People in any profession who do legit research should be lauded. Neither chiropractic nor physical therapy is a specific modality or treatment, so you’re being imprecise. It’s like saying “medicine” is better than “food”. What conditions are you talking about? Are you including chiropractors who do physical therapy? Are you including physical therapists who are trained in manipulation? If you have statistics, you should cite them.
YMMV with both professions, but there’s good people in each, bad people in each. Neither of them are as bad as the worst of the medical snipehunt.
A rather nice examination of the claims:
2 Likes
It was the year 2019 –
“Media companies are now literally demonizing millenials!”
3 Likes
Yes I think I have the same thing. I thought it was normal.
Oh, this needs a signal boost.
This paper is one huge leap to the wrong conclusions. How on earth did this get published in Nature?
In short:
- They’ve not actually tested their link between mobile usage and this condition
- The paper doesn’t contain the model that they use to reach those conclusions
- The model could actually be driven by a link between posture and bone growth among the older population, not young people.
Of course, the good side of this is that this is an example of the scientific method working properly. Even if peer review misses things like this, publication of papers and many eyes reviewing the results sceptically and thoroughly is the vital corrective factor that ensures that the process works towards truth.
1 Like
(edited)
I just learned that the origin of the phase whippersnapper actually referred to an idle pastime of snapping whips. The devilishness of the “youth” is a timeless trope.
Reading the paper, they hypothesize that the change is due to being more sedentary and the emergence of handheld electronics, but I don’t think they conclude that. They could have explicitly said “future work will examine this”, but I don’t believe they intended it as a conclusion, though that’s of course not what the news reports on it said.
As far as “a link between posture and bone growth among the older population, not young people”: enthesopathies get more prevalent in older populations, partly due to postural changes, they tend to not disappear once they’ve calcified, which is why it’s odd they saw them in the youngsters as opposed to those of advanced years. It’d be good to look at x-rays of decades ago and skeletons of different ages at different points in history, and see if the findings are unique to this time period.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
