The Intelligent & Relentless Pursuit of Muscle™
Get a Life
 
Doctor of Chiropractic?
 

batman730
Level

Join date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1253

sandos wrote:
EyeDentist wrote:
sandos wrote:
Now, if you want to go to a Chiropractor and get a back rub or your neck cracked and it feels good, go ahead. There is no harm in that.


Actually, high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) cervical manipulation (ie, having one's neck cracked) is associated with a small-but-nonzero risk of CVA secondary to vertebrobasilar artery dissection, carotid dissection, or mobilization of carotid plaque:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicin...


I remember a bodybuilder back in the day (I think it was Jim Quinn) had his neck broken while getting adjustments. It got progressively worse until he finally went to a real doctor to get diagnosed.



Even if this is 100% correct, it is estimated that 98 000 people die and 180 000 are severely injured each year in the US as a result of preventable medical errors committed by "real" doctors in real hospitals. It's the sixth largest killer in the country. Even presumably well-trained, well-meaning humans f@^k it up sometimes. Often apparently. That being said, I have tremendous respect for the medical profession as a whole, I just think the air of authority and infallibility attached to the word "doctor" is a little overblown.

Regardless of whether chiropractic is a legitimate treatment (I find it helpful, but that's not exactly clinically significant), pointing to one instance "back in the day" where a grievous error was made does not logically invalidate the profession as a whole. Where I live chiropractic is a 7 year course of study. In terms of duration it is pretty much on par with an optometrist, a dentist, a PhD and a couple of other people who are customarily referred to as "doctor" without raising any eyebrows.

My own chiro is an intelligent, professional well read guy who works with Olympic athletes and many other performance oriented people. He is also extremely fit and healthy looking himself and I would be much more interested in what he had to say about nutrition than any MD I've ever been to.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Smashingweights
Level

Join date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1650

Professor X wrote:
MikeTheBear wrote:
From what I understand, "oral surgery" involves anything tooth and gum related. Removing an impacted wisdom tooth falls under oral surgery as does doing a gum graft for receding gums (something my dentist has recommended). A dentist can perform oral surgery.

Maxillofacial surgery is a medical specialty involving reconstruction and repair of the face, which can involve repositioning the jaw and teeth. Many maxillofacial surgeons have both an MD and DDS or DMD - they are medical doctors as well as dentists given that there is substantial overlap in the fields.

This is my understanding of the distinction.



That is pretty much how it works.

The fact that you can now become an oral surgeon using dental school as equivalent to med school means they consider the education equal.

That's pretty cool.
I always just assumed "oral surgeons" were dentists with a specialized degree for the surgery part.
It would make sense to me to be a dentist first and foremost if you are going to be working inside people's mouths because, well, that's sorta their thing lol
Did you see my question in my other post Professor X?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

AC234
Level

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 2

I can only speak to Chiropractic Education in the United States.

Chiro education focuses on Anatomy, Physiology, Pathology, Kinesiology, Manipulation, and Therapy.

What is it? Where is it? How does it work? Is it working? Why not? Can I help? If not who can?

If a Chiropractor tells you they can treat any and all forms of disease alone, they were not taught that in school.

Don't take any medications: Not taught in school.
Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.
It's ok to stop taking medications prescribed by your MD: Not taught in school.
Take a ride on this magic machine and it fixes everything: Not taught in school.
Eat this magic dust and you will never have the sniffles again: Not taught in school.

Simply:
If little Johnny has the sniffles or needs a couple stitches I send him to his MD. If little Johnny can't pitch at the big game on Saturday because his shoulder is hurting or restricted, his MD sends him to me.

Chiros are taught to work WITH a patient's primary care Doc. Anyone refusing to refer out was not taught that in school and is a hack.

Should you go to a chiropractor as the primary treatment for your lung cancer? Of course not. If you are having joint or muscle pain associated with illness will I try to help you get out of pain while working WITH your Doc? Of course.

Medical schools are swarmed with vendors selling magic pills and equipment, as are chiro, dental, and podiatry schools.
If your MD says he has magic pills, he is a hack.
If your Chiro says he has a magic supplement, he is a hack.

Like other limited license care areas: Dentistry, Optometry, and Podiatry, Doctors of Chiropractic are certified and monitored by state and national boards. If you find someone being a hack, report them. Let them defend their license.

If your MD, Dentist, or Chiro makes a claim that you question, simply ask where they read it, and if you can have a copy.

An example: If you go to a doc with pain, and they hand you some crystals and incense, RUN!
-They were NOT taught this in school.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

AC234 wrote:

Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.


Thanks for the post. I want to reply more later, but I have a few free minutes and "googled" chiropractors and vaccinations. It seems a very high number of Chiropractors are (were?) against vaccinations. Earlier in this thread a soon-to-be chiropractor seemed to have serious trepidation about vaccinations. If it is not being taught in the chiropractic schools, where is it being taught? Why are so many chiropractors against vaccinations?

Article (2000) http://pediatrics.aappublicati...

Google search: https://www.google.com/...280&bih=685


Edit: you might find this exchange helpful. It seems like the other chiropractor here has claimed he was taught about this in school.

