The Society for Science-Based Medicine has tax-exempt public charity status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. This means the Society's tax-exempt status is retroactive to the date the organization was formed in 2013. If you've already made a contribution (thanks!) your contribution is deductible to the extent allowed by federal law. Membership dues can be treated as contributions to a certain extent. Please consult your tax professional or the
If you haven't donated or joined, or both, now's the time.
The Society for Science-Based Medicine
A Society for a community of like-minded individuals, both in and out of health care, who support Science-Based Medicine.
People should not suffer, die and lose hope, time and money due to pseudo-medicine.
The mission of the Society for Science-Based Medicine includes, but is not limited to,
Educating consumers, professionals, business people, legislators, law enforcement personnel, organizations and agencies about Science-Based Medicine.
Providing resources and information for information concerning all aspects of Science-Based Medicine. Providing a central resource for communication between individuals and organizations concerned about Science-Based Medicine.
Supporting sound consumer health laws for the practice of Science-Based Medicine and opposing legislation that undermines Science-Based Medicine.
Encouraging and aiding legal actions in support of the practice of Science-Based Medicine.
Science-Based Medicine needs organization, people and funding.
To see what organization and funding can provide, visit the
Naturopaths, chiropractors, acupuncturists are organized, funded and increasingly licensed by the State.
The anti-vaccine groups have the organization and funding to
For Science-Based Medicine we have virtually nothing. Those who are proponents of Science-Based Medicine are few in numbers, poorly funded and lack organization. It could be argued that we have breadth and depth of the medical-industrial complex behind us, and at some level we do.
As a self-identified mostly liberal I get intellectual cognitive dissonance when I think in terms of a population as having a shared characteristic. Oddly, it does not bother me when I am using information based on epidemiology and disease risk, but it does bother me when applied to other endeavors, even when the data would support the association.
For example, consider studies out of China. Can the results be trusted? Perhaps. But the data would suggest that when the topic is traditional Chinese pseudo-medicine (TCPM), the reader should be a bit more critical about accepting resultes, espcially positive results, at face value.
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, an open-access chiropractic journal, has a
Those who oppose prescription privileges cited the loss of identity as a "drugless" profession. The lack of chiropractic education and training in pharmacology and toxicology, which amounts to a paltry 12 hours, is also a barrier. Note that this figure belies the
And here's another scary thought. According to the article,
North American chiropractors as a group were of the opinion that only 39.8% of all pharmacetical prescriptions filled annually were clinically beneficial.
Page 1 of 2