Current Views of Chiropractic; What Do You See?

[cdmguy]

No. The only chiropractic school that closed this year was the Los Angeles satellite school of the Cleveland College of Chiropractic. NACM was a small group of chiropractors who pushed the EB standards of 1984-disclaiming visceral disease cures and the right to provide unsupervised primary care for kids. In the 1990s PT advanced by realizing that the spinal mechanical lesions that manipulating fields like chiropractic professed to treat were diagnostic illusions and revised their guidelines to emphasize limiting manipulation's use to symptomatic treatment and facilitating rehab. This was good because it reduced exposure to adverse effects (stroke, etc) and prevented wasted money. The NACM group refused to recognize the change and plodded on with the old mechanical model but were rejected by most chiropractors and never grew significantly, shutting down in 2010. A new group called The West Hartford Group took their reigns and is pushing the same thing-treating nonexistent mechanical lesions as EB care.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Gotcha. Good deal

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[facetguy]

No. The only chiropractic school that closed this year was the Los Angeles satellite school of the Cleveland College of Chiropractic. NACM was a small group of chiropractors who pushed the EB standards of 1984-disclaiming visceral disease cures and the right to provide unsupervised primary care for kids. In the 1990s PT advanced by realizing that the spinal mechanical lesions that manipulating fields like chiropractic professed to treat were diagnostic illusions and revised their guidelines to emphasize limiting manipulation's use to symptomatic treatment and facilitating rehab. This was good because it reduced exposure to adverse effects (stroke, etc) and prevented wasted money. The NACM group refused to recognize the change and plodded on with the old mechanical model but were rejected by most chiropractors and never grew significantly, shutting down in 2010. A new group called The West Hartford Group took their reigns and is pushing the same thing-treating nonexistent mechanical lesions as EB care.

Hang on. You've always said that the NACM was the greatest thing since paper napkins, and that the fact that they failed as an organization meant the rest of the chiropractic profession was only interested in money or killing people or some nonsense.

But here you appear to be criticizing the NACM? What's the story?

And I love how you think you know better than people like Don Murphy and John Triano. Those guys would eat you alive.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Hang on. You've always said that the NACM was the greatest thing since paper napkins, and that the fact that they failed as an organization meant the rest of the chiropractic profession was only interested in money or killing people or some nonsense.

But here you appear to be criticizing the NACM? What's the story?

And I love how you think you know better than people like Don Murphy and John Triano. Those guys would eat you alive.

I have no idea what is going on. Why would he support a group that clings to the pseudoscience of it all?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[facetguy]

Why evidence based chiropractic is an oxymoron and how Quackwatch got tricked into supporting quacks.

Ah, yes. Another one of your conspiracies. Someone's always getting "tricked" or something in your world.

And speaking of Quackwatch, I've heard your buddy Barrett has been taking some real heat in a court battle stemming from claims he's made on his site. You might get dragged into this one, so keep your attorney's number handy.

 

[facetguy]

I have no idea what is going on. Why would he support a group that clings to the pseudoscience of it all?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

Not that anyone cares, but cdm's comments regarding NACM have always been very positive, claiming that they were The Way for chiropractic, but since they never gained traction that was proof positive that chiros were dirtbags. Now, however, he appears to be changing his view.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Ah, yes. Another one of your conspiracies. Someone's always getting "tricked" or something in your world.

And speaking of Quackwatch, I've heard your buddy Barrett has been taking some real heat in a court battle stemming from claims he's made on his site. You might get dragged into this one, so keep your attorney's number handy.

You can thank me for that new emoticon (and WS who actually put it up)

But Barrett is a god among men
He hasn't said anything out of line. Scammers and quacks are just very litigious. The case has been lingering and will likely go nowhere.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[facetguy]

You can thank me for that new emoticon (and WS who actually put it up)

I like it!

But Barrett is a god among men
He hasn't said anything out of line. Scammers and quacks are just very litigious. The case has been lingering and will likely go nowhere.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

We'll see what happens in the case (assuming we're talking about the same case; perhaps there's more than one).

 

[SpecterGT260]

I like it!



We'll see what happens in the case (assuming we're talking about the same case; perhaps there's more than one).

There may be. Lots of people hate him. But is be surprised if anything comes of it. His site isn't commercial. How is Perez Hilton a thing where he draws penises on peoples faces and Barrett is in trouble for simply reporting on a blog?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[cdmguy]

Hang on. You've always said that the NACM was the greatest thing since paper napkins, and that the fact that they failed as an organization meant the rest of the chiropractic profession was only interested in money or killing people or some nonsense.

