• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Chiropractic, Docs vs. Quacks?

skepdoc

New Blood
S
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
7
Does anyone here know of the weirdness of chiropractic, there seems to be a huge fight going on as to whether they should maintain a pseudoscientific paradigm or become specialist neuromuscular skeletal practitioners with evidence.

Seems weird,

any comments?
 
Are you saying that a group of them wants to give up chasing the subluxation fairy and concentrate on making peoples backs feel better? That would be great.

Seems like they are looking to go down the same road that the Osteopaths went down, but they have to give up shennanigans like giving babies ajustments and trying to cure Diptheria.

Do you have a link?
 
It's my understanding that Chiropractors fall into two groups: The legitimate medicine group who just do musculoskeletal stuff, and the quacks who came up with all the subluxation nonsense. The legitimate medicine group is, of course, the minority.
 
Well, my sister and mother both went to chiropractors for back problems and they were satisfied. However, they both would tell you the same thing as Penn and Teller: they're fine for back and neck problems. They are quacks if they go on about subluxations and claim they can cure bedwetting (among other things).
 
I guess you guys do know what's going on. And yes the medically based chiropractors are in the major minority.
Makes me sick just thinking of the people falling for this scam, even though many of the chiros don't think it is a scam.

Strangest thing ever.

thanks
 
I fell into the hands of a chiropractor when I had a pinched nerve. (Okay, everyone, get the puns out of the way before reading any further.) He not only told me he could solve my sinus problems and create world peace, he kept me coming back to him for months before I finally told him I had to get on with my life. He got very snippy with me over that, and I don't blame him. He had been getting the wonderful payments from my insurance company.

Insurance covers chiropractors and not birth control Please explain.
 
Chiropractors are pretty good at resolving certain back pains, but they are dangerous. They've been known to precipitate strokes when they manipulate the cervical spine. That's quite a price to pay for simple back pain.
 
The only result I've seen from people going to the chiropractor is that they have to continue going to the chiropractor.
 
Linky No.1

Linky No.2--read especially Mr Homola's writings about his college experience, etc.

Reformist chiropractors are fancily decorated masseurs. But yes, some orthodox chiropractors have been in trouble for attempting "manipulations" on the upper neck, where the carotid artery comes out of the protection of the spine and wraps around the atlas vertibra, and pressure on it by unwary has caused cerebrovascular accidents--strokes or central brain bleeds. :jaw-dropp This is documented in a few court cases...
 
I know of some occasions in my life when chiropractors practised good medicine.

My mother had back pains. The chiropractor did back massage or manipulation and prescribed daily stretches. Her back improved, of course it is reasonable to believe that it would have improved with just the stretches. The chiropractor demonstrated good physio, but do we now if he practice good "chiropractry"?

Sister had back problems. The chiropractor prescribed regular visits and weight loss. My sister continued visited the office for an extended period of time. When she finally got around to losing weight the chiropractor said "I told you so". The chiropractor demonstrated good physio/nutrition, but do we now if he practice good "chiropractry"?

Friend had broken a bone in his foot and basically hadn't realised for days. Just thought it was a persistent injury. Finally went to a medical doctor who said it was to late to put a cast on, and prescribed some anti-inflammatories. My friend filled the prescription on the way to the chiro. When he mentioned the incident to the chiro it was pointed out that since inflammation hadn't been a problem he should avoid the prescribed medicine since it at most he would just get the negative side affects from it. Sounds like he practised good medicine (from what I know), better medicine than the medical doctor. But no "chiropractry" involved.

Until I see studies showing benefits of chiropractors when they just practice "chiropractry", or benefits of "chiropractry" and physio vs. plain physio I maintain that all fall under the quack category. The difficult in evaluating chiropractors is they rarely apply just chiropractry and often overlap with legitimate professions like nutritionist and massage and physio-therapists.

Remember, one bowl of fruit-loops and four ounces of milk, has all the nutritional value of four ounces of milk.

Walt

(Added quotation marks arround chiropractry because doesn't appear to be a real word)
 
jlam4911 said:
The only result I've seen from people going to the chiropractor is that they have to continue going to the chiropractor.
Click to expand...

It is well known that the asymmetrical gait caused by carrying too full a wallet can be readily cured by a steady stream of chiropractic sessions.
 
Manipulation is a reasonable adjunt to physical medicine of various varieties, however traditional chiropractors didn't manipulate to treat backpain. The association with lumbar manipulation was a happy accident for chiropractors, whose research was actually done by osteopaths and physical therapist researchers. Chiropractors quickly jumped on the band wagon.
 
Hastur said:
Well, my sister and mother both went to chiropractors for back problems and they were satisfied. However, they both would tell you the same thing as Penn and Teller: they're fine for back and neck problems. They are quacks if they go on about subluxations and claim they can cure bedwetting (among other things).
Click to expand...
Exactly.

As to the percentage of "legit" ones vs the I-can-cure-anything new agey ones, no idea on the % breakout, although my impression, at least here in the mid-Atlantic region, is that the % of legits is higher than many here imagine (maybe a lot of you are on the left coast? ;) ).

As for the quacks, there are quacks in all professions, including "regular" doctors and (gasp) scientists. That doesn't invalidate the worthwhile ones.
 
I would say that All Chiropractic practitioner ought to
1. Be expert in handling dislocation of other bodily joints.
2. Show in their office, the number of dislocation treatment he has successfully treated.

