Views of Chiropractic?

Off Topic
62

No one said chiros are MDs. They are, however, DCs. The profession is licensed and regulated by the government by the way.

As far as I’m concerned, being an MD does not score you points. MDs kept me on asthma meds for years that did nothing to help my asthma, just suppressed the symptoms of it. Which allowed it to continue to get worse.

A DC did not help with my asthma either, what helped was changing my diet and adding supps like fish oil etc. I’m not on no meds at all. Thanks in NO part to my MDs.

However, my DCs have all helped with back issues. Some have been better than others, but the better ones have been excellent, and the not so good ones have been competent. That’s just been my personal experience.

Naturally chiropractic is best used in combination with other therapies (ART, massage etc.) and is also best used by people who take care of themselves and put the time and effort into staying healthy.

A good DC will support that goal, relieve acute symptoms but also help their patient address chronic issues both inside AND outside the chiro’s office.

63

All I know is that when I had subluxation on my L4/L5 I went to two MD’s and both said I would need surgery and one even said possibly they would have to fuse my spine.

I go to a chiropractor, he takes an x-ray and shows where my disk is compressed by showing how my vertebrae aren’t lined up correctly (if you think MD’s are good see if they take a spine x-ray while you are standing up like they are supposed to, which they probably won’t).

Anyways, it took him 3 months of adjustments because he had to correct it slowly…and poof I was better. No surgery, no fused spine, and the 3 months I saw him was a lot shorter than the time I would have spent healing after surgery. Oh yeah, no pain to this day.

64

bushi…

First of all, the amount of time spend in school has nothing to do with the validity of the discipline. I don’t care how much you know about nervous and musculoskeletal systems. IF you are in the business of ‘adjusting’ spinal ‘subluxations’, you’re a quack. The end.

Secondly, your comment about me being ‘so proud’ of medical doctors is idiotic. I never offered any praise to MDs, and FYI I happen to think they are utterly incompetent and useless, if not outright dagerous.

Third, and most importantly, is that you can’t defend chiropractic by attacking medicine. That is AD HOMINEM nonsense. Yes doctors prescribe drugs carelessly, but medicine’s shortcomings don’t make chiropractic pseudoscience any more valid. Sometimes I wonder if you they don’t train students just to attack MDs every time chiropractic comes into question. Can you say SCIENTOLOGY?

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
belligerent wrote:
Chiros are doctors like Condoleezza Rice is a doctor… in COMMON USAGE, the term “doctor” refers to medical doctors.

Dude, by the time I have finished obtaining my honours degree in chiropractic, I will have been studying for 5 years. Now I know thats a couple of years less than a ‘doctor’, but I will happliy pit my knowledge of the nervous and musculoskeletal systems against any regular MD.

These ‘doctors’ that you are so proud of, spend a couple of extra years above and beyond the subjects covered in chiropractic, learning about drug and their interactions. Why? So they can continue to court the pharmaceutical giants, and prescribe drugs to almost anybody who walk through their doors. To be honest, the tag of ‘doctor’ is one that I would rather distance myself from, because as I see it, most “real doctors” as you call them, are just pimps for the drug industry.

Oh yeah, and what does the drug industry want you to do? Not to get better, certainly, as that would stop you from needing their drugs…[/quote]

65

[quote]Jinx Me wrote:
No one said chiros are not MDs. They are, however, DCs. The profession is licensed and regulated by the government by the way.
[/quote]

The fact that the profession is licenced and regulated does not make it legitimate. That’s politics not science.

66

beligerent,

Yay, long time no see. Your view is extreme. As many can attest to, chrio is useful in at least a limited way. Do you concede? If not you are wrong. :slight_smile:

BTW, I agree with much of the criticism lobbed at chiro’s.

67

[quote]beebuddy wrote:
beligerent,

Yay, long time no see. Your view is extreme. As many can attest to, chrio is useful in at least a limited way. Do you concede? If not you are wrong. [/quote]

yes I concede that it’s useful in a limited way. it’s been proven to be effective for certain types of back back pain.

68

[quote]belligerent wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
beligerent,

Yay, long time no see. Your view is extreme. As many can attest to, chrio is useful in at least a limited way. Do you concede? If not you are wrong.

yes I concede that it’s useful in a limited way. it’s been proven to be effective for certain types of back back pain.[/quote]

Yay I win! lol!

70

[quote]BGB wrote:
What are some of your views on Chiropratic work?

[/quote]

Chiropractic treatment has been shown to relieve back pain. However, the problem is that they tell you it will help all kinds of medical conditions, which is not true and have no reliable studies to back it up.

So if you go to a Chiropractor and he gives you a course of treatment to fix a back issue, then stops once it gets better, he is a reputable clinician. But if he keeps you coming for “routine maintenance”, he is a quack and you should stop seeing him.

There is NO truth to the idea that routine joint manipulation is of benefit. Aside from acute trauma, vertebral bodies do not move out of line without some other underlying problem, which cannot be fixed by Chiropractic treatment.

Chiropractic treatment release endorphins, so it feels good at the time. But it doesn’t fix subluxation and other problems. Those problems require physical therapy, to strengthen the tendons and ligaments around the joint and/or surgery.

71

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
Actually, in my eyes, the quality of schooling, has everything to do with the validity of the discipline, IF that discipline is based in science. The chiropractic that I study is most definitely based in science. I plan to ‘manipulate’ spinal ‘fixations’. This is not quackery. I have had fixations of my own, and I have observed/felt them in others, and I know from personal experience how great it can feel to have a fixation released. Chiro is just a tool to be used in a whole arsenal of tools, but to call it ‘quackery’ is close-minded.
[/quote]

This is the big question here - is chiropractic based on science? To say that chiros get as much, or more, education than MDs as a way to justify the science of chiropractic is like saying that an astrologer knows as much about the movements of planets as an astronomer, therefore, astrology must be a valid science.

Chiropractic was started by a grocery store owner in Iowa who was also into magnetic healing.

A physiologist did a study on cadavers to determine how much force was required to cause subluxations of the spine. He found that the amount of force needed to cause a vertebra to subluxate also caused it to fracture. Bottom line is that if you have a “real” spinal subluxation, you’ve got a really serious problem.

Go view the anatomy of the spine - it really is a remarkable piece of engineering. The vertebrae fit together quite nicely and are surrounded by some of the strongest, if not the strongest, ligaments in the entire body. The idea that everyday activities can cause the spine to subluxate simply defies common sense - I don’t need 5 years of schooling to figure that out.

I will also concede that chiros can offer some limited benefits. A good chiro will play down the whole subluxation thing. I recall another debate here on chiropractic and Dr. Ryan himself said that he does not use the term “subluxation” because it has so many different meanings to so many people. Personally, I think that this is a nice way of saying that a good chiro will realize that the whole concept of subluxations is bullshit. A good chiro will also treat a condition and send you off. A good chiro will not tell you that you need “maintenance” treatments. Chiropractic treatment should be done in conjunction with the proper care of an MD and/or PT. If you’re not happy with your MD, get a new MD. Don’t substitute an MD with a DC because the two are not the same.

Having said all that, I’ll still never go see DC. Ever.

73

Good chiropractors are physical therapists.

74

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:
Actually, in my eyes, the quality of schooling, has everything to do with the validity of the discipline, IF that discipline is based in science. The chiropractic that I study is most definitely based in science. I plan to ‘manipulate’ spinal ‘fixations’. This is not quackery. I have had fixations of my own, and I have observed/felt them in others, and I know from personal experience how great it can feel to have a fixation released. Chiro is just a tool to be used in a whole arsenal of tools, but to call it ‘quackery’ is close-minded.

This is the big question here - is chiropractic based on science? To say that chiros get as much, or more, education than MDs as a way to justify the science of chiropractic is like saying that an astrologer knows as much about the movements of planets as an astronomer, therefore, astrology must be a valid science.

Chiropractic was started by a grocery store owner in Iowa who was also into magnetic healing.

A physiologist did a study on cadavers to determine how much force was required to cause subluxations of the spine. He found that the amount of force needed to cause a vertebra to subluxate also caused it to fracture. Bottom line is that if you have a “real” spinal subluxation, you’ve got a really serious problem.

And a dry cadaver spine is like a live spine How?

[/quote]
Go view the anatomy of the spine - it really is a remarkable piece of engineering. The vertebrae fit together quite nicely and are surrounded by some of the strongest, if not the strongest, ligaments in the entire body. The idea that everyday activities can cause the spine to subluxate simply defies common sense - I don’t need 5 years of schooling to figure that out.

I will also concede that chiros can offer some limited benefits. A good chiro will play down the whole subluxation thing. I recall another debate here on chiropractic and Dr. Ryan himself said that he does not use the term “subluxation” because it has so many different meanings to so many people. Personally, I think that this is a nice way of saying that a good chiro will realize that the whole concept of subluxations is bullshit. A good chiro will also treat a condition and send you off. A good chiro will not tell you that you need “maintenance” treatments. Chiropractic treatment should be done in conjunction with the proper care of an MD and/or PT. If you’re not happy with your MD, get a new MD. Don’t substitute an MD with a DC because the two are not the same.

Having said all that, I’ll still never go see DC. Ever.

75

For whats its worth: I recently watched a Ronnie Coleman movie (very entertaining I might add) and he went to see a chriopractor. He said he went once a week and it has been great for him. He named several injuries they got him through, and attested they prevent many other injuries.

One lady went across just about all of his muscles grinding her elbow into him. He said it hurt, butis worth it. He then went to another room where a doc cracked his back and neck.

I personally have not had any luck with them. I saw one for about a year when I was 16 after an auto accident and it did nothing for me. Never been back.

76

I went to chiropracter when I was 15 for lower back pain. He adjusted my spine and neck, did some EKG stimulation and it did nothing at all to relieve my problem. As I know now my lower back pain was caused from excessively tight hamstrings, poor hip & ankle mobility, weak abs/posterior chain.

I started working on all of these inefficencies (via much of thes stuff from Cressey and Robertson’s MM2 DVD) and after about a month my back pain was totally gone and haven’t had any trouble since.

On the similar note, I think a few Athletic Trainer’s idiots (It’s most likely just my bad experiences with a couple of idiots). I had arthroscopic bankart repair surgery on my shoulder when i was 17(after several dislocations). Rehabbed and all that good stuff and everything was back to normal. My Freshman year of college playing DII football, took a freak hit on a fumble recovery and dislocated it again. The AT’s reduced my shoulder and were asking me about my previous surgery.

When I told them I had Bankart Lesion repair surgery they said somebody must be using the wrong terminolory because they’ve never heard of such surgery. What the hell, I’ve been to two orthapaedic surgeons and two PT’s and this is rather common surgery with shoulder dislocations/torn labrums.

I have since transferred(but no longer play football). The AT department at my previous school was also in charge of the strength and conditioning programs for the athletic department, totally bullshit there as well. Lots of bosu ball/swiss ball/unstable surface training bullshit. With my past experiences I’ve come to believe that most Athletic Trainers are just glorified water boys/girls who can tape a mean ankle.

And have a pretty poor grasp of the muscoloskeletal system and and overall poor view of how to manage a proper training program for an athlete(which in my mind is something they should be rather well versed in).

But back to chiropractic…I have also found as others if you can find somebody who is an ART practictioner and uses other modalities such as massage, mobility work etc. your probably in good hands.

As far as the subluxations and what not I’m not real sure what to make of it but I agree with others, I’m not too excited about somebody jerking my neck around…

77

It’s obvious the degree of knowledge when it comes to the human body varies between different professions. The belief that your nervous system has nothing to do with every other organ in your body sounds quack to me. I suggest you treat the body as a whole and yes…your spine is a part of that. Everyone here trains regularly and maintains a regular diet. I find it hard to believe that you feel there is no need to maintain your spine.