But here you appear to be criticizing the NACM? What's the story?.

Actually I never supported NACM and was never a member. As the thread states, I confronted their president with the fact that by continuing to base care around treating mechanical lesions they weren't EB. I don't know where you got that idea from-probably another assumption intended to deflect from how shady chiropractic is. But it would be irrelevant if I did because using that reason to discount what I say is a tuquoque fallacy. I've seen you use that numerous times, guess you just like them right?

Do us a favor. Before you claim something, provide a quote and citation to back it up. You have been wrong on so many other points you've stated as fact that it's tiresome to keep having to respond.

Everyone, if facetguy makes a claim without evidence just disregard it-he's probably wrong. If you read that thread you'll see that even a DC who went on to get a PhD is working with an extremely tainted knowledge base so they can't tell right from wrong. That's where facetguy is.

 

[facetguy]

Actually I never supported NACM and was never a member. As the thread states, I confronted their president with the fact that by continuing to base care around treating mechanical lesions they weren't EB. I don't know where you got that idea from-probably another assumption intended to deflect from how shady chiropractic is. But it would be irrelevant if I did because using that reason to discount what I say is a tuquoque fallacy. I've seen you use that numerous times, guess you just like them right?

Do us a favor. Before you claim something, provide a quote and citation to back it up. You have been wrong on so many other points you've stated as fact that it's tiresome to keep having to respond.

Everyone, if facetguy makes a claim without evidence just disregard it-he's probably wrong. If you read that thread you'll see that even a DC who went on to get a PhD is working with an extremely tainted knowledge base so they can't tell right from wrong. That's where facetguy is.

You have stated at least a dozen times on these various threads that NACM was the model organization for chiropractic, was evidence-based, represented what chiro should be, blah blah.

Now you're saying they aren't evidence based either. As such, you've changed your position, and I'm simply pointing that out.

And beyond that, you've always suggested that the NACM's lack of survival was proof that the entire chiro profession was against scientific evolution.

You're the king of editing posts, but I doubt even you would go back and edit all those posts. It's there for anyone to read if they care enough to do so (which nobody does, including me).

 

[SpecterGT260]

You have stated at least a dozen times on these various threads that NACM was the model organization for chiropractic, was evidence-based, represented what chiro should be, blah blah.

Now you're saying they aren't evidence based either. As such, you've changed your position, and I'm simply pointing that out.

And beyond that, you've always suggested that the NACM's lack of survival was proof that the entire chiro profession was against scientific evolution.

You're the king of editing posts, but I doubt even you would go back and edit all those posts. It's there for anyone to read if they care enough to do so (which nobody does, including me).

Uh.... yeah you're gunna need to quote such or drop the point.

As an example:

Facetguy always claims how he secretly wishes he had gone the MD route and admits that chiropractic is dangerous and ineffective bit changes his tune in arguments. He is the king of editing posts though so maybe you can't find it.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[cdmguy]

I still think it's irrelevant but using search terms: 'cdmguy' and 'NACM' I found only one post which I think facet is referring to (out of a total of three results). In 2010 I wrote:

I'm sure the accreditation changes were token. The fact that the only ethical, science based practicing chiropractors, the NACM reformists, shut down their organization in 2010 out of lack of interest.
-How about osteopathy reclaiming spinal rehabilitation?

In the quote above Tim Mirtz DC PhD states that NACM DCs were evidence based in 1984 when they were founded. Later they were not.

Was this a huge endorsement for NACM? Not really, more an aside. Besides, there are very few DCs on this forum anyway so that would be a pointless thing to do. Moreover, I'd like to see these 11 other posts where facetguy claims I used SDN to prosthelytize chiropractors to join NACM. So bring them on big guy.

But back to his point, does the demise of NACM indicate that ethical chiropractic is impossible? It's a red herring because in the late 1990s the treatment NACM advocated was no longer ethical and EB. Can chiropractic right its ship, dump the false biomechanics, expand scope into a unique niche that would contribute to healthcare and not be called quackery? No. The two reform efforts (NACM and orthopractic) attempts to make even moderate changes was so fiercely resisted that the organizations gave up so these more extreme measures will never fly. At the time they asked for only two changes, stop claiming to help nonmusculoskeletal conditions and don't treat kids without referral. The response was that orthopractic had state licensing boards threatening to revoke the licenses of any DCs who called themselves orthopractors and NACM never had more than a few percent of DCs as members.

And what would this new scope even be? Symptom treating would duplicate PT and manipulative lesions are debunked. Oh forget I asked. Facetguy isn't capable of inventing a new scope. That would like asking a cow to solve a differential equation.

 

[facetguy]

I'm just waiting to see how many times you're going to edit your post.



(Likin' that new smilie!)

 

[cdmguy]

I'm waiting for you to stop making juvenile comments.

 

[cdmguy]

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
-TS Eliot

.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I'm a practicing chiropractor. We have a lot of success with back/neck pain, headaches, migraines, etc. Whether it is scientifically-backed or not, patients come back because they get relief.

That all said, I'm applying to med school this year because I need to be able to treat patients without handcuffs. As a DC, I am severely limited in helping patients. Because of insurance, because of the TMA, because of a variety of things.

My goal has always been to help patients get healthy, get active, and be happy. I believe I have a better shot at that with both a DC and MD.

 

[SpecterGT260]

I'm a practicing chiropractor. We have a lot of success with back/neck pain, headaches, migraines, etc. Whether it is scientifically-backed or not, patients come back because they get relief.

That all said, I'm applying to med school this year because I need to be able to treat patients without handcuffs. As a DC, I am severely limited in helping patients. Because of insurance, because of the TMA, because of a variety of things.

My goal has always been to help patients get healthy, get active, and be happy. I believe I have a better shot at that with both a DC and MD.

Do you realize that the majority of the complaint here is peddling placebo?

"Getting relief" doesn't mean it is effective at all.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

It hasn't been disproved, though. So, technically it may not be placebo.

I don't believe chiropractic is placebo. But I can't prove that, just as you can't prove it is. KWIM?

I don't want to get into arguing about its efficacy, just wanted to offer that I've had my struggles and am now looking at expanding my education.

 

[cdmguy]

It hasn't been disproved, though. So, technically it may not be placebo.

I don't believe chiropractic is placebo. But I can't prove that, just as you can't prove it is. KWIM?

I don't want to get into arguing about its efficacy, just wanted to offer that I've had my struggles and am now looking at expanding my education.

This is what I mean. Anyone reading this thread automatically knows more than any DC about chiropractic. Read this thread from the beginning DC2MD and that will enlighten you.

It isn't that chiropractic is placebo, more that it can't accomplish its stated aim of correcting biomechanical lesions, this has been totally debunked, and is stuck misleading patients for its livelihood.

 

[SpecterGT260]

It hasn't been disproved, though. So, technically it may not be placebo.

I don't believe chiropractic is placebo. But I can't prove that, just as you can't prove it is. KWIM?

I don't want to get into arguing about its efficacy, just wanted to offer that I've had my struggles and am now looking at expanding my education.

I hope when you get into medical school you get an appreciation for everything that is wrong with this statement.

The burden is on the provider to prove efficacy. Not on others to prove inefficacy

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[DCtoMD2018]

Jeez, welcome to the gauntlet. I understand where the burden of proof lies.

I read the thread. Like I said, I'm not here to argue efficacy. I am here answering OP. I am modifying my education to adapt to the crisis that is our healthcare system. Basically, it isn't "good enough" to just have a DC, now DCs need an additional doctorate (MD/DO) just to be able to practice effectively and lucratively.

 

[Textbookversion]

Jeez, welcome to the gauntlet. I understand where the burden of proof lies.

I read the thread. Like I said, I'm not here to argue efficacy. I am here answering OP. I am modifying my education to adapt to the crisis that is our healthcare system. Basically, it isn't "good enough" to just have a DC, now DCs need an additional doctorate (MD/DO) just to be able to practice effectively and lucratively.

If you still want to do manipulation, why not DO? Seems to make more sense.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

If you still want to do manipulation, why not DO? Seems to make more sense.

I can still manipulate with my DC. Don't really want to go through manipulation courses again. Also, I'm in San Antonio, TCOM is too far. Hoping to get into UTHSC-SA or somewhere in Houston.

 

[cdmguy]

I'm amazed a med school would take someone who still believes in chiropractic.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Jeez, welcome to the gauntlet. I understand where the burden of proof lies.

I read the thread. Like I said, I'm not here to argue efficacy. I am here answering OP. I am modifying my education to adapt to the crisis that is our healthcare system. Basically, it isn't "good enough" to just have a DC, now DCs need an additional doctorate (MD/DO) just to be able to practice effectively and lucratively.

