tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.comments2023-05-08T05:40:51.720-04:00Perles of WisdomDr. Stephen M. Perlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10842367889503625768noreply@blogger.comBlogger100125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-75873476652488994932011-03-25T22:37:49.094-04:002011-03-25T22:37:49.094-04:00Thank you for your comment.
While it is true th...Thank you for your comment. <br /><br />While it is true that the services provided by chiropractic physicians are underutilized when it comes to the treatment of headache, neck and back pain I disagree with the your remainder of your comments in two important ways.<br /><br />1. chiropractic is not a method it is a profession. <br /><br />2. I assume that when you say chiropractic is effective that you mean that the services of a doctor of chiropractic. The current state of the evidence is such that one cannot support with good quality evidence the statement that our interventions are "the most effective". Unfortunately, at best, we can say that the evidence is very strong that some of the services offered by chiropractic physicians, most particularly spinal manipulation, is an effective treatment, not the most effective treatment for low back pain, neck pain and headaches. <br /><br />I know that this will seem like a semantic argument but when talking about scientific evidence these differences effective vs. most effective are important distinctions.Dr. Stephen M. Perlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10842367889503625768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-16645788833140933152011-03-25T03:45:44.216-04:002011-03-25T03:45:44.216-04:00Chiropractic is the most effective and least utili...Chiropractic is the most effective and least utilized method of headache neck and back pain treatment available.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.adelaidechiropractor.com.au/" rel="nofollow">chiropractor</a>Chirohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17204330782764489292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-36367979135617125272011-03-10T17:26:12.217-05:002011-03-10T17:26:12.217-05:00A well-constructed addition to the demolition of D...A well-constructed addition to the demolition of Dr Ernst. It is staggering that his pseudoscientific manipulation of data has been published on so many occasions (ignoring the journal he is affiliated with, of course, as one would expect him to publish his own drivel, after all). What really makes me chuckle is that while he's rambling on about non-existent associations we can continue to get on with some proper work, namely getting our patients better!<br /><br />Thanks for your work on this and other articles.<br /><br />S Garstin DCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-54870589324784508302011-03-01T19:14:25.125-05:002011-03-01T19:14:25.125-05:00Thanks for the reminder that not all scientific pu...Thanks for the reminder that not all scientific publications or authors are created equal, and bias can crop up anywhere.Olympia Chiropractorhttp://www.kellygolob.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-42031676197831153882011-02-06T16:08:28.730-05:002011-02-06T16:08:28.730-05:00Great expose on Ernst and the self-acclaimed perce...Great expose on Ernst and the self-acclaimed perceived authority in the field - unfortunately, those important nuances don't reflect fairly in headlines, and the situation does reflect a disappointing abuse of the term "scientific". It goes without saying that the sheer number of published papers he's authored (a distracting indicator of lucidity) might deflect one's observation from a humanistic one - that he could be under the influence of cognitive decline, as in dementia...presenting as irrational associations and narcissistic behavior. Whatever it is, something ain't right about it. <br /><br />Aaron Root, DC, DACNBAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-12615886415597431902011-02-03T10:35:28.818-05:002011-02-03T10:35:28.818-05:00Excellent post and response to Ms Bellamy's co...Excellent post and response to Ms Bellamy's comment. I recall Dr. Long's pre-filed submission was rejected because he was unable to appear in person, attest under sworn oath that it was accurate, and then endure cross examination. As a result his submission was kicked aside and does not appear in the official record or transcripts and was never deliberated upon by the Board of Examiners. If the CBOE ruling were to be appealed to Superior Court the judge would not consider Dr. Long’s pre-filed submission as part of the proceedings. Dr. Long’s submission was never qualified as actual testimony and therefore should not be cited as such by Ernst. <br /><br />Truth be told the involved parties were looking forward to Dr. Long testifying and were disappointed at never having the opportunity to cross examine him.Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-68203472619995119852011-02-02T09:18:44.793-05:002011-02-02T09:18:44.793-05:00That prefiled testimony isn’t testimony until the ...That prefiled testimony isn’t testimony until the board has its hearing. And according to the Regulations of the Department of Public Health 19a-9-29 (e) the person submitting the testimony must be present and adopt the testimony. Long wasn’t present therefore he couldn’t adopt the testimony and it was not admitted. I could be wrong but testimony that isn’t admitted as testimony is no testimony at all.<br /><br />Ms. Bellamy says that the fact that Long’s testimony wasn’t accepted isn’t in accord with the procedural rules in CT. I guess because she isn’t from Connecticut she didn’t bother reading the Rules of Practice. Probably because she was a layperson intervenor and now wants to claim knowledge of legal proceedings in CT. From Regulations of the Department of Public Health 19a-9-29 (e) “each witness shall be present at the hearing at which the prefiled written testimony is offered, shall adopt the written testimony under oath and shall be available for cross examination as directed by the presiding officer.”<br /><br />Regarding the ICA having Cassidy represent them and not allowing someone else to adopt Long’s prefiled testimony. Long was an intervenor as an individual and the ICA was a party as a corporation. Thus Long was the only person who could represent Long but the ICA could pick anyone they so choose to represent the corporation. They choose Cassidy.<br /><br />The problem with Ernst having a copy is as a scientist writing a paper whose purpose is “summarising all fatalities which occurred after chiropractic spinal manipulation and were published in the medical literature” it had no probative value. And not that I am a conspiracy theorist but Ernst’s façade of disinterested objectivity is shattered when he uses material sent to him from zealots for whom science is a dilettante's game. You were the one who during their testimony said that you ignore research that doesn’t support your conclusion. While this is normal practice in legal research – not presenting to the court opinions that don’t support your case – it is bad science and suggests that as the mouthpiece for the Campaign for Science-Based Healthcare (SBHC) you ought to get to know science a bit better.<br /><br />SMP<br /><br />19a-9-1 (13) "Intervenor" means a person, other than a party, who is allowed to participate in either a contested case or a hearing on a request for declaratory ruling, as set forth in section 4-177a of the Connecticut General Statutes, and section 19a-9-27 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.<br /><br />19a-9-1. (17) "Party" has the meaning provided in section 4-166 of the Connecticut General Statutes.<br /><br />Connecticut General Statutes, Title 4, Chapter 54, § 4-166 - Definitions<br />(9) "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, governmental subdivision, agency or public or private organization of any character, but does not include the agency conducting the proceeding;<br /><br />DPH regulations<br />http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/agency_regulations/dph_regulations-9.1.2009.pdfDr. Stephen M. Perlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10842367889503625768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-49660084054009611192011-01-07T13:28:32.757-05:002011-01-07T13:28:32.757-05:00Fantastic. Exactly what I'm teaching in my co...Fantastic. Exactly what I'm teaching in my communication class and in continuing ed seminars here in California.<br />Dr. Carter<br />Los AngelesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-57682030610003193912010-12-20T10:21:52.089-05:002010-12-20T10:21:52.089-05:00Your criticism of Dr. Ernst’s citation of the test...Your criticism of Dr. Ernst’s citation of the testimony of Preston Long, DC, is misinformed. The Campaign for Science-Based Healthcare (SBHC) was granted intervenor status at the hearing before the Connecticut Board of Chiropractic Examiners (“Board”). As President of SBHC I had access to all documents filed and participated in the hearing. On September 14, 2009, the Board issued a “Ruling on Request for Status and Notice Regarding Procedures” which provided, in pertinent part: “In lieu of live direct testimony, all parties, intervenors and other designated persons must prefile their testimony by October 27, 2009.” <br /><br />In accordance with the Board’s ruling, Preston Long, DC, who had been granted intervenor status by the Board, submitted his prefiled testimony on October 25, 2009. This filing is reflected in the Board’s “Declaratory Ruling Proceeding Regarding Informed Consent EXHIBIT LIST,” as Exhibit 42: “Preston Long, DC - Prefiled Testimony, October 25, 2009.” As required by the Board, the original and seven copies of the prefiled testimony were sent to the Board and served on all parties and intervenors. Thus it is entirely correct that Dr. Ernst referred to this document as Dr. Long’s “testimony.” That is the name of the document and it is how the Board itself referred to the document. Nowhere does Dr. Ernst say that Dr. Long’s testimony was part of the actual hearing. His only errors were referring to an administrative proceeding as a “court,” and in describing a filing as a “presentation,” which is fully understandable given that he is not a U.S. resident and therefore likely unfamiliar with the American administrative procedural systems, of which there are 50 in the individual states plus one federal system.