Wednesday, 20 August 2008

COMING UP: The Ten Questions British Chiropractic Association Members Should Now Be Asking the BCA

Later this week I will set out on this Blog the ten questions BCA members should perhaps now be asking of the BCA about launching this case.

Nothing controversial, just questions dealing with what one would hope a responsible professional representative body should have properly considered before risking (a) members' money, (b) possibly the reputation of the BCA, and (c) perhaps even the reputation of Chiropractic itself, on what increasingly appears to me to be a rather unfortunate enterprise.

It may well be that the BCA has already fully addressed the issues my questions will raise. After all, they did tell the Sunday Telegraph that a lot of thought had gone into the decision...

In the meantime, here's Ben Goldacre's brilliant summary of the unfortunate case:

"Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic, pathetic, crass, revealing, and pathetic"

1 comment:

Smarter Than The Average said...

Having a potch about with the background of the BCA, I notice they don't mention subluxation anywhere in their literature (Singh didn't in his article either, so now worries there). However, the World Chiropractic Association shuns them for this:

"He is not alone in walking away from the GCC and BCA since both organizations fail to recognize the traditional non‑medical view of chiropractic and repeatedly discriminate against and harass subluxation‑centered doctors. Although purporting to be "chiropractic" organizations, the word "subluxation" does not appear on either group's website. The BCA defines chiropractic in medical terms as a treatment of "conditions that are due to problems with the joints, ligaments, tendons and nerves of the body, particularly those of the spine.""


So much for the BCA's claim that

"Chiropractic is unique in that the profession is organised internationally and there are international standards for education."