Chiropractors around the world are used to having mainstream newspapers and magazines demonstrate their ignorance and prejudice by publishing articles which promote medicine and pharmaceuticals while attacking chiropractic and other non-medical practices.

When these articles appear, however, it's vital that D.C.s respond immediately with professionalism and facts. Although publications won't print all (or even most) of these responses, it's important for their editors to realize that, when they attack chiropractic, they attack a well informed and vigilant group of individuals who can wield political and economic clout.

A case in point was when The Times, the major British daily newspaper, printed a completely biased article titled, "Can Chiropractic Maim and Kill?" in its July 10, 2001 issue. Dr. Adrian Wenban, a member of the World Chiropractic Alliance International Board of Governors, shot back an eloquent rebuttal, exposing the inaccuracies and wrong conclusions of the article. Dr. Wenban is also the Associate Governor of the Australian Spinal Research Foundation.

Dr. Wenban's response stated calmly -- while forcefully -- that the article "did not accurately reflect what the best scientific evidence presently tells us concerning the safety of chiropractic care. In particular one of the studies which The Times article made reference to was inappropriately represented."

He explained in detail that the study in question, from the University of Toronto and the Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Center and published in the May issue of Stroke, analyzed patient records for all of Ontario, Canada's hospitals during a six-year period, from 1993 to 1998. Also analyzed were public health insurance billing records to determine which patients had used chiropractic services.

He pointed out that The Times article was incorrect when it noted the study had "confirmed" that chiropractic neck manipulations may increase the risk of a stroke.

"In fact," Wenban argued, "the limits of the Canadian study, and all others performed to date, mean that researchers are unable to confirm anything of the sort. The only thing that we can actually conclude from the latest Canadian study is that over a six-year period, in all of Ontario, 6 patients under the age of 45 had chiropractic care within one week of having a stroke. What that study does not rule out is the possibility that something else -- some other trauma to the neck -- might have caused the pain and the dissection, and that's what sent the patient to the chiropractor. For example, whiplash from a motor vehicle accident can cause similar trauma to arteries. It is therefore possible that the patients sought chiropractic care for neck pain due to trauma and that they were already well on the way to developing a stroke prior to receiving chiropractic care."

Continuing in his rational yet firm tone, Wenban added positive information about chiropractic.

"The findings from another recent study have cast serious doubt on whether chiropractic care could cause a stroke," he stated. "That study revealed that the stretching of the vertebral artery during chiropractic neck adjustments is at most 11% of the stretching observed at the point where an artery tears, and furthermore, the arterial stretching that takes place during chiropractic adjustments are consistently less than that seen during routine range of motion and diagnostic testing.

Wenban included footnotes to specific references when making each argument.

Then, in conclusion, he chided The Times for the article, saying, "Responsible journalism is a must if public health is to be best served."