THE RECOGNITION OF OSTEOPATHY
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—May I have sufficient space to place a few facts before your readers as an answer to the two correspondents whose letters appeared in your issue of February 28th ?
Mr. Herbert J. Paterson, by inference, conveys the impres- sion that all osteopaths are ignorant, and have no training or knowledge of the subjects which are the foundations of a medical curriculum. Your other correspondent, who modestly signs himself " A General Practitioner of Medicine," goes a step further and, either through prejudice or ignorance, states that " The osteopaths cut out all the preliminary work on anatomy and physiology. They ignore it. They can then invent an anatomy of their own." He does not differentiate between individuals who suddenly decide to call themselves osteopaths and commence to practise what they call osteopathy (which is quite within the present law), and osteopaths who have spent years of training and study in acquiring the right to practise osteopathy.
The British people want osteopathy and should have some protection against pretenders, who are multiplying very rapidly on the reputation established by trained osteopaths.—
I am, Sir, &c., WILLIAM COOPER (Secretary, British OsteopathM Association). 40 Park Lane, London, W. 1.
[This question was very fully discussed in the Spectator in 1925 and 1920.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
