In the UK, a Victory For Free Speech

Forget4it was one of several readers to note that British science writer Simon Singh, whose prosecution for libel we have discussed on several occasions, has won an interim victory in a UK appeals court. "The landmark ruling will allow the writer, whose battle has become a catalyst for demands for libel law reform, to rely on a 'fair comment' defense of his statements about chiropractors. It will also strengthen the position of others — from science writers and medical professionals to bloggers — who face libel suits, as the judges made clear the court was not the place to settle scientific controversies."

Comments

Re:Bad things to say about chiropractors?

[pjt33]

Trolling or just not reading the previous discussions? The issue is indeed about making claims without evidence to back them up: Singh observed that the British Chiropractic Association claims that they can cure a laundry list of medical issues but that there was no evidence to support this. The BCA responded by suing him.

It's not a prosecution!

[augustw]

Just to be clear, Dr Singh is not being "prosecuted for libel" - that's only for criminal offences, and libel is not a criminal offence, but a civil wrong. He is being sued for libel, in the civil courts, by the BCA.

Re:Bad things to say about chiropractors?

[The Yuckinator]

It seems to me that if you're going to run a for-pay business that purports to "heal people" then you ought to have at least a little evidence to show that what you're doing is actually working. There is currently no evidence to support Chiropractic's "subluxation" theories. I used to live above a chiropractor who claimed that he could cure diabetes via direct spinal manipulation.

Many of them also refuse to acknowledge Pasteur's Germ Theory of Disease. I'd say that they could use a little bit of evidence on their side instead of hiding behind ridiculous libel laws. I wonder if this post will get me sued in the UK?

Re:Bad things to say about chiropractors?

[wjousts]

So, you had a back rub and it felt great. Great, nobody is disputing that back rubs feel great. If you RFTA you'd see that isn't what this is about.

What this is about is claims by the BCA that a nice back rub can cure a laundry list of aliments that have no connection to you back whatsoever such as: ADHD/learning disabilities, dizziness, high blood pressure, vision conditions, asthma, baby colic, bedwetting, carpal tunnel syndrome, fibromyalgia, kinetic imbalance due to suboccipital strain (KISS) in infants and menstrual cramps.

If you can explain how a back rub can cure these conditions, then there's a Nobel prize in medicine with your name on it.

Re:Bad things to say about chiropractors?

[buchner.johannes]

Hello BadAnalogyGuy,

I'm not a scientist. But I do know that going to my drug dealer leads to feeling great.

There you have your 'bad' analogy

Re:For the record...

[buchner.johannes]

Homeopathy works and it is based on a known, scientifically studied effect. The placebo effect.

Re:Bad things to say about chiropractors?

[Vintermann]

Not exactly. What he said was:

The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.

The BCA latched onto the word "bogus". They claimed that it implied intentional deception, that the BCA knew it didn't work but promoted it anyway. It's still stupid, of course. No one reading the piece by Singh will think he accuses them of not believing what they teach.