panacea
Colic in infants causes excessive crying in an otherwise healthy and thriving baby. Colic is a common but poorly understood and often frustrating problem for caregivers. The objective of this trial was to study whether osteopathic treatments of infants with infantile colic / excessive crying (IC/EC) have an impact on the subjectively perceived psychological stress of caregivers compared to usual care.
The study was designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Infants aged 1 week to 3 months and who met Rome IV criteria for IC/EC were included. By means of external randomization, infants were allocated to an intervention group or a control group. Infants in the intervention group received three osteopathic treatments at intervals of one week. The treatments were custom-tailored and based on osteopathic principles. Controls received their osteopathic treatment after a 3 week untreated period. The primary outcome parameter was the assessment of parental psychological stress (three questions), measured using a numeric rating scale (NRS; 0-10). Furthermore, the average daily crying time (measured using the Likert scale), the crying intensity (measured using the NRS) and the parents’ self-confidence (measured using the Karitane Parenting Confidence Scale) were assessed.
A total of 103 infants (average age 39.4 ±19.2 days) were included, 52 in the intervention group and 51 in the control group. An inter-group comparison of changes revealed clinically relevant improvements in favor of the intervention group for the main outcome – parameter psychological stress – for all 3 questions (e.g., for question 2 respectively 3, NRS: between group difference of means 3.5; 95% CI: 2.6 to 4.4; p < 0.001). For the secondary outcome parameters of crying intensity and crying time/day, the changes were of similar magnitude.
The authors concluded that three osteopathic treatments given over a period of two weeks led to statistically significant and clinically relevant positive changes of parental psychological stress.
This is a cleverly designed study. I say ‘cleverly’ because the casual reader might not even notice that it compared osteopathic treatments with doing nothing. It is well-documented that just hadling babies with IC/EC has an effect on outcomes. Thus the positive effect may not have anything to do with osteopathy and be due simply to the extra attention given to the child. In other words, the positive result of the study was sure even before the 1st baby was entered into the trial.
I am impressed!
Perhaps this study should be in the textbook entitled:
HOW TO CHEAT WITH SEEMINGLY RIGOROUS CLINICAL TRIALS?
Saffron, the stigmas of Crocus sativus L., has been used extensively in traditional herbal medicine. Since several years, the research interest in this plant is intense. Thus numerous clinical trials of saffron supplements (in contrast to the spice, supplements are affordable [they use different parts of the plant]) have been published. Almost all of them yield positive results (this invariably makes me suspicious!).
The purpose of this 2-arm, 12-wk, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was to examine the effects of supplementation with a saffron extract (Affron) on mood and sleep in adults experiencing subclinical depressive symptoms. 202 adults aged 18-70 with depressive symptoms were supplemented with either 28 mg saffron daily or a placebo. Outcome measures included the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale – 21, Sleep Disturbance and Sleep-Related Impairment Scale, World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Scale, and daily depression, stress, and anxiety ratings.
On the primary outcome measure, compared to the placebo, saffron was associated with greater improvements in the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress scale – 21 depression score (β: -2.92 points; 95% confidence interval: -5.13, -0.71 points; Cohen’s d = 0.39). 72% of participants in the saffron group achieved a clinically significant change (a reduction of ≥ 7 points) compared to 54.3% of participants in the placebo group (P = 0.010). However, in the other secondary outcomes, there was no evidence of between-group differences. In exploratory analyses across various strata and assumptions, improvements in sleep disturbances (β: -2.72 points; 95% confidence interval: -4.99, -0.46 points; Cohen’s d = 0.44) were identified in a subset of participants with a greater severity of sleep disturbance. There were no serious adverse reactions reported.
The authors concluded that this study, the largest conducted to date on saffron, provides evidence supporting the beneficial effects of 3 mo of saffron supplementation on depressive symptoms in adults. Large placebo responses were evident in this study, which require consideration in future trials.
As mentioned above, the body of evidence suggesting that saffron is effective for a surprisingly wide range of conditions is impressive. I looked with some skepticism at some of these studies and have to say that many are of decent or even good scientific quality.
