Author Simon Singh, a well-known science writer (Fermat's Enigma, Trick or Treatment) has lost a preliminary ruling in his battle with the British Chiropractic Association over an article he published with the Guardian newspaper last year. The article criticized overreaching claims made in the practice of chiropractic medicine and included this offending sentence: "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 judge found that the word "bogus" "implied" that the Association was "being consciously dishonest." This, said Mr. Justice Eady, is defamatory.
Mr. Singh and his lawyers plan to appeal the ruling through the English courts, and if necessary, through the European courts. The UK is a member of the European Union, so litigants have access to those courts.
The ruling has caused an uproar and much comment, among skeptics, scientists, and free speech advocates. Here is a sampling of reaction.
From Jack of Kent's Blog; from Holford Watch (this post from August of 2008); Gimpy's Blog (ditto; includes the original article, which has been removed from the Guardian's website); Gimpy's Blog (June 4, 2009); Science-Based Medicine; Skeptic.org; Counterknowledge.com; Badscienceblogs; Ministry of Truth.
I looked for reaction online from chiropractic associations and related groups, and from chiropractors who blog and people who go to chiropractors. I didn't find anything, but maybe I don't know where to look.
Comments