Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Feature Libel laws and scientific debate

An old battle: England’s libel laws versus scientific debate

BMJ 2010; 340 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c1227 (Published 10 March 2010) Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c1227

Rapid Response:

Focus on evidence

I wrote a letter several years ago defending British chiropractors in
response
to an article written by Dr Samuel Homola (1,2). Dr
Homola, a chiropractor himself, argued that many in his profession
practice
pseudo-science.

I stated that most UK chiropractors I had spoken to considered the
term
"chiropractic subluxation" to be outdated and had little truck
with the quasi-religious claims of founder DD Palmer, who believed that
chiropractic can cure all diseases. Given recent events I am
not sure I had an accurate picture.

Spinal manipulation even for common complaints such as back pain
lacks
clinical evidence (3,4). That is not to say patients with
uncomplicated musculoskeletal problems don’t benefit from chiropractic,
but
there may be other factors at play that help the patient
such as reassurance, attention and additional treatments such as
exercises.

However Simon Singh’s beef with the chiropractic profession were with
the
wilder claims of treating colic, asthma and numerous other
‘internal’ maladies (which would have made DD Palmer proud).

Like other physical therapy professions, chiropractors would do well
to
develop their evidence-base for conventional musculo-
skeletal treatments before branching out into other medical domains with
dubious, however well-meaning, practices.

1.http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/408156.
2.http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=4068
3.http://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/full/99/4/192
4.http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD000
447/frame.html

Competing interests:
None declared

Competing interests: No competing interests

23 March 2010
Richard Bartley
Physiotherapist
Wales