tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3092752484604128683.post8473326595133170885..comments2023-07-05T12:35:51.011+01:00Comments on Bad Reason: Chiropractic: A Pain in The NeckDr Michael Wardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18208273325282474983noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3092752484604128683.post-59051938278937281792011-07-20T09:58:07.095+01:002011-07-20T09:58:07.095+01:00This is a very informative post. I admire your det...This is a very informative post. I admire your detailed explanation.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.bestchiropractoradelaide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">Chiropractor Adelaide</a>G WIlsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15582821514980015534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3092752484604128683.post-82258487597462612792011-06-07T12:37:06.507+01:002011-06-07T12:37:06.507+01:00Thanks for an excellent post.
IMO, there is one, ...Thanks for an excellent post.<br /><br />IMO, there is one, big question that remains unanswered regarding to the GCC’s dealings with your complaint, and other similar ones:<br />On what basis did the Professional Conduct Committee determine that it was reasonable for chiropractors to rely on the GCC's guidance before Bronfort was commissioned? Section C1.6 of the COP/SOP clearly stated that it was *binding on chiropractors* to find out precisely what quality of evidence was required, and to keep up to speed with any changes. As it would appear that it has never been part of the GCC’s remit to issue comprehensive, condition-specific, evidence-based advertising guidance to chiropractors, why would chiropractors have a right to rely on the GCC’s guidance rather than the ASA’s?<br /><br />Whitewash anyone?@Blue_Wodehttp://www.ebm-first.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3092752484604128683.post-37100076841864533332011-06-06T18:55:28.974+01:002011-06-06T18:55:28.974+01:00Just a quick comment for now...
You say that coli...Just a quick comment for now...<br /><br />You say that colic has been removed from almost every chiro website?<br /><br />Try these searches for 'colic':<br /><br /><a href="http://www.google.com/cse?cx=005869422800619552621%3Aeu5gsb9lfxu&ie=UTF-8&q=colic" rel="nofollow">British Chiropractic Association members</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.google.com/cse?cx=005869422800619552621%3At4gfb4qxie8&ie=UTF-8&q=colic" rel="nofollow">Scottish Chiropractic Association members</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.google.com/cse?cx=005869422800619552621%3Afv1vxcryxf0&ie=UTF-8&q=colic" rel="nofollow">McTimoney Chiropractic Association members</a><br /><br />(See <a href="http://adventuresinnonsense.blogspot.com/2011/04/making-misleading-health-claims-online.html" rel="nofollow">Adventures in Nonsense</a> for further details of Google Custom Searches.)<br /><br />Of course, not all of these results are claims to treat colic, but they are an indication of the failure of the GCC to issue clear guidance to its members and its inability to properly regulate them.Zenohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10419783839561343514noreply@blogger.com