Should I Listen To My Chiropractor?

Training Bodybuilding
61

[quote]jbdd wrote:
MikeTheBear wrote:
jbdd wrote:
You say your friend is a Mortician, hmm you wouldn’t by any chance be an M.D., cause that would explain your friendship…

Interesting that you have 7 physicians in your family yet hold so much contempt for the AMA. I originally wanted to be an M.D. but ended up going to law school instead. I’ve seriously considered serving on Dr. Barrett’s legal advisory board.

He’s really not as anti-chiropractor as he is made out to be. He does believe that chiropractor’s have a role in back pain management. What he opposes is the idea that subluxations are the root of all human medical problems, i.e., the so-called “straight” or subluxation-based chiropractors. It seems that Dr. Ryan shares a similar philosophy.

So what do you do for a living?

I replied already but, once again,chiropractors are PHYSICIANS you dickhead,get it now?

Still wanna toss around physiology education gleaned from your Mortician friend? What an asshole! And please join Dr. Barret’s team, it’s probably the best thing you could do for Chiropractic![/quote]

I agree with Mike. They are not physicians. Physicians refer to medical doctors. The training is different between MD and DC. I will not say that they are not doctors because that is the title that they have. They are many doctors who are not physicians, but I don’t believe it works the other way around.

62

jbdd, your attitude is bringing down your side.

When reading things you post I have less faith in chiros.

When I read Dr. Ryan’s posts I have more faith in them.

63

[quote]climbon wrote:
jbdd wrote:
MikeTheBear wrote:
jbdd wrote:
You say your friend is a Mortician, hmm you wouldn’t by any chance be an M.D., cause that would explain your friendship…

Interesting that you have 7 physicians in your family yet hold so much contempt for the AMA. I originally wanted to be an M.D. but ended up going to law school instead. I’ve seriously considered serving on Dr. Barrett’s legal advisory board.

He’s really not as anti-chiropractor as he is made out to be. He does believe that chiropractor’s have a role in back pain management. What he opposes is the idea that subluxations are the root of all human medical problems, i.e., the so-called “straight” or subluxation-based chiropractors. It seems that Dr. Ryan shares a similar philosophy.

So what do you do for a living?

I replied already but, once again,chiropractors are PHYSICIANS you dickhead,get it now?

Still wanna toss around physiology education gleaned from your Mortician friend? What an asshole! And please join Dr. Barret’s team, it’s probably the best thing you could do for Chiropractic!

I agree with Mike. They are not physicians. Physicians refer to medical doctors. The training is different between MD and DC. I will not say that they are not doctors because that is the title that they have. They are many doctors who are not physicians, but I don’t believe it works the other way around.
[/quote]

Really exactly what is the difference in education, total course hours, cirriculum etc? From what source do derive your definition of Physician?

64

A licensed medical doctor, dentist, oral surgeon, podiatrist, osteopath, chiropractor, psychiatrist or licensed counseling or clinical psychologist acting within the scope of the license, excluding an intern, resident or house physician.
www.eip.sc.gov/glossary/p.htm

means a Doctor of Medicine (MD), Doctor of Osteopathy (DO), Doctor of Dental Surgery (DDS), Doctor of Podiatry (DPM), Doctor of Chiropractic (DC), Audiologist, Certified Nurse Anesthetist, Licensed Professional Counselor. Licensed Professional Physical Therapist, Midwife, Occupational Therapist, Optometrist (OD), Physiotherapist, Psychiatrist, Psychologist (PhD. …
www.healthinsure.com/glossary.html

65

Physician \Phy*si"cian, n. [OE. fisician, fisicien, OF.
physucien, a physician, in F., a natural philosopher, an
experimentalist in physics. See Physic.]

  1. A person skilled in physic, or the art of healing; one
    duty authorized to prescribe remedies for, and treat,
    diseases;
66

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
jbdd, your attitude is bringing down your side.

When reading things you post I have less faith in chiros.

When I read Dr. Ryan’s posts I have more faith in them.
[/quote]

Then I guess I will leave you with your revelation about Chiros in regards to your ankle.To believe Mike would mean that your ankle was really broken not subluxed,and I am not totaly sure of Dr. Ryans beliefs, however if he is, as Mike suggests a “straight” Chiro believing only in chiropractic as a treatment for back pain you yourself have proven that theory wrong,yes?

68

[quote]ScottL wrote:
Yikes.