GL wrote
or what it's worth, I just checked this guys "professional" page where he has a link to a "no more vaccines " page that extols the "danger" of vaccination.

Can I safely assume that this is not taught in school?


Vaccinations are touchy. Chiropractic education teaches that we are to inform patients of the pros and cons of vaccines. Once I get into practice I'll have to do my own research on how I actually feel, but it will be my job to remain purely objective to my patients, regardless of my opinion.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

CroatianRage
Level 1

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 685

Gambit_Lost wrote:
AC234 wrote:

Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.


Thanks for the post. I want to reply more later, but I have a few free minutes and "googled" chiropractors and vaccinations. It seems a very high number of Chiropractors are (were?) against vaccinations. Earlier in this thread a soon-to-be chiropractor seemed to have serious trepidation about vaccinations. If it is not being taught in the chiropractic schools, where is it being taught? Why are so many chiropractors against vaccinations?

Article (2000) http://pediatrics.aappublicati...

Google search: https://www.google.com/...280&bih=685


I don't know about serious trepidation. I said that I have not formed an opinion on (certain) vaccinations personally. Even if I did, it would not factor into a patients choice to have their children vaccinated.

You didn't answer my question from before. How do you feel about medicine, and how did you come to that conclusion?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

CroatianRage wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
AC234 wrote:

Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.


Thanks for the post. I want to reply more later, but I have a few free minutes and "googled" chiropractors and vaccinations. It seems a very high number of Chiropractors are (were?) against vaccinations. Earlier in this thread a soon-to-be chiropractor seemed to have serious trepidation about vaccinations. If it is not being taught in the chiropractic schools, where is it being taught? Why are so many chiropractors against vaccinations?

Article (2000) http://pediatrics.aappublicati...

Google search: https://www.google.com/...280&bih=685


I don't know about serious trepidation. I said that I have not formed an opinion on (certain) vaccinations personally. Even if I did, it would not factor into a patients choice to have their children vaccinated.


I went back and read to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering...I was talking about your professional opinion based upon your schooling. Honestly, I found your switch to personal shocking. I assumed you were dodging because of a lack of scientific evidence to support your true belief.

You also made some comment about children biting (connecting the time they receive the vaccination to the time when they could contract it perhaps? A misunderstanding of the rationale behind vaccinations? Or perhaps a desire to push back the time a child is inoculated? ) and it seemed to me as you were saying it was talked about in chiropractic school, but outside the professional scope of chiropractors to advise.


You didn't answer my question from before. How do you feel about medicine, and how did you come to that conclusion?


Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean about "medicine." Could you elaborate and perhaps I can answer in a more complete fashion. In short though, I see medicine the same way I see food: something that is added to the body to produce a result. I came to this belief via trial-error and research. ...I was very young when I first found erowid, for example. As I grew older, I moved on to more scientific sources.

What I see as the largest difference in our personal beliefs, however, seems to be my support and acceptance of science-based medical care, and your belief that science-based research/medical-care is not important, at least to chiropractic.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

CroatianRage
Level 1

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 685

Gambit_Lost wrote:
CroatianRage wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
AC234 wrote:

Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.


Thanks for the post. I want to reply more later, but I have a few free minutes and "googled" chiropractors and vaccinations. It seems a very high number of Chiropractors are (were?) against vaccinations. Earlier in this thread a soon-to-be chiropractor seemed to have serious trepidation about vaccinations. If it is not being taught in the chiropractic schools, where is it being taught? Why are so many chiropractors against vaccinations?

Article (2000) http://pediatrics.aappublicati...

Google search: https://www.google.com/...280&bih=685


I don't know about serious trepidation. I said that I have not formed an opinion on (certain) vaccinations personally. Even if I did, it would not factor into a patients choice to have their children vaccinated.


I went back and read to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering...I was talking about your professional opinion based upon your schooling. Honestly, I found your switch to personal shocking. I assumed you were dodging because of a lack of scientific evidence to support your true belief.

You also made some comment about children biting (connecting the time they receive the vaccination to the time when they could contract it perhaps? A misunderstanding of the rationale behind vaccinations? Or perhaps a desire to push back the time a child is inoculated? ) and it seemed to me as you were saying it was talked about in chiropractic school, but outside the professional scope of chiropractors to advise.


You didn't answer my question from before. How do you feel about medicine, and how did you come to that conclusion?


Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean about "medicine." Could you elaborate and perhaps I can answer in a more complete fashion. In short though, I see medicine the same way I see food: something that is added to the body to produce a result. I came to this belief via trial-error and research. ...I was very young when I first found erowid, for example. As I grew older, I moved on to more scientific sources.

What I see as the largest difference in our personal beliefs, however, seems to be my support and acceptance of science-based medical care, and your belief that science-based research/medical-care is not important, at least to chiropractic.



I must be choosing my words poorly if that is what you've taken from this. If I've said I don't support science based medical care then I've misspoken. I do, however, strongly believe that if an individual doesn't require medical intervention then it is a doctor's duty to withhold it. I also think that if there is a more conservative option to take then you should be informed of it (it is required in our informed consent, I can't speak of MD informed consent). Your comparison of food and medicine, in my opinion, is also way off base and I think should be reconsidered.

