A couple weeks ago I wrote about the fun tennis match between Adam Meakins (manual therapy sux!) and Chad Cook (manual therapy is unfairly demonized even though I have taken great scientific pains to point out its shortcomings).
See part 1 here.
Edzard Ernst has given the Cook paper a good looksee: Here is his take.
Here is my favourite excerpt:
"Cook’s defence of manual therapy is clumsy, inaccurate, ill-conceived, misleading and often borders on the ridiculous. In the age of evidence-based medicine, therapies are not ‘demonized’ but evaluated on the basis of their effectiveness and safety. Manual therapies are too diverse to do this wholesale. They range from various massage techniques, some of which have a positive risk/benefit balance, to high-velocity, low-amplitude thrusts, for which the risks do not demonstrably outweigh the benefits."
I like to think that the kind of manual therapy that I spent the last 35 years of life practicing and the past 20 developing into a nervous system and pain-science-based approach to treating patients, and also decluttering minds, falls at the positive tip of the spectrum of effective and safe, as far as possible away from the orthopaedic manual therapy uncomfortable pop-em end. 😎