Following my previous emails I would now like to make a complaint about Victoria Chiropractic Clinic, which unless adequately resolved I will be forwarding on to the General Chiropractic Council.
I have two complaints to make, as I believe in each case you are breaching GCC regulations.
My first complaint relates to the use of the title "Dr" to describe Jeremy Spanton on your website. I believe the use of this term is misleading, as members of the public may be led to believe that Jeremy Spanton is a medical doctor. Whilst Nichola Worril states that she has a PhD, there is no such explanation of Jeremy Spanton's use of the title. I have searched the General Medical Council's register and find no Dr Spanton, and therefore assume he is not a registered medical practitioner.
I would like to refer you to GCC regulations which state that members:
"must not use any title or qualification in such a way that the public may be misled as to its meaning or significance. In particular, chiropractors who use the title of ‘doctor’ and who are not registered medical practitioners must ensure that they make it clear that they are registered chiropractors and not registered medical practitioners"
My second complaint relates to you page entitles "What we treat". On this page you claim that chiropractic is beneficial for children suffering from colic, amongst other conditions. However, you provide no evidence to back up these claims. I would like to refer you to a recent Advertising Standards Authority adjudication against a chiropractor named Carl Irwin, which stated that:
"We considered that, whilst some of the studies indicated that further research was worth pursuing, in particular in relation to the chiropractic relief of colic, we had not seen robust clinical evidence to support the claim that chiropractic could treat IBS, colic and learning difficulties."
The adjudication also instructed Irwin: " not to refer to the treatment of IBS, colic and learning difficulties in future."
I should remind you that GCC regulations state that members:
"may publicise their practices or permit another person to do so consistent with the law and the guidance issued by the Advertising Standards Authority."
Your claims are clearly not consistent with ASA guidance, and therefore are not permitted by the GCC.
I therefore request that you clarify Jeremy Spanton's qualifications on your website and remove any claims for which robust evidence is not available. I would also like you to acknowledge this complaint and confirm your intent to resolve these issues as soon as possible. Should I recieve no response, or not be satisfied with your response I will be submitting a complaint to the GCC and may also complain to Trading Standard.
Evidence to House of Commons Sci Tech Select Committee on Research Integrity - Sorry not to be in regular blogging mode at the moment. Here’s a video of our evidence session to parliament, where they are running an inquiry into resear...
3 months ago