The problem with making claims about the chiropractic practices is that it spans such a huge range of "absolute bullshit" to "physically grounded adjustments". Joints and vertebrae (especially) really can be out of alignment, and you can absolutely see that on imaging. Muscles in constant tension can be self-reinforcing in ways that don't easily correct themselves without an external force. My wife has significant back issues as a result of various injuries -- one leading to an SI joint that frequently pops out of place, one due to an injury that fractured most of the spinal processes -- and you can absolutely feel the "pop" when an adjustment helps something slide back in place. This is validated by imaging and sports medicine, not just chiropractic quacks.

At the same, adjusting your back isn't going to cure your cancer, no matter what idiots with fake degrees say.

The challenge is that the latter is just as stupid as homeopathy, but whereas homeopathy really has no redeeming qualities beyond the placebo effect, at least chiropractic practices actually do sometimes have groundings in reality.

You get funding for such a study the same way you get funding for anything else: first you run cheap small studies, perhaps in mice, perhaps observational, that show an interesting effect and motivate why you need money to run a proper clinical study.

There's enough money in 'crank health' that, if it were possible to publish something that might have a chance of lending some credibility (and thus expanding the breadth of the vulnerable customer base), then I would think it would have been done already.

This implies to me that the counter-evidence is strong and complete enough to discourage 'investment' into such a pursuit.

Is this a bit? Please state your point clearly instead of conspiratorial innuendo.

Try drinking a pint dry, and try drinking it diluted with water. And let me know what was easy...

That might be true but it's absolutely not what I was getting at. Certainly I have never had or even seen a supplement containing any prescription medicine.

My comment was strictly in the context of ingredients and isolated labeled products that are used only in the homeopathic space.

Perhaps some very traditional ones would. Most people are just concerned with addressing their symptoms.

Rightly or wrongly, homeopathic products are considered medicines, not supplements, and people in general are very mindful of spending money on medicines that don't work.

[dead]