After dealing with several ankle sprains and some mild rotator cuff issues over the past several years I"ve discovered that orthopods are basically useless for soft tissue injuries (well unless you’ve torn something and need surgery). I’ll stick to a good physical therapist or preferably a chiro/ART therapist. I give the chiro/ART person the edge because they can do adjustments which are very helpful with some injuries e.g. ankle sprains.[/quote]

Most physical therapists that I know of are incredibly skilled in peripheral extremity manipulations (as well as vertebral manipulations). Look up Mulligan manipulations if you need an example. The difference between the two is a chiro will perform chiro manipulations, and a PT will do PT manipulations. Different takes on a similar subject. Some work great on somethings while not as good on others and vice versa. I personally would choose a PT over anyone else anyday of the week, but I am personally biased :slight_smile:

69

[quote]climbon wrote:
jbdd wrote:
MikeTheBear wrote:
jbdd wrote:
You say your friend is a Mortician, hmm you wouldn’t by any chance be an M.D., cause that would explain your friendship…

Interesting that you have 7 physicians in your family yet hold so much contempt for the AMA. I originally wanted to be an M.D. but ended up going to law school instead. I’ve seriously considered serving on Dr. Barrett’s legal advisory board.

He’s really not as anti-chiropractor as he is made out to be. He does believe that chiropractor’s have a role in back pain management. What he opposes is the idea that subluxations are the root of all human medical problems, i.e., the so-called “straight” or subluxation-based chiropractors. It seems that Dr. Ryan shares a similar philosophy.

So what do you do for a living?

I replied already but, once again,chiropractors are PHYSICIANS you dickhead,get it now?

Still wanna toss around physiology education gleaned from your Mortician friend? What an asshole! And please join Dr. Barret’s team, it’s probably the best thing you could do for Chiropractic!

I agree with Mike. They are not physicians. Physicians refer to medical doctors. The training is different between MD and DC. I will not say that they are not doctors because that is the title that they have. They are many doctors who are not physicians, but I don’t believe it works the other way around.
[/quote]

Spoken like every other PT I know that dosen’t have the time, energy,brains,money or what have you to get the DR. degree! Again what exactly is the difference in training? do you even know? As far as all of the"making as much money as they can comments" let me guess you are a P.T. cause you genuinely love and want to help people,and Mike again an ATTORNEY discussing another profession just trying to empty peoples wallets? WHO ARE YOU KIDDING? there isn’t a ton of lawyer jokes for nothing my friend

70

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
MikeTheBear wrote:
Ptak is part of the subluxation cult of chiropractic.

This cult believes that subluxations are the root of every medical ailment. The reject the “germ theory” of disease and they will even recommend to parents that they not vaccinate their children. Granted, vaccinations have been dangerous, but they are being and have been made safer. Of course babies don’t need chiropractic care.

If anyone goes to a chiro who recommends adjustments for children, advises against getting kids proper immunization, and/or says he or she doesn’t “believe in germs,” run, do not walk, out of the office. And don’t, under any circumstances, let that quack touch your child.

As chiro students we touched upon these issues just a few weeks ago in a lecture called “The straights and the Mixer”. The ‘straights’ are the ones who believe in the type of philosophy you mention above - belief in an ‘innate intelligence’ and a ‘universal intelligence’. I can’t really be bothered to go into it now, but I have to admit to being horrified that a trained medical professional (yes, that is what chiros are, like it or not) could actually believe in such mumbo-jumbo as ‘having access to the universal healing force that flows in every person and throughout the universe, and through it, access to every person on the planet’ - or some such BS, to be honest, my jaw was hanging so aghast, that I had trouble listening to the exact details of the ‘straight’ belief system…

Anyway, suffice to say, there are not many ‘straights’ in the UK (as far as I am aware), but even if there were, I for one would not be able to recommend that a normal, sane person seek treatment from such a practitioner.

My lecturer would no doubt castigate me for such remarks (thank god for ‘handles’ LOL), but truely, whilst I see chiropractic as an extremely useful tool in the healing process (when combined with other, equally valuable tools), as a stand-alone, it is certainly not the be-all-and-end-all of treatments that some of these ‘straights’ make it out to be, and one has to onder if they genuinely view it as such or are in it to make as much money as humaly possible…

Yes, I too am a sceptic…

bushy[/quote]

Well put bushi and most qualified and concientious chiros in the U.S. would agree with the “cult” universal healing force nonsense,my own wife is the first to tell her patients if she does not think she can help them and refers to, and has a very good relationship with many M.D.s in our area, and shares your philosophy that chiropractic is a very useful tool in overall health as well as nutrition,fitness etc. I will however add that both our children( 24 and 25 y.o.)were adjusted the day they were born,have never been imunized and were raised with sound nutrition and fitness as the base of their healthcare, and thank god neither has been seriously ill and rarely even get a common cold.

I just could not sit back and not respond to the “all chiros are quacks or have only limited effectiveness with back pain or are just out to suck you dry” mentality.