Could it be that we have in saffron a plant-based treatment that shows real promise?
WATCH THIS SPACE!
The alkaline diet is based on the disproven belief that shifting the body’s acidity levels can cure diseases or “detoxify” the body. It is often claimed to offer a cure for a range of conditions, e.g.:
- Cancer
- Heart disease
- Low energy levels
- Rheumatoid arthritis
- Osteoarthritis
The diet is also promoted to prevent diseases such as:
- kidney stones,
- urinary tract infections.
Yet, none of these claims are supported by sound evidence. In fact, the diet is not just nonsense, it also is dangerous!
An Arizona couple is facing possible prison time after their parenting practices, shaped by online misinformation about medical care and nutrition, left their 5-month-old child dead and three other children suffering from chronic malnutrition. The couple followed the dangerous and debunked alkaline diet − and imposed it on their kids.
According to a 2024 poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, most Americans encounter false health information online, and many are unsure whether it is accurate. Nearly 70% of doctors polled said they think patient trust declined from 2020 to 2022. Therefore, it’s all the more crucial people understand how to distinguish fact from fiction when it comes to their health. Amongst other things, people should also make sure their health protocols and diets are not clouded by politics or ideology.
“Misinformation isn’t a point of view; it does actual harm,” commented Brian Castrucci, president of the de Beaumont Foundation. “It’s hurting physicians. It’s hurting medical practice. And it’s hurting the American public.”
The pattern of harm can be traced back to an extreme version of the “alkaline diet” which the couple imposed on their children. In addition, they combined this with a growing distrust of medical care. The couple told investigators they relied on online videos and posts that warned against vaccines, infant medical treatments and even common medicines such as Tylenol. Moreover, they also avoided taking the children to doctor visits, limiting outside contact.
The children’s diet entailed eating vegetables, fruit and plant-based milks − with almost no protein, fats or fortified foods crucial for overall health. The parents interpreted the children’s rapid weight loss as evidence the diet was working and removing toxins, rather than a sign of medical crisis. “We chose this diet for good health,” Stanley told the court.
—————————————–
When I encounter stories like this, I almost despair of the ignorance and naivety of some people. Then I realize how important the job of fighting dangerous misinformation is
… and I continue my work with renewed enthusiasm.
Dysmenorrhoea refers to the occurrence of painful menstrual cramps of uterine origin and is a common gynaecological condition. The efficacy of medical treatments such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) or oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) is considerable. However the failure rate can still be as high as 20-25% and there are also a number of associated adverse effects. Many women are thus seeking alternatives to conventional medicine. One popular treatment modality is spinal manipulation.
The objectives of this Cochrane review were to determine the safety and efficacy of spinal manipulations for the treatment of primary or secondary dysmenorrhoea when compared to:
- each other,
- placebo,
- no treatment,
- or other medical treatments.
Electronic searches of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group specialised register of controlled trials, CCTR, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Bio extracts, Psyclit and SPORTDiscus were performed to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field’s Register of controlled trials (CISCOM) was also searched. Attempts were also made to identify trials from the National Research Register, the Clinical Trial Register and the citation lists of review articles and included trials. In most cases, the first or corresponding author of each included trial was contacted for additional information.
Included were any RCTs including spinal manipulative interventions (e.g. chiropractic, osteopathy or manipulative physiotherapy) vs each other, placebo, no treatment, or other medical treatment were considered. Exclusion criteria were: mild or infrequent dysmenorrhoea or dysmenorrhoea from an IUD.
Five RCTs were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review. Four trials involving high velocity, low amplitude manipulation (HVLA), and one involving the Toftness manipulation technique were included. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Meta analysis was performed using odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. Data unsuitable for meta-analysis were reported as descriptive data and were also included for discussion. The outcome measures were pain relief or pain intensity (dichotomous, visual analogue scales, descriptive) and adverse effects.
Results from the four trials of high velocity, low amplitude manipulation suggest that the technique was no more effective than sham manipulation for the treatment of dysmenorrhoea, although it was possibly more effective than no treatment. Three of the smaller trials indicated a difference in favour of HVLA, however, the only trial with an adequate sample size found no difference between HVLA and sham treatment. There was no difference in adverse effects experienced by participants in the HVLA or sham treatment. The Toftness technique was shown to be more effective than sham treatment by one small trial, but no strong conclusions could be made due to the small size of the trial and other methodological considerations.
The authors concluded that overall there is no evidence to suggest that spinal manipulation is effective in the treatment of primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea. There is no greater risk of adverse effects with spinal manipulation than there is with sham manipulation.
Probably the first question that springs in one’s mind is, WHY ON EARTH COULD SPINAL MANIPULATIONS BE EFFECTIVE FOR THIS CONDITION? Unsurprisingly, the proponents of this approach have come up with several rationales:
- The parasympathetic and sympathetic pelvic nerve pathways are closely associated with the spinal vertebrae, in particular the 2nd-4th sacral segments and the 10th thoracic to the 2nd lumbar segments. One hypothesis is that mechanical dysfunction in these vertebrae causes decreased spinal mobility. This could affect the sympathetic nerve supply to the blood vessels supplying the pelvic viscera, leading to dysmenorrhoea as a result of vasoconstriction. Manipulation of these vertebrae increases spinal mobility and may improve pelvic blood supply through an influence on the autonomic nerve supply to the blood vessels.
- Another hypothesis is that dysmenorrhoea is referred pain arising from musculoskeletal structures that share the same pelvic nerve pathways. The character of pain from musculoskeletal dysfunction can be very similar to gynecological pain and can present as cyclic pain as it can also be altered by hormonal influences associated with menstruation.
I think we can all agree that these theories are very long shots! As it stands, we also do not need to shoot long at all. There is simply no good evidence that spinal manipulations work for dysmenorrhoea. There is thus no need to embark on implausible explanations to justify the notions of Palmer and Still claiming that spinal manipulation is a panacea. The idiocy of this claim has long been established.
The only question that does remain, in my view, is this:
WHEN WILL CHIROPRACTORS AND OSTEOPATHS FINALLY GIVE UP THEIR OUTLANDISHLY WISHFUL THINKING OF THEIR FOUNDING FATHERS?
The connections between Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.), his “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) cult, and the US chiropractic profession are complex and worrying.
Chiropractors’ support for RFK Jr.
The shady love affair had started long before RFK Jr. decided to join Trump. While Kennedy conducted his anti-vaccine campaign before running for president, chiropractors were hefty donors to his actions. In 2019, for instance, they donated nearly half a million dollars to the cause — about a sixth of the organization’s revenue that year. When Kennedy created the MAHA Alliance super PAC for his presidential candidacy, more than half of its initial donors were chiropractors. And when Kennedy’s nomination to lead HHS was questioned, a raft of chiropractors signed a letter of support for him.
RFK Jr.’s advocacy for so-called alternative medicine (SCAM)
After his appointment as Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), RFK Jr. has proven to be a vocal proponent of SCAM, particularly chiropractic. He has publicly supported chiropractic, for inctance, when speaking at chiropractic colleges and forums. His expressed his belief that chiropractic is a “necessary part of modern healthcare” and that chiropractors treat the “root causes” of disease, while conventional medicine is just masking symptoms. Major professional chiro-organizations, such as the “International Chiropractors Association” (ICA) and the “Georgia Council of Chiropractic” (GCC), have therefore applauded Kennedy’s appointment to HHS, viewing it as a “pivotal moment” for the advancement of chiropractic care and its integration into federal health programs. They anticipate his leadership will lead to expanded insurance reimbursement and greater acceptance by MAHA followers. “People that graduated with me in 2017, probably out of 100 people … around 70 or 80 of them were Kennedy freaks,” says Gabe Padilla, who once studied and worked as a chiropractor but has since left the field. “And I’m talking about, wow, they lived and breathed this man. They would drink his bath water if they could.”