Or... you know... just be an MD/DO to begin with

Do you plan to say this in interviews?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[SpecterGT260]

I'm amazed a med school would take someone who still believes in chiropractic.

This plays into the question I just asked

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[DCtoMD2018]

Almost like taking someone who believes in God, isn't it?

I do that too. I'm obviously quite a wretch.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Almost like taking someone who believes in God, isn't it?

I do that too. I'm obviously quite a wretch.

It depends on their reasons. I do. But dome Christians irritate me with their complete lack of critical thinking. In this light the comparison to DC is very fitting

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I haven't outlined what I'm saying in my interviews. That's a while away.

All I know is I want to help people, and this is my best avenue. If this is the attitude I'll be looking forward to in allopathy, I can't wait.

 

[SpecterGT260]

I haven't outlined what I'm saying in my interviews. That's a while away.

All I know is I want to help people, and this is my best avenue. If this is the attitude I'll be looking forward to in allopathy, I can't wait.

What attitude are you referring to?

I believe that wanting to help is by itself insufficient and often accomplishes the opposite. Proper training and an understanding of ebm and ethics keeps well meaning people from killing patients. Every mid level turned physician I have ever talked to have told me med school taught them that they didn't know what they didn't know.

I personally think that if you get in your current views won't survive. Until then

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[cdmguy]

Depends on what god you're talking about. If it's a god that prohibits bloodletting you're gonna have problems. Maybe you mean the straight chiropractic god that prohibits vaccinations, that would be a big problem too.

Chiropractic is quackery. If you don't realize that subluxations are hockum you owe it to yourself to get with a good skeptical group (Chirotalk if they can stand you) and deprogram yourself until you do. Otherwise you're just going to go through medicine (provided they make the mistake of taking you) with the idea that you know more than everyone, make waves and hopefully get kicked out.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

The attitude that I shouldn't be allowed in med school by holding a belief in chiro.

That's the attitude that turned me away from med in the beginning. That if it doesn't fit in the AMA's perfectly designed little box, it is forbidden or quackery.

I'm just saying that I'd like to come to the dark side, add to my education, and be allowed to practice within my scope without having anyone question my past or my intelligence. Seems like a fair proposition. You'd think.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I'm not a straight by any stretch, subluxation is hairy for me.

Any preconceived notions you may hold about how I practice are likely skewed by your previous encounters with DCs.

 

[SpecterGT260]

The attitude that I shouldn't be allowed in med school by holding a belief in chiro.

That's the attitude that turned me away from med in the beginning. That if it doesn't fit in the AMA's perfectly designed little box, it is forbidden or quackery.

I'm just saying that I'd like to come to the dark side, add to my education, and be allowed to practice within my scope without having anyone question my past or my intelligence. Seems like a fair proposition. You'd think.

I haven't expressed that view and cdm is not in allopathic.

I said if you get in I suspect you will find the doctrines to be mutually exclusive. What you think about healthcare and patient care now is a result of not knowing what you don't know. My money says that if you do gain entry to MD or DO it won't be long before you look back and kick yourself for swallowing the pseudo sciences that DC schools push.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I really don't see myself completely dismissing chiropractic. I treat 2 MDs in my office currently. If they can see a benefit, despite mutually-exclusive doctrines, then there's hope for me yet.

 

[SpecterGT260]

I really don't see myself completely dismissing chiropractic. I treat 2 MDs in my office currently. If they can see a benefit, despite mutually-exclusive doctrines, then there's hope for me yet.

If you look back you will see I have said there is benefit as well. This isn't what we were discussing though.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[DCtoMD2018]

Anyhow, regardless of all this, to answer OP:

-insurance payers almost entirely recognize chiro and provide coverage
-my personal experience is that I'm seeing more referrals for MSK cases from MDs

Chiro is here, it's being more widely recognized.

Insurance reimbursements still suck, but that's the same on MD/DO side as well.

 

[cdmguy]

Yes I'm a former DC, deprogrammed, now skeptic.

If you are practicing pseudo-PT then there's no conflict because the MDs would just think you're being EB. You say you disavow subluxations but I know with 100% certainty your manipulations are based on subluxation theory because that's the way all DCs are trained. The fact that you base manipulations on subluxation analysis is quackery even if the MDs can't spot it.

MDs get next to no training in biomechanics so if they trust you and are too lazy to look into chiropractic quackery it is very easy to see and use you as a PT. I even know MDs who were intelligent and fell for the subluxation crapola.

