Last June Jack of Kent summarised the BCA’s decision to sue Simon Singh.

April 18, 2010
By

My Comment was spot on: Jack of Kent is a member of the Legal profession and has been blogging about the BCA libel case from the start. Simon Singh and Jack of Kent will come out of this with a very high profile, whereas the chiropractic profession has been severely damaged despite the NICE guidelines.

The BCAs idea to make a professional statement around the “BCA chiropractor” does not look very credible today. The BCA council has made the MacTimoney Association seem inviting.

 

Saturday, 6 June 2009

Why The BCA Claim Is Misconceived

It has not been a good few days for the British Chiropractic Association.
Whatever can be lawfully said about their treatments, I don’t think that the treatments were being promoted at all happily this week.
I am sure this was not the BCA envisaged when they first coined the phrase "Chiropractic Awareness Week".
I would think more people are now aware of chiropractic, and the nature of the claims made on its behalf, than this time last week. And this awareness is not on terms favourable to the BCA or to chiropractic generally.
The Sense About Science campaign launched this week is a fantastic development, and it may well be a real shift in the terms of engagement between those scrutinising ambitious claims and those seeking to use legalism to avoid that scrutiny.
However, the BCA clearly launched their misconceived legal action with no expectation of the storm which has now developed, and may even develop further. It may be that they saw this matter last summer as a "quick win".
But litigation is not like that.
And I did try to warn them.
Back in August 2008 I set out in a blogpost a series of questions which BCA members should pose to those bringing this case. I think that post reads rather well in retrospect. In particular I am struck by:
"Libel litigants often suffer a counterproductive impact on their reputations generally, even if they prevail at court.
"Also, by suing over an issue related to the efficacy of Chiropractic, the BCA are potentially also putting at risk the reputation of the whole discipline. They have needlessly created the scope for "Chiropractic on Trial", which they can be seen to lose."

I have always seen the BCA’s case as misconceived, but not weak.
What was especially misconceived …………………….for the rest of the posting

 

Reading Jack of Kents Blog one can be in no doubt why the chiropractic profession is in such a sorry state.

Peter Dixon is the GCC chairman and former BCA, ECU, WFC President and Tony Metcalfe is BCA president, former ECU, WFC president and GCC council member, they have been swapping these positions like a couple footballers roasting a wag, perhaps here lies the answer.

Share Button

Related posts:

  1. The BCA’s decision to sue Simon Singh will be a disaster for the profession
  2. Jack of Kent is being naive if he thinks the General Chiropractic Council will tell him what he wants, under The Freedom of Information Act.
  3. If Simon Singh is not allowed to express his opinions in the UK, chiropractic is finished, in fact it would never have started.
  4. BCA and GCC member David Byfield would seem to concur with Simon Singh that the BCA were making bogus claims about the efficacy of chiropractic
  5. Advertising Standards Authority decision on Colic and Carl Irwin.
  6. The McTimoney Chiropractic Association would seem to believe that chiropractic is “bogus”. Posted June 2009
  7. More people supporting Simon Singh
  8. Journalist explains how the BCA has damaged the chiropractic profession, by going after Simon Singh
  9. Tuesdays Telegraph article about Simon Singh case.
  10. Sir David Frost interviews Simon Singh

Tags: , , ,

Follow

Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers: