Discover Chiropractic. The sceptics “fair” and “impartial” new website

Thursday, January 28 2010 - Promoting Chiropractic

#1 fed up on 1.28.2010 at 2:07 PM

It's zeno AKA A Henness birth child. How unbiased can it possibly be.

He has a quote from E Ersnt on the home page!!!

#2 fed up on 1.28.2010 at 2:11 PM

I think this is also zenos site, I'm not 100% sure.

http://www.thinkhumanism.com/

On it he has a golden rule. See if after checking his chiro website out you think he is sticking to the Golden Rule.

"Humanists try to embrace the moral principle known as the ‘Golden Rule’, otherwise known as the ethic of reciprocity, which means we believe that people should aim to treat each other as they would like to be treated themselves – with tolerance, consideration and compassion.

Humanists like the Golden Rule because of its universality, because it is derived from human feelings and experience and because it requires people to think about others and try to imagine how they might think and feel. It is a simple and clear default position for moral decision-making.

Sometimes people argue that the Golden Rule is imperfect because it makes the assumption that everyone has the same tastes and opinions and wants to be treated the same in every situation. But the Golden Rule is a general moral principle, not a hard and fast rule to be applied to every detail of life. Treating other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves does not mean making the assumption that others feel exactly as we do about everything. The treatment we all want is recognition that we are individuals, each with our own opinions and feelings and for these opinions and feelings to be afforded respect and consideration. The Golden Rule is not an injunction to impose one’s will on someone else!

Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means trying to empathise with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect – qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatever we think and wherever we come from. And although it isn’t possible to know what it really feels like to be a different person or live in different circumstances and have different life experiences, it isn’t difficult for most of us to imagine what would cause us suffering and to try to avoid causing suffering to others. For this reason many people find the Golden Rule’s corollary – “do not treat people in a way you would not wish to be treated yourself” – more pragmatic.

The Golden Rule cannot be claimed for any one philosophy or religion; indeed, the successful evolution of communities has depended on its use as a standard through which conflict can be resolved. Throughout the ages, many individual thinkers and spiritual traditions have promoted one or other version of it. Here are some examples of the different ways it has been expressed:

•Do not to your neighbour what you would take ill from him. (Pittacus, 650 BCE)

•Do not unto another that you would not have him do unto you. Thou needest this law alone. It is the foundation of all the rest. (Confucius, 500 BCE)

•Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing. (Thales, 464 BCE)

•What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them. (Sextus the Pythagorean, 406 BCE)

•We should conduct ourselves toward others as we would have them act toward us. (Aristotle, 384 BCE)

•Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for another’s welfare as your own. (Aristippus of Cyrene, 365 BCE)

•Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you. ( Isocrates, 338 BCE)

•This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you. (From the Mahabharata (5:1517), 300 BCE)

•What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow men. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary. ( Rabbi Hillel 50 BCE)

•Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (From the Bible, Leviticus 19:18 1440 BCE)

•Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them. (Jesus of Nazareth, circa 30 C

#3 John on 1.28.2010 at 2:47 PM

I think the public should be grateful that someone like this has now stopped filling the public sewerage system with semen and tissues and now has taken to stroking his ego instead.

Richard by drawing attention to this masturbatory act you heighten the pleasure and encourage it.

I feel dirty I even clicked into the ste and increased the web visit numbers.

.

#4 Richard Lanigan on 1.28.2010 at 3:12 PM

The sceptics will all link to this site and it will go up the search rankings very fast.

The only question is what will the chiropractic profession do. Keep their heads down and let their incompetent leaders hire a lawyer or show this website to their patients and ask them what they think. There must be at least 1,000,000 satisfied chiropractic patients in the UK alone. The "keep libel out science people" are not the same as this lot who are very evangelical about their beliefs.

#5 fed up on 1.28.2010 at 3:17 PM

even the skeptics linked to are not happy with this new unbiased site.