My question about medicine was to ask how you deal with medical intervention on your own body. If you have a condition that isn't life threatening, for example, would you take medicine to fix it immediately or run a trial of lifestyle modification first? Would you ever put your child on Prozac or Adderall?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

setto222
Level

Join date: Nov 2012
Posts: 438

AC234 wrote:
I can only speak to Chiropractic Education in the United States.

Chiro education focuses on Anatomy, Physiology, Pathology, Kinesiology, Manipulation, and Therapy.

What is it? Where is it? How does it work? Is it working? Why not? Can I help? If not who can?

If a Chiropractor tells you they can treat any and all forms of disease alone, they were not taught that in school.

Don't take any medications: Not taught in school.
Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.
It's ok to stop taking medications prescribed by your MD: Not taught in school.
Take a ride on this magic machine and it fixes everything: Not taught in school.
Eat this magic dust and you will never have the sniffles again: Not taught in school.

Simply:
If little Johnny has the sniffles or needs a couple stitches I send him to his MD. If little Johnny can't pitch at the big game on Saturday because his shoulder is hurting or restricted, his MD sends him to me.

Chiros are taught to work WITH a patient's primary care Doc. Anyone refusing to refer out was not taught that in school and is a hack.

Should you go to a chiropractor as the primary treatment for your lung cancer? Of course not. If you are having joint or muscle pain associated with illness will I try to help you get out of pain while working WITH your Doc? Of course.

Medical schools are swarmed with vendors selling magic pills and equipment, as are chiro, dental, and podiatry schools.
If your MD says he has magic pills, he is a hack.
If your Chiro says he has a magic supplement, he is a hack.

Like other limited license care areas: Dentistry, Optometry, and Podiatry, Doctors of Chiropractic are certified and monitored by state and national boards. If you find someone being a hack, report them. Let them defend their license.

If your MD, Dentist, or Chiro makes a claim that you question, simply ask where they read it, and if you can have a copy.

An example: If you go to a doc with pain, and they hand you some crystals and incense, RUN!
-They were NOT taught this in school.


I know of a few MD/DOs who have lost their licence for the above but not of many chiros.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

CroatianRage wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
CroatianRage wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
AC234 wrote:

Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.


Thanks for the post. I want to reply more later, but I have a few free minutes and "googled" chiropractors and vaccinations. It seems a very high number of Chiropractors are (were?) against vaccinations. Earlier in this thread a soon-to-be chiropractor seemed to have serious trepidation about vaccinations. If it is not being taught in the chiropractic schools, where is it being taught? Why are so many chiropractors against vaccinations?

Article (2000) http://pediatrics.aappublicati...

Google search: https://www.google.com/...280&bih=685


I don't know about serious trepidation. I said that I have not formed an opinion on (certain) vaccinations personally. Even if I did, it would not factor into a patients choice to have their children vaccinated.


I went back and read to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering...I was talking about your professional opinion based upon your schooling. Honestly, I found your switch to personal shocking. I assumed you were dodging because of a lack of scientific evidence to support your true belief.

You also made some comment about children biting (connecting the time they receive the vaccination to the time when they could contract it perhaps? A misunderstanding of the rationale behind vaccinations? Or perhaps a desire to push back the time a child is inoculated? ) and it seemed to me as you were saying it was talked about in chiropractic school, but outside the professional scope of chiropractors to advise.


You didn't answer my question from before. How do you feel about medicine, and how did you come to that conclusion?


Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean about "medicine." Could you elaborate and perhaps I can answer in a more complete fashion. In short though, I see medicine the same way I see food: something that is added to the body to produce a result. I came to this belief via trial-error and research. ...I was very young when I first found erowid, for example. As I grew older, I moved on to more scientific sources.

What I see as the largest difference in our personal beliefs, however, seems to be my support and acceptance of science-based medical care, and your belief that science-based research/medical-care is not important, at least to chiropractic.



I must be choosing my words poorly if that is what you've taken from this. If I've said I don't support science based medical care then I've misspoken. I do, however, strongly believe that if an individual doesn't require medical intervention then it is a doctor's duty to withhold it. I also think that if there is a more conservative option to take then you should be informed of it (it is required in our informed consent, I can't speak of MD informed consent). Your comparison of food and medicine, in my opinion, is also way off base and I think should be reconsidered.

My question about medicine was to ask how you deal with medical intervention on your own body. If you have a condition that isn't life threatening, for example, would you take medicine to fix it immediately or run a trial of lifestyle modification first? Would you ever put your child on Prozac or Adderall?


Thanks again for your posts. Am I misunderstanding your posts? I feel like I am not. Perhaps this is what the philosophical differences between us?

Please explain your professional beliefs about vaccinations (not personal). Please explain why your doctoral-level schooling has left you unable to make a professional determination/recommendation (I believe you said you wanted to do more study) and please answer if you think advising about vaccinations is within or outside the scope of D.C.s. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't know if you have answered this yet specifically.

