subrosaDom
Posts: 724
Joined: 2/16/2014
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
quote:
ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant
Absolutely legitimate. The medical establishment isn't keen on treatment that doesn't make them oodles of money, and a very skilled chiropractor knows that the better he/she is, the more driven they are to ease and eliminate the clients ailment, the more damage it does to their livelihood. Western philosophy chiropractic medicine is a money mill, offering relief to clients, but not arresting the issue or eliminating the issue. Eastern philosophy isn't so much a money mill. The target of this post, I'm pretty confident, is more Eastern rather than western. So I'll get directly to your point:
Which is it CD, heal or profit?
Like every other health care enterprise, it's a mixture of both.
I wouldn't have done it for 31 years if it didn't earn me a living. But, is it making me wealthy? Nope. Do I need to be wealthy? Nope...I just want to fix people as best as I can and when I know I can't, I send them elsewhere.
I have a working relationship with the hospital and with several
M. D.s. Why. Because I know my limitations and the M. D.s know theirs. I know what I can fix, what I can help with but not fix, and what I can't fix. Am I going to heal diabetic neuropathy? No, because I can't heal diabetes. Neither can medicine. Can I manage diabetic neuropathy in conjunction with the patients medical doctor? Sure can...and I do.
utter quackery.
Diabetic neuropathy is a degenerative condition of the nerves and cannot be managed or treated by mechanical manipulation of the bones. You are at best using the placebo effect to convince people you have done something when you haven't.
Here are the facts, in the 19th century a nutty father and sun dreamed up a metaphysical, i.e. magical, theory that manipulating bones could cure disease. This was based on absolutely nothing.
It turns out that there is only one thing that cracking the back helps. It does relieve lower back pain. Not upper back or neck just lower back. So if you lumbar hurts maybe go and let a Chiropractor crack it.
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-end-of-chiropractic/
How lovely. An article from a blog...thought you didn't like blogs or is that only when they don't agree with you? Written by three chiropractic doctors. But that wasn't exactly what they said, was it Ken? What they said was that the BEGINNING of chiropractic is steeped in myth and questionable concepts (Innate Intelligence and magnetism). But then...so are some other professions: accupunture (Chi...alignment of the body with water, fire, earth, metal, wood), medicine itself (relief of noxious "humors" in the body among others), osteopathy (the Law of the Artery) .
They also noted that many in the profession cling to those old beliefs and they are right, they do. They are called straights. There are others though...mixers (such as myself) who've moved on to a more modern concept of what "Innate" is...what subluxation is. Then, there are the reform mixers such as these three whose views are that all of the old be discarded completely...disavowed...and only the new, modern, medically-acceptable chiropractic doctor be allowed to exist. (not so much Drs. Morgan and Wyatt but Mirtz).
Some interesting things about these three that you won't find in the article:
Tim Mirtz was the founder of the National Association of Chiropractic Medicine. This group advocated that chiropractic doctors receive education in pharmocology to the extent that we could prescribe or inject painkillers and muscle relaxants. The group disbanded sometime in the 90s as initial membership numbers fell each year. Dr. Mirtz is uncomfortable with chiropractic doctors using physical therapy or adjustment machines and believes mainly in hands only chiropractic care (believe it or not, a lot like those straights he decries...just differing in philosopy). In addition, despite his austere outlook on how practice should be done, Dr Mirtz has only ever taught while never actively practicing in a Chiropractic office.
Dr. Morgan is a Canadian D.C. who taught and wrote. His main belief is that of the reform mixer (noted above) who wants to do away with all of the old and bring chiropractic into a world where everything done is based on what medical science says is O.K. (of course, you might want to remember that this is the same medical science that said "smoking was good for you" up to the thirties and who also said that "Vioxx was good". (We do know how that turned out for some people, right?)
Dr. Wyatt teaches at a Chiropractic college And maintains a practice. He is a reform mixer advocating in this article for an embrace of evidence-based care. Interesting thing though...I thought the nname sounded familiar so I checked some of my textbooks. Yep, there it was: Dr. Wyatt's "Handbook of Clinical Chiropractic Care. You might find part of his introduction to the book interesting. "Where possible, an evidence-based approach is presented. BUTTTT (emphasis mine) it MUST be understood that a purely evidence-based practice is IMPOSSIBLE to achieve in ANY form of health care. Instead, the clinician must use the best available evidence, CLINICAL EXPERIENCE, and a PINCH OF INTUITION to manage his/her patients.
Doesn't sound like a group that totally disbelieves in chiroppractc, does it?
I was going to next take on Stephen Novella, M. D....His humiliation by Dr. Oz (a doctor with a real university affiliation...Columbia...And not a rented one), his association with Dr. Steven Barrett (under indictment), the National Council of Health Fraud (the council appears to be one member now), Williiam Jarvis (unceremoniously dismissed by Loma Linda University), etc. His work as an "insurance company whore". His groups determination to rid the world of naturopathy, homeopathy, accupuncturists, massage therapists, chiropractic. His hit list with such names as double Nobel winner Linus Pauling, Teddy Loren D C. and others.
But I'm not going to. Believe what you want, Ken. You have that right, just as I do and the other people on this thread do. I'm not going to let you turn this into a pissing contest again...
My own experience is that there are a number of "straights" as CD calls them. And yes, these people are quacks. They say chiropractic can cure cancer, etc.
I have also known 2 chiropractors who said these "straights" were quacks. They never made absurd claims and they didn't talk about homeopathy. They did use a variety of techniques, some standard chiropractics, some from massage, some from other non-New Age disciplines -- and when I had muscle pain or cramps, yes, their techniques worked. Of course, if I had bronchitis, I didn't go to see them. This latter category of chiropractors were generally skeptical, made limited claims, but knew what they could effect to some degree. I found them generally intelligent and honest.
_____________________________
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
- Nietzsche
|
RE: Chiropractic Medicine: Real, Quackery, or Scam? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread