Hi all
For the benefit of those practitioners not registered as members of the British Acupuncture Council, the BAcC has become aware of a concerted move by the Advertising Standards Agency to severely limit what we can say about the disorders that acupuncture can treat. This ruling already applies to written text such as pamphlets and leaflets, and in March 2011 will also apply to websites.
This move is neither big nor clever; it will make a significant difference to what we can say about what we do. The only upside so far, is that the ASA is a self appointed voluntary body that holds no ability to enforce its recommendations (as I understand).
This may well be the thin end of the wedge, and could eventually apply to all therapists, not just acupuncturists. Time to wise up, the enemy is at the gates.:mad::mad::mad:
There's something a bit strange about the advertising standards authority being the experts on our scope of practice. Perhaps we should boot out the academics and clinicians and have ASA run the colleges and the training clinics instead. Perhaps Skeptic bloggers should run the research departments. What do we know, with all our training and experience?
Perhaps the same ASA spotlight should be shone onto the medical profession? Examine the evidence base supporting all those implicit and explicit claims for many common treatments - taking risks, accidents and side-effects into account. And we shall see if sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
On the other hand, who has decided that the RCT is the only acceptable form of proof? Where is the evidence supporting that as the standard? Where is the proof that it is the only fair, accurate, complete and consistent way to determine the effectiveness of any therapy?