Heavy artillery

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Readers' comments (2)

  • Having read the article: http://svetlana14s.narod.ru/Simon_Singhs_silenced_paper.html
    I'd have to say that in the absence of malice it fits perfectly within the qualified privelidge defence. His use ofthe word 'bogus' is the point of contention as it is claimed that this suggests that chiropractitioners are deliberately misleading people. I see no reason why an honestly held belief cannot, de facto, be 'bogus' in the sense of simply being untrue. The fact that Singh also states "have ideas above their station" also suggests fervour rather than deception. Having an idea about something suggests that there is genuine (albeit possibly misguided) belief, ergo no suggestion of an attempt to mislead, although the phrase "happily promotes bogus treatments" does suggest at the least a lack of care or recklessness which no doubt the Chiropractic Association will vehemently seek to defend. There is also of course the question of balance (from Reynolds privelige) which has undoubtedly not been addressed. Overall though, the Article 10 consideration has to be prima because it is an area of public concern on which he has expressed a genuine an well researched contention.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "1895 when Canadian Daniel David Palmer performed the first chiropractic adjustment " from:
    http://www.chiropractic-uk.co.uk/default.aspx?m=3&mi=19&ms=7&title=History+of+chiropractic

    Question: is the statement above a bogus claim?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (2)