ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags chiropractic , John McTimoney

Reply
Old 9th November 2010, 04:01 AM   #1
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
The Royal Society of Medicine and Chiropractic

The RSM has another nice little earner, its Wall of Honour. The deal is, anyone can put anyone else on the Wall, for a fee of GBP2,500. Ker-ching. Hence the appearance of John McTimoney. Mine was the first comment on this entry, which said:
Quote:
This is astounding. Chiropractic is neither science nor medicine, it is a belief system based on imaginary ideas about how the body works. This entry dishonours both the Society and the genuine people listed here.
That was on 28th October, and it has just been taken down. So here is a suggestion. Let's see how quickly the RSM will take down further adverse comments. Please keep them polite but to the point. Nevertheless, the RSM of course reserves the right to remove anything it damn well likes - or doesn't like.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 04:41 AM   #2
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,979
Done. Set watches.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 04:52 AM   #3
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Nice one Wudang. Someone will probably react and say that it does work for back pain, which is true, but no better than standard treatment (exercise and analgesics).
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 04:58 AM   #4
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,750
Quote:
(From Royal Society of Medicine 'Wall of honour' Webpage.) "We are delighted to announce that thanks to our Wall of Honour donors, we have now raised over half a million pounds in support of the RSM's provision of medical education. The exact figure is 513,386!"
http://www.rsm.ac.uk/wallofhonour/

Well, it's their wall and if most of the money raised actually is going to medical education,so far as I'm concerned they can honour Harold Shipman on it. Perhaps they might include a History of Medicine course.

Why not get together , find the cash and propose Ben Goldacre?

Last edited by Soapy Sam; 9th November 2010 at 05:01 AM.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 05:32 AM   #5
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,979
Or even Shipman himself? Or Dr Josef Mengele?
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 05:59 AM   #6
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
http://www.rsm.ac.uk/wallofhonour/

Well, it's their wall and if most of the money raised actually is going to medical education,so far as I'm concerned they can honour Harold Shipman on it. Perhaps they might include a History of Medicine course.

Why not get together , find the cash and propose Ben Goldacre?
I rarely disagree with you Soapy, but this time I do. Firstly, the RSM isn't fussy about how it spends money on `education'. Secondly, by its very nature this wall is intended to enhance the reputations of those `honoured'. OK, people can argue till the cows come home about who deserves it, but I do consider it inappropriate to lend credibility to a practice for which evidence has been thoroughly discredited, and especially recently. If the RSM wants to honour controversial figures, then fine, but they should then be prepared to put up with the controversy and not sanitise the discussion.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 07:27 AM   #7
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,750
Originally Posted by Asolepius View Post
I rarely disagree with you Soapy, but this time I do.
OK. I send da boys round.
Quote:
Seems not, if that's typical. I do feel a sneaking sympathy with David Misselbrook's reply though. I have the feeling he's between a rock and a hard place. Still, excrement tends to adhere. If you want to smell clean, it's surely wisest to avoid it altogether- and I agree it's hard to see what this symposium could have been intended to achieve, unless it was to provide doctors with the sort of info they might get more cheaply right here.
Quote:

Secondly, by its very nature this wall is intended to enhance the reputations of those `honoured'. OK, people can argue till the cows come home about who deserves it, but I do consider it inappropriate to lend credibility to a practice for which evidence has been thoroughly discredited, and especially recently. If the RSM wants to honour controversial figures, then fine, but they should then be prepared to put up with the controversy and not sanitise the discussion.
Realising I know very little about what it actually is and does, I just looked at the RSM's homepage. http://www.rsm.ac.uk/welcom/index.php

A quote from the above linked page:-
Quote:
"The Royal Society of Medicine is an independent, apolitical organisation, founded over 200 years ago. We are one of the largest providers of continuing medical education in the UK."
And from the "RSM Events" page.
Quote:
"The RSM events team organises more than 400 medical CPD conferences, courses and meetings each year. All appropriate events have CPD accreditation and can form part of your medical education.
Contributions are received for unrestricted medical educational purposes for a number of RSM meetings. The RSM maintains full editorial control of the meeting content."
So by "medical education" it seems to mean informing already qualified doctors, rather than (as I had supposed) teaching the basics to students. That being so, I'd expect some at least of their symposia to cover controversial, but relevant topics. It seems reasonable for doctors to get the same sort of information about SCAM from the RSM that the rest of us get from sceptical blogs and websites. Of course "reasonable" depends on what exactly is being said at such symposia.

