“Systematic reviews of controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have found no evidence that chiropractic manipulation is effective, with the possible exception of treatment for back pain.[8] A 2011 critical evaluation of 45 systematic reviews concluded that the data included in the study “fail[ed] to demonstrate convincingly that spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for any condition.”[10] Spinal manipulation may be cost-effective for sub-acute or chronic low back pain, but the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.[11] No compelling evidence exists to indicate that maintenance chiropractic care adequately prevents symptoms or diseases.[12]”
Just my medicolegal experience. Not sure what you mean by fatalist or veneer of scientific authority, though medicolegal science is a thing, I said up front I wasn’t a scientist and that my experience was in resolving and litigating coverage disputes or how you’d simplify my conclusions into such a slogan. I clearly said the entire art suffers from inadequate validity and training that ends up getting people seriously injured or killed.
Oh, it’s fatalist of me to say the law and insurance industry say patients may elect that risk? I suppose, that’s the way it is right now. Certainly doesn’t have to be. The political will of regular people is too distracted by culture wars and disinformation to be hopeful that Congress is going to step in and regulate chiropractic. We have serious challenges like maintaining democratic governance to be so focused on this. You want to regulate something that maims and kills people, I have about twenty other things way more urgent before we get to chiropracty. If you want to spend all your political capital in this one place, have at it. I hope you’re right and chiropractic medicine is the most imminent of our problems; is that fatalist?
Welcome to Lemmy. Enjoy your stay. 🤷