I default to assuming chiropraxis is bullshit, but the existence of "potential dangers" is not a good argument against the potential existence of benefits.

Not defending chiroquacktors, but you can make any number of really goofy points by dropping an ncbi.nlm.nih.gov link into a thread without further comment. There is no real barrier to getting PubMed to link to your content.

You could use nih.gov links to 'prove' that vaccines cause autism, that cell phones and power lines cause cancer, that video games are responsible for school shootings, and that ESP is a thing.

I don’t buy the whole “your spine is out of place” line they sell, but for acute pain relief, it’s really great.

I saw diminishing returns when done weekly though.

From your link:

> Specifically, data from the report suggests that a chiropractor will be aware of an arterial dissection occurring following cervical manipulation only once in 8.06 million office visits