Re the "Wall"- It would seem to undercut any value (except the pecuniary!) such a memorial might have, if known eejits featured there . That seems to be the best argument aimed at keeping it sane- and seems to be pretty much the one (albeit more elegantly phrased) that you used.
My own feeling is that such vanity memorials would be something of a joke anyway, if anyone could get his own name up there merely by handing over the cash (directly or via surrogates). I'm pleased to learn that objections actually are considered. I wonder though, whether an increased donation might yet carry the day?

As I'm far less familiar than yourself with the RSM, you will appreciate that to me, what someone pays to put on a wall in a building I'm unlikely to ever enter, must be of limited concern. (Indeed, had you not told us about this, I doubt I should ever have been aware of it). And if this is in effect a private body, I must hold to my view that what they write on their wall, whether in the "magnificient atrium", or the gents' toilet, is up to them. If it was a publicly owned organisation, my response would be different.

It will either become a serious memorial to serious people, or it will become a sad joke. I hope they will have the integrity to take the first route. If not, perhaps we should indeed propose Crippen, Shipman or - for a different reason- Goldacre. I'm uncertain which would annoy them more.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 07:53 AM   #8
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Well yes Soapy, it's a private organisation, but it chooses to be public by putting the Wall on its website, and it invites comments. It then denies free speech by deleting adverse comments. As I said, absolutely fine to be controversial, but not fine to expunge dissenting voices. They have to take the rough with the smooth.

This is extremely typical of the anti-science movement I'm afraid. Look at the blogs and other fora. Skeptical bloggers usually engage with dissenters and leave their posts unchanged, woo-woo bloggers always ban anyone who challenges them.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2010, 05:14 PM   #9
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,750
Originally Posted by Asolepius View Post
Well yes Soapy, it's a private organisation, but it chooses to be public by putting the Wall on its website, and it invites comments. It then denies free speech by deleting adverse comments. As I said, absolutely fine to be controversial, but not fine to expunge dissenting voices. They have to take the rough with the smooth.
Aye, the website bit I could do without.
Quote:
This is extremely typical of the anti-science movement I'm afraid. Look at the blogs and other fora. Skeptical bloggers usually engage with dissenters and leave their posts unchanged, woo-woo bloggers always ban anyone who challenges them.
That's often so in my experience. But do you truly consider the RSM "anti-science"? I accept they do some questionable stuff, but is that the norm in your view? (This is a frank and honest question. I really know little or nothing of them at all. Had you asked me yesterday what "RSM" stood for , my reply would have been "Regimental Sergeant major". )

I suppose that's why I feel this is a wee bit of a storm in a teacup - because I barely knew who or what the RSM was. If I were a member, I expect I'd be pretty vehement about not having quacks on the wall. (Remember those triplets of ceramic ducks without which no suburban home was complete in the 1950s? Somehow they come to mind).
Apart from a very few egregious crazies, I simply wouldn't know who was who on their wall anyway. I doubt many people would. Nor, I suspect, would most non medics care - and (one hopes) the medics will know the difference .
I don't know how you feel, but I actually find the whole business a tad tawdry and distasteful. Any "honour" one may buy for 2500 seems like a pale and paltry honour indeed. But some people do take such "Honours" a great deal more seriously than I.

I recently visited the National Memorial Arboretum and looked at the long list of names of military casualties there. No amount of money gets one's name on that wall. If being honourable costs the same as an upmarket mountain bike, I think I'd prefer the bike.

Anyway, while we may differ on how seriously we view this, by all means, should you need substitute objectors, feel free to add me to the list. I can complain as politely as anyone.

I do rather like the thought of seeing Goldacre up there.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2010, 12:53 AM   #10
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
But do you truly consider the RSM "anti-science"? I accept they do some questionable stuff, but is that the norm in your view?
No I don't. Most RSM stuff is fine, but they have been infiltrated by the usual suspects. Much the same happened to the Royal College of Physicians, until the President was alerted to what was going on, resulting in its Integrated Health Committee being disbanded. Of course, that has risen again as The College of Medicine (merged with the dregs of the Prince's Foundation for Integrated Health). What irks me is a respected learned society stooping to the tactics of the snake oil salesmen. They should know better.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2010, 02:12 AM   #11
Physiotherapist
Critical Thinker
 
Physiotherapist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 361
Done.
Physiotherapist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2010, 04:19 AM   #12
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,750
Comment added.