<br /><br />Because Dr. Long could not appear in person before the Board at the hearing to attest to his prefiled testimony the Board did not admit the testimony into evidence nor would it allow a substitute witness to adopt the testimony. This was the Board’s decision and is not correctly described as “in accordance with the procedural rules in CT.” In fact, the Board ruled exactly the opposite when the International Chiropractors Association requested that David Cassidy be allowed to substitute for its previously designated witness, thus demonstrating that the decision was a discretionary one, not required by any “procedural rule.” <br /><br />I don’t know who told you the documents were not to be “made public,” but there was never an order issued by the Board to that effect. In any event, that is not the same thing as the document’s not being part of the public record nor does the fact that the Board refused to consider Dr. Long’s testimony mean that the document is not part of the public record. In any event, whether it is or is not part of the public record is irrelevant. Copies of Dr. Long’s testimony were in the hands of all participants in the Board hearings and there was nothing wrong with anyone sending a copy to Dr. Ernst for his consideration. Thus, your insinuation that Dr. Ernst’s possession of Dr. Long’s testimony is somehow inappropriate is simply not in accordance with the public record of the Board’s proceedings. <br /><br />Jann J. Bellamy, J.D.<br />Campaign for Science-Based Healthcare<br />www.sciencebasedhealthcare.orgJann J. Bellamy. J.D.http://www.sciencebasedhealthcare.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-45427021457645653982010-12-19T17:44:00.693-05:002010-12-19T17:44:00.693-05:00A couple of people have privately emailed me about...A couple of people have privately emailed me about the proper citation for Ernst's paper in Verlag Perfusion GmbH. I stand by my statement that citing this as Perfusion is not appropriate as there is a journal of renown by that name. <br /><br />http://www.uk.sagepub.com/journals/Journal201824#tabview=boards<br /><br />A few have noted that verlag is German for publisher or publishing house. And GmbH is an abbreviation for the German Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung, which in English means company with limited liability. I knew these facts.<br /><br />I've said that one should cite the journal as Verlag Perfusion GmbH because that is what the copyright notice at the bottom of the pages says. <br /><br />On the other hand The British Library calls the journal Perfusion -Munich then Nurnberg.Dr. Stephen M. Perlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10842367889503625768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-31264729965311254462010-12-17T18:13:53.801-05:002010-12-17T18:13:53.801-05:00A devastatingly accurate analysis of Ernst’s self-...A devastatingly accurate analysis of Ernst’s self-righteous crusade to bury all healthcare techniques he doesn’t like. Phenomenal!<br /><br />--Bill Lauretti, DCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-91369915113524954272010-12-17T13:27:27.113-05:002010-12-17T13:27:27.113-05:00Wow! Very interesting looks at the work of someone...Wow! Very interesting looks at the work of someone who is far too interested in discrediting chiropractic. I wonder what ticked Ernst off so much that is life's work revolves around trying to destroy the chiropractic profession?Todd Lloyd, DChttp://lloydchiro.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-76023279615822157982010-12-17T12:17:42.867-05:002010-12-17T12:17:42.867-05:00Excellent article Stephen. Thanks for all of your...Excellent article Stephen. Thanks for all of your work and dedication to our profession.<br /><br />DougDouglas Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05986287164314270638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-80866415370885032162010-12-17T10:29:27.435-05:002010-12-17T10:29:27.435-05:00Well done Stephen! The gods know that the chiropra...Well done Stephen! The gods know that the chiropractic profession has its share of problems and questionable practitioners but Ernst has really painted himself into a corner and comes off looking like …umm … a quack.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-41871561725876473882010-12-17T09:34:12.163-05:002010-12-17T09:34:12.163-05:00Unfortunately, sounds more like an axe to grind th...Unfortunately, sounds more like an axe to grind than science.Brettnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-48801479314177739012010-12-17T02:19:17.512-05:002010-12-17T02:19:17.512-05:00Oh my God Stephen, this is phenomenal!