AndyD:

Wednesday 27 January 2010 at 08:34

Love the new site (not sure if you’re responsible for it). It’s a bit like the various “vaccination advice” sites except this one uses actual evidence rather than conspiracy theory.

My only concern is the link list. There’s no doubting the effect bloggers such as yourself have had and continue to have but, for the most part, they don’t come across as “quality” references in my opinion. Linking to mostly-generic sceptical blogs gives the site away I think. I’d be tempted to stick with Cochrane, BMJ and similar resources if possible – or create a separate site that pools some of the best works from these blog sources then link to that.

I’ll blog a link to it soon – FWIW.

Skepticat:

Wednesday 27 January 2010 at 13:24

I agree with AndyD about the links. Although my blog is one of them, I think including links to the home pages of skeptic blogs is a step too far in the direction of bias and away from objectivity.

I suggest just having ’scholarly’ links. There could be a separate heading for recommended articles from different blogs but I don’t think there should just be links to blogs regardless of whether they are big names or not.

#6 Richard Lanigan on 1.28.2010 at 4:46 PM

One of the links of this "Evidence based" "fair" and "impartial" discover chiropractic site site does go to Skepticat's article titled ;"Chiropractic is crap" Skepticat is perfectly entitled to his opinion, why he thinks Hariet Hall should be such an expert on chiropractic or the anatomy and physiology of the spine, is beyond me. She is just another rent a mouth anti CAM medic with time on her hands and a prescription pad.

#7 John on 1.28.2010 at 5:15 PM

" She is just another rent a mouth anti CAM medic with time on her hands and a prescription pad."

And an ego to be masterbated....

.

#8 Nico Mendes on 1.28.2010 at 8:36 PM

Who cares what they do. Stephen Barrett and the 911 website have made no impact on the profession in the States. Members of the public come to chiropractors in spite of $0 public advertising on Tv/billboards, no public endorsement by Drs or other "authority figures" and the ritualistic CAM bashing every year. When the chips are down and they need somewhere to go, they'll listen to their family and friends that we have served so well. Just keep doing the best job possible, get out and do more health care talks, take the battle to the public. Get the truth about chiropractic and the chiropractic lifestyle out there and the chips will fall on our side, 99.9% of the time.

#9 `anon on 1.28.2010 at 10:40 PM

Terrible - terrible antichiropractic website, and they are too much cowards to give out their address - cowards.

#10 Maria on 1.28.2010 at 11:26 PM

Was there something wrong with my last comment and it didn't get through? Here it is again:

@fedup

Think Humanism is my website, not zeno's. Everything you quote from it was written by me. Thanks for the plug.

@anon

You post anonymously and accuse other people of being cowards? LOL! Why do you want people's addresses anyway?

#11 Richard Lanigan on 1.29.2010 at 8:42 AM

I have no interest in having anybody’s address especially Zenos, we are very different people, I love sports for a start. However if someone has something important to say they should be prepared to put their name to it unless they are too embarrassed to do so, in which case it would bring the content of the material into question. Its why members of the BNP want their membership kept secret.

According to “facebook” this humanist website is Alan Henness's,

www.facebook.com/.../search

so Maria is LOL because “Fed Up” given her a "plug" for something Alan is claiming to own.

There was an guy at my school we used to call Mary, he bacame a priest. We were very mean to him, I thought he would have been praying for bolts of lightening not going on the internet. Further proof it were needed that there is no God and praying is a waste of time. Fed Up stop pissing him of he may start claiming to be a chiropractor and that would be bad for the profession of which I have rejoined. In the Republic of Ireland.

#12 Maria on 1.29.2010 at 8:51 PM

Richard, I responded to your next blog before seeing your last comment here. Newflash:

The way to check ownership of a website isn't to look at facebook.

Choosing to publicise your favourite internet forum in your facebook profile does not mean you own it.

Instead of ad hominems against people who may or may not own websites, how about stating what exactly it is you don't agree with and why not ?

#13 Maria on 1.29.2010 at 10:42 PM

And, BTW, I was LOL at the anon comment, not at fed up's. As is pretty clear, actually.

#14 Richard Lanigan on 1.29.2010 at 11:40 PM

"ad Hominems" I dont even know what it means.

however I like the fact,

"Humanists try to embrace the moral principle known as the ‘Golden Rule’, otherwise known as the ethic of reciprocity, which means we believe that people should aim to treat each other as they would like to be treated themselves – with tolerance, consideration and compassion. I would have no problem or "Ad Hominem" with anyone who lived their life according to these principles. I was very luck to have the mother I had and I know its easier to talk the talk rather than walk the walk.

#15 Paul on 1.30.2010 at 1:59 PM

So to remove any confusion with anonymity etc - who is zeno - Maria or Alan?

#16 Richard Lanigan on 1.30.2010 at 5:56 PM

Hi Paul,

Zeno is Alan and Maria owns his favourite website “Thinking Humanism” . Which according to Maria “is an independent humanist forum for people interested in humanism, secularism and freethought. Their “aim is to offer a stimulating and supportive on-line environment to individuals who choose to live without religion and who wish to explore and develop humanist ideas on the web”

“Humanists embrace the moral principle known as the Golden Rule”. This means they “believe that people should aim to treat each other as they would like to be treated themselves – with tolerance, consideration and compassion”

All this sounds great , however I am not sure how Alan squares bringing misery to 600 chiropractors, ( using a body (the GCC) who despises free speech and relies on libel lawyers to silence dissenters) squares with the golden rule and showing “tolerance” and “compassion” to others. The GCC wrote to Alan in the Summer asking him to include a few chiropractic bad eggs in his original complaint. My information is he was very helpful and Margaret Coats GCC chief executive appreciates his co-operation.

#17 Jeremy McMinn on 1.30.2010 at 6:39 PM

Hi Richard

After coming across this shockingly biased website, it is the last straw for me.

Just wondering if you possibly could send me your email so I can send you a proposal or two.

Kind Regards

Jeremy McMinn

#18 Paul on 1.30.2010 at 8:06 PM

Thanks Richard - now zeno is unvailed. No doubt Margaret Coats of the Anti Chiropractic General Council and this loser would find something in common (other than of course their dislike of chiropractic they would say). Jenny I hope you and Richard find something to help forward the need of folk requiring a wider discourse of care rather than blow off, drugs, surgery and abandonment.

Maria I don't obviously know you nor had the opportunity to hear you out or engage with you but I think another thread has described Alan quite well as a wanker.

#19 Richard Lanigan on 1.30.2010 at 11:11 PM

Hi Paul,

Lets not sink to the level of the sceptics and resort to name calling. Focus on the rubish they write about chiropractic and the way they assume all people calling themselves chiropractors were trained the same way and think the same way. I guess they see us as we see them which I find rather amusing becuse they seem to have such high opinions about their knowledge or lack of.

#20 Jeremy on 1.31.2010 at 9:36 AM

I'm slightly confused now.

DiscoverChiropractic.co.uk is registered to Maria MacLachlan, however Zeno is claiming ownership.

Maria perhaps you could clear that up for us?

#21 Maria on 1.31.2010 at 10:08 AM

@Richard

An ad hominem is an argument that attacks the individual, rather than the argument the individual is presenting. I've seen rather a lot of that going on over here, if I may say so. And, by the way, the new website does not claim to be "impartial".

@Jeremy

Zeno isn't "claiming ownership" of the domain. He said he "designed and set up" the website, which is true.

#22 Paul on 1.31.2010 at 10:21 AM

Any one think this is too timely with the GCC revalidation process?

#23 Paul on 1.31.2010 at 10:23 AM

So Maria to be clear here; you and Alan [zeno] designed, set up and own the website 'discoverchiropractic.co.uk?'

