB]

*Richard Lanigan has interesting opinions and an axe to grind regarding the GCC so caution is required when reading but his site is a useful resource.