Thursday, 25 February 2010

"Leaked" BCA Legal Advice

Following this Blog's daring publication of the "leaked" legal advice to Boots on the 10:23 "Overdose" and the legal advice to the unfairly-maligned Storm, I thought it appropriate to disclose the legal advice just received by the BCA.

You will see they have a weird idea that might just work...

British Chiropractic Association

To: Governing Council

From: Legal & Regulatory

This litigation has not necessarily developed to the BCA's advantage.

The remark by the Lord Chief Justice that the case had a certain degree of "artificiality" and that he was "surprised" and "baffled" by us bringing it at all seems to suggest that he thinks the litigation to be, er, misconceived.

However, should the Court of Appeal rule against us, there is still one way we can succeed.

Remember that the libel is that we happily promote bogus treatments without a jot of evidence.

As you know, much of the attention so far has been on the words "happily", "bogus" and "not a jot".

Indeed, acres of the internet are given over to discussions as to what these terms mean.

And now the word "evidence" is being closely scrutinised.

But in all this, there is a crucial word which has been consistently overlooked.

A word where events are increasingly on OUR side.

It is the word "promote".

For, even with an adverse ruling from the Court of Appeal, we can still legally require Simon Singh to prove that the BCA is able to "promote".

And, of course, he will not be able to do so.

For example, our promotion of chiropractic for various children's ailments has been an absolute disaster.

Not only was the "plethora" of references supporting such treatment demolished by the blogosphere and Professor Ernst; the editor of the British Medical Journal said the demolition of the eighteen references was, to her mind, complete: that is, that not a jot remained.

And today, this has been reinforced by the General Chiropractic Council's own study, finding no or "inconclusive" evidence for the efficacy of chiropractic for the relevant ailments.

Other attempts at promotion by the BCA have also been utterly hapless.

We somehow managed to defame Simon Singh in one press release (and have to endure their very sinister radio silence on this).


And on our own website we managed to make a gormless claim which seemed to say that we had deciphered Linear A.

As for promoting chiropractic as whole, we have instead managed to create a situation where our members face hundreds of complaints to the General Chiropractic Council, the Advertising Standards Authority, and local Trading Standards.

Overall the evidence is clear.

We cannot promote a bloody thing.

And not even Simon Singh can prove otherwise.

Shall I prepare a press release?


A. Parody
Legal Adviser


No purely anonymous comments will be published; always use a name for ease of reference by other commenters.


Jo said...

So good :)

Up until I clicked your tweet I hadn't even twigged a spoof would greet me. Should I be worried ;)

Extra mirth from 'hapless', which should be woven into their motto somehow.

Tom (iow) said...

I can't believe you got me with that again. :)

Andy said...

Schadenfreude is such a sweet feeling, especially in this case... :-)

Dr Aust said...

Yes, Schadenfreude (in the true German sense of rejoicing at a much-deserved and overdue come-uppance) is definitely BCA-relevant. One can hope...

Alice said...

I can't stop laughing :-D

I would recommend this approach to the poor little sausages!

Kemposaur said...

Top stuff as ever! Thanks :)

David Bradley said...

#foot #in #shot #BCA #the #itself #singhbca