There’s a petition online in support of Simon Singh, the UK science writer being sued by the British Chiropractic Association for, essentially, using the word “bogus” in the same article as “chiropractic.” You can get the full scoop at Jack of Kent, a blog that has really nailed the issue from the start.
Here’s the article (originally posted on the Guardian’s site). And here’s an occurrence of the horrid word:
The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.
Is he wrong? I don’t think so. (In case you stumble across this, feel free to point me to the literature that shows chiro can treat children for the problems described above, Damien. Sorry, bro. I’ve always loved ya, man, but it seems implausible given the method of action.)
We don’t have the same libel laws in the US, of course, but chiropractic doesn’t really need the “protection” — few in the mainstream press ever call into question the effectiveness of chiropractic. Like many alternative medical practices, they tend to be accepted uncritically in the press. I think it might have something to do with the illusion of “balance” in reporting and the reluctance of the American press to tackle complicated issues surrounding science and medicine.