Aug 19 2008

If you don’t have anything nice to say, say it on lawyer’s headed paper

Published by Dougal at 9:41 pm under Bad Science, Health

Clearly the chiropracters need to take a good long look at their PR strategy. Two separate incidents from opposite sides of the world within a few months of each other — and both incredibly stupid.

CCC: Cat Chiropractic Clinic
CCC: Cat Chiropractic Clinic
© Kevin

In the New Zealand Medical Journal David Colquhoun wrote about Inappropriate use of medical titles by some “alternative” medicine practitioners. Rather than keep quiet about this editorial and hope it would blow over, the New Zealand Chiropracters’ Association sent a letter from their lawyer, demanding retraction and apologies. The journal printed the legal demands in full, with a statement from the editor:

The Journal has a responsibility to deal with all issues and not to steer clear of those issues that are difficult or contentious or carry legal threats. Let the debate continue in the evidence-based tone set by Colquhoun and others. … I encourage, as we have done previously, the chiropractors and others to join in, let’s hear your evidence not your legal muscle.

Now it should be very obvious that the New Zealand chiropracters would rather resort to a legally enforced muzzle than demonstrate the efficacy of their treatments. One can only hope that this kind of embarrassing repercussion will be enough to make them think twice about legal threats in future.

Something very similar has been going on much closer to home, and it’s the chiropracters involved again. Simon Singh wrote an opinion piece for the Guardian way back in April, for Chiropractic Awareness Week. True to form, the British Chiropractic Association is suing for libel. The original article has been pulled from the Guardian website, but has been quickly replicated elsewhere.

The best reposting is on Gimpy’s blog: the article comes with full references for every one of Simon Singh’s assertions.

It should be pretty obvious now that these two associations have little interest in medical science or patient wellbeing. If they did then stifling criticism would not be their first reaction.

9 responses so far

9 Responses to “If you don’t have anything nice to say, say it on lawyer’s headed paper”

  1. # British Chiropractors Join the Legal Intimidation Party « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad scienceon 20 Aug 2008 at 1:34 am

    […] He has a punchy summary of the chiropractors’ tactics (or those of their associations): If you don’t have anything nice to say, say it on lawyer’s headed notepaper. We are seeking clarity as to whether the patient in the cat chiropractic clinic is merely deeply […]

  2. # Professor Frizelle’s Instant Classic: Let’s hear your evidence not your legal muscle « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad scienceon 20 Aug 2008 at 1:40 am

    […] this story and the more recent one involving the British Chiropractic Assocation and Simon Singh: If you don’t have anything nice to say, say it on lawyer’s headed notepaper. It should be pretty obvious now that these two associations have little interest in medical […]

  3. # HolfordWatchon 20 Aug 2008 at 1:42 am

    Good summary of the issues and we’ve added it to the list of blogs who are covering these stories. As I’ve said before, I’m waiting for some great unifying fact to be unveiled. It is sometimes reported that Swedenborgians believed that each act of intercourse created a guardian angel in Heaven: the espousal of polygamy and a continual state of readiness accompanied those beliefs.

    I’m waiting to hear that each act of litigation to mollify the hurt feelings of CAM representative bodies creates a new physical law in some multiverse or other (aka, Alt.Reality ™ Dr Aust) and through some sleight of quantum mechanics or other, this will make the potency of infinitessimal dilutions and suchlike plausible in this universe. The corollary is that chiropractic associations have to stand by, ready to put their money where their knee-jerks take them.

    Now, about that cat in the photo, the one that isn’t turning its head. That cat is just asleep - yes? Not the victim of a high-velocity thrust too far?

  4. # Dougalon 20 Aug 2008 at 8:34 am

    Thanks for the kind words, Holfordwatch.

    As for the cat being “treated” in the photo… I’m not sure. One of the tags in the photo is “Really - he is not a quack” which could go either way. Maybe these are just stunt cats, trained to demonstrate the dangers of chiropractic in a safe and fluffy way. Or maybe the cat on the left really is a dangerous spine-manipulatin’ moggy. I just don’t know! :-)

  5. # LIndyon 20 Aug 2008 at 8:43 am

    I wonder if there any relevance in the fact that they appear to be fat cats?

  6. # Helenon 20 Aug 2008 at 10:24 am

    Lindy- yeah, their Vet said they have to eat less and move more if they wanted to lose weight…whereas with chiro, they just have to lie back and watch the weight drop off!

  7. # HolfordWatchon 20 Aug 2008 at 4:06 pm

    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.

    Conceivable, the public kicking that another bunch of woo merchants - homeopaths - has gotten over the last year or so may have spooked the BCA but, casting around for information presents a rather more enticing and plausible explanation as to why they might want to prevent the publication of adverse commentary in the press and any kind of critical public debate surrounding the efficacy and risks of chiropractic… …and to see that explanation first hand one need only take a short trip over to the website of NICE the National Institute for Clinical Evidence, where we find that one of things they’re working on is a new set of clinical guidelines for the treatement of non-specific lower back pain. Yep, its the key to the NHS gravy train. If NICE approves the use of chiropractic manipulation as part of the treatment regime for lower back pain then the door opens to chiropractors taking referrals from the NHS under contracts in which the NHS pays their fees and before you can say ‘vested interest’ you’ve got a whole bunch of chiropractors on what is effectively the public payroll. Little wonder then that just about the last thing that the BCA want right now is science journalists asking all sorts of awkward questions like ‘is there any evidence to show that it works?’ and ‘what kind of risks might patients face when referred for a course of woo?’. [Emphasis added.]

    All of which does sound plausible.

    Hm, I wonder if, like human chiropractors, a high percentage of feline chiropractors are anti-vaccination.

    tbh, I have never met a cat that didn’t act up over its shots…

  8. # Jack of Kenton 21 Aug 2008 at 10:48 am

    “If you don’t have anything nice to say, say it on lawyer’s headed paper”

    Such a brilliant title!

    I will be providing some legal-ish commentary on my Blog on this case. This weekend I will be posting the ten questions BCA members should now be asking the BCA…

  9. # Dougalon 21 Aug 2008 at 11:56 am

    Thanks Jack! I look forward to reading more about the legal procedures involved. The whole thing is just incredibly baffling, even in the light of what HolfordWatch quoted above. Suing someone never serves the purpose of keeping a low profile!