Category Archives: Freedom of Speech

WATCH OUT! There’s a Thief About.

An obnoxious git by the name of Geoff has been copying large chunks of my blog and posting them on his own so-called blog. Why so-called? Simply because as far as I can see nothing on his blog is actually written by him, but it is all copied from other peoples blogs. He doesn’t claim to have written the stuff himself and actually links to the blogs where he has conducted his intellectual theft.

If so why am I annoyed? I’m annoyed because he has not taken complete posts but single paragraphs out of context to which he has then added his own ill informed and ignorant comments. Geoff likes to think of himself as an open minded, sceptical atheist, he even has one of those fancy red letter As on his blog to show how cool he is but in fact he is a narrow minded, bigoted coward. Why, because the comments on his collections of stolen treasures are off.

Geoff you are a despicable scumbag, if you wish to comment on, criticise or even contradict anything I have written here you would be more than welcome to do so, I’m not scared of anything you or anybody else might say, my comments are open. The only rule that exists here is don’t be abusive to other commentators; I don’t give a monkey’s toss if you are rude to me!

If you are neither prepared to comment here or to open the comments on your own so-called blog I must request that you desist in stealing content from mine.

 

13 Comments

Filed under Freedom of Speech

A day of ignominy

On 22nd June 1633 Galileo Galilei was formally convicted of ‘vehement suspicion of heresy’ by the Holy Roman Catholic Church and sentenced to imprisonment. On the following day the sentence was commuted to house arrest.

Leave a comment

Filed under Freedom of Speech, History of science

A Bandwagon to Jump On.

I’m not a joiner. I don’t belong to clubs, societies, action groups and such things. As a person I belong very much to the species lone wolf, which is not in anyway a complaint but just a simple statement of fact. I don’t go in for the latest “in” movies, books, CDs or what ever, in fact if something becomes “in” it’s usually a reason for me to avoid it. I certainly don’t jump on bandwagons. However there are exceptions and this is one of them.

The British Chiropractic Association is trying to silence the more than justified criticism of the science writer Simon Singh by misusing Britain’s ridiculous libel laws. Simon Singh is one of the best popular science writers working in Britain today and a clear and powerful voice in the fight against all form of pseudo science that are threatening modern society. Various bloggers have decided to take up the cudgels on Mr Singh’s behalf by posting on their blogs the article of his that the BAC is trying to censor. I have decided to follow the example of Orac and do the same.

Beware the spinal trap

Some practitioners claim it is a cure-all but research suggests chiropractic therapy can be lethal

Simon Singh
The Guardian, Original version published Saturday April 19 2008
Edited version published July 29, 2009

You might be surprised to know that the founder of chiropractic therapy, Daniel David Palmer, wrote that “99% of all diseases are caused by displaced vertebrae”. In the 1860s, Palmer began to develop his theory that the spine was involved in almost every illness because the spinal cord connects the brain to the rest of the body. Therefore any misalignment could cause a problem in distant parts of the body.

In fact, Palmer’s first chiropractic intervention supposedly cured a man who had been profoundly deaf for 17 years. His second treatment was equally strange, because he claimed that he treated a patient with heart trouble by correcting a displaced vertebra.

You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact some still possess quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything, including helping treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying – even though there is not a jot of evidence.

I can confidently label these assertions as utter nonsense because I have co-authored a book about alternative medicine with the world’s first professor of complementary medicine, Edzard Ernst. He learned chiropractic techniques himself and used them as a doctor. This is when he began to see the need for some critical evaluation. Among other projects, he examined the evidence from 70 trials exploring the benefits of chiropractic therapy in conditions unrelated to the back. He found no evidence to suggest that chiropractors could treat any such conditions.

But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic.

In 2001, a systematic review of five studies revealed that roughly half of all chiropractic patients experience temporary adverse effects, such as pain, numbness, stiffness, dizziness and headaches. These are relatively minor effects, but the frequency is very high, and this has to be weighed against the limited benefit offered by chiropractors.

More worryingly, the hallmark technique of the chiropractor, known as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust, carries much more significant risks. This involves pushing joints beyond their natural range of motion by applying a short, sharp force. Although this is a safe procedure for most patients, others can suffer dislocations and fractures.

Worse still, manipulation of the neck can damage the vertebral arteries, which supply blood to the brain. So-called vertebral dissection can ultimately cut off the blood supply, which in turn can lead to a stroke and even death. Because there is usually a delay between the vertebral dissection and the blockage of blood to the brain, the link between chiropractic and strokes went unnoticed for many years. Recently, however, it has been possible to identify cases where spinal manipulation has certainly been the cause of vertebral dissection.

Laurie Mathiason was a 20-year-old Canadian waitress who visited a chiropractor 21 times between 1997 and 1998 to relieve her low-back pain. On her penultimate visit she complained of stiffness in her neck. That evening she began dropping plates at the restaurant, so she returned to the chiropractor. As the chiropractor manipulated her neck, Mathiason began to cry, her eyes started to roll, she foamed at the mouth and her body began to convulse. She was rushed to hospital, slipped into a coma and died three days later. At the inquest, the coroner declared: “Laurie died of a ruptured vertebral artery, which occurred in association with a chiropractic manipulation of the neck.”

This case is not unique. In Canada alone there have been several other women who have died after receiving chiropractic therapy, and Edzard Ernst has identified about 700 cases of serious complications among the medical literature. This should be a major concern for health officials, particularly as under-reporting will mean that the actual number of cases is much higher.

If spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.


Simon Singh is a science writer in London and the co-author, with Edzard Ernst, of Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial. This is an edited version of an article published in The Guardian for which Singh is being personally sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association.

2 Comments

Filed under Freedom of Speech