I presume there are many members of the RSM who will feel that their wall should be reserved for genuine contributors to medicine and that chiropractic is not in that category.
As one who has actually defended chiropractic treatment (for a specific range of problems) on this forum, my objection is only partly to Mr.Mctimoney's methods which may well be useful in specific cases, but to the whole idea of selling "honour", which I find cynical and distasteful.
From the POV of the RSM, this also seems a bad time to be linking themselves to the plaintiffs in the recent Singh case which seems likely to result in major change to English libel law.

Last edited by Soapy Sam; 10th November 2010 at 04:38 AM.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2010, 05:25 AM   #13
JJM
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,853
I duplicated your message, and added a line
Quote:
This is astounding. Chiropractic is neither science nor medicine, it is a belief system based on imaginary ideas about how the body works. This entry dishonours both the Society and the genuine people listed here. How far does GBP2,500 go that you will sell your reputation for it?
JJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 05:50 AM   #14
Blue Wode
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,304
UK Royal Society of Medicine "honours" chiroquacktor, John McTimoney

Appallingly, the UK Royal Society of Medicine's 'Wall of Honour' now features the founder of the McTimoney variety of chiropractic, John McTimoney:
Quote:
Members, both current and former, the Chair and Executive Committee, together with friends of the McTimoney Chiropractic Association (MCA) honour John McTimoney.

John McTimoney ('Mac') developed the McTimoney method of chiropractic and was the driving force behind the founding of the McTimoney College of Chiropractic and the Association itself.

McTimoney chiropractic has helped millions of patients over the past 30 years and will continue to do so well into the future.

http://www.rsm.ac.uk/wallofhonour/share/?n=727

Not only is this an affront to scientific medicine, but just today the Royal Society saw fit to delete all the comments below the McTimoney bio protesting the addition to the wall. Fortunately, the comments can still be read here:
http://www.freezepage.com/1289472509LVIVAGRSRY

Althought the McTimoney Chiropractic website recently had a makeover and apparently no longer uses the word 'subluxation', it stands shoulder to shoulder with the new Alliance of UK Chiropractors (AUKC) which is attempting to retain the vitalistic model of chiropractic in the UK:
http://www.chiropracticlive.com/?p=842
__________________
ebm-first.com
What alternative health practitioners might not tell you.

https://twitter.com/Blue_Wode
Blue Wode is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 05:55 AM   #15
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
More comments - I doubt they will stay there long:

http://www.freezepage.com/1289480056OILGEPKPQW
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 06:02 AM   #16
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
Ah! All comments have gone now! http://www.rsm.ac.uk/wallofhonour/share/?n=727 and the following message put up:

Quote:
Posted by P. Summerfield, Development Director, RSM | 11 November 2010 1:00 PM

The Royal Society of Medicine has been made aware of a number of comments made by RSM members and others, regarding the inclusion of John McTimony on the Wall of Honour.

In response to these comments the Society is reviewing the situation and will announce the result of the review on the RSM website by November 18th.

Anyone who wishes to express a view should email development@rsm.ac.uk .

In the meantime, all entries ( including a number of abusive comments) are being removed as stated on our website since the Wall of Honour website was launched.
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 06:07 AM   #17
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
I wonder which comments they think are 'abusive'?

ETA: I've asked them, but don't think I'll like the reply!

Last edited by zeno2712; 11th November 2010 at 06:18 AM.
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 07:02 AM   #18
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,443
Originally Posted by zeno2712 View Post
Ah! All comments have gone now!

At least this time they've removed the positive comment as well.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 08:05 AM   #19
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,750
Well, there's abuse and there's criticism. One hopes they can tell the difference.

Is this normal behaviour among "learned societies", to sell "honours" of this sort for money?




http://www.chiropracticlive.com/?p=842
Interesting website. "Resisting the medicalisation of chiropractic"? Whose side are they on again?

And I like the 3 chimps picture of the GCC. Seems all is not cosy back at the ranch.
The comments are intriguing. Seems they have given their European colleagues the impression Chiro is under tyrannical threat in the UK and the small band of brothers is willing to go to the stake for their principles.

Last edited by Soapy Sam; 11th November 2010 at 08:11 AM.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 08:08 AM   #20
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
Not as far as I know - it's just the RSM that have a penchant for it as a way of raising money.
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 08:37 AM   #21
Blue Wode
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,304
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
http://www.chiropracticlive.com/?p=842
Interesting website. "Resisting the medicalisation of chiropractic"? Whose side are they on again?

And I like the 3 chimps picture of the GCC. Seems all is not cosy back at the ranch.
The comments are intriguing. Seems they have given their European colleagues the impression Chiro is under tyrannical threat in the UK and the small band of brothers is willing to go to the stake for their principles.

