No room for the evidence
Posted by apgaylard on June 19, 2009
Last week I tried to get a modestly sized letter published in the New Scientist, to highlight just one of the very poor pieces of argumentation displayed by BCA vice-president Richard Brown in an opinion piece. Unfortunately, I failed. Space is very limited and I guess that they just had to make room for another error-strewn contribution from the indefatigable George Lewith*.
So, I’ve published it here to make at least some use of it.
Letters to the Editor
84 Theobald’s Road
There is good evidence that Richard Brown’s assessment of the proportion of UK Chiropractors who subscribe to DD Palmer’s ninteenth century mumbo-jumbo is a substantial under-estimate (New Scientist, 13 June, pp.22-23). A survey reported in 2007 by Pollentier and Langworthy (Clinical Chiropractic, doi:10.1016/j.clch.2007.02.001) found that “Traditional chiropractic beliefs (chiropractic philosophy) were deemed important by 76% of the respondents and 63% considered subluxation to be central to chiropractic intervention.” This is far from the “tiny minority” he suggests.
It’s interesting that Lewith’s letter makes the same mistake of insisting that chiropractors no longer hold with the traditional mumbo-jumbo when it’s clear that, at least in the UK, they still do.
*Edzard Ernst has submitted an on-line comment about Lewith’s letter, which is a critical comment on an earlier article by Ernst. It appears that Lewith is attacking a straw man built via cherry-picking: quelle surprise!
5 Responses to “No room for the evidence”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.