Originally Posted by Dubious
Junk science knows no ideological or academic boundries. The power of a paper lies in it's research design, whether it's a clincial trial, review or meta-analysis, controlled or not, blinded or not, intrinsic and extrinsic biases and so forth. So I think you would agree that a series of well constructed research papers whose results consistently are in agreement are probably more reliable than anyone's web page opinion, no matter who owns it!
So in short, I think we agree.....right?
No, not entirely, and I would include anecdotal evidence as being unreliable. But since you brought up (not verbatim) well-designed, controlled scientific studies,
in the 1987 court decision that forced
the AMA's change in position on chiropractic,
Judge Getzendanner also went out of her way to make clear what she was not doing:
The plaintiffs [chiropractors] clearly want more from the court. They want a judicial pronouncement that chiropractic is a valid, efficacious, even scientific health care service. I believe that the answer to that question can only be provided by a well designed, controlled, scientific study... No such study has ever been done.*** In the absence of such a study, the court is left to decide the issue on the basis of largely anecdotal evidence. I decline to pronounce chiropractic valid or invalid on anecdotal evidence.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilk_v....al_Association
*** I'm still not aware of any such study.
I have done my own homework, and IMO, chiropractic is still pseudo-science/quackery, and I will not allow a chiropractor to come anywhere near my spine or any other part of me.