Editing Simon Singh (section)

==Chiropractic lawsuit {{anchor|Chiropractic lawsuit}}==
{{main|British Chiropractic Association v Singh}}
{{multiple image
<!-- Images -->
 | total_width       = 350
<!--image 1-->
 | image2            = Simon Singh at the Royal Courts of Justice11.jpg
 | width1            = 2848
 | height1           = 4272
 | caption2          = Simon Singh approaches The Royal Courts of Justice
<!--image 2-->
 | image1            = Simon Singh at the Royal Courts of Justice8.jpg
 | width2            = 2848
 | height2           = 4272
 | caption1          = Protest before the [[Royal Courts of Justice]] on the [[Strand (London)|Strand]], central London
}}
On 19 April 2008, ''[[The Guardian]]'' published Singh's column "Beware the Spinal Trap",<ref name="beware">{{cite news |last=Singh |first=Simon |date=19 April 2008 |title=Beware the spinal trap |newspaper=[[The Guardian]] |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/apr/19/controversiesinscience-health |access-date=21 January 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081113000000/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/apr/19/health |archive-date=13 November 2008 }} [http://svetlana14s.narod.ru/Simon_Singhs_silenced_paper.html Alt URL] {{Webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20120722132746/svetlana14s.narod.ru/Simon_Singhs_silenced_paper.html |date=22 July 2012 }} [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/apr/19/controversiesinscience-health reinstated on 15 April 2010]</ref><ref>[http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/simon_singh/ Comment is Free], ''The Guardian''</ref> an article that was critical of the practice of [[chiropractic]] and which resulted in Singh being sued for [[libel]] by the [[British Chiropractic Association]] (BCA).<ref name=Eden>{{cite news | url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mandrake/2570744/Doctors-take-Simon-Singh-to-court.html | title = Doctors take Simon Singh to court |last=Eden |first=R | date=16 August 2008 | work = [[The Daily Telegraph]]|location=London|access-date=12 December 2008}}</ref>
The article developed the theme of the book that Singh and [[Edzard Ernst]] had published, ''[[Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial]]'', and made various statements about the lack of usefulness of [[chiropractic]] "for such problems as [[otitis media|ear infections]] and [[baby colic|infant colic]]":

{{quote|You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact they still possess some quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything. And even the more moderate chiropractors have ideas above their station. The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.<ref name=beware/>}}

When the case was brought against him, ''The Guardian'' supported him and funded his legal advice, as well as offering to pay the BCA's legal costs in an [[out-of-court settlement]] if Singh chose to settle.<ref name="guardianeurope">{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/may/13/simon-singh-british-chiropractic-association|title=Science writer accused of libel may take fight to European court|last=Boseley|first=Sarah|date=14 May 2009|work=[[The Guardian]]|access-date=19 May 2009 | location=London}}</ref>
A "furious [[Backlash (sociology)|backlash]]"<ref name=Robbins>Martin Robbins. [https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/mar/01/simon-singh-libel-case-chiropractors Furious backlash from Simon Singh libel case puts chiropractors on ropes]. "One in four chiropractors in Britain are under investigation as a result of campaign by Singh supporters." ''[[The Guardian]]'', 1 March 2010</ref> to the lawsuit resulted in the filing of formal complaints of false advertising against more than 500 individual chiropractors within one 24-hour period, with one national chiropractic organisation ordering its members to take down their websites,<ref name=withdraw>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/06/chiropractic_group_advises_mem_1.html |title=The Great Beyond: Chiropractic group advises members to 'withdraw from the battleground' |publisher=Nature.com |author=Lucas Laursen |access-date=20 June 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url = http://skepticzone.libsyn.com/webpage/2014/1
|title = The Skeptic Zone episode 273
|date = 13 January 2014
|access-date = 15 January 2014}}</ref> and ''[[Nature Medicine]]'' noting that the case had gathered wide support for Singh, as well as prompting calls for the reform of English libel laws.<ref>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1038/nm0709-723b | year = 2009 | last1 = Willyard | first1 = C. | title = Lawsuit sparks calls for libel law reform | journal = Nature Medicine | volume = 15 | issue = 723 | pages = 723| doi-access = free }}</ref> On 1 April 2010, Simon Singh won his court appeal for the right to rely on the defence of fair comment.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/apr/01/simon-singh-wins-libel-court | newspaper=The Guardian|location=London | title=Simon Singh wins libel court battle | access-date=1 April 2010 | date=1 April 2010}}</ref> On 15 April 2010, the BCA officially withdrew its lawsuit, ending the case.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.elyplace.com/index.aspx?p=1&articleId=208 | publisher=Ely Place | title=British Chiropractic Association v Singh&nbsp;— BCA admits defeat | access-date=15 April 2010 | archive-date=17 April 2010 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100417064047/http://www.elyplace.com/index.aspx?p=1&articleId=208 | url-status=dead }}</ref>

To defend himself for the libel suit, Singh's out-of-pocket legal costs were tens of thousands of pounds. The trial acted as a catalyst. The outrage over the initial ruling{{Clarify|reason=An "initial ruling" has not been mentioned – there needs to be a sentence further up saying what the verdict in the court of first instance was. Is this the "furious backlash" of the previous paragraph?|date=May 2024}}  brought together several groups to support Singh<ref>{{cite web |last1=Grossman |first1=Wendy |authorlink=Wendy Grossman|title=Minding the Gaps: Simon Singh |url=https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/minding-the-gaps-simon-singh/ |website=Skeptical Inquirer |date=8 October 2021 |publisher=Center for Inquiry |access-date=12 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211012021101/https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/minding-the-gaps-simon-singh/ |archive-date=12 October 2021}}</ref> and acted as a focus for libel reform campaigners, resulting in all major parties in the [[2010 United Kingdom general election|2010 general election]] making manifesto commitments to libel reform.<ref name="libel">{{Cite journal | last1 = Singh | first1 = Simon | author-link1 = Simon Singh| title = How English libel law has a global chill on free speech | doi = 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.03.007 | journal = Cortex | volume = 47 | issue = 6 | pages = 643–644 | year = 2011 | pmid =  21458790| s2cid = 20001290 }} {{closed access}}</ref>

On 25 April 2013 the [[Defamation Act 2013]] received [[Royal Assent]] and became law. The purpose of the reformed law of defamation is to 'ensure that a fair balance is struck between the right to [[freedom of expression]] and the protection of reputation'. Under the new law, [[claimant]]s must show that they suffer serious harm before the court will accept the case. Additional protection for website operators, defence of 'responsible publication on matters of public interest' and new statutory defences of truth and honest opinion are also part of the key areas of the new law.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2012-13/defamation.html|title=Defamation Act 2013|author=British Parliament|date=25 April 2013|author-link=British Parliament}}</ref>