Lipstick on a Pig 3

The problem with discussing alternative medicine is that oftentimes its proponents do not quote specific studies to back up their claims, so I am in fact quite delighted to see a reply in the ST Forum today that bucks the trend:


Chiropractors have meaningful role to play

I REFER to Dr Andy Ho's commentary ('Perils of chiropractic neck manipulation; last Friday').
To date, there has been no documented case of vertebral artery dissection (stroke) caused and occasioned by chiropractic treatment in Singapore.

Dr Ho did not mention very important facts stated by the Bone Joint Task Force in the journal Spine (2008). The authors concluded that there is no evidence of excess risk of vertebrobasilar artery stroke associated with chiropractic care. The risk - if any - is no different from that associated with a primary care provider such as a general practitioner.

An independent report by the Rand Cooperation concluded that the risk, if any, is estimated at one in a million, lower than that of being struck by lightning (one in 700,000).

The Mercer Report (2008) by two Harvard-trained medical doctors concluded that chiropractic care is more effective than other modalities for treating neck and lower back pain. It is also highly cost-effective. This is supported by the Bronfort Study (2010) from Britain.

The Chiropractic Association (Singapore) has made representations to the Health Ministry to be included in the Allied Health Professions Bill. As a trade association, we adhere to an international code of ethics and we do require our members to upgrade their skills annually with training.

Chiropractic does not have a genesis rooted in mysticism but rather in the biomechanics of the human frame. As in any profession, we have evolved through the years to become a profession that draws its conclusion based on facts and results.

Chiropractors are playing an important role, and being recognised, in hospitals in Canada, the United States, Saudi Arabia and China. Australia is currently in the preliminary stage of utilising chiropractors to serve in hospitals. We believe that sensible national legislation and a proper sense of internal regulations will bring about a higher level of professionalism in Singapore.
Chiropractors have a meaningful role to play in the Singapore health-care system. Although we regret that we are not currently included in the Allied Health Professions Bill, we have been - and will always be - playing a meaningful role all these years.

Terrence Yap
Asian Executive Council
World Federation Chiropractic


Now we are cooking with fire.

One wonders of course why despite all the evidence that Mr Yap quoted, chiropractors are nevertheless not included in the Allied Health Professions Bill. If we are going to put lipstick on TCM, why not chiropractic too, right?

Now you can read the Bronfort Study in its entirety here. It will take me a few days to read through the thing and track down the individual papers reviewed (if I can find them), but let's for argument's sake say that its conclusions are true; the question then is: if, as Mr Yap claimed, chiropractors are "a profession that draws its conclusion based on facts and results", does that mean that the World Federation Chiropractic are committed to censure all its members who claim that chiropractic is "effective" for neck pain of any duration, mid back pain, sciatica, tension-type headache, coccydynia, temporomandibular joint disorders, fibromyalgia, premenstrual syndrome, and pneumonia in older adults, asthma and dysmenorrhea, Stage 1 Hypertension, otitis media and enuresis in children, infantile colic, knee osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain syndrome, migraine headache, and premenstrual syndrome?

Added: Out of curiosity I googled "Singapore chiropractor" and looked at the first few sites that came up. Do try the same and see how many of them advertise a cure for those conditions that the Bronfort Study had found chiropractic to be ineffective for.

I believe this is what the young people these days call self-pwnage?