#24 Richard Lanigan on 1.31.2010 at 10:45 AM

Hi Maria,

Thanks for explaining that, its not a term I have heard used in normal converstation. If there is one group of people who do ad hominem then its the sceptics. They have read a few research papers and think they are experts on chiropractic. Time and time again I have explained the anatomy and physiology of a vertebral subluxation and the ignore it and say it does not exist?? Humanism exists so why cant subluxation theory. I have offered to demonstrate a subluxation to Andy Lewis, he was not not interested.

The sceptics even have names for those who dont agree with them; Quacks, antivaxers, stupid, fucking idiots, etc.

If the "Discover Chiropractic" website is not impartial does that not fly in the face of the humanists "Golden Rule" or are CAM practitioners exception to the rule

#25 Maria on 1.31.2010 at 10:09 PM

@paul

<i> What is a real doctor? A person with a doctorate. You will find General Medical Practitioners do not hold doctorate degrees.</i>

And, more to the point, Doctors of Chiropractic are not Doctors of Medicine which, as you know, was my point. Why do (some) chiros call themseves doctor? Because they are trying to give the impression that chiropractic is a recognised medical specialty, rather than what it is.

<i>Your argument regarding the treatment of childhood asthma: good argument but I think you would find your child improved with chiropractic care.</i>

That you "think" my child would improve with chiropractic care is irrelevent. You are not allowed to claim to be able to treat it on your website.

<i>Have you considered finding out how many cases there are of people being drugged and undergoing surgery without full and proper diagnosis? Those drugged for asthma who have a subluxation requiring adjusted?</i>

No, I haven't because it has no bearing on what you are allowed to claim on your website.

<i>Perhaps as a humanist it would behove you to find out the true nature of chiropractic before attacking it or its practitioners. We could do with two less ill informed self righteous 'humanists' proclaiming themselves judge and jury over healthcare choices for our community.</i>

I have read extensively about chiropractic, talked to chiropractors, talked to people who've had it and had it myself. IOW, I am exceptionally well-placed to be able to attack chiropractic.

<i>The Golden Rule is a moral default which the rules for living i.e. a code of life practice, follow from. I think your argument is see through.</i>

I agree that rules about how to live ones life follow from the general principle that is the Golden Rule. Code of practice is not a good analogy for several reasons but if it's really important to you to see the Golden Rule the same as a Code of Practice, then suit yourself. I haven't broken the Golden Rule, whatever you want to call it.

<i>I believe you have been dishonest in grabbing a web domain that previously was owned and used by an active chiropractic practice, ran by one of the most thorough and well thought of chiropractors in the profession in the UK and Europe.</i>

LMAO! The domain was on the market and I bought it. If that's what you call dishonest, I can live with it. :-)

@richard

<i>it would seem that none of the patients who responded to these adverts had reason to complain about the chiropractor which would suggest the complaint is vexatious and not congruent with the principle of the Golden rule.</i>

The complaints are not vexatious and are completely in keeping with the Golden Rule for reasons I've already explained. If you are going to persist in claiming that chiropractic is a totally safe and totally effective therapy you are at liberty to do so, just as Alan is at liberty to create a website challenging these kinds of claims. And, no, for the last time, challenging unsupported claims does not breach the Golden Rule.

Now it's been a pleasure but I really must get on with the rest of my life. :-)

#26 Richard Lanigan on 2.01.2010 at 1:36 PM

Thats why I hate arguing with prejudiced people. You have an idea in your head about all chiropractors based on some previous experience and now you are “experts”. Its like a member of the BNP deciding all Indians are dishonest because the Sun exposes one as a “Dole scrounger”. I would never say Chiropractic is "totally" effective or "totally" safe . You guys want to believe thats what I would say and will go and repeat it on your blogs even though I would never say such a thing. I would say chiropractic is safe and effective and if you can not see the difference “totally” makes to that statement you are not nearly as bright as you seem to think you are.