The reason I'm asking these questions is because so many D.C.s (including the one who got me thinking about this and thus started this thread) are marketing themselves as "doctors" and not really explaining the difference in-between and MD and a DC. They ARE giving medical advice that I believe is outside of their professional purview, and doing so under the mantra of "doctor" (*cough*DC-not-MD*cough*). Vaccinations seem to cut to the heart of my concern. I don't see a science-based defense of advising against taking vaccinations. Nor do I see a science-based rationale for highlighting the "cons" while limiting the explanation of the "pros".

Further, does your school still teach the Subluxation Theory? Do you believe it? If so could you explain the science-based rationale? (a link perhaps?) If not, could you explain the rationale for chiropractic without it?

Thank you again for your time and your posts. You have greatly helped me to begin to understand your field of study.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

CroatianRage wrote:

Your comparison of food and medicine, in my opinion, is also way off base and I think should be reconsidered.

My question about medicine was to ask how you deal with medical intervention on your own body. If you have a condition that isn't life threatening, for example, would you take medicine to fix it immediately or run a trial of lifestyle modification first? Would you ever put your child on Prozac or Adderall?


Please feel free to help me reconsider. What are your objections? What should I reconsider?

Re: Non-life-threatening: For example, Wednesday night I did some boxing, bear crawls, and other things that left me VERY sore Thursday morning. My neck and shoulders hurt (muscular). When I woke up, I took some pain-killers and warmed-up, did some stretches. At night, before sleep, I took the same pain-killers again and put some icy-hot-style cream on my neck.
...is this what you are looking for? I used both medicine and exercise to limit pain. I plan to do mobility drills and other "shoulder saver" exercises today for longevity in weightlifting.

I'm not familiar with prozac (no experience or research), but I would certainly consider ADHD medication if my child were afflicted. I've seen other children for whom the medicine worked well. What are you getting at?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Testy1
Level 4

Join date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3891

Gambit_Lost wrote:
Vaccinations seem to cut to the heart of my concern. I don't see a science-based defense of advising against taking vaccinations. Nor do I see a science-based rationale for highlighting the "cons" while limiting the explanation of the "pros".



While on average it is rare, people do die and/or have catastrophic reactions from vaccinations. This is something that the medical community greatly downplays.

I understand that in general they are good for society but that is not very reassuring if your child is the statistic. For the record, my children are fully vaccinated but it was a tough decision whether to get them all or not.

Further not all vaccines are created equal. Doctors were really pushing the varicella (chicken pox)vaccine and a year later it was pulled from the market.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

Testy1 wrote:

Further not all vaccines are created equal. Doctors were really pushing the varicella (chicken pox)vaccine and a year later it was pulled from the market.


Do you have a link? I just googled it. From a 2 minute search, I must question the veracity of this statement. It seems to still be available and promoted.

http://www.cdc.gov/...fault-basic.htm

EDIT:
I DON'T know about this. I literally only spent about 2 minutes looking into this and it seems wrong. Was it pulled and then put back out? What do you mean? Could you provide a science-based explanation?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Testy1
Level 4

Join date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3891

Gambit_Lost wrote:
Testy1 wrote:

Further not all vaccines are created equal. Doctors were really pushing the varicella (chicken pox)vaccine and a year later it was pulled from the market.


Do you have a link? I just googled it. From a 2 minute search, I must question the veracity of this statement. It seems to still be available and promoted.

http://www.cdc.gov/...fault-basic.htm

EDIT:
I DON'T know about this. I literally only spent about 2 minutes looking into this and it seems wrong. Was it pulled and then put back out? What do you mean? Could you provide a science-based explanation?


Hmm, I thought it was varicella. I will have to look into it more. I distinctly recall my kids pediatrician pushing a non essential vaccine and then it getting pulled.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

CroatianRage
Level 1

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 685

http://www.acatoday.org/...#firstSearchHit

This is the ACAs public policy for anyone who is interested.

On vaccination:
Resolved, that the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) recognize and advise the public that:
Since the scientific community acknowledges that the use of vaccines is not without risk, the American Chiropractic Association supports each individual's right to freedom of choice in his/her own health care based on an informed awareness of the benefits and possible adverse effects of VACCINATION. The ACA is supportive of a conscience clause or waiver in compulsory VACCINATION laws thereby maintaining an individual's right to freedom of choice in health care matters and providing an alternative elective course of action regarding VACCINATION. (Ratified by the House of Delegates, July 1993, Revised and Ratified June 1998).

Is this consistent to what I said before?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

CroatianRage
Level 1

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 685

Gambit_Lost wrote:
CroatianRage wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
CroatianRage wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
AC234 wrote:

Don't get vaccinated: Not taught in School.


Thanks for the post. I want to reply more later, but I have a few free minutes and "googled" chiropractors and vaccinations. It seems a very high number of Chiropractors are (were?) against vaccinations. Earlier in this thread a soon-to-be chiropractor seemed to have serious trepidation about vaccinations. If it is not being taught in the chiropractic schools, where is it being taught? Why are so many chiropractors against vaccinations?

Article (2000) http://pediatrics.aappublicati...

Google search: https://www.google.com/...280&bih=685


I don't know about serious trepidation. I said that I have not formed an opinion on (certain) vaccinations personally. Even if I did, it would not factor into a patients choice to have their children vaccinated.