FYI, the newly-formed Alliance of UK Chiropractors (AUKC) incorporates three out of the four existing UK chiropractic associations, representing around 50% of UK chiropractors – and that is a conservative figure since the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) has recently joined the AUKC in a vote of no confidence in the GCC.

It's worth noting that the AUKC’s stated intention is to “create a vitalistic chiropractic model of health”. Indeed, it represents chiropractors “who stand behind the founding principles of chiropractic as a vitalistic drug free profession based on the identification and reduction of vertebral subluxations”. It would appear that the AUKC is currently working on various strategies to get the 'right people' at the helm of the GCC.


ETA: If anyone is wondering what a McTimoney chiropractic adjustment looks like, see 1:40, 1:56 and 3:20 in here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGIEfpRui28
__________________
ebm-first.com
What alternative health practitioners might not tell you.

https://twitter.com/Blue_Wode

Last edited by Blue Wode; 11th November 2010 at 08:48 AM.
Blue Wode is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2010, 08:58 AM   #22
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
Should have linked to the ChangeDetection page I had set up to monitor changes to the RSM McTimoney page:

https://www.changedetection.com/log/...share_log.html

This shows all changes since 2 November including the original comment by Les Rose on 28 October:
Quote:
Posted by Les Rose | 28 October 2010 7:37 AM

This is astounding. Chiropractic is neither science nor medicine, it is a belief system based on imaginary ideas about how the body works. This entry dishonours both the Society and the genuine people listed here.
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2010, 03:48 AM   #23
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
I see the RSM have completely removed the comments form from McTimoney's page now. The pages for others still have their comment forms.
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2010, 09:23 AM   #24
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
And they have added an invitation to report unsuitable or abusive comments. Should we use this to report unsuitable `honours'?
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 10:05 AM   #25
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
I just got this from the RSM:
Quote:
Statement by The Royal Society of Medicine

Over two years ago The Royal Society of Medicine launched an initiative to raise money for the provision of medical education, called the Wall of Honour. The project has to date been very successful and over 589,000 has been raised. Donors have responded enthusiastically to the idea that they (not the Society) have the opportunity to honour someone who works (or worked) in the healthcare and medical sector.

In autumn 2010, the Society expanded its website to include a 'Virtual' Wall of Honour which provided the donor, family, friends, colleagues and admirers to share personal thoughts, stories, anecdotes and photos of the person being honoured. This facility was launched following feedback from those who were unable to travel to London due to ill health or because they are based overseas.

In recent weeks some people - who are not family, friends or colleagues of the person being honoured - have chosen to abuse the purpose of the Virtual Wall of Honour by placing a variety of personal views on the website and specifically on the page dedicated to John McTimoney.

The donor who gave money to honour John McTimoney is entirely within their rights to honour him and at the same time to support the medical education provided by the Society.

The acceptance of this donation does not mean that the Society endorses the work of John McTimoney. Nor does the Society endorse the names or work of any of the 461 names inscribed on the Wall. The Wall solely exists for families, friends and colleagues to remember someone close to them.

As stated from the day the website was launched, the Society reserves the right to remove or edit entries made on its website and those submitting comments have agreed to abide by the RSM's terms and conditions. These particular pages are not a forum for debate or discussion. Due to the misuse of the website the Society will now pre-moderate all contributions on all pages.

It should be noted that anyone who has an interest in medicine or healthcare has been able to join the RSM as an Associate Member for many years. Membership of the RSM does not automatically mean that the Society as an organisation endorses what its individual members do, say or practise.
So they are now going to stop free speech and carry on allowing quackery to be presented under their banner.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 10:35 AM   #26
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
Predictable, but still a cop out.
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 11:37 AM   #27
JJM
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,853
They have re-posted one, fauning comment. You can send a comment to paul.summerfield@rsm.ac.uk
JJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 12:40 PM   #28
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Badly Shaved Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,362
I posted this, but a bit late to the party.

"McTimoney is deserving of honour when and only when the mythical chiropractic subluxation can be shown to exist."
__________________
"i'm frankly surprised homeopathy does as well as placebo" Anonymous homeopath.
"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment; you must also be right." (Robert Park)
Is the pen is mightier than the sword? Its effectiveness as a weapon is certainly enhanced if it is sharpened properly and poked in the eye of your opponent.
Badly Shaved Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 03:05 PM   #29
JJM
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,853
I replied to paul.summerfield@rsm.ac.uk

Mr. Summerfield,

"Statement by The Royal Society of Medicine

Over two years ago The Royal Society of Medicine launched an initiative to raise money for the provision of medical education, called the Wall of Honour. The project has to date been very successful and over 589,000 has been raised. Donors have responded enthusiastically to the idea that they (not the Society) have the opportunity to honour someone who works (or worked) in the healthcare and medical sector." [italics added]

Chiropractic is quackery and not in the "healthcare and medical sector." Your acceptance of McTimoney insults the real heathcare and medical professionals you "honor." Surely, you can find medical professionals to educate the Society about chiropractic quackery. If not, I can provide many references.

Last edited by JJM; 17th November 2010 at 03:09 PM.
JJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 03:38 PM   #30
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,750
In recent weeks some people - who are not family, friends or colleagues of the person being honoured - have chosen to abuse the purpose of the Virtual Wall of Honour by placing a variety of personal views on the website and specifically on the page dedicated to John McTimoney.

The donor who gave money to honour John McTimoney is entirely within their rights to honour him and at the same time to support the medical education provided by the Society.


The acceptance of this donation does not mean that the Society endorses the work of John McTimoney. Nor does the Society endorse the names or work of any of the 461 names inscribed on the Wall. The Wall solely exists for families, friends and colleagues to remember someone close to them.


I pasted the above in brown, because that's the colour weasels are.

"We don't approve of Nazis / drug pushers / gun runners / paedophiles, but we will take their money."

What a very, very pathetic excuse for a justification of simple greed.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2010, 03:49 PM   #31
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,443
Originally Posted by RSM
The acceptance of this donation does not mean that the Society endorses the work of John McTimoney.
However, the acceptance of positive testimonials and the rejection of negative comments suggests that it does.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 08:18 AM   #32
Worm
Master Poster
 
Worm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2,991
If I'd paid to have McTimoney 'honoured' I'd be pretty hacked off at the shockingly poor quality picture they are using.
__________________
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" Isaac Asimov

Not all cults are bad - I've joined a cult of niceness
Worm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 09:25 AM   #33
Blue Bubble
Sharper than a thorn
 
Blue Bubble's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Duxford, Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 4,870
Here's a suggestion: let's pool together so that we might honour Harold Shipman (who most certainly worked in health-care).

I'm up for 10.
Blue Bubble is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 09:40 AM   #34
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Originally Posted by Blue Bubble View Post
Here's a suggestion: let's pool together so that we might honour Harold Shipman (who most certainly worked in health-care).

I'm up for 10.
I'm tempted. I think your 10 is pretty safe because the RSM will reject the application. So then we can ask on what grounds. Would it come down to whether he made a positive or a negative contribution to health? They are then making a value judgment, which they say they are not doing at the moment as they don't endorse any nominee.

Your main problem is getting this out to 250 people willing to chip in.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 09:59 AM   #35
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
I think there are serious negative media issues nominating Shipman.

However, how about some other doctor? I'm thinking Dr Who! They may reject that on the basis he's fictional, but are there any other doctors who would be sufficiently controversial as far as the RSM are concerned, but who would be safer with regards to the media?
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 10:03 AM   #36
zeno2712
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 168
Anyone got a cat called Dr Tiddles?
zeno2712 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 10:06 AM   #37
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Originally Posted by zeno2712 View Post
I think there are serious negative media issues nominating Shipman.

However, how about some other doctor? I'm thinking Dr Who! They may reject that on the basis he's fictional, but are there any other doctors who would be sufficiently controversial as far as the RSM are concerned, but who would be safer with regards to the media?
Andrew Wakefield? We could form a spoof antivax group.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 01:53 PM   #38
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,443
Originally Posted by Asolepius View Post
Andrew Wakefield? We could form a spoof antivax group.

You couldn't make up a spoof antivax group that wouldn't be mistaken for a real one. See Poe's law.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 02:25 PM   #39
Camillus
Critical Thinker
 
Camillus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 476
Wouldn't it be better to get some of the high profile people on the wall to write an open letter to the RSM asking for their names to be removed while McTimmony's is on it? They might also suggest that those who have made bequests to the RSM in their wills consider changing them to support an organisation that promotes real science and medicine.

Hit them where it hurts - bad publicity that costs them money.
__________________
Live long and prosper.
Camillus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2010, 03:36 PM   #40
Asolepius
Graduate Poster
 
Asolepius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,150
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
You couldn't make up a spoof antivax group that wouldn't be mistaken for a real one. See Poe's law.
The intention is that it would be mistaken for a real one.
__________________
No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Blog - Majikthyse
Asolepius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.