There is no evidence that people were misled or hurt in anyway by these “claims”. It would have been acceptable to say there is some evidence that chiropractic helps colic, Dr Bob Philips reported as much in Archimedes, in the Archieves of Childrens Health a few years ago . The mistake these chiropractors made was to say “chiropractic treats colic”. They will get an admonishment from the regulator and their insurance premiums will go through the roof. Chiropractors will increase their prices and its the consumer will end up paying for this act of spitefulness. Insurance companies and lawyers will make money, patients will have to pay more. Good job Madame Humanist. Lets finish this dialogue with another piece from the Golden Rule which you and Zeno claim to subscribe to.

“Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means trying to empathise with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect – qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatever we think and wherever we come from”.

Fantastic, the perfect world, utopia! I am told this philosophy is an alternative to Christianity, these words could have been lifted from the Gospels and I have to say humanists don’t seem to be any better at applying their doctrine to their lives than Christians are. Fortunately I have no need for God, a Maharisi, or a Humanist Guru to feel fulfilled, I get that when I look at my wonderful kids and every time someone tells me how their quality of life has improved since having WOO.

#27 Paul on 2.02.2010 at 8:52 AM

"I am told this philosophy is an alternative to Christianity ..."

The philosophy indeed might be Richard but the forum / website is not.

It is clearly a platform for Anti CAMmers masquesrading as humanists.

There is little or no discussion of humanism, philosophy, how to better live ones life or indeed to ad to others.

Its a sham forum.

• Search

• Recent Blog Entries

  • GCC sceptics redefining Chiropractic in the UK.
  • Boring! We know AC Milans players are healthy thanks to woo. Ask ordinary people how chiropractic helped them overcome asthma or my client with parkinsons disease.
  • Sceptics dont understand the difference between causal association and a temporal association of risk.
  • Vacancy for a former medical doctor who did a bit of Woo on the side.
  • The British Chiropractic Association have perfected the art of putting heads in sand.
  • Shock, horror! “Sceptics” are questioning the evidence behind some vaccines in Time magazine.
  • The Lay Scientist, is seeking chiropractic opinion on the Simon Singh case.
  • General Chiropractic Council defines chiropractic scope of practice for UK chirpractors.
  • Freedom of Information request to the General Chiropractic Council
  • Freedom of Information request to the Council for Health Care Regulatory Excellence?

• Categories

  • Spinal Care
  • GCC Management
  • GCC! No Confidence
  • GCC 2007/08
  • GCC 2009
  • GCC Educational Standards
  • GCCs Vexatious Complaints
  • Chiropractic Associations
  • Privy Council/DOH/CHRE
  • Risk from Chiropractic
  • Big Pharma
  • Unethical Practise
  • Medicalisation
  • Promoting Chiropractic
  • Advertising Standards

• Tags

  advertising-standards-authority asa back-pain bca chre christina-cunliffe colic david-byfield edzard-ernst flu funding graham-donald greg-price margaret-coats monica-handa not-fit-for-purpose peter-dixon prescribing privy-council risk risks sceptics simon-singh subluxation swine-flu

• Popular Posts

  • The New General Chiropractic Council
  • The McTimoney Chiropractic Association would seem to believe that chiropractic is “bogus”.
  • Could the chiropractic sceptics bankrupt the General Chiropractic Council?
  • Scope of medipractic practise by the back door of the General Chiropractic Council
  • Not my fault. This is all down to the jobsworths at the General Chiropractic Council.
  • Richard Lanigans Bio.
  • Told you the General Chiropractic Council would find a way to dismiss the complaints. “Protecting the public”?? Protecting themselves more like it.
  • Why the complaints to the General Chiropractic Council will never see the light of day.
  • The Sceptics complaint against members of the British Chiropractic Association.
  • NICE Guidelines for low back pain has drawn much criticism from,reductionist medical thinkers.

• BBC News Health

  • Call to halt NHS medical database
  • 'No proof' IVF aided by acupuncture
  • Street actress reveals depression
  • Social care deal 'dead in water'
  • MP writes to police over hospital
  • 'Problem kids' risk future pain
  • Illegal cord blood sample warning

Web Hosting Sponsored by