What alternative health

practitioners might not tell you



Note that some links will break as pages are moved, websites are abandoned, etc.

If this happens, please try searching for the page in the Wayback Machine at www.archive.org.

Read the original article

“…based on the totality of the best evidence available to date, there can be little doubt that the formal criteria for causality are, in fact, fulfilled, and that upper spinal manipulation is the cause of vascular accidents. Moreover, the Cassidy study is seriously, some would say fatally, flawed. Finally, there are several case-control studies that contradict its findings; so the totality of the evidence from case-control studies does suggest that upper spinal manipulation is risky.  Even if one conceded that there is still reasonable doubt about this question, responsible and ethical healthcare professionals have to subscribe to the precautionary principle. Neck manipulation is not of proven therapeutic value for any condition. Therefore, we have to err on the safe side. Put bluntly, this means that, until the matter is settled, we should not routinely use or recommend upper spinal manipulation. At the very minimum, we should only do so after fully informed consent.”  Edzard Ernst, Pulse (27th July 2010) [Free registration]