MD, PhD, FMedSci, FRSB, FRCP, FRCPEd.

Absurd claims about spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) improving immune function have increased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Is there any basis at all for such notions?

The objective of this systematic review was to identify, appraise, and synthesize the scientific literature on the efficacy and effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes in patients with infectious disease and to examine the association between SMT and selected immunological, endocrine, and other physiological biomarkers.

A literature search of MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase was conducted. Randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were included. Eligible studies were critically appraised, and evidence with high and acceptable quality was synthesized using the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis guideline.

A total of 2593 records were retrieved; after exclusions, 50 full-text articles were screened, and 16 articles reporting the findings of 13 studies comprising 795 participants were critically appraised. No clinical studies were located that investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes among patients with infectious disease. Eight articles reporting the results of 6 high- and acceptable-quality RCTs comprising 529 participants investigated the effect of SMT on biomarkers. Spinal manipulative therapy was not associated with changes in lymphocyte levels or physiological markers among patients with low back pain or participants who were asymptomatic compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups. Spinal manipulative therapy was associated with short-term changes in selected immunological biomarkers among asymptomatic participants compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups.

The authors concluded that no clinical evidence was found to support or refute claims that SMT was efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes. Although there were limited preliminary data from basic scientific studies suggesting that SMT may be associated with short-term changes in immunological and endocrine biomarkers, the clinical relevance of these findings is unknown. Given the lack of evidence that SMT is associated with the prevention of infectious diseases or improvements in immune function, further studies should be completed before claims of efficacy or effectiveness are made.

I fully agree with the data as summarised in this paper. Yet, I find the conclusions a bit odd. The authors of this paper are chiropractors who declare the following conflicts of interest: Dr Côté reported receiving grants from the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia during the conduct of the study and grants from the Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation, travel expenses from the World Federation of Chiropractic, and personal fees from the Canadian Chiropractic Protective Association outside the submitted work. Dr Cancelliere reported receiving grants from the Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation outside the submitted work. Dr Mior reported receiving grants from the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia during the conduct of the study and grants from the Canadian Chiropractic Association and the Ontario Chiropractic Association outside the submitted work. Dr Hogg-Johnson reported receiving grants from the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia during the conduct of the study and grants from the Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported. The research was supported by funding from the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia to Ontario Tech University, the Canada Research Chairs program (Dr Côté), and the Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation (Dr Cancelliere).

Would authors independent of chiropractic influence have drawn the same conclusions? I doubt it! While I do appreciate that chiropractors published these negative findings prominently, I feel the conclusions could easily be put much clearer:

There is no clinical evidence to support claims that SMT is efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes. Further studies in this area are not warranted.

5 Responses to No evidence that spinal manipulation improves immune function

  • And what about somebody who writes about SCAM who is the daughter/son of a chiropractor who was the family’s provider? She/he would perhaps not have been among us if not… How many generations do we have to consider?

  • “There is no clinical evidence to support claims that SMT is efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes.
    Further studies in this area are not warranted.”

  • there was never any prior plausibility for this absurdly silly notion in the first place.
    we did not NEED any studies to figure this out. What would the mechanism even be?
    There is not even much evidence that SMT works very well for low back pain – why on earth it should have ANY effects on immune function or any other organ systems in the body is quite beyond me or any other person with half a brain surely?

    all this has even been is a daft belief in “magical thinking” which is how Chiropractic was dreamt up in the first place. And it buys into the dreams Chiros have of extending their role into all others areas of healthcare – even fantasizing that they can be “primary healthcare providers.” All of which is just some very sick joke.

    just because people can come up with daft notions doesn’t mean we have to do a “study” to refute them. Bertrand Russel came up with his “teapot” in orbit around the sun as an analogy for this as did Carl Sagan with his invisible “dragon” in his garage – one can make such things impossible to refute but are they of any use? They are also thereby unfalsifiable and scientifically absurd.

    BTW there was much talk on this blog recently of the low case rate in India being due the the use of AYUSH in particular homeopathy – please note that India now has the second highest rate of daily cases IN THE WORLD having overtaken even BRAZIL! 161,000 odd cases per day and hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed.
    Many hospitals are just dumping the dead bodies outside as they cannot cope with disposals.

    All of this is being reported to be as a result of the almost total relaxation of PPE/ distancing measures with large crowds congregating and mixing and folk abandoning masks and other precautions.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/12/coronavirus-india-becomes-second-worst-hit-country-as-covid-cases-surge.html

    perhaps I KRISHNA can explain why homeopathy is no longer working so well?
    presumably they have also stopped taking the silly little pills as well……….

  • no clinical evidence was found to support or refute claims

    Is that enough to fix that part of the conclusion? 😉

    • @ prl

      it is very difficult is not impossible to prove a negative. e.g. my earlier comment about Bertrand Russel’s tiny teapot in orbit around the sun that is just too small to be seen by even the most powerful telescope……..

      but if the assertion is just too implausible and silly in the first place and in any event is unfalsifiable…..

Leave a Reply to prl Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent Comments

Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.

Archives
Categories