Doctor of Chiropractic?

Off Topic
101

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

Thanks for the post and your time. I do have some questions:

1a) In your studies, how much did you “get into” food/diets?

1b) In your professional opinion, are chiropractors properly educated/qualified to be giving medical advice? (re: the breast cancer scenario I wrote above)

  1. Do you, personally/professionally, believe that “proper diet” could produce have the same outcomes as a double mastectomy?

  2. What is an equivalent degree to yours? An M.S.? An M.A.? A Ph.D.? Are the rigors of study equivalent?

  3. Is it ethical for a D.C. to label themselves as “Dr. Smith” when giving dietary and/or medical advice/opinion?

    What I mean by this last question is, I have given nutrition advice to a lot of my friends/family, but I have NEVER claimed to be a qualified doctor. A good friend of mine is a Ph.D. in English. If she were to go by “Dr. Smith” and give nutrition advice, I would find that difficult to accept, ethically speaking. Should I hold the same standards for a D.C.?

[/quote]

1a) We take biochemistry 1 and 2, nutrition, and clinical nutrition. All together they were pretty poor. Kind of a side note, much of what a doctor does in their practice is learned from seminars outside of school. Some choose to focus on nutrition, which seems to be your scenario. Not my cup of tea, however.

1b) I kind of have to be careful on this one because it is tricky. AJ did not have breast cancer, just a high chance of developing it. I personally don’t think it would be okay to advise a patient one way or another, but it would be the DCs duty to educate the patient if capable. In my opinion, with most visceral issues it is always best to defer to an MD. i.e. We are not allowed to take a patient off blood pressure medication, but we are allowed to suggest to them to talk to their doctor about it–but once again, not my cup of tea.

  1. Diet may be one of the largest influencing factors on whether or not a patient develops cancer. I believe this is over a lifetime though. This is difficult again though, because she didn’t actually have cancer if I recall. This DC seems to have been making a pretty extraordinary claim nevertheless.

  2. I will have a doctorate degree. I don’t really know what to compare it to. People will call me Dr. and I won’t feel bad about it. We average about 25 hours per trimester (10-12 to graduate) and then have to meet certain numbers in clinic before we may graduate. Watered down or not, it is an extremely large time commitment for 4 years.

  3. Eh, it’s not unethical. They should probably state they are a Chiropractor though. Some Chiros are on the cutting edge of nutrition, some should keep their advice to themselves. Keep in mind, it is within the scope of practice for a DC to offer nutritional advice. Although, when a doctor creates a situation in which one can reasonably assume a Dr./patient relationship (i.e. your example: “I’m a Dr. do this”) they are thereafter liable for all consequences of their advice. So if guy says don’t get a mastectomy just eat blah blah and the girl gets breast cancer, then he can expect a call from a lawyer.[/quote]

Thanks for your time and opinions. If (when?) people jump on you in this thread, please remember this in the internet… and ignore. I truly appreciate your taking the time to write to me.

For 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? [/quote]

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. I’ve seen some of the anti-Chiropractic sentiment on this site–the best revenge is to live well.

102

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:
PX, do you ever have TMJ issues come into your office? If so, how do you handle the situation? A buddy of mine in class has a job lined up with a dentist a couple days a week to manage his patients with TMJ dysfunction.[/quote]

First method for me is to stay conservative with treatment. Watch and observe or try an appliance to aid in tooth grinding at night. Surgery is a very risky option due to joint complexity.[/quote]

Apart from the mouthpiece have you ever done rehab yourself or referred out for it? I’ve taken a TMJ rehabilitation seminar and am curious how dentists approach this issue. You all might be surprised that adjusting the joint is considered a last resort, at least as far as this seminar went.[/quote]

Most refer out if it becomes more complicated. I have dealt with many cases.

No, it doesn’t surprise me…because that joint is one of the most complex joints in the human body (next to the knee and it still comes in first).

103

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Are “dental surgery” and “oral surgery” the same thing?[/quote]

Yes. No one calls it “dental surgery”. [/quote]
So it’s oral surgery and oral surgeon not dental surgery and dental surgeon?
I know you have stated repeatedly that you use scalpels and sutures on a daily basis so are you an oral surgeon?[/quote]

I am a DDS whbo does personally specialize in oral surgery. I am not an “oral surgeon” accredited.[/quote]
EDITED
I think I understand, let me see if I have it right.
Does that mean that you preform oral surgery but aren’t an accredited oral surgeon and you work under the license/accreditation of an oral surgeon?
Sort of like a PA working under a MD’s license?

Or do I have that wrong
[/quote]
Oops, I did not mean to re quote that.
I was trying to just edit my question from the last page.

104

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

[quote]setto222 wrote:

To the OP:
Chiro isn’t regulated as severely as the medical community and therefore a lot of quacks tend to squeeze through. You will RARELY find someone with a PhD or MD/DMD/DO etc refer to a Chiro as “doctor”. I guess it’s something that’s put into our head and a sort of elitist attitude that is taught. Present some solid peer reviewed papers on what is often touted by Chiros and maybe that will warrant some respect.

This goes for certain DOs as well as MDs. Unless it’s evidence based medicine it’s quackery to me! [/quote]

How would you suggest that Chiropractic present itself to the medical community? Most of what we know about Chiropractic is unproven or theorized. The majority of peer reviewed papers are in the form of case studies which are typically dismissed as anecdotal. There are few Chiropractic schools in the US and the research departments don’t have nearly the resources or equipment to observe the proposed mechanisms. Would you ever refer a patient to a Chiro? Would you ever go to one yourself? Have you ever been approached by a Chiro in a professional manner?[/quote]

How can something be “known” if it is “unproven”? Perhaps I am being elitist, but shouldn’t the field as a whole be working to obtain the necessary evidence? Just a few posts ago you were claiming that you could run an office extremely cheaply…perhaps some of that money could be used to create peer reviewed studies?

Was the earlier poster correct that there is almost no peer-reviewed evidence to support the field?!? [/quote]

Aspirin was used for years before its mechanism was understood. I suppose I know Chiropractic works because it has worked on me, worked when I’ve done it to certain patients, and worked when others have done it to patients. The problem is we can’t see what structures are being affected during the manipulation so we may only suggest theoretical mechanisms. There are cadaver studies showing that HVLA (high velocity low amplitude) adjustments don’t damage the vertebral arteries or discs that are considered bunk because it’s dead tissue. Case studies are dismissed as correlation and not causation. Like I said before, Chiropractic doesn’t have the luxury of a large uniting body such as the AMA which makes research difficult. Studies also only take adjustments into consideration and ignore other adjuncts that may or may not be occurring simultaneously.

The money my practice makes will not fund research unless it is being done by a specific few researchers. I believe the best case Chiropractors can make is to build a large successful practice and market to the large percentage of Americans who have never been to a DC.

105

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

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. I’ve seen some of the anti-Chiropractic sentiment on this site–the best revenge is to live well.
[/quote]

Uh-oh. Perhaps I’ve touched upon something here. What is “touchy” about vaccines? What are the “cons?” I must admit, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in the medical field claiming talking about “touchiness” or “cons” in terms of vaccinations (although, admittedly, this could be because my own education is not in this field). From what (admittedly little) I understand, the pros GREATLY outweigh the cons. Could you explain what you mean?

How are you not aware of how you feel about vaccinations? Aren’t you about to get a doctorate?

106

Vaccines eradicated or virtually removed from the general public a large number of diseases that plagued the U.S. up until the point vaccines were found for said diseases.

I work under the implicit assumption that anyone who argues that vaccines are dangerous and questionable also believe that it’s perfectly fine to see tens of thousands of people die or crippled yearly due to measles/smallpox/polio (just the biggest successes) when we easily have the power to stop said deaths.

I don’t even want to imagine U.S. population today with smallpox being a disease that still exists. That would be murderous to an unimaginable degree.

107

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

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. I’ve seen some of the anti-Chiropractic sentiment on this site–the best revenge is to live well.
[/quote]

Uh-oh. Perhaps I’ve touched upon something here. What is “touchy” about vaccines? What are the “cons?” I must admit, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in the medical field claiming talking about “touchiness” or “cons” in terms of vaccinations (although, admittedly, this could be because my own education is not in this field). From what (admittedly little) I understand, the pros GREATLY outweigh the cons. Could you explain what you mean?

How are you not aware of how you feel about vaccinations? Aren’t you about to get a doctorate?

[/quote]

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. I personally wouldn’t advise either way on them. 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). That is neither here nor there, because in my opinion a Chiropractor is only ethically bound to provide objective information about vaccines, not offer advice.

108

Thank you again for your opinion and your time.

109

What is this bullshit?

Haggling over definitions, are we?

