A secret list of 27 publically available papers

In their extraordinary press release, the litigious British Chiropractic Association claim to have a plethora of evidence that chiropractors can treat various childhood ailments. They asked Simon Singh if he had read 27 papers that, apparently, are so persuasive that "If Dr. Singh had read the research he could not have held the view he expressed in the Guardian unless he simply chose to ignore the facts."

So what are these papers? Obviously the papers are going to be reporting high quality placebo controlled trials with appropriate blinding and randomisation: nothing less is likely to persuade Singh. Chiropractors are real medics (Proof? - they have statutory regulation), so there won't be any customer satisfaction surveys masquerading as evidence. That's the sort of low trick that evidence-deficient homeopaths pull. But as to the identity of the 27, the BCA are rather coy. 

So I, polite as ever, write a short email to the BCA, asking for the list of 27, and promptly receive the reply 

As this case is still sub-judice, I am unable to accede to your request at this time.

So they are hiding behind their lawyers' wigs. Any respectable organisation would have proclaimed their scientific evidence before they launched legal action. 

A quick dredge through ISI web of knowledge revealed that Olafsdottir et al. (2001) is a prime candidate for being accidentally omitted from the list of 27. Her conclusion that "Chiropractic spinal manipulation is no more effective than placebo in the treatment of infantile colic." is not the most convincing evidence in favour of bone crunching.