I went back and read to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering...I was talking about your professional opinion based upon your schooling. Honestly, I found your switch to personal shocking. I assumed you were dodging because of a lack of scientific evidence to support your true belief.

You also made some comment about children biting (connecting the time they receive the vaccination to the time when they could contract it perhaps? A misunderstanding of the rationale behind vaccinations? Or perhaps a desire to push back the time a child is inoculated? ) and it seemed to me as you were saying it was talked about in chiropractic school, but outside the professional scope of chiropractors to advise.


You didn't answer my question from before. How do you feel about medicine, and how did you come to that conclusion?


Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean about "medicine." Could you elaborate and perhaps I can answer in a more complete fashion. In short though, I see medicine the same way I see food: something that is added to the body to produce a result. I came to this belief via trial-error and research. ...I was very young when I first found erowid, for example. As I grew older, I moved on to more scientific sources.

What I see as the largest difference in our personal beliefs, however, seems to be my support and acceptance of science-based medical care, and your belief that science-based research/medical-care is not important, at least to chiropractic.



I must be choosing my words poorly if that is what you've taken from this. If I've said I don't support science based medical care then I've misspoken. I do, however, strongly believe that if an individual doesn't require medical intervention then it is a doctor's duty to withhold it. I also think that if there is a more conservative option to take then you should be informed of it (it is required in our informed consent, I can't speak of MD informed consent). Your comparison of food and medicine, in my opinion, is also way off base and I think should be reconsidered.

My question about medicine was to ask how you deal with medical intervention on your own body. If you have a condition that isn't life threatening, for example, would you take medicine to fix it immediately or run a trial of lifestyle modification first? Would you ever put your child on Prozac or Adderall?


Thanks again for your posts. Am I misunderstanding your posts? I feel like I am not. Perhaps this is what the philosophical differences between us?

Please explain your professional beliefs about vaccinations (not personal). Please explain why your doctoral-level schooling has left you unable to make a professional determination/recommendation (I believe you said you wanted to do more study) and please answer if you think advising about vaccinations is within or outside the scope of D.C.s. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't know if you have answered this yet specifically.

The reason I'm asking these questions is because so many D.C.s (including the one who got me thinking about this and thus started this thread) are marketing themselves as "doctors" and not really explaining the difference in-between and MD and a DC. They ARE giving medical advice that I believe is outside of their professional purview, and doing so under the mantra of "doctor" (*cough*DC-not-MD*cough*). Vaccinations seem to cut to the heart of my concern. I don't see a science-based defense of advising against taking vaccinations. Nor do I see a science-based rationale for highlighting the "cons" while limiting the explanation of the "pros".

Further, does your school still teach the Subluxation Theory? Do you believe it? If so could you explain the science-based rationale? (a link perhaps?) If not, could you explain the rationale for chiropractic without it?

Thank you again for your time and your posts. You have greatly helped me to begin to understand your field of study.


The subluxation theory has been around for over 100 years and remains (whether anyone likes it or not) a key component in Chiropractic. Subluxation can easily be exchanged with intersegmental dysfunction, hypomobile joint, joint restriction, etc. In our school clinic the diagnosis is VSC (vertebral subluxation complex). In practice I will probably not use the term subluxation because it turns a lot of people off and I don't like it. Whatever you want to call it, it is defined in ISD-9 as a nonallopathic lesion and coded as 739.0, 739.1 and so on, depending on the body part.

The reason I don't personally like subluxation is that it is associated with other terms like bone out of place, misalignment, and nerve compression. In biomechanical terms, all spinal joints move through X, Y, and Z planes. We compare each joint bilaterally and if it is deficient on one side compared to another then a restriction is noted. Other objective signs are also noted, such as posture, muscle hypertonicity, asymmetry, etc. Depending on the patients symptoms we perform indicated orthopedic tests and may take Xrays. This objective data combined with earlier subjective data (patient history) is then used to make an assessment and create a treatment plan which may include any, all, or none of the following: Chiropractic adjustments, rehab exercise, manual therapy, physiotherapy, or any other specialty the Chiro is competent in. After the treatment plan is over the patient is reassessed and the process starts all over again with the goal of reaching maximum medical improvement as quickly as possible.

As for Chiro theory I like dysafferentation proposed by Korr. If you google it quite a bit comes up. I asked one of the professors in our research department to provide me with some articles that I will post later if you are interested.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

CroatianRage
Level 1

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 685

Gambit_Lost wrote:
CroatianRage wrote:

Your comparison of food and medicine, in my opinion, is also way off base and I think should be reconsidered.

My question about medicine was to ask how you deal with medical intervention on your own body. If you have a condition that isn't life threatening, for example, would you take medicine to fix it immediately or run a trial of lifestyle modification first? Would you ever put your child on Prozac or Adderall?


Please feel free to help me reconsider. What are your objections? What should I reconsider?

Re: Non-life-threatening: For example, Wednesday night I did some boxing, bear crawls, and other things that left me VERY sore Thursday morning. My neck and shoulders hurt (muscular). When I woke up, I took some pain-killers and warmed-up, did some stretches. At night, before sleep, I took the same pain-killers again and put some icy-hot-style cream on my neck.
...is this what you are looking for? I used both medicine and exercise to limit pain. I plan to do mobility drills and other "shoulder saver" exercises today for longevity in weightlifting.

