On the pointlessness of acupuncture in the emergency room…or anywhere else

For those apologists that believe in anything acupuncture. Have at it.
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/on-the-pointlessness-of-acupuncture-in-the-emergency-room-or-anywhere-else/

The Bobath Concept/NDT: Clarifications and Context

Wow, The Bobath concept  is an individualised response-based treatment approach. Because of that it results in difficulty in investigating the Bobath concept using traditional experimental designs such as the Randomised Controlled Trial. What a crock, if you can't create a RCT then you have no basis in even using it for therapy. Apologists in force in this posting. I guess it is unprofessional to criticize Bobath, well shit, I'm not a medical professional so if you can't prove your stuff works then you can shove it.
http://www.bbta.org.uk/news/bobath-concept-clarifications-and-context

Point by point refutation here:
Thoughts on the BBTA’s thoughts

Researchers dispute warning that drugs for high cholesterol could impair memory, cognitive function

More statin apologists. These people still are not focusing on the real problem. Stop the inflammation!
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-01-dispute-drugs-high-cholesterol-impair.html
Researchers question whether there is substance to the US Food and Drug Agency's recent warning that statins could affect the memory, attention span and other cognitive abilities of people who take this drug to control high cholesterol. This follows a systematic review of 25 clinical trials incorporating nearly 47,000 people. It was led by Brian R. Ott, M.D., director of The Alzheimer's Disease & Memory Disorders Center at Rhode Island Hospital and professor at the Alpert Medical School of Brown University in the U.S. The review findings appear in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

Since 2012, the FDA regulates that labels on statin packaging should warn that the drugs could change users' cognitive abilities. These cognitive changes could include attention span, problem solving, memory, and language or visuospatial abilities. The warning was based on surveillance and case reports, observational studies and randomized trials. Subsequent reviews of available research have cast doubts on the cautionary stance taken by the FDA. Ott's team therefore set out to do a more comprehensive analysis using well-studied analysis methods. They scrutinized the data of 25 relevant randomized clinical trials that investigated a possible link between statin therapy and mental ability. Combined, these studies included the test results of 46,836 patients. Ott and his colleagues also contrasted and combined the results of 14 of these studies through a meta-analysis, which in total included 27,643 participants.
The review found no significant effect of statin use on the mental capacity of people with normal brain functioning or even those with Alzheimers' disease. The results suggest that the FDA's statin warning should be re-evaluated. Ott also believes there is a need to investigate the reasons behind the differences in the review results and the initial reports on which the FDA warning was based. It could be that some of the mental changes that were reported in the case studies were the result of overdosing with statins.
The review findings are congruent with the 2013 safety statement made by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association Cholesterol Guideline. It advises that patients on statins who seem to be confused or who might have memory problems should be evaluated for causes other than their cholesterol medication. This could include the use of other drugs or systemic and neuro-psychiatric causes.
The researchers believe that there is more benefit to be had by sticking to statin therapy to manage heart-related diseases and prevent strokes than worrying about the possible adverse mental effects of these drugs.
"We found no significant effects of statin treatment on cognition," concludes Ott. "Given these results, it is questionable whether the FDA class warning about potential cognitive adverse effects of statins is still warranted."

Cervical artery dissection: a biomechanical perspective

Complete and total apologist for the chiropractic profession. I will never get my neck adjusted. These guys will say anything to not take responsibility.
I won't have this done for these reasons;
1. Call for age limit after chiropractor breaks baby's neck
2. 'My chiropractor gave me locked-in syndrome, but I survived': Astonishing recovery of woman, 46, who beat the odds to walk and talk  again
3. Woman claims stroke stems from spinal manipulation by chiropractor
4. Comparing chiropractic neck adjustment to hanging
5.  Mitchell, SD chiropractor denies causing Gunkel's stroke
6.  Cerebrospinal fluid leak secondary to chiropractic manipulation
7.  Chiropractor forged consent form after patient's stroke
8.  Letting a chiropractor 'crack' your neck to ease pain could trigger stroke
9.  Deaths after chiropractic: a review of published cases.
10.  Chiropractic stroke

The  apologist here:
Cervical artery dissection: a biomechanical perspective

276

J Can Chiropr

Assoc 2013; 57(4)

Commentary

Introduction

Although there has been a putative ??? link between cervical

spinal manipulative treatment (cSMT) and cervical artery

dissection (CAD) ever since Thornton’s report in the literature in 1934¹

, recent evidence suggests that this is an association rather than a causal relationship. Since 2008, several studies published by Cassidy and co-workers^2-4

have attributed the association between cSMT and CAD

to patients seeking chiropractic care for neck pain and

headaches during the prodrome ??? of a stroke.

Most reviews in the literature now generally report

that there are no convincing data, either to prove or disprove, any causality between cSMT and CAD⁵. (really?)

However, case reports and case series still accumulate that identify

chiropractic as the sole cause of CAD^6-7.

Furthermore, Tuchin⁸ recently tested the causality between CAD and SMT using Hill’s criteria, and concluded that there is no evidence that SMT is causally related to stroke. Nevertheless, some authors continue to claim that cSMT causes CAD.

Rather than using an epidemiologic approach to assess

the risk of whether cSMT can cause CAD, another approach is to investigate the mechanism(s) of how cSMT can cause CAD. Since 2002⁹, our laboratory has focused on the latter strategy. Using cadaveric vertebral arteries (VAs) as a model for the in vivo neck, we have measured

the strains experienced by VAs using ultrasonography to dynamically measure the changes in VA segment lengths during manipulative procedures. The details of the experimental procedures have been described elsewhere^9-11.

We have now replicated these experiments on a total of 16 VAs obtained from 10 cadavers^9-11 in 3 different papers. 

You can read the rest of the blathering at the link.