Chiropractic handles your spine with care.
So do a normal qualified medical doctor.
So why do we need a Chiropractic? Chiropractic must have a value-add.

As far as I know, normal medical doctor may be good at diagnosis and prescribing a proper medication. But I bet, they are, poor in handling a simple dislocation of joints. My encounter was that the doctor don't even bothered to treat my dislocation in my wrist. He just asked the nurses to do it. And they did not succeed despite many painful and feeble attempts. I think the doctor would do no better. In my case, a "famous" chinese joint dislocation specialist in old china town did the job. Quick, fast, single-handedly, confidence inspiring. I guess he do many cases every hour until he is quite skilled.

I think making it a mandatory requirement for Chiropractic to handle common limbs dislocation is good for the following reasons:

1. They fill a gap the normal doctors are poor in.

2. They get lots of practices, treating dislocation.

3. If they cannot even put back a simple dislocated arm, properly, painlessly, and confidently, all their customer will shy away from asking him to handle their spine.

4. If he is unpopular in treating normal dislocation of arm and leg joints, his certification should be reevaluated. If he is unable to handle joint dislocation, his knowledge about the spine is "useless". This is because normal doctor would be better positioned to handle it.

5.There would be more and more people doing high quality dislocation treatement.

6. More People will go to "chiropractor" for simple, basic once off dislocation treatment.

7. If the customer wishes to pay extra for daily message to aid the healing of a broken bone, it is up to them. At least we know that they are paying extra to a person who is an expert dislocation specialist.
 
Last edited:
My nominee for the #1 hoax is, of course, the basic principle upon
which the industry is based: the all-important, but nonexistent
subluxation itself. Without this concept chiropractic wouldn't exist
today. Bill Jarvis has written: "Without subluxation theory,
chiropractic's claim that it is a unique and comprehensive
'alternative' to standard medicine is lost." articles/c-d/chiro.html>

Then there's the rampant belief among chiropractors that vaccinations are unnecessary and dangerous. What's the percentage of them who espouse that notion these days - perhaps 50% or more?
Click to expand...


http://www.ssr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?1:mss:102453:acfjebnmhfmpnofcmipc

1. They fill a gap the normal doctors are poor in.
Click to expand...

This is not true. Doctors are not "poor in" this area at all. What would make you think that?


6. More People will go to "chiropractor" for simple, basic once off dislocation treatment.
Click to expand...
This will not happen. Chiros push for repeat business. They will convince you that you will have poor health unless you get regular maintenance appointments.

http://quackfiles.blogspot.com/2005/10/victims-of-chiropractic-contracts.html

2. They get lots of practices, treating dislocation.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence they do anything but pop air out of the back bone's joints. Subluxation does not exist. If your vertebrae were to really become dislocated you'd need a real MD, not some joint popper that would make a bad situation worse.

I know this is anecdotal, but the people in my life that see a chiro regularly are always in pain. There's never any permanent positive change. I've seen people misdiagnosed by a chiro go months in pain from a hernia. One finally couldn't stand it and saw an MD. He had to get surgery, yes. But a few months later he was running around like a new man. The chiro only caused prolonged pain.

Don't let those quacks touch your neck! A common thing a chiro will do for headaches is to crack your neck. This will twist arteries around in ways you could never imagine.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirostroke.html

http://quackfiles.blogspot.com/2006/12/must-see-dangers-of-chiropractic.html
 
skepdoc said:
I guess you guys do know what's going on. And yes the medically based chiropractors are in the major minority.
Click to expand...

There are no medically based chiros. They would have to "stop chasing the subluxation fairy" and join the mainstream in evidence based treatment to be medically based. That would mean they would no longer be chiros.

They are so darn popular though! Their education is heavily marketing based. We have a "World of Women" show every year in our city. Every year the quacks come out and do presentations...

Chiros are DCs, not MDs, but they are still allowed to call themselves "doctors". So, in their presentations they are "doctors". You don't hear the word "chiro" anywhere.

So, this one goes on about vitality. He has a nice film. He goes on about how he has the number one bestselling PRE-ORDERED not yet published book ever about the very topic of vitality and wellness. You can get a free copy...lemme tell you how! You want vitality right? So, just come put your finger in my machine so it can measure your vitality. This procedure only costs a hundred bucks, and will indicate which of my supplements you will need for optimum health and vitality!

AND you get a free copy of my (not yet published, but very pre-ordedered) book to boot! What an awesome deal!

Harumph :(
 
I've said this before, so won't labour it. I have dealt with one chiro. He greatly alleviated a neck problem, but had no effect on a lumbar one, (which later investigation suggests has an organic, not musculoskeletal origin). He was methodical, took detailed notes, asked many questions and listened to the answers. I saw nothing in any way "woo" and the word "subluxation"was not used, ever.
I saw him a handful of times over a few months for the first problem and go back once every year or two, as I feel necessary. I was never pressured into a course of sessions. Frankly, if all GPs were as accessible and responsive, I would be happier.
That said, I realise I'm comparing private treatment with NHS, but if I could find a GP I trusted for thirty quid a half hour session, I for one would be happy to visit every six months like I do the dentist.

All I'm saying is there are good ones. Maybe I was lucky. One is a small sample. They do backs and limbs, and as Jyera said, some of them do it well. If they claim they can fix your fallen arches or straighten your teeth, leave at once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom