Well, you know the media…if it bleeds (or stinks) it leads…regardless of the accuracy, integrity or true value. Sensationalism sells, and the Professor is the Queen of that.

here’s edzard ernst in a review/interview of spinal manipulation for headaches. this his comments to the public through reuters

frank, here’s edzard ernst on a literature review of “spinal manipulation and cervicogenic headaches”. it’s somewhat interesting to me to read a review of the literature regarding evidence based/gold standard research but with subjective leaps/jabs. thanks

J Altern Complement Med. 2001 (Feb); 7 (1): 65-78; discussion 79-82

Accurate use of published data and references is a cornerstone of the peer-review process. Statements, inferences, and conclusions based upon these references should logically ensue from the data they contain.

When journal articles and textbook chapters summarizing the safety and efficacy of particular therapies or interventions use references inaccurately or with apparent intent to mislead, the integrity of scientific reporting is fundamentally compromised.

Ernst et al.’s publication on chiropractic include repeated misuse of references, misleading statements, highly selective use of certain published papers, failure to refer to relevant literature, inaccurate reporting of the contents of published work, and errors in citation.

Meticulous analysis of some influential negative reviews has been carried out to determine the objectivity of the data reported. The misrepresentation that became evident deserves full debate and raises serious questions about the integrity of the peer-review process and the nature of academic misconduct.