The MAHA Initiative and Holistic Integration
The MAHA cult allegedly aims to tackle the chronic disease epidemic through a strategy that includes a focus on SCAM. It claims that factors like poor diet, environmental chemicals, over-medicalization and even vaccinations are major drivers of chronic illness. This over-emphasis on external and lifestyle factors, and a rejection of conventional medicine and science resonates with the “philosophy” espoused in the chiropractic, SCAM “wellness” spheres. The MAHA framework thus includes the goal of incorporating SCAM, opening the door for increased governmental support for chiropractic. There even is a chiropractic liaison for MAHA now, whose job is to keep chiropractic organizations connected to the larger movement.
Chiropractors are delighted, of course, advocating the expansion of Medicare and Medicaid coverage beyond spinal adjustments. In DD Palmer’s tradition, chiropractors advocate their quackery as a panacea. RFK Jr. and MAHA have developed strong ties to a dubious coalition of wellness influencers, holistic and functional medicine advocates, and anti-vaxers. This alliance favours SCAM and questions the scientific and medical establishment—a sentiment that creates a fertile environment for chiropractic. Spending on wellness in general has hit more than $500 billion in the United States and is projected to continue growing. Meanwhile, the employment of chiropractors is forecasted to rise 10 percent over the next decade, at a higher rate than the average for all occupations.
Conclusion
The connection between RFK Jr./MAHA and chiropractic is a relationship of mutual support and ideological alignment. The chiropractic profession sees Kennedy’s leadership as a political opportunity to achieve greater recognition and financial integration, while Kennedy’s MAHA framework provides an official platform for promoting chiropractic quackery.
Acupuncture is considered an effective complementary therapy for major depressive disorder (MDD), yet current findings remain inconsistent, and its overall quality is uncertain. Therefore, this systematic review summarizes the existing evidence on acupuncture for MDD, providing an overview of the current research, identifying gaps and limitations in the literature, and offering guidance for future research.
A Chinese team of researchers systematically searched eight electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CDSR, CENTRAL, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and SinoMed) and seven guideline repositories (Trip, AHRQ, NICE, NZGG, GIN, CMACPG, and NHMRC) from inception to November 15, 2024, for RCTs, systematic reviews, and clinical practice guidelines on acupuncture for major depressive disorder. Eligibility criteria were defined according to the PICOS framework. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and AMSTAR-2 for systematic reviews (SRs). Key evidence and recommendations were synthesized and presented in tables and figures.
A total of 374 studies were identified, including 330 RCTs, 35 SRs, and 9 clinical guidelines. Among these studies, 307 (93.03%) were published in Chinese and 23 (6.97%) in English. The RCTs generally involved small sample sizes (50 to 100 participants). The primary intervention was acupuncture combined with antidepressant medication (50%), while 79.39% of studies used antidepressants as the main control. Nearly all studies (97.88%) used changes in depression severity as the primary outcome, although the risk of bias was unclear in 80.3% of cases.
Of the SRs, 97.14% reported positive findings favoring acupuncture’s potential benefits, but 74.29% were rated as very low in methodological quality, lacking thorough bias assessments. Among the two acupuncture-specific guidelines and seven broader guidelines, recommendations for acupuncture in managing MDD varied considerably.
The authors concluded that the evidence from RCTs, SRs, and clinical guidelines suggests that acupuncture may reduce depressive symptom severity and provide additional benefits for patients with comorbid anxiety, sleep disturbances, or somatic symptoms, particularly when used as an adjunctive therapy. However, these findings are mainly based on small-scale trials with methodological limitations, and most guidelines recommend acupuncture only as a third-line complementary option. Further large, high-quality RCTs are needed to strengthen the evidence base and inform future guideline development.
For the following reasons, the conclusions are, in my opinion, wrong:
- Almost all RCTs came from China (we have discussed the untrustworthiness of these trials many times previously, e.g. here or here).
- Almost all studies were methodologically flawed.
