How UK Chiropractors' Attempt To Silence One Critic Created The Backlash That May Change Chiropractics In The UK

from the can-a-chiropractor-fix-that? dept

Last year, we wrote about a really troubling incident in the UK, where the British Chiropractic Association had sued Dr. Simon Singh for noting that there was little scientific evidence to back up some of the marketing claims used by the BCA concerning what chiropractors could treat. Rather than responding with evidence, the BCA responded with a lawsuit. As we noted at the time, the backlash against the BCA was pretty impressive, with it calling a lot more attention to the questionable medical claims, as well as tremendous anger towards the BCA and chiropractors for the actions against Singh. It was a classic Streisand Effect in action. What was also interesting was how a group of bloggers then teamed up to do the investigative work that no full-time journalist was doing (and who says bloggers can't do investigative journalism?) to debunk the BCA's claims.

While the lawsuit continues, the loosely organized group of folks who had been fighting back against the BCA have continued to work their magic. Brandon writes in to let us know that they've been going one-by-one through every chiropractor who's a member of the BCA and examining their web sites for false marketing claims -- leading to a situation where a stunning one out of every four chiropractors in the UK is under investigation for misleading marketing or advertising. This isn't just the Streisand Effect, this is the Streisand Effect on steroids. In trying to hush up one critic, the BCA has unleashed a large group of concerned folks who are organized (perhaps loosely, but quite effectively) to bring about massive change concerning the BCA and chiropractor marketing practices in general.

The article linked above also goes through more details of how this group has helped dismantle the BCA's weak attempt at showing scientific evidence for some of those marketing claims:

The statement, supported by just 29 citations, was ripped apart by bloggers within 24 hours of publication, before being subjected to a further shredding in the British Medical Journal. It emerged that 10 of the papers cited had nothing to do with chiropractic treatment, and several weren't even studies. The remainder consisted of a small collection of poor-quality trials.

More seriously, the BCA misled the public with a misrepresentation of one paper, a Cochrane review looking at the effectiveness of various treatments for bed-wetting, claiming that the authors had simply concluded that, "there was weak evidence to support the use of [chiropractic].

One day someone will write a big case study (or perhaps a book) about what happened here. An attempt to silence a critic may end up resulting in massive changes to not just the British Chiropractic Association (the article notes that many chiropractors are horrified and want to leave the organization), but also how people view chiropractors and how chiropractic services are marketed.

Filed Under: backlash, chiropractors, streisand effect, truth in advertising, uk

UK Libel Laws, Scientific Criticism, Chilling Effects, Bloggers And The Streisand Effect

from the enough-for-you? dept

Well, here's a story that's got a bunch of different points worth highlighting. Back in July, Ben Goldacre wrote up an excellent article on the libel lawsuit against Simon Singh by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA), highlighting how a bunch of bloggers, rather than reporters, were doing much of the work exposing the BCA's questionable tactics. Why weren't those intrepid "only we can do investigative reporting" journalists taking on the issue? This week, the NY Times has an article by Olivia Judson explaining why: they're scared to death of being sued ,as well, thanks to draconian UK libel laws.

The background is that Singh, a well respected PhD. in physics, who has written a bunch of top selling "popular science" books, wrote an article for the Guardian, where he complained about some of the claims made by the BCA concerning what chiropractic care could help cure, noting that there was little (if any) evidence to support some of their claims. In response, the BCA has sued, and to date, the case has not gone well. It's already tough, because the UK laws greatly favor those who claim defamation (which is why there are worries about defamation tourism claims being made in the UK). Singh has had to spend quite a lot of money defending himself, and an early court ruling focused on the use of the word "bogus," which Singh clearly meant in the colloquial way, as meaning his opinion that there was no evidence in support of the claims. However, the court interpreted it to mean a factual statement accusing the BCA of deliberate dishonesty.

The case is still ongoing, but Judson highlights that many reporters are feeling the chilling effects, and are purposely avoiding certain scientific stories, for fear that their writing will lead them to a similar lawsuit. Both Judson and Goldacre note what a dangerous situation this is for basic scientific criticism, whereby it's a part of the process to question evidence and conclusions. In fact, it's good for everyone, because it leads to a more detailed exploration of the actual facts to come to a reasonable conclusion. But throwing libel law into the middle of that certainly has pretty massive chilling effects.

Except... for a bunch of bloggers who are more upset about those chilling effects than they are afraid of a libel charge. Goldacre covers how this group of "amateurs" have not only been picking apart (in great detail) certain claims by the BCA, they've also been able to pressure chiropractors to change some of their claims and start defending themselves on these issues. On top of that, they're helping to shine a lot more light on the whole situation, effectively using the "Streisand Effect" to call attention to the idea that the BCA is working to stifle criticism.

The whole story is quite fascinating for all of these reasons. There is a real problem with UK libel laws that needs to be dealt with. The chilling effects on reporting and scientific criticism -- especially in cases where people's health may actually be at stake -- are rather sickening. But, it's also illustrative of how an interested group of "amateurs" can certainly band together and take on a project, even in places where reporters fear to tread.

Filed Under: chiropractors, defamation, libel, simon singh, uk
Companies: british chiropractic association