What's wrong with osteopathy?

... question the credibility of osteopathy and go as far and title the profession as pseudoscience, as the claims and mechanism for the treatment hold on outdated biomedical model and can therefore have no valid place in modern bio-psycho-social patient care and can furthermore be harmful in evidence-based parctice, as a) it adds confusion to an already complex information landscape, making it hard to distinguish between effective and harmful health practices, b) it undermines trust in official science by contradicting well-established scientific facts and c) it can lead to harmful outcomes. The authors see pseudoscientific claims coming from practitioners as a greater threat than the profession itself. The profession itself is a patient-practitioner interaction via soft tissue manipulation, which can have an impact of the body via psychophysiological and neurophysiological mechanism. But when it comes to the claims, it can get tricky. Examples of claims include the palpable presence of the cranial rhythm, the detectable movement of cranial sutures, the palpable flow of cerebrospinal fluid, the

The theory underlying craniosacral therapy is invalid because the cranial bones fuse by the end of adolescence and no research has ever demonstrated that manual manipulation can move the individual bones. Nor do I believe that the rhythms of the craniosacral system can be felt as clearly as the rhythms of the cardiovascular and respiratory systems, as was claimed by another Upledger Institute brochure. The brain does pulsate, but this is exclusively related to the cardiovascular system. Many years ago, three physical therapists who examined the same 12 patients diagnosed significantly different “craniosacral rates,” which is the expected outcome of measuring a nonexistent phenomenon

the problem lies in the absolut assumptions

there fore .... calls it anatomical possibilism

But what does the research say:

Structural osteopathy

Visceral osteopathy

Cranial osteopathy