I'm not familiar with prozac (no experience or research), but I would certainly consider ADHD medication if my child were afflicted. I've seen other children for whom the medicine worked well. What are you getting at?


You and I seem to just hold different opinions on medication. I typically avoid medication when not necessary and will usually just wear the discomfort or pain. To be fair, I also can usually receive some sort of Chiropractic care within a short period of time at no cost. My question was a sort of probe to see how readily you would take medication or give it to your children. Testy said something to the tune of, it is a lot different when your child is the statistic, which resonates with me.

Food and medicine serve two completely different purposes. Food in the body creates a situation in which physiological processes can continue. Pharmaceuticals, OTC or otherwise, either modify a physiological process or block a pathological process. Medicine in the body always comes with unintended consequences of varying severity. Aspirin inhibits the pathway for creation of prostaglandins to relieve pain, but it also inhibits pumps in the stomach causing ulcers. Food can also have unintended consequences, but only when abused.

I would certainly not judge those in pain for taking pain killers or muscle relaxers, but I would advise them, if at all possible, to use them sparingly. This only goes for pain medication as it would be illegal for me to tamper with dosing of prescribed medicine.

As always, feel free to let me know if I've caused any confusion or am talking out of my ass. Please keep in mind that I in no way represent the Chiropractic profession as a whole, but I do hope that what I'm saying represents myself accurately.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

First, thanks for taking the time to write that. I hardly know anything about D.C. and I think I'm learning.

I'll try to get to as much of this as I can, but then I'm off for the weekend w/o internet access, so hopefully I can puck this up next week if you (or others) still have time.

I wrote:

Please explain your professional beliefs about vaccinations (not personal). Please explain why your doctoral-level schooling has left you unable to make a professional determination/recommendation (I believe you said you wanted to do more study) and please answer if you think advising about vaccinations is within or outside the scope of D.C.s. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't know if you have answered this yet specifically.

The reason I'm asking these questions is because so many D.C.s (including the one who got me thinking about this and thus started this thread) are marketing themselves as "doctors" and not really explaining the difference in-between and MD and a DC. They ARE giving medical advice that I believe is outside of their professional purview, and doing so under the mantra of "doctor" (*cough*DC-not-MD*cough*). Vaccinations seem to cut to the heart of my concern. I don't see a science-based defense of advising against taking vaccinations. Nor do I see a science-based rationale for highlighting the "cons" while limiting the explanation of the "pros".


CroatianRage wrote:
http://www.acatoday.org/...#firstSearchHit

This is the ACAs public policy for anyone who is interested.

On vaccination:
Resolved, that the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) recognize and advise the public that:
Since the scientific community acknowledges that the use of vaccines is not without risk, the American Chiropractic Association supports each individual's right to freedom of choice in his/her own health care based on an informed awareness of the benefits and possible adverse effects of VACCINATION. The ACA is supportive of a conscience clause or waiver in compulsory VACCINATION laws thereby maintaining an individual's right to freedom of choice in health care matters and providing an alternative elective course of action regarding VACCINATION. (Ratified by the House of Delegates, July 1993, Revised and Ratified June 1998).

Is this consistent to what I said before?


This is consistent. However, you have not come close to answering my questions. I cannot help but note there was no attempt at a scientific explanation. My understanding is that this is a common issue with D.C.s.

Would you consider yourself to be a "mixer?"
The rhetoric of Mixers indicates that they are attempting to become accepted into the scientific mainstream, rather than replace scientifically based medicine with a philosophy based approach. They no longer openly oppose immunization, like straights do, but they do advocate the freedom to choose whether or not to be immunized. Their appeal to freedom is emotionally effective, especially in the United States, but it fails to recognize that immunization is far less effective in eliminating or containing infectious diseases when it is not given to everyone. They also advocate a role for chiropractors as a primary care portal of entry system within HealthCare, despite the fact that they lack adequate training as generalists skilled in medical diagnosis.
http://www.sciencebasedmedicin...

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

CroatianRage wrote:
You and I seem to just hold different opinions on medication. I typically avoid medication when not necessary and will usually just wear the discomfort or pain. To be fair, I also can usually receive some sort of Chiropractic care within a short period of time at no cost. My question was a sort of probe to see how readily you would take medication or give it to your children. Testy said something to the tune of, it is a lot different when your child is the statistic, which resonates with me.

Food and medicine serve two completely different purposes. Food in the body creates a situation in which physiological processes can continue. Pharmaceuticals, OTC or otherwise, either modify a physiological process or block a pathological process. Medicine in the body always comes with unintended consequences of varying severity. Aspirin inhibits the pathway for creation of prostaglandins to relieve pain, but it also inhibits pumps in the stomach causing ulcers. Food can also have unintended consequences, but only when abused.

I would certainly not judge those in pain for taking pain killers or muscle relaxers, but I would advise them, if at all possible, to use them sparingly. This only goes for pain medication as it would be illegal for me to tamper with dosing of prescribed medicine.