If Prof X can take a knife and cut you open legally and hopefully with your consent, surgeon, doctor, what does it matter?

There is a knife, there is a man, you trust him or you dont.

110

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.

111

It’s funny the OP mentioned Palmer; a friend of mine recently graduated from the chiropractic school there.

He says some of the profs are definitely borderline kooks (chiropractic can cure cancer, vaccines are bad, chiros are nutrition experts, ect.). However, the newer faculty appear more interested in examining crazy chiropractic claims rationally and comparing them to medical publications. Also, my friend and the majority of other students took the wild claims mentioned above with massive doses of salt. He realizes the importance of research, and won’t make any claims unless he can find it in accepted journals.

As Steely said, you have to search for a good chiro. The guy I go to works with a lot of athletes and is very well educated on musculo-skeletal disorders. He realizes his limitations and was encouraging when I told him I was also seeing physical therapists and osteopath physicians. However, some chiros are quacks who will try and sell you on some special manipulation as a cureall. You have to test them before you let them treat you. If they say their training trumps someone with an MD and claim they can cure any ailment with chiropractic, run for your life.

Will I call my friend “doctor”? Probably not. I only call people with a medical degree (DO, MD, dentist, optometrist) or a PhD “doctor”. Plus I’m in my fifth year of a PhD in molecular cell biology with at least another year ahead of me, and it pisses me off he got his degree in only four years.

Since someone asked how long different degrees take, a PhD in a science field in the US runs anywhere from 4 to 8 years after your bachelors. The PhD process is a little bit shorter in Europe, from my understanding. It is widely variable depending on which field you are studying. The average time to a PhD at my school is 6 years. In my program, the first 2 years have classes, but the majority of your time is devoted to your research project (thesis). Most people pursue a post-doc after they get the degree, and the post doc can last another 2-3 years. I think PhDs have earned the title “doctor” for spending the better part of a decade in post-graduate work/research.

112

I just skimmed this but I wanted to add that the idea that the average MD is really any type of authority on nutrition on the strength of his or her medical training is a little off base. Med school’s treatment of nutrition is pretty perfunctory at best and an MD’s ability to give and inclination to give nutritional advice is generally limited to parotting whatever the current government guidelines may be. This is hardly cutting edge nutritional theory. It just isn’t really their area. Some doctors recognize the (IMO obvious) benefit of nutrition in promoting health and combating disease and undertake to study it on their own initiative, but they seem to be the exception.

Unfortunately, I have noticed that some MD’s fancy themselves authorities on all things related to health simply by virtue of being physicians and so hold out their designation as some sort of gold standard of nutritional expertise. The public largely buys into this due to the (often justified) prestige associated with the profession. This is in no way intended a a knock at medical doctors. They are excellent at what they do. Modern pharmacology has either eradicated or reduced the severity of a host of once life threatening conditions to the point of being a minor inconvenience in most cases. What is being accomplished through lacroscopic surgery etc verges on the miraculous. However, nutrition just isn’t their wheelhouse. Many of the MD’s I’ve had contact with have the grace to acknowledge this and to confine themselves to what they do know well.

My point is that even if this guy were a “real” doctor (MD) he wouldn’t necessarily know what he’s talking about and just because he isn’t doesn’t mean he doesn’t.

113

In Belgium anyone can call himself a chiropractor. There’s no education whatsoever. This being said there are good chiropractors who know what they are doing. However, most don’t. When you are confronted to health care you should be very careful, the same goes for chiropractors. I’ve seen patients who had significant paresis requiring surgery after visiting a chiropractor.

Strongly agree with the last poster’s remarks on doctor’s knowledge about nutrition.

I didn’t read the whole thread but I saw somebody saying he didn’t know why Hep B vaccine is useful. If mothers carry hepatitis B they can give it to their children during birth (HBsAg positive has a transmission rate of 10-20%, HBeAg positive 90%, so this is significant). Newborns usually have no symptoms but the majority develop chronic hepatitis often leading to cirrhosis and cancer. World wide 15% of pregnant women are HBsAg positive.

114

[quote]magick wrote:
Vaccines eradicated or virtually removed from the general public a large number of diseases that plagued the U.S. up until the point vaccines were found for said diseases.

I work under the implicit assumption that anyone who argues that vaccines are dangerous and questionable also believe that it’s perfectly fine to see tens of thousands of people die or crippled yearly due to measles/smallpox/polio (just the biggest successes) when we easily have the power to stop said deaths.

I don’t even want to imagine U.S. population today with smallpox being a disease that still exists. That would be murderous to an unimaginable degree.[/quote]

I agree with everything in this post.

People tend to ignore a lot of the facts and just tend to believe anything that is “shared” on facebook. Does anybody remember this:

115

Lots of good information.
I did not know we had so many doctors here on T Nation.
I’m still hoping PX will chime in to answer my question from earlier but maybe one of you other doctors knows how that works?
Cheers :slight_smile:

116

[quote]
Will I call my friend “doctor”? Probably not. I only call people with a medical degree (DO, MD, dentist, optometrist) or a PhD “doctor”. Plus I’m in my fifth year of a PhD in molecular cell biology with at least another year ahead of me, and it pisses me off he got his degree in only four years. [/quote]

You may be perfectly aware of this, and I may have misunderstood your post, but he got his degree in “only” four years AFTER getting a Bachelor’s.

117

[quote]Dr J wrote:

[quote]
Will I call my friend “doctor”? Probably not. I only call people with a medical degree (DO, MD, dentist, optometrist) or a PhD “doctor”. Plus I’m in my fifth year of a PhD in molecular cell biology with at least another year ahead of me, and it pisses me off he got his degree in only four years. [/quote]

You may be perfectly aware of this, and I may have misunderstood your post, but he got his degree in “only” four years AFTER a Bachelor’s.[/quote]

I think the Dr. label is getting a little blown out of proportion here. I will advertise myself as Dr. and have my staff address me as the same as a means to increase patient compliance. Chiropractic works much better when patients take an active role in their own care. Honestly, I could care less if my friends or family–or others on this site refer to me as Dr. When I have the respect of my patients I am better able to serve them, which is what doctors are meant to do.

118

[quote]Dr J wrote:

[quote]
Will I call my friend “doctor”? Probably not. I only call people with a medical degree (DO, MD, dentist, optometrist) or a PhD “doctor”. Plus I’m in my fifth year of a PhD in molecular cell biology with at least another year ahead of me, and it pisses me off he got his degree in only four years. [/quote]

You may be perfectly aware of this, and I may have misunderstood your post, but he got his degree in “only” four years AFTER getting a Bachelor’s.[/quote]

J

I was being a bit facetious, but I did mean to emphasize the “only four years”. Like I said in my post, I will be working on my PhD for another year for a grand total of 6 years post bachelors. While medical school is only four year program post bachelors, I consider the multiple years of residency a continuation of the educational process. The residency period for medical specialists ranges from 3 to 6 years in length after graduation. That being said, my friend’s completion of his degree in four years is fairly short in comparison.

I mainly don’t call my friend “doctor” because I’ve known him since he was 12, and I know it drives him crazy when I don’t.

119

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

[quote]Dr J wrote:

I guess I’m a little squirmish about this. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. Aren’t you obtaining respect through dishonesty?

I guess I don’t see chiropractors (based on the information I have in this thread and what you have told me) as equivalents to medical doctors. And yet, that is apparently EXACTLY what they are purposefully marketing themselves as. To me, this seems unethical, especially given the disparities in length of education and rigor.

For example, the “debate” about whether or not to get a vaccination for one’s child (or whether a mastectomy would be necessary) does not appear to be one between peers. It appears to be one between evidenced-based science and conspiracy-theorists. Yet (at least some of) these conspiracy-theorists are marketing themselves as medical doctors.

Am I misunderstanding something here?

120

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

[quote]Dr J wrote:

I guess I’m a little squirmish about this. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. Aren’t you obtaining respect through dishonesty?

I guess I don’t see chiropractors (based on the information I have in this thread and what you have told me) as equivalents to medical doctors. And yet, that is apparently EXACTLY what they are purposefully marketing themselves as. To me, this seems unethical, especially given the disparities in length of education and rigor.

For example, the “debate” about whether or not to get a vaccination for one’s child (or whether a mastectomy would be necessary) does not appear to be one between peers. It appears to be one between evidenced-based science and conspiracy-theorists. Yet (at least some of) these conspiracy-theorists are marketing themselves as medical doctors.

Am I misunderstanding something here?

[/quote]

I think what you are misunderstanding is that MD’s are no more qualified to give nutrition advice in most cases than a chiro, and in some cases even less so. Some Chiro’s are quacks and so are some MD’s, but the really good ones in either profession are both to be respected.