[CarelessExpert]

I'm just gonna quote the last paragraph in the article (which really should have been the first for folks unwilling to read the whole thing);

> I get it, you’re going to occasionally hear a friend say that chiropractic helped him de-clutter his alcove or do 87 sun salutations… but that’s an anecdote, and data is more important, and trustworthy than anecdotes. The data on chiropractic supports that the practice is nothing more than a collection of broken promises and fake medicine.

[saurik]

The problem is that that doesn't actually mean "chiropractors are useless"--as it is too focused on what they are claiming to sell rather than what they are capable of--nor certainly does it mean "doctors are effective" (and, if you actually look at the studies, most of the interventions performed by orthopedic surgeons are apparently at best no better than just getting physical therapy and at worst ridiculously horrible: they are mostly short-term hacks that cause long-term tradeoffs... which might sound familiar ;P). I spent a ton of time avoiding the chiropractor because I had been indoctrinated into the world of "chiropractors are useless hacks selling snake oil" until I realized that I specifically needed to get a "grade 5 lumbopelvic mobilization" and it suddenly occurred to me "I bet a chiropractor knows how to do that!"... it turns out they do, and are a lot easier to "manipulate" (pun absolutely intended ;P) into getting what you want than physical therapists.

[CarelessExpert]

> The problem is that that doesn't actually mean "chiropractors are useless"

That's true. A blind pig does find an acorn from time to time. :)

Look, you found a chiro that basically did physiotherapy for you for a problem you were experiencing. Great! I'm glad it worked out!

But that doesn't change the fact that the profession at large is 1) founded on a fundamentally pseudo-scientific basis that has no grounding in reality, 2) is absolutely riddled with charlatans who claim to cure basically every human ailment, and 3) the professional associations actively defend those who make these claims rather than insisting on rigorous, evidence based, ethical standards of care.

If chiropractors want to be taken seriously, it's pretty easy: expose your treatments to the rigors of the scientific method, only support those treatments that have demonstrable benefits, and take away the licenses from the fraudsters who prey on those who are desperately suffering and looking for a way out.

[doggodaddo78]

I'm trying not to roll my eyes at some mumbo-jumbo pseudoscience.

Get an inversion table, a strong masseuse, sublingual CBD tincture, some shots of vodka, and a scrip for baclofen. Problem solved without snakeoil.

[LBJsPNS]

Mmmhmm.

Selective data collection and interpretation can say pretty much anything you want it to, can't it.

[CarelessExpert]

Which is why we have the scientific method. Shame that the chiropractic "profession" refuses to use it.

[wizzwizz4]

That doesn't mean that no chiropractors use it.

And even the quackiest quack's “I've seen this problem before, this fixed it” is better than the best doctor's “I've never seen this before, but I can guess what might help”. You can have empiricism without science.

[CarelessExpert]

Uhuh.

So the associations who ostensibly regulate this "profession" allow chiropractic practicioners to make absurd claims about curing asthma or hearing loss.

But there's good chiros out there so that makes it all fine!

Got it.

Should we just jump to the No True Scotsman thing, now, or should we go back and forth a bit first?

[wizzwizz4]

My attempt at nuance wasn't intended as a rebuttal. I'd pick a random doctor over a random chiro any day.

[JeremyNT]

It's not like they need data, when they can recruit plenty of satisfied customers to go sing their praises on the Internet with powerful anecdotes.

Placebo is a hell of a drug, most especially when it comes to nebulous and subjective pain.