Therefore, I suggest a more accurate conclusion based on the available data:
The evidence from RCTs, SRs, and clinical guidelines is unreliable due to the poor quality of the available data. Until reliable evidence is available, acupuncture is not a recommendable therapy for MDD, a life-threatening condition.
The literature of homeopathy is littered with papers that are weirdly hilarious. A recent example of this genre is an article by Indian authors published in the ‘INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE’ entitled Homeopathy in chronic disease management: a critical review of the evidence. Here is its abstract:
Homeopathy remains one of the most widely practiced complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities worldwide, particularly among individuals with chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) who seek safe, holistic, and personalized therapeutic options. Despite its global popularity, controversy continues regarding its mechanisms of action and clinical effectiveness. This review critically evaluates the current evidence on the role of homeopathy in chronic disease management. A comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published between 2000 and 2025 was conducted. Studies were included if they examined homeopathic interventions in chronic conditions such as asthma, arthritis, type 2 diabetes mellitus, depression, chronic pain, and fibromyalgia. Data were synthesized thematically to assess efficacy, mechanistic plausibility, methodological quality, and safety outcomes. Mechanistic hypotheses suggest that hormesis, nanoparticle-mediated signaling, immune modulation, and neuropsychological or psychosocial mechanisms may contribute to the therapeutic effects of homeopathy. Meta-analytic evidence demonstrates modest but statistically significant improvements in subjective measures such as pain, fatigue, and quality of life across several chronic diseases, with standardized mean differences ranging from 0.18 to 0.25. However, objective clinical outcomes, including spirometry and HbA1c, rarely show consistent benefit. Methodological challenges, including small sample sizes, heterogeneous interventions, limited follow-up durations, and a high risk of bias, continue to constrain the reliability of existing findings. Importantly, homeopathy exhibits a favorable safety profile, with no serious adverse events reported across chronic disease studies. Current evidence indicates that homeopathy may provide modest adjunctive benefits for symptom relief and improved patient satisfaction among individuals with chronic illnesses, although its specific therapeutic mechanisms remain uncertain. Integration of homeopathy into evidence-based, patient-centered chronic disease management frameworks may enhance holistic care. Future research should emphasize large-scale, multicenter randomized trials with standardized outcome measures and mechanistic endpoints to better define clinical relevance and biological plausibility.
The lead author of this paper earns his living in the Department of Materia Medica, NatoreHomeo Medical College, Natore, Bangladesh. Thus, we might be surprised by the critical tone of this paper. However, having a closer look at it, we soon find that, under a thin veneer of critical assessment, the paper is a prime attempt of white-washing the established evidence. Let me explain; the authors claim that:
- “Mechanistic hypotheses suggest that hormesis, nanoparticle-mediated signaling, immune modulation, and neuropsychological or psychosocial mechanisms may contribute to the therapeutic effects of homeopathy.” Do the authors really suggest that all of these vague theories are true? Why not decide which one constitutes the actual mode of action? Why not tell the truth and state clearly that none of them are remotely plausible, none would explain how homeopathy works, and none is accepted by anyone outside the cult of homeopathy?
- ” Meta-analytic evidence demonstrates modest but statistically significant improvements in subjective measures such as pain, fatigue, and quality of life across several chronic diseases, with standardized mean differences ranging from 0.18 to 0.25. ” Do the authors not see that the meta-analyses demonstrating such outcomes are invariably done by overtly biased homeopath? Do they really not know that independent scientists are unable to confirm such findings?
- “Homeopathy exhibits a favorable safety profile…” Are the authors not aware that using homeopathy (or any other ineffective therapy) to treat serious conditions at best prolongs the suffering of patients and at worst hastens their death?
- “Homeopathy may provide modest adjunctive benefits for symptom relief…” Do the authors know that this statement is firstly untrue and secondly contradicts Hahnemann’s teaching (he called doctors who employed homeopathy as an add-on therapy “traitors” and insisted that homeopathy was not a symptomatic treatment but a causal cure of disease)?