It is poet...Oh my God Stephen, this is phenomenal!<br /><br />It is poetic and sadly so true it hurts.<br /><br />Thanks!<br /><br />CharlesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-57930462882480986112010-11-27T00:50:54.817-05:002010-11-27T00:50:54.817-05:00As long as rumors about the safety of chiropractic...As long as rumors about the safety of chiropractic exist, we must work to educate the general public. The Foundation for Chiropractic Progress is doing a great job with campaigns by Jerry Rice and others. Every doctor DC needs to post articles proving efficacy of chiropractic and the fallacy of the stroke connection onto their website and work to educate the public, one patient at a time. In time, the public will come to know that chiropractic is the safest and most effective health care system available.seattle chiropractorhttp://www.downtownseattlechiropractic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-63413669290635454622010-10-24T18:28:11.944-04:002010-10-24T18:28:11.944-04:00best line in the song has to be 'would they li...best line in the song has to be 'would they listen to invective of a playboy bunny and a pet detective.' <br />When issues spark strong emotion with the public, then science often take a back seat. Incontrovertable evidence is no match for emotionally driven invective commentary, especially when delivered by a 'playboy bunny and a pet detective' (though I hear they are no longer a couple). <br />I cannot imagine the pain the parent of a child with autism goes through. And we can only hope that science will help us to understand the origin of this disorder. There just is no evidence that vaccination is the culprit.John M Venturahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07099521598549906322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-38729869751689271682010-10-22T08:52:09.136-04:002010-10-22T08:52:09.136-04:00ianam,
You are correct IF a treatment is pointles...ianam,<br /><br />You are correct IF a treatment is pointless no level of risk or expenditure of money would be worthwhile. Your implication, I suspect, is that cervical manipulation is pointless. Unfortunately that belief is not supported by the scientific evidence and to ignore that evidence is just another example of what my blog posting is about. High quality scientific evidence shows that cervical manipulation is amongst a group of effective treatments. Is it a perfect treatment. No but neither is anything else and the alternatives offered by non-DCs don't appear to be any more effective and in fact pose greater known risks. <br /><br />SMPDr. Stephen M. Perlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10842367889503625768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-45121155456297103192010-10-22T02:53:46.400-04:002010-10-22T02:53:46.400-04:00"I have always been jealous of mathematics ab..."I have always been jealous of mathematics ability to remain concrete and just build upon its foundation of knowledge whereas science all too often takes seemingly endless baby steps toward a conclusion only to reverse direction suddenly and embrace the opposite notion."<br /><br />This is necessarily true because mathematics is based on logical deduction, whereas science is based on the best inference from the available evidence.ianamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-74068061561826341392010-10-22T02:49:47.614-04:002010-10-22T02:49:47.614-04:00"Mathematical results are either false or tru..."Mathematical results are either false or true (that is, proven or false) and nothing in between."<br /><br />Um, the Professor of the Year is unfamiliar with Gödel? The set of provable, let alone proven, statements and the set of true statements are not coextensive.<br /><br />As for strokes and chiropractic -- that the chance of suffering a stroke from expending time and money on something pointless is low to nonexistent is no reason to do so.ianamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-86018079357003091682010-10-13T20:48:20.558-04:002010-10-13T20:48:20.558-04:00Fabulous article, this is the kind of work that ne...Fabulous article, this is the kind of work that needs public attention to help combat the scaremongering that goes on.Dr. Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12692192804507971017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-62023880528651578762010-09-17T03:22:25.341-04:002010-09-17T03:22:25.341-04:00Chiropractic care has proven beneficial and effect...Chiropractic care has proven beneficial and effective to those who undergo chiropractic therapy. <br /><br /><a href="http://walkervillechiropractic.com.au/" rel="nofollow">Chiropractor Adelaide</a>Chiropractor Adelaidehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00509414115387883196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-25375728305635395362010-07-26T23:36:47.080-04:002010-07-26T23:36:47.080-04:00Great article! I have always been jealous of mathe...Great article! I have always been jealous of mathematics ability to remain concrete and just build upon its foundation of knowledge whereas science all too often takes seemingly endless baby steps toward a conclusion only to reverse direction suddenly and embrace the opposite notion. Is coffee good for us? Oh, it's not? How about now? Wait, how about now? Oh, it's good again? Thank goodness.<br /><br />Brett L. Kinsler, DCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390054012370292935.post-69522347735043474282010-07-26T19:44:01.455-04:002010-07-26T19:44:01.455-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.J. Jacksonnoreply@blogger.com