<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DIY Chiropractic?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573</link>
	<description>News, Views, Events, Reviews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:06:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Michael W. Cox</title>
		<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/comment-page-1#comment-1059</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Michael W. Cox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skeptic.org.uk/news/?p=1573#comment-1059</guid>
		<description>I hope no one out there is using such a device.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope no one out there is using such a device.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chiropractors dc</title>
		<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/comment-page-1#comment-1053</link>
		<dc:creator>chiropractors dc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 23:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skeptic.org.uk/news/?p=1573#comment-1053</guid>
		<description>very disturbing image lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very disturbing image lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/comment-page-1#comment-1041</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 02:02:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skeptic.org.uk/news/?p=1573#comment-1041</guid>
		<description>For the record: I&#039;m fairly certain no CAM practitioner would suggest THAT.

Disturbing image.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For the record: I&#8217;m fairly certain no CAM practitioner would suggest THAT.</p>
<p>Disturbing image.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lyvvie</title>
		<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/comment-page-1#comment-1040</link>
		<dc:creator>Lyvvie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skeptic.org.uk/news/?p=1573#comment-1040</guid>
		<description>I saw cervical traction with doorstop and began to worry as I was not thinking vertebrae at the first, and was nervous to click through. Silly me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw cervical traction with doorstop and began to worry as I was not thinking vertebrae at the first, and was nervous to click through. Silly me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/comment-page-1#comment-1036</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 10:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skeptic.org.uk/news/?p=1573#comment-1036</guid>
		<description>While it bears a similarity to the concept of joint adjustments, I agree that the product page makes no claims that this is a chiropractic treatment. Perhaps the title of the post was misleading but I wished to post a link to a product which I personally found quite funny and which looked a little scary.

On the topic of misleading, I&#039;d pedantically note that it is not a truly &quot;vertical traction kit&quot;. Vertical would be this:
http://www.activeforever.com/p-70-overdoor-home-cervical-neck-traction-kit.aspx

In any case, it would seem that some chiropracters would not endorse the product, instead offering an alternative:
http://www.chisoftnecktraction.com/necktraction/neck-traction.shtml</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While it bears a similarity to the concept of joint adjustments, I agree that the product page makes no claims that this is a chiropractic treatment. Perhaps the title of the post was misleading but I wished to post a link to a product which I personally found quite funny and which looked a little scary.</p>
<p>On the topic of misleading, I&#8217;d pedantically note that it is not a truly &#8220;vertical traction kit&#8221;. Vertical would be this:<br />
<a href="http://www.activeforever.com/p-70-overdoor-home-cervical-neck-traction-kit.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.activeforever.com/p-70-overdoor-home-cervical-neck-traction-kit.aspx</a></p>
<p>In any case, it would seem that some chiropracters would not endorse the product, instead offering an alternative:<br />
<a href="http://www.chisoftnecktraction.com/necktraction/neck-traction.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.chisoftnecktraction.com/necktraction/neck-traction.shtml</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BR</title>
		<link>http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news/2009/1573/comment-page-1#comment-1035</link>
		<dc:creator>BR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skeptic.org.uk/news/?p=1573#comment-1035</guid>
		<description>The web page says nothing about chiropractic; this is not chiropractic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The web page says nothing about chiropractic; this is not chiropractic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