Understanding that this is what homeopaths call a ‘CRITICAL’ review might be helpful: it explains, I think, why they they feel that true critical assessments are nothing but brutal and cynical destructions of their beautiful fantasies.
This post is inspired by an article by Michael Miller entitled ‘6 Reasons Why People Believe Health Misinformation‘ published recently in PSYCHOLOGY TODAY. Miller identified the following reasons:
- Reasons 1 and 2: Mistrust of Experts and Personal Autonomy
- Reason 3: Misinformation Makes Money (and Advances Other Agendas)
- Reason 4: Misinformation Sounds Like It’s True
- Reasons 5 and 6: Charisma and Simplicity Sell Soothing Misinformation
In my post, I will try to avoid much overlap with Miller’s paper and name 6 reasons why people believe misinformation specifically about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). The evidence for the reasons I list comes from 30 years of research into SCAM and from stuying many thousands of papers published on these and related issues.
VIPs
Almost 20 years ago, Max Pittler and I published an article entitled ‘Celebrity-based medicine‘; here is its abstract:
Objective: To collect contemporary accounts of celebrity use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), to aid clinicians in determining which CAM treatments patients are likely to use.
Design: Articles published during 2005 and 2006 reporting celebrity use of CAM.
Results: 38 celebrities were found to use a wide range of CAM interventions. Homeopathy, acupuncture and Ayurveda were the most popular modalities.
Conclusions: There may be many reasons why consumers use CAM, and wanting to imitate their idols is one of them.
Lots has changed since but wanting to imitate idols, VIPs and celebrities is still a powerful motivator, in fact, more powerful than ever before. The number of VIPs who have jumped on the SCAM bandwaggon has increase manyfold. As we have often discussed here, many of them now have even started to profit from the need of consumers to admire their stupidity of using worthless, expensive and often dangerous treatments.
Desperation
Many people who employ SCAM are unwell, suffer symptoms or even fight for their lives. They are desperate and leave no stone unturned to get better. In their desperation, they come across the many irresponsible promises of the SCAM industry. Like drowning individuals they cling to every bit of straw they can grab. And SCAM practitioners are often only too willing to offer (and charge for) false hope.
Consumers want to believe
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” We all – well almost all – want to believe that there is more than our rationality lets us to believe. Science does not know everything, many feel, and turn to pseudoscience. From there it it only a small step to turn from medicine to SCAM, particularly if they have enough money in their pocket to give it a try. This is regrettable, no doubt, but it also is the undeniable truth.
Journalists’ promotion
Journalists have a bizarrely keen interest in SCAM. This is presumably because certain sections of the public – those who are in favour of SCAM – like to read about it. And this means that a reinforcing spiral drives the odd phenomenon: plenty of people are in favour of SCAM –> they want to read positive things about SCAM –> journalists deliver what is wanted, namely uncritical promotion of SCAM –> more and more people get convinced about the value of SCAM.
Disappointment
Many of us are disappointed with what conventional healthcare offers to them. I can fully understand this sentiment. In theory, modern medicine is better than it ever was. In practice, it all too often is abominable. This can be due to phenomena ranging from human or professional incompetence to marode healthcare systems to financial constraints. Whatever the reason, people who are disappointed look elsewhere and, for many, SCAM seems an obvious solution.
Naivety
I often tell people: IF IT SOUNDS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE, IT PROBABLY IS. It’s a simple principle that sadly is not often heeded, particularly by individuals who are gullible and tend to believe or even lap up whatever SCAM practitioners promise. Some may call it ignorance or even stupidity, I prefer naivety – whatever it is, it renders people easy prey of the SCAM industry.
The list of reasons why consumers believe the misinformation that is currently abundantly available about SCAM is almost endless. Different people have (and different situations bring forth) different reasons. Understanding them might enable us to minimise some of the damage misinformation causes.
One key element of damage limitation must be reliable information which is the raison d’etre of my blog.
This study analyzed the prevalence and characteristics of misinformation in YouTube videos about chiropractic treatment for otitis media (OM).