71

[quote]Dr. Ryan wrote:
conorh wrote:
It’s my understanding, and hopefully Doc Ryan can correct me if I’m wrong, that years ago, when the AMA allowed DO’s in, there was also a push to involve chiropractors, as in the old adage “If you can’t beat 'em, join 'em.”. However, probably because of the active assault on chiropractic from medical doctors from the early decades of it’s inception, the head honchos of chiropractic told AMA to shove it.

I may have that all wrong…

Basically true. The chiropractors did not want to give up their autonomy and be governed by the AMA. The DO’s, chose to join and the DC’s opted not to. Unfortunately all that did was piss off the AMA, who then set out to disparage chiropractic every chance they got. Worked pretty good from the sounds of the people on this site. However, the AMA got sued by the ACA in the 80’s for this very thing and the AMA was found guilty.

Thanks for the stimulating the history lesson.[/quote]

No problem, it was my duty as a repository of mostly useless knowledge.

72

"Mention taking a Brian Mulligan course for conitnuing education. His course and his book (Nags, Snags and more) covers it and a taping technique. "

Mulligan stuff is great. I use many of his ideas on daily basis in my practice. I am a Physical Therapist BTW.

What I don’t understand is that jbdd appears to make the assertion that MD’s and DC’s are have essentially the same amount/type of education. This is simply not true, each curriculum will have a differnt focus based on an intended outcome. Personally, I wouldn’t want a DC treating my cancer just as I wouldn’t want a OB/GYN to treat my shoulder pain. (hypotheticals)
Suggesting that DC’s have differing education than “Real” doctors (MD’s in this example) does not lessen what DC’s have accomplished in school or their practice.

I have linked to a listing of the medical school curriculum at the University of Iowa (my alma matar ;))
http://www.medicine.uiowa.edu/osac/curriculum/index.htm
simply click on the links on the Left side of the page. I would imagine there would be some similarities between a MD and DC program in the first year or so. As a member of the PT program we had several courses that we shared with the med students the first year but after that our paths diverged. Now anyone feel free to post a link to curriculum from their DC school of choice and start making comparisons.

pvp

73

[quote]cyman wrote:
"Mention taking a Brian Mulligan course for conitnuing education. His course and his book (Nags, Snags and more) covers it and a taping technique. "

Mulligan stuff is great. I use many of his ideas on daily basis in my practice. I am a Physical Therapist BTW.

What I don’t understand is that jbdd appears to make the assertion that MD’s and DC’s are have essentially the same amount/type of education. This is simply not true, each curriculum will have a differnt focus based on an intended outcome. Personally, I wouldn’t want a DC treating my cancer just as I wouldn’t want a OB/GYN to treat my shoulder pain. (hypotheticals)
Suggesting that DC’s have differing education than “Real” doctors (MD’s in this example) does not lessen what DC’s have accomplished in school or their practice.

I have linked to a listing of the medical school curriculum at the University of Iowa (my alma matar ;))
http://www.medicine.uiowa.edu/osac/curriculum/index.htm
simply click on the links on the Left side of the page. I would imagine there would be some similarities between a MD and DC program in the first year or so. As a member of the PT program we had several courses that we shared with the med students the first year but after that our paths diverged. Now anyone feel free to post a link to curriculum from their DC school of choice and start making comparisons.

pvp
[/quote]

Pardon me , of course I was assuming some common sense in regards to specialites as you say i.e. ob/gyn,oncologist etc and obviously D.C.s do not have pharmacology training etc.and the similarities actually go to about year 3. My point was and is that both professions spend roughly 8 years of dedicated education and that chiros recieve MUCH of the same education as an M.D.they do not spend 4 years learning to adjust as the technicues and style each chiropractor would choose would be considered their specialty,just as an oncologist is an M.D. specializing in cancer.
http://www.logan.edu/pages/chart.htm check the link and you will find nuerology,histology, cellular biology obsetrics,pathology,My point is that they are equally well trained as an M.D. relative to their specialty,they do not sit around for 4 years and hold hands or chant or learn"how to crack yer bones" so compare and let me know what you think!

74

Here’s a good article by a DC on what to look for, and what to avoid, when choosing a chiropractor.

75

Bushy - thanks for the write up. You are an example of a rationale chiropractor (or soon to be one) with the right amount of common sense to know what you can and can’t do for your patients.

76

I’m a skeptic too.

The main reason for my skepticism is that I have had probably 30 to 35 students in my 5 years of teaching (4th,6th, 7th, and 8th grades) who have had two or three sessions a week with chiropractors. These guys (I’m not saying all, but definitely these guys) are total leeches. You can’t tell me that this many little kids who happen to be in MY class need to visit a chiropractor two or three times a week. That’s insane.

77

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
Here’s a good article by a DC on what to look for, and what to avoid, when choosing a chiropractor.

http://www.chirobase.org/01General/chirosham.html[/quote]

Hey Mike just might be something we can agree on here,of course there are scham D.C.s and there are plenty of M.D.s over and improperly prescribing drugs and missing diagnosis’defrauding insurance company etc. my whole point has been and my defensive posture comes from the"they are good for nothing except maybe back pain and maybe not even then" attitude coupled with the “they are just in it for the money” bit,Ever file any documents or draft any documents wothout first telling your client that they could probably do it themselves? or did ya just go ahead and do it for the billable hours? and at how much an hour? Almost all of us do or did what we do to make a living,yes?

The point is common sense should apply to anything like this, to use the aformentioned mechanic analogy I recently had my car die on the road with the charging system light on and no electrical, auto shop 101 says the alternator was bad, my dealer however said it was my transmission? Do you think I left my car there? no of course not!This should apply to your Dr DC Dentist whomever.If they are not asking the right questions or taking an active role in your history,your life your symptoms,leave!

It is just an assinine statement to assert that ALL Chiros are quacks or have little use or training.As far as people making money leaching off others,you don’t think the DC that wrote the article was compensated and has been compensated to speak at Insurance co.s and medical conventions? I’m sure for the right amount of money even Dr Barret would call his colleagues quacks, no?

And by good article I asume you meant “see even they don’t believe in themselves” I have had an Internal Medicine doc tell me that most of the time they were just guessing,or my own experience with a doctor in st louis last year who after three office visits had not done a single test outside the standard bp,pulse,temp but did prescribe 3 different drugs over the course of a month with the end result of me being taken to the hospital with advanced bacterial pnuemonia,no test ,minimal history and out the door,sounds like how you describe Chiropractors,or how about the time I had to go to the E.R. for what appeared to be chicken pox I was told the Dr had never seen anything like it, given 5 prescriptions including Prednisone! and Valtrex and sent to the pharmacy ,upon giving my prescriptions to the pharmacist he became very angry made a phone call to the E.R. doc that 2 of the medications were contraindicated and could have KILLED ME if taken together!Turns out what i had was an allergic reaction to the drug he had prescribed a week earlier!

I guess I could close with “there are unscrupulous and incompetent people in every profession” or “Quack or not when’s the last time a Chiropractor killed or almost killed a patient”, you choose.

78

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
Bushy - thanks for the write up. You are an example of a rationale chiropractor (or soon to be one) with the right amount of common sense to know what you can and can’t do for your patients.[/quote]

Mike just curious why so adamant about “exposing” the limitations of Chiropractic? I think I have explained my defensive posture,please explain your offensive nature on the subject

79

[quote]doogie wrote:
I’m a skeptic too.

The main reason for my skepticism is that I have had probably 30 to 35 students in my 5 years of teaching (4th,6th, 7th, and 8th grades) who have had two or three sessions a week with chiropractors. These guys (I’m not saying all, but definitely these guys) are total leeches. You can’t tell me that this many little kids who happen to be in MY class need to visit a chiropractor two or three times a week. That’s insane.[/quote]
You are right that is insane,what is the nature of the visits,is it school sponsored or you just happen to have 30 students whos parents are taking them to chiros 3 times a week? what type of students?“normal” 4th-8th graders.

Once again any good Chiro would say at that age for a sustained period that tretament protocol is un warranted any special problems that the kids have in common other than ignorant parents? Are/were the kids active in sports?(yeah I know kids that age don’t need chiropractic care no matter what) just humor me please

80

[quote]jbdd wrote:
doogie wrote:
I’m a skeptic too.

The main reason for my skepticism is that I have had probably 30 to 35 students in my 5 years of teaching (4th,6th, 7th, and 8th grades) who have had two or three sessions a week with chiropractors. These guys (I’m not saying all, but definitely these guys) are total leeches. You can’t tell me that this many little kids who happen to be in MY class need to visit a chiropractor two or three times a week.

jbdd wrote:

That’s insane.
You are right that is insane,what is the nature of the visits,is it school sponsored or you just happen to have 30 students whos parents are taking them to chiros 3 times a week? what type of students?“normal” 4th-8th graders.

Once again any good Chiro would say at that age for a sustained period that tretament protocol is un warranted any special problems that the kids have in common other than ignorant parents? Are/were the kids active in sports?(yeah I know kids that age don’t need chiropractic care no matter what) just humor me please
[/quote]

The kids seemed to have been recruited at different times. Most of them at “clinics” at the mall. Definitely NOT school sponsored. A couple were cheerleaders, and a couple played basketball. The common factor was that they all had CHIPS:
http://www.hhsc.state.tx.us/chip/index.html

I’ve always had a sneaking suspicion that the parents were getting kick-backs (I teach in one of the two poorest districts in Texas).