As always, feel free to let me know if I've caused any confusion or am talking out of my ass. Please keep in mind that I in no way represent the Chiropractic profession as a whole, but I do hope that what I'm saying represents myself accurately.


I'm certainly not qualified to discuss "what medicine is" but perhaps you could share your ideas. Where is the line you are drawing between food and medicine? Is coffee food? What about a caffeine pill? I "eat/use" whey protein every day; I consider it food. What about you? Other supplements? I often drink beer, is it a drug? Medicine? or Food?

Also, why did you bring up ADHD medication earlier? Do you feel D.C.s are qualified to offer their opinions on these drugs? THis would be another case where I would think that a D.C.s education is inadequate to offer a professional opinion.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

CroatianRage
Level 1

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 685

Gambit_Lost wrote:
First, thanks for taking the time to write that. I hardly know anything about D.C. and I think I'm learning.

I'll try to get to as much of this as I can, but then I'm off for the weekend w/o internet access, so hopefully I can puck this up next week if you (or others) still have time.

I wrote:
Please explain your professional beliefs about vaccinations (not personal). Please explain why your doctoral-level schooling has left you unable to make a professional determination/recommendation (I believe you said you wanted to do more study) and please answer if you think advising about vaccinations is within or outside the scope of D.C.s. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't know if you have answered this yet specifically.

The reason I'm asking these questions is because so many D.C.s (including the one who got me thinking about this and thus started this thread) are marketing themselves as "doctors" and not really explaining the difference in-between and MD and a DC. They ARE giving medical advice that I believe is outside of their professional purview, and doing so under the mantra of "doctor" (*cough*DC-not-MD*cough*). Vaccinations seem to cut to the heart of my concern. I don't see a science-based defense of advising against taking vaccinations. Nor do I see a science-based rationale for highlighting the "cons" while limiting the explanation of the "pros".


CroatianRage wrote:
http://www.acatoday.org/...#firstSearchHit

This is the ACAs public policy for anyone who is interested.

On vaccination:
Resolved, that the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) recognize and advise the public that:
Since the scientific community acknowledges that the use of vaccines is not without risk, the American Chiropractic Association supports each individual's right to freedom of choice in his/her own health care based on an informed awareness of the benefits and possible adverse effects of VACCINATION. The ACA is supportive of a conscience clause or waiver in compulsory VACCINATION laws thereby maintaining an individual's right to freedom of choice in health care matters and providing an alternative elective course of action regarding VACCINATION. (Ratified by the House of Delegates, July 1993, Revised and Ratified June 1998).

Is this consistent to what I said before?


This is consistent. However, you have not come close to answering my questions. I cannot help but note there was no attempt at a scientific explanation. My understanding is that this is a common issue with D.C.s.

Would you consider yourself to be a "mixer?"
The rhetoric of Mixers indicates that they are attempting to become accepted into the scientific mainstream, rather than replace scientifically based medicine with a philosophy based approach. They no longer openly oppose immunization, like straights do, but they do advocate the freedom to choose whether or not to be immunized. Their appeal to freedom is emotionally effective, especially in the United States, but it fails to recognize that immunization is far less effective in eliminating or containing infectious diseases when it is not given to everyone. They also advocate a role for chiropractors as a primary care portal of entry system within HealthCare, despite the fact that they lack adequate training as generalists skilled in medical diagnosis.
http://www.sciencebasedmedicin...



I don't understand what you want a scientific explanation of. DC public policy on vaccinations is to advise patients they have a choice because vaccines may cause adverse reactions (which they do, which is not rebutted). Patients (almost) always have a choice of what a practitioner does to them. If DCs are influencing patients decisions on vaccinations they are acting on their own accord and, from the way I see it, outside of the public policy of the ACA and what was taught in Chiropractic curriculum. We are also taught not to claim to cure visceral ailments. Unfortunately, some do not follow the rules, which should not be a reflection on me, just as I am not upon them.

I don't associate myself with being straight or mixer or any of that other nonsense. Labeling myself as any of those would be exactly that, a label. I will be an neuromusculoskeletal specialist dealing with conditions affecting that system using the various techniques and modalities at my disposal. Articles on the website you posted that are relevant to Chiropractic are from what I've seen all dismissive and insulting. Peer review can be done without sinking to that level. Posters on that site and some other posters here have tried to pigeonhole both myself and the Chiropractic profession with little to no knowledge of it.

Kelly Starrett is a DPT and coach who created mobilityWOD. The majority of his exercises focus on some sort of MFR and static stretching--two things people cry have inconclusive literature. His rebuttal is perfect, test then retest, you be the judge. Any Chiro should have objective findings that they are trying to change. If they don't, they aren't doing their job. "Patient feels better" isn't a successful treatment. "Patient is able to squat without hip pain" or "Patient ROM restored to equal bilaterally" is what we look for.

"They also advocate a role for chiropractors as a primary care portal of entry system within HealthCare, despite the fact that they lack adequate training as generalists skilled in medical diagnosis." I would be interested to know how the author came to this conclusion.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

theBird
Level

Join date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4556

Bird's 2 cents:

I studied a science based degree for 5 years and I am a keen fan of evidence based science. However I visit a osteopath(who started off by doing his chiro degree) about once a month for various back troubles I have (usually lower back). He was recommended by my girlfriend, and I was very sceptical as I had visited chiros previously before and they offered me very little relief.

