But I have this rock that protects me from subluxations.

Why would they cure a subluxion? The General Chiropractic Council, the UK's chiropractic regulatory agency run by chiropractors, states that subluxions have nothing to do with disease:

"The chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex is an historical concept but it remains a theoretical model. It is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease."

By law, in the UK you cannot make any of the claims you have posted above.

Forget about slander, lets talk about libel, legal liability and false advertising.

You're actually missing the point of the original example, which is summarized in the same Jeffrey Sachs Huffington Post article:

The real point is obvious. The money received by the richest households is vast, and higher taxes on the rich will make a major contribution to closing the deficit. Nobody says that the rich should carry the entire tax burden or that spending cuts shouldn't play a role. The waste in military spending alone is so large that we can and should save at least 2 percent of GDP per year from the defense budget alone.

America's richest households have enjoyed quite a ride in recent decades as they've accumulated a mountain of wealth unprecedented in human history, at a time when much of the rest of society has been suffering. The average income tax rate paid by the top 1% has declined from 34.5% in 1980 to just 23.27% in 2008. During this period, the share of total income accruing to the richest 1% has soared from 8.5% in 1980 to 20% in 2008. The share of total AGI accruing to the top 10% of taxpayers has similarly risen from 32% in 1980 to 46% of income in 2008.

I wish that were the case: if Sony really had limited their products, we would have been spared Mariah Carey in the 90s.

With great bravado, the Journal claims that even the income of the top 10% of the taxpayers wouldn't close the deficit. The top 10% reported $3,856 billion in AGI, equal to 46% of total reported income in the United States, almost 27 percent of GDP. On that, they paid $721 billion in personal federal income taxes, or an average of 18.7% of income. If the remaining 81% of income were paid in federal income taxes, the increment in tax revenues would be more than $3,100 billion, or roughly 21% of GDP. The budget deficit would obviously be closed many times over.

source

thanks

Can you provide your source for this? The United States has more millionairesthan any other country on the world.

how many passwords do you have to protect yourself from the "reply all" e-mail button?

argumentum ad populum. You give specific numbers (40%, 30%) but you cannot cite a specific source?

The arrogance to think they can legislate against 10,000 years of mutualism between human and domesticated animal is astounding. If this prohibition were somehow to pass and was somehow enforceable in any way, It will only serve to further disconnect people from nature and from animals, and lead to increased ignorance about animal welfare: out of sight, out of mind. What will they do with Aquarium of the Bay or San Francisco Zoo?

It's interesting that DCs are the only "Doctors" that feel they need to marginalize other medical doctors. I do not hear from an internist that the surgeon is bought off by "BigCutlery", nor do i see the optometrist spit when he refers to the optician's chart.

I think it's irresponsible for any medical practitioner to dissuade pursuing a second opinion in such an intimidating, dismissive manner. It is perfectly fine to hold this opinion personally; However, for the practice of patient care, a doctor needs to leave these personal prejudices outside of the waiting room. To come out swinging against evidence-based medicine (e.g. "MD" doctors) when you hold such a position of authority over your own patients is malpractice.

So why doesn't everyone have kidney and bladder cancer? those organs are in continual, unending contact with urea. or do you believe that skin is the only porous human body tissue?

Actually,parts of the skeletal structure are still in development well into puberty (e.g. cranial sutures). By recommending spinal manipulating >3yrs, you're recommending potentially maiming a person that you think has a completely "set" spine. this is not based on any science nor reasonable health practitioner's recommendation; in fact, you'd have trouble finding any medical doctor (not chiropractor) to state that diaper rash is a nervous issue. to treat diaper rash, look for horses, not zebras. and keep 3yr olds out of the chiropractor's office!

apple owns groupon?