|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 855
|
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 855
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Smith
No, not entirely, and I would include anecdotal evidence as being unreliable. But since you brought up (not verbatim) well-designed, controlled scientific studies, in the 1987 court decision that forced the AMA's change in position on chiropractic,
*** I'm still not aware of any such study.
I have done my own homework, and IMO, chiropractic is still pseudo-science/quackery, and I will not allow a chiropractor to come anywhere near my spine or any other part of me.
Doc
|
OMG! Really....1987 Wilks v. AMA?
That suit was to get the AMA off of the backs of the chiropractors as they were instituting an illegal boycott of the the profession. It was not to validate efficacy and outcomes of manipulation. That would come later and since then, there has been almost 3 decades of research to that end (you can't find what your not looking for) since that suit ended!
And I hate to tell you but Wilks, a chiropractor, won the suit spurring a plethora of ensuing research (by MD's, PhD's, DC's, etc) validating manipulation and opened up open referals between the two profession that benefited everyone, that once existed before the AMA boycott.
Look Doc, no one is going to force a quackerpractor on you or anyone else and I could certainly tell you about a lot of unbelieveable crazy crap I've seen them do but let's at least be accurate in our degradation and trashing of a profession!
|