|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 855
|
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 855
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Smith
Actually, Dr. Barrett is retired, and while he runs Quackwatch (and 23 other watchdog sites), content is contributed and reviewed (when appropriate) by an international network of people from all kinds of backgrounds/professions, including a former chiropractor who contributed:
[INDENT]
I could have cited many many articles, but IMO, Dr. Barrett's was the most comprehensive, best written, and well-referenced I could find in short time. The article's sources are there at the bottom for anyone to follow-up.
I'm sure we could argue this and cite contradicting sources til the cows come home. If people are interested/concerned, they can read all sides of the issues....
Google: chiropractic stroke
Google: chiropractic stroke
Google: debunking chiropractic
(and related searches at the bottoms of these search pages)
...and decide for themselves.
Doc
|
I am familiar with that site. I was a member of a contributing group for many years.
So...a Google search is authorative over peer-reviewed literature?? I am just wondering...what kind of Google results might you get if you instead (of yours) used search words like "chiropractic neck pain," "chiropractic low back pain" or "benefits of chiropractic?"
But then again I don't think this thread was meant to definitively decide the efficacy of an entire profession. We'll leave that up to the insurance companies and poiliticians!
Last edited by Dubious; 06-07-2012 at 10:27 AM.
|