I dont know what this guy exactly does but it involves me lying on my stomach while he pushes and prods my back, and does a few cracks here and there, and I am 100% convinced that whatever he does helps.

Im now without lower back pain 90% of the time, and will continue to visit this guy at least once a month


*tweet*

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

AC234
Level

Join date: May 2013
Posts: 2

I only heard the terms straights and mixers one time. In a chiro history class the first semester of school. Tons of old info out there from tons of old docs. Imagine doctors performing bleedings to treat infection while antibiotics exist. There are dinosaurs in this profession too.

In the course of any education personal opinions are injected.
What is important is when tested in class, or by the certifying
body, the most widely held, evidence based position is the correct
answer. That is my experience in class, and on national chiro boards.

It is the responsibility of those entering the profession now to promote and publish the most current research as well as dismissing that which is no longer held to be true.

History of many of the pioneers of systems and schools are an entertaining read. They are fun to discuss in class when compared to techniques and educational requirements of today. Some of those old tech films are crazy violent and draw no shortage of covered eyes and cringing in history class.

People skeptical of chiropractic care are only drawing those conclusions because of the professions anemic efforts to promote the latest research, and certainly it's lack of visibility in mainstream healthcare systems. A lot of time has been spent making excuses about suppression and monopoly. Wilk vs the AMA was long ago. Time to research and publish harder and faster.

Chiropractic is a conservative and practical approach to treat and prevent muscle and joint problems.
Sometimes a more aggressive approach like surgery is appropriate.

The currently educational system teaches just that. If you have a patient who is not being helped by conservative care, you refer them up the chain. Anyone who doesn't do that puts the patient an their license at risk.



  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Gambit_Lost
Level 3

Join date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3949

1st, thanks again for your time.
2nd, one of my posts seems to have disappeared...oh well, maybe I didn't post it properly before leaving for the weekend.

A quick post:

CroatianRage wrote:

I don't understand what you want a scientific explanation of.


I'd like a scientific explanation of your claims:
Vaccines can't be lumped into a single category. They're touchy due to the nature they are administered, the preservatives in them, and the amount people now receive. I don't know how I feel about them because I currently don't have children. [...] For example, I understand the importance of the MMR, or smallpox, or polio vaccines. I do not, however, understand why every 2 year old needs a hepatitis B vaccine (from my understanding it is due to bite risks from daycare).



DC public policy on vaccinations is to advise patients they have a choice because vaccines may cause adverse reactions (which they do, which is not rebutted). Patients (almost) always have a choice of what a practitioner does to them.


Do you offer the same advice regarding chiropractic procedures? Aren't the incidences of adverse reactions to vaccines LESS THAN those of adverse reactions to chiropractic treatment?

If DCs are influencing patients decisions on vaccinations they are acting on their own accord and, from the way I see it, outside of the public policy of the ACA and what was taught in Chiropractic curriculum. We are also taught not to claim to cure visceral ailments. Unfortunately, some do not follow the rules, which should not be a reflection on me, just as I am not upon them.


Are their licences being stripped? I start this thread because of a chiropractor making pubic claims that mastectomies (or at least AJ's) are unnecessary and that vaccines are not needed. Is he in any danger of having his licence stripped from him? If he was an MD, would it be?


I don't associate myself with being straight or mixer or any of that other nonsense. Labeling myself as any of those would be exactly that, a label. I will be an neuromusculoskeletal specialist dealing with conditions affecting that system using the various techniques and modalities at my disposal. Articles on the website you posted that are relevant to Chiropractic are from what I've seen all dismissive and insulting. Peer review can be done without sinking to that level. Posters on that site and some other posters here have tried to pigeonhole both myself and the Chiropractic profession with little to no knowledge of it.


Can you use science-based explanations to refute their claims?

Kelly Starrett is a DPT and coach who created mobilityWOD. The majority of his exercises focus on some sort of MFR and static stretching--two things people cry have inconclusive literature. His rebuttal is perfect, test then retest, you be the judge. Any Chiro should have objective findings that they are trying to change. If they don't, they aren't doing their job. "Patient feels better" isn't a successful treatment. "Patient is able to squat without hip pain" or "Patient ROM restored to equal bilaterally" is what we look for.


Kelly Starrett is a Doctor of Physical Therapy {DPT), not a Doctor of Chiropractic. From what I understand a DPTs do use science-based medicine. Are you arguing that your profession needs to learn from Physical Therapists?

Thanks for the link by the way, it looks like a great website.

"They also advocate a role for chiropractors as a primary care portal of entry system within HealthCare, despite the fact that they lack adequate training as generalists skilled in medical diagnosis." I would be interested to know how the author came to this conclusion.


Which conclusion? That they are advocating for a role in Primary care portal or that they lack adequate training as generalists skilled in medical diagnosis?

Are you claiming that a DC has adequate training as a generalist skilled in medical diagnosis?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report