weapon69

I have to say for once that IMO OllyK has made some good points. Babies bones when they are only days/weeks old are constantly changing,moving around etc. How do you know Osteopathy in this instance was the cure?

OllyK

I'm trying to find studies of the efficacy of Cranial Osteopathy and they are somewhat lacking. What I did find was a study to see if there was anything to support the mechanism that isclaimed to be behind it working. This study is here (pdf)

The abstract is as follows:
Bolding by me, which suggests that my seach for any scientific evidence that cranial osteopathy works is not likely to be forthcoming.

I'll re-itterate that visiting a "quack" is down to personal choice, but if you do go, go with your eyes open.

OllyK

Now that's a surprise!!

That's in part my point, with a young child there are so many variables it very hard to come to a conclusion based on a sample size of 1. I've mentioned it before but "attention" or "the tea and sympathy effect" can be quite effective, especially in pain related conditions. In otherwords "anything" that involves showing the patient some attention and concern would have a positive effect.

weapon69

you said yourself how relaxing it was going to the cranial osteo. How do you know it wasn't having the same effect on your son? I.E his crying stopped and he slept better because he'd had a nice head rub!

You say you went to several sessions, in which case as OllyK said (in as many words), he may have grown out of his problem.

I went to a cranial osteopath at the clinic you mention B2Z and it turned out to be the biggest waste of money! My condition wasn't helped but it was relaxing for about an hour afterwards. There are a lot cheaper ways of relaxation than the osteopath!!!!

weapon69

What part of 'babies bones are constantly readjusting as they grow' do YOU not understand? My Son had a ridge on his head that has now gone. its called growing up or do you not understand that??

weapon69

B2Z-i suggest you do you research a little more in depth. A babies head, when newborn is incredibly soft and when manipulated it will change shape and then go back to as it was again soon after.

You seem to believe Cranial Osteopathy is some sort of miracle cure for babies. I disagree.

OllyK

And it may well have recovered on its own.

Osteopaths claim it should be used for this, can you cite any papers by non-osteopathic paediatricians recommending this course of action, or do you only have word of mouth?

I appreciate that, which is why I stated the 5 main bones involved:
2 frontal bones, 2 parietal bones and 1 occipital bone.

Seeing as the occipital is at the back of the skull and the other 4 all come together to form a cross shape meeting at anterior fontanelle, it is rather difficult to see how only 3 bones were involved, the ridge you describe suggests all 4 were involved along the coronal suture and hence why I asked for the clarification. The mention of 3 bones suggested the meeting of the parietal bones with occipital at the Lambdoid suture.

As it does to heal naturally?

You said:
Why use "apart from" if you mean "as well as"?

It is that science has shown that cranial osteopathy has no effect for any of the things it claims, and the osteopaths don't seem to keen to actually test it under controlled conditions.

Your appeal to poularity does not mean you, or the others are right. You have seen an effect and you are assuming the cause. You "may" be right, you may not, but you don't seem to keen to acknowledge there are other possibilities.

OllyK

I'm glad you acknowledge you are basing your statements on belief and not any kind of fact. I'm suggesting people exercise caution, as I would before they seek to take any medication that has NEVER been formally tested or approved.

I don't need to "try it" to be pretty sure that filling my petrol car up with derv is not going to do it much good. By the same basis, I can state that I am unlikely to try cranial osteopathy as there is no solid evidence that it does what it claims. Show me the DBPC test results, that will do for me, this is supposed to be medicine not religion.

and you may have got equally good results if you had done nothing.

OllyK

I'll ask again - please show where it is so recognised, by non-osteopathic practitioners. The scientific studies to support its efficacy would be good too.

weapon69

B2Z- i've been looking on some websites concerning cranial osteopathy and the damage as well as the good it has done in babies is frightening. Put it this way, i wouldn't take my baby to one.

OllyK

Oh dear. Then there is little point discussing things further as you will not change your mind, nor are you interested in presenting any evidence to allow people to form a similar conclusion to yourself based on good practice. All I can hope to do is point out the errors in your arguments so that a casual reader gets both sides of the story.

Unless somebody is qualified in a field, in this case paediatrics then they really don't know if what they saw was normal or not. The lack of ANY empirical evidence relating to cranial osteopathy suggests that any observed effect is more than likely natural, if it did work as effectively as claimed, then they would no doubt be queuing up to prove to the rest of the medical community how effective this treatment was. The lack of research, even by the oteopaths speaks volumes. Add the "supernatural" underpinnings to the explanations behind how it works and we really do have a cause for concern.

Despite the rolling eye - spontaneous remission and cure are not unheard of by any means. I also do a nice little trick where I can cure a blister on my finger in seconds with a wave of my hand. People can be fooled, very easily in many cases, especially when they don't really understand what is going on.

Without a control group, we cannot know if the cure was natural or due to something done by the osteopath. Most of what is written reads as if dictated by an osteopath. I'd like a diagnosis and prognosis from another doctor.

References to:
"by the looks of it I am not the only one on here to have seen such a positive result from the treatment"
"I am talking about a specific condition that is now recognised as being helped by seeing a cranial osteopath"

No proof just claims along the lines of "lots of people think this, so it must be right"

OllyK

And yet...
Without empirical evidence, of which there is none in this case, all there is, is a belief that something caused something else. Humans are incredibly easy to fool, some people make a legitimate living out it in the form of conjurer's and magicians, others do so by more underhanded means. Alt med is a multi billion pound industry based around the hopes and fears of the vunerable with no evidence that any of it works (otherwise it would by just plain med).

For any given condition, if left untreated 1 of 3 things will happen:
1) It gets better
2) It stays the same
3) It gets worse

The alt med responses to these 3 occurences are
1) We cured it (see this case)
2) We arrested it
3) You need more treatment

Even in case 1 where the patient does get better, it peeves me that the quacks are taking money off people while they wave their hands around, dish out sugar pills and let the body get on with healing itself.

I'd like to point that in the case of muscle injuries or dislocated joints, an osetopath or chiropractor may be able to offer very real benefit, but then so can a physiotherapist or a masseur.

MattW

Interesting stuff, I must admit I would normally be very sceptical but it seems to have helped this other child I mentioned at the beginning of the thread.

However, please remember I asked about this with regard ear infections and not to do with a mis-shaped skull. My daughter was born by section and therefore didn't have the trauma of a "normal" birth.

edited spelling

Chip

Matt,
You have PM.

Chip

OllyK

And the control groups was...

Just another uncontrolled incident that more than likely was just a natural recovery.

You "think" you know what happened, you still have no proof. I don't need to be there to analyse the evidence. There is none. I have even looked wider to find DBPC tests to support your claim, there are none. At the moment it's as credible as pixe dust, you just happen to believe it.

MattW

Thanks Chip - PM returned

OllyK

And you would have people take up a potentially hazardous procedure that has no scientific backing whatsoever.

Proof you keep forgetting to provide any.

Give me the evidence, the unbiased clear as day evidence gathered under controlled conditions.

OllyK

It doesn't work for any condition it claims to.

john banks

A noble effort by OllyK as ever, but using the scientific method to assess the efficacy of alternative medicine could be compared to using it to assess religious belief systems. The arguments on either side tend to appeal to those with a suitable world view to accept them.