Regardless, the idea that you want to use a MD degree to circumvent EB rules makes me cringe. It shows a lack of ethics. I hope they hang you.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I'm not seeking to circumvent at all. I'm recognizing that I can't treat patients as a DC anymore. Texas is a rough state for us. If I want to be able to treat patients, I have to adapt and obtain my MD.I'm looking at OB anyhow.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

Will I incorporate some of the things I've learned as a DC? Probably. To what extent, I've no idea. That doesn't mean I'm circumventing.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

Thanks for ETA that you hope they'll hang me. I am a human being with the best intentions. A mom with 3 kids. I've only ever wanted to treat patients, so I do t understand the attempts to crucify me just because I became a chiro and now seek an allopathic degree.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

*don't

 

[cdmguy]

Thanks for ETA that you hope they'll hang me. I am a human being with the best intentions. A mom with 3 kids. I've only ever wanted to treat patients, so I do t understand the attempts to crucify me just because I became a chiro and now seek an allopathic degree.

Well you know what they say that the road to hell is paved with.
and Ma Barker had sons too, that didn't keep her from robbing banks.

I guess my problem with it is that I think you need to deprogram prior to entering because the program will keep you too busy to do it at the same time. You have to fully understand why manipulative lesions are bunk in order to move on. Otherwise you're just trying to get a license to access a new insurance billing number with a higher fee structure. This is exactly why the PTs rejected a DC to PT program that Stanley Paris proposed at U of FL.

Just because you don't call them subluxations doesn't means you are not treating subluxations. Manipulative lesions = subluxations.

Spec is right. A house divided can not stand. You are going to have to make a choice, either give up chiropractic delusional thinking or reject science. You can't have it both ways.

But med school admission boards are much more choosy than what you're used to in chiropractic. Most likely they'll spot your delusional thinking and just reject you. They'll probably be wondering why in 2012 you still think NACM style chiropractic is evidence based. If you were practicing it would show that either you're stupid or are very unethical with a heavy bias towards chiropractic and against science.

The best thing you could do would be to read that chirotalk thread about why the NACM guidelines are no longer evidence based and how chiropractic colleges defraud students with self-serving propaganda.

If I were an admissions officer I would have a field day grilling you on that. And when they reject you you can bet the letter will be vague so you have no idea why.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

Manipulating an area of decreased ROM does not mean I'm calling a subluxation. I only ever discuss with my patients terms of decreased ROM and soft tissue injury. Last I checked, that's not subluxation theory, and is how OMT and PTs operate.

Maybe you should get to know my theories before you assign judgment.

I understand you're jaded because of your background. But remember, you came from the same place, so don't be so quick to act superior. You're no more entitled to an MD than I am, much less anyone else on the planet.

It comes down to competency, intelligence, and patient care.

 

[cdmguy]

Do you manipulate for symptoms/condition or to treat manipulatable lesions? Chiropractors hold that decreased ROM is a sign of a manipulatable lesion but research proves that manipulation only has a temporary effect on joint ROM.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I don't treat either. Some one comes in, says "my low back hurts".

I put them on the table and look for decreased ROM and areas of muscle spasm. I manipulate the area to inflict ROM, do some manual therapy on the musculature (PNF), and then put some stim on the area at a frequency that breaks spasm, usually a symmetrical biphasic with a frequency of 7 to flutter the muscle to fatigue.

I see a patient maaaaaybe 1-2x a week until they don't need me anymore.

I'm treating their pain.

 

[DCtoMD2018]

So I may treat the symptom of pain, but that's it.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Manipulating an area of decreased ROM does not mean I'm calling a subluxation. I only ever discuss with my patients terms of decreased ROM and soft tissue injury. Last I checked, that's not subluxation theory, and is how OMT and PTs operate.

Maybe you should get to know my theories before you assign judgment.

I understand you're jaded because of your background. But remember, you came from the same place, so don't be so quick to act superior. You're no more entitled to an MD than I am, much less anyone else on the planet.

It comes down to competency, intelligence, and patient care.

I agree with this. Just also remember that critical thinking is also important. Without it patient care stalls. Good intentions are not sufficient. If you really care for patients you will always seek out the best avenue for care in the most critical way possible. Not in a way that defends your own background or personal beliefs. Medicine spends more time disproving its own practices than it does addressing alternative practices. That is the difference between MD and DC. DC jealously guards their craft and seek to validate it rather than improve it.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[DCtoMD2018]

I refer out more than most. I'm blatantly aware of my scope as a chiro.