Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 18 December 2003
- Published on: 6 November 2003
- Published on: 6 August 2003
- Published on: 18 December 2003Authors' Reply: chiropractic spinal manipulation for back painShow More
Dear Editor
McCarthy, Byfield [1] and Breen [2] make a number of comments which require a brief reply. I wrote the article on this specific subject because I was invited to do so by the British Journal of Sports Medicine. All three correspondents seem to oppose my "long track record" of writing about adverse effects of spinal manipulation. I do this simply because it is my job. I try to apply the rules of science to al...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 6 November 2003Observations concerning chiropractic spinal manipulation for back pain a replyShow More
Dear Editor
We found the leader by Professor Ernst (Br J Sports Med 2003;37:195-196) to be rather disjointed, out of date and potentially misleading. This is particularly evident in the initial paragraph. The author begins by generally addressing sports medicine clinicians, including those who are trained in mobilisation and manipulation, namely osteopaths, physiotherapists and chiropractors and a...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 6 August 2003The "war" on chiropractorsShow More
Dear Editor
The Ernst and Sran commentary [1] about 'chiropractic manipulation' is not consistent with the majority of systematic reviews, nor national guidelines. It is, however, highly consistent with the previous and prolific writings of the first author himself on this topic. Surely, the significance of this pattern is an obvious one, and the suggestion that if anyone else but a chiropractor performs a ma...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.