A canna’ change the laws of physics

Scotty, The Naked Time, stardate 1704.3, Episode 7

Posts Tagged ‘New Scientist’

Lewith lashes out

Posted by apgaylard on June 20, 2009

bigstockphoto_Xray_Spine_488820From his letter published in this week’s New Scientist it is clear that Professor George Lewith doesn’t like Edzard Ernst’s recent opinion piece on Chiropractic.  However, it is just as clear that Lewith is prepared to use fallacious reasoning and debunked statistics, among other things, to support his argument.*

It’s not as though he even manages to properly engage with Ernst’s criticisms.  Through cherry picking and a meticulous avoidance of published evidence he first constructs then attacks a straw man. 

His opening accusation is that, “[…] Ernst fails to give a balanced view of Chiropractic”.**  Is this a true reflection of what Ernst wrote?  Well, Ernst’s article maps out the origins of Chiropractic, and then describes three major schools:  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in chiropractic | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

No room for the evidence

Posted by apgaylard on June 19, 2009

bigstockphoto_Rejected_1909608Last 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. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in chiropractic, unpublished | Tagged: , , , | 5 Comments »

Defending chiropractic?

Posted by apgaylard on June 13, 2009

bigstockphoto_Xray_Spine_488820The Great Chiropractic Debate rumbles on in the pages of the New Scientist.  This week Richard Brown, a Chiropractor and vice-president of the BCA, has a comment piece entitled, “Defending chiropractic”. 

It is worth looking at it as an exemplar of fallacious argument and claims about Chiropractic practise that do not stand scrutiny.  For instance, he uses a typical quack defence: critics claim that chiropractic lacks evidence, but they overlook, “the fact that many accepted medical interventions have little or no research evidence to support them.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in chiropractic | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »