Chiropractors try to erase web clues

At least one chiropractic association has told its members to remove their wilder unproven claims from their web sites. This follows the decision of science writer Simon Singh to appeal against a conviction of libelling chiropractors by saying that their claims of being able to cure colic and other infant troubles were “bogus.” Unfortunately for Mr. Singh, he defined “bogus” in his article as meaning invalid; but the judge invoked mind-reading powers to conclude that Mr. Singh meant “deliberately fraudulent.” That’s a bogus decision, Judge.


2 Responses to “Chiropractors try to erase web clues”

  1. S E E Quine Says:

    Simon Singh! Isn’t that the chiropractor who is interested in having empirical evidence for medical claims?

  2. monado Says:

    No, he’s a science writer who said that claims of chiropractors that they can cure infant colic, feeding problems, and asthma were bogus. For which the British Chiropractic Association sued him for libel. In his article, Simon defined “bogus” as meaning “not supported by the evidence,” but a judge decided that he must have meant “deliberately fraudlulent” and found him guilty. He’s going to appeal but it’s an uphill battle in the British legal system. Blogger Jack of Kent, who is a lawyer, has articles about it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: