Either we've entered the Twilight Zone, or you and I are miscommunicating. When peripheral mechanoreceptors fire, where does that information end up? The North F*cking Pole??? NO!! The CNS, of course. Are you saying something different? Remember, we're not talking about a nerve being pinched by a mean old bone out of place.
Of course there's something behind what chiros do; we are in agreement there. But I think you are misrepresenting chiro-related research a little. Over the years, there have been different types of studies done. This includes the basic science/mechanistic stuff as well as the clinical trials. Perhaps you've got the impression that all chiro research comes down to "this specific technique is better than this other technique...", which isn't at all the case. Technique-specific studies aren't that common, in fact. There have been a few trials here and there that compared one specific technique (i.e., way of going about manipulating), but these aren't considered the more important studies. One such trial (going from memory here) compared the typical HVLA manip to flexion-distraction manip and found little difference in outcomes. Getting back to the clinical trials, these became more popular because of demand for evidence-based practices a couple decades ago; that's why there are so many of them now. Not because all other research has been abandoned or neglected.
When we talk about those studies trying to figure out the effects on central integration/higher centers/etc, these fall more into the basic science of things, trying to figure out mechanisms. As I stated when I posted those links, they are mostly hypothesis generating at this point. You can criticize the methods, as you will, but there's lots of these studies that don't "prove" anything per se but add to our overall understanding of how manipulation works. Much of this work, by the way, is done outside the profession. But those chiros who are working in this area tend not to be clinicians but researchers/scientists, some of whom are DC,PhDs. The everyday MD clinician is no research-level scientist either.
Drug trials, especially the larger effectiveness trials, absolutely attempt to prove a pre-conceived conclusion. "Our drug works, so start prescribing it and using it". Yes, the efficacy work has already been done. But make no mistake: in many cases, these trials are set up to place the drug in the best light. There's been a lot written about this in recent years, which may have understandably escaped a busy medical student. Over break, look up Ben Goldacre, Marcia Angell, Jon Abramson, David Healy...these are off the cuff names, so there are certainly others. Anyway, chiro studies DO look at basic mechanisms, have looked at basic efficacy, but also include effectiveness and safety trials too.
Whether you personally buy it or not.