YouTube was searched in January 2023 (Incognito mode, US region) using the terms “chiropractic treatment for otitis media”, “chiropractic ear infection”, and “chiropractic ear problems”. The first 50 English-language videos ranked by relevance were evaluated. Two independent reviewers extracted metadata (views, duration, likes, comments, upload source) and coded for references to evidence-based therapies, chiropractic techniques, and misinformation themes (“fixing” nerves or the Eustachian tube); a third reviewer resolved discrepancies. Descriptive statistics summarized video characteristics and engagement. A parallel PubMed search identified published literature on the most commonly mentioned techniques.
Fifty videos accrued 2,600,209 views, with a mean of 192 seconds, and generated 21,102 likes and 1,766 comments. Chiropractors produced 42 videos (84% of the content); hospital or academic channels contributed two videos (4%).
The findings are both revealing and frightening:
- Only three videos (6%) cited scientific sources.
- Twenty-five (50%) videos claimed that chiropractic manipulation could “fix” the Eustachian tube.
- Forteen videos (28%) asserted nerve correction.
- None of the videos mentioned antibiotics or tympanostomy tubes.
- Upper‑cervical adjustments (32 videos, 64%) and ear‑massage maneuvers (25 videos, 50%) were the most frequently promoted techniques, despite limited or low‑quality supporting evidence in the published literature.
The authors concluded that misinformation about chiropractic treatment for OM is widespread and highly viewed on YouTube. The omission of proven therapies and promotion of unverified claims pose risks for delayed care
and preventable harm. Efforts from clinicians, professional societies, educators, and platforms are needed to
elevate accurate content, promote media literacy, and reduce exposure to misleading medical information.
I suppose most of us have seen such videos. They are surprisingly popular, are by no means confined to relatively benign conditions like otits media, and reach vast audiences. Therefore, I often was tempted to conduct a proper study of them. I praise the US authors for having me beaten to it!
After reading this paper and after watching some of the videos, I foremost have one question:
HOW CAN ANYONE STILL BELIEVE THAT CHIROPRACTORS ARE SERIOUS HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS?
“Med beds” (short for “medical beds”) are a so-called alternative medicine (SCAM) that are claimed to cure every ailment and even regenerte amputated limbs. Med beds are said to be secret — held by military, powerful elites, or even using alien technology. Only the rich or well-connected have them.
The med bed conspiracy theory spread through QAnon associated internet conspiracy communities and social media. Soon the inevitable snake-oil salesmen started ripping off consumers by selling med beds or similar devices or “experiences” based on pseudoscientific ideas — often with vague concepts of “energy healing,” “bio-frequencies,” “quantum,” “frequency,” “vibrations,” “bio energy,” “alien tech,” etc.
Of course, the charlatan-in-chief, Donald Trump, had to join in; he shared an AI-generated video on his Truth Social account that appeared to show a Fox News-style segment hosted by Lara Trump, former co-chair of the Republican National Committee who is married to Eric Trump, announcing a rollout of “Med Bed Hospitals”. “Every American will soon receive their own medbed card”, the video proclaimed. After being up for ~12 hourhe, the clip was deleted, but the damage was done: thousands of MAGA fans – not known for their acute intellect – were looking forward to soon be cured of their disabilities.
Needless to say that there is no evidence that med beds or similar panacea exist nor will ever become available. Some US regulators have flagged vendors who make medical claims about “ealing beds who promote energy healing devices or services in ways that could mislead consumers.
In conclusion, “Med Beds” are a conspiracy theory and a pseudoscientific nonsense about miraculous healing devices devoid of any basis in scientific evidence. Trump’s AI video has given this stupid quackery more visibility but, rest assured, it is as credible as all the other lies the orange felon likes to issue on a daily basis.
PS
Just found this on social media:
According to adherents of the QAnon conspiracy theory, the government possesses “medbeds” — short for “medical beds” or “meditation beds” — that supposedly contain hidden technology capable of curing nearly any disease or ailment. However, according to the theory, those devices are reserved for elites …
