The onus of proof
As a Chiropractor I answer to the Chiropractors registration board. They ensure that any practicing Chiropractor has completed ‘a prescribed course of study’ which equates to a five year university degree. They then ensure a strict code of ethical conduct is adhered to. Part of that code of conduct is to not make claims about the efficacy of Chiropractic care that aren’t supported by scientific studies. That means there are thousands of things that have been observed by Doctors of Chiropractic and their patients that can’t be discussed. Fortunately there is also a large amount of research which we can discuss to give people an idea about the power of spinal correction, the removal of interference from their bodies and the impact it can have on their health.
It’s interesting that the World Health Organisation has declared Glyphosate as probably cancer forming. Wasn’t Monsanto supposed to have established safety? What astounds me is that discussion on A.B.C. talk back radio revolved around if there was proof it was harmful. Why should I as a private practitioner be responsible for proof of anything I say or do, while a multinational corporation, with almost unlimited resources, is able to introduce a synthetic chemical into the environment, yet the public becomes responsible for proving its dangers. That is a definite double standard, reckless, dangerous and irresponsible.