Chiropractor teaching anatomy?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
DrDarce

DrDarce

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
458
I have a friend who said one of his anatomy professors is a chiropractor. Apparently he didn't know until after a few lectures and he said this professor is actually pretty good. I honestly am pretty ignorant about chiropractors but this seemed weird to me (they are considered CAM) so I was wondering if any of you have been in a similar situation or if this is indeed a weird situation?
Members don't see this ad.
 
Just my opinion, but if it is not weird for a pharmacist to teach medical school pharmacology I don't see why it should be weird for a chiropractor to teach musculoskeletal anatomy.
 
ChrisMack390 said:
Just my opinion, but if it is not weird for a pharmacist to teach medical school pharmacology I don't see why it should be weird for a chiropractor to teach musculoskeletal anatomy.
Click to expand...
Pharmacists' area of expertise is pharmacology. So it's not exactly weird for them to teach pharmacology. A chiropractor's area of expertise is chiropractic diagnosis and treatment, not anatomy. It would make more sense for a physician to teach anatomy to medical students than a chiropractor because at least they can provide useful clinical correlates based on medicine, not chiropractic science.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I don't want anyone other than an anatomy phd to teach me anatomy so that I can be well versed in anatomical minutiae that is not clinically relevant.

I imagine that chiropractors would be even worse than an anatomy phd in teaching anatomy. What are they even going to teach, how to manipulate spinal facets to treat anemia? Ridiculous
 
ChrisMack390 said:
Just my opinion, but if it is not weird for a pharmacist to teach medical school pharmacology I don't see why it should be weird for a chiropractor to teach musculoskeletal anatomy.
Click to expand...

Because I don't want to learn from a quack.
 
While he's in there in anatomy lab, ask him to show you some of those "subluxations" and how fancy sacral massage corrects leg length discrepancy. One of our ortho faculty made millions correcting leg length discrepancy with complex and very painful surgeries. I'm glad these alternative medicine heroes can save people from this predator sociopath I have to work with!
 
Many of you are being ignorant about chiropractors. There is a sub-population of chiropractors that are total lunatics (the ones that claim to be able to cure obscure conditions). There is also a large population of them that specialize in neck and back pain and do a damn good job of it. I am confident that if an LCME accredited school had hired someone to teach in their school, it would be one of that latter.

Also - is this guy truly teaching all of MS1 anatomy? I'd bet he just did a lecture or two on musculoskeletal stuff.
 
If he's just doing a couple lectures, that's fine. Who knows, he might have additional training as an anatomist in addition to his DC degree :shrug:

At my school it was all PhDs, and damn good ones at that.
 
ChrisMack390 said:
Many of you are being ignorant about chiropractors. There is a sub-population of chiropractors that are total lunatics (the ones that claim to be able to cure obscure conditions). There is also a large population of them that specialize in neck and back pain and do a damn good job of it. I am confident that if an LCME accredited school had hired someone to teach in their school, it would be one of that latter.

Also - is this guy truly teaching all of MS1 anatomy? I'd bet he just did a lecture or two on musculoskeletal stuff.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it matters much whether the chiropractor "believes" in the nonsense foundational philosophy of chiropractic. My concern would be where their expertise in the subject of anatomy comes from.
 
jonnythan said:
I'm not sure it matters much whether the chiropractor "believes" in the nonsense foundational philosophy of chiropractic. My concern would be where their expertise in the subject of anatomy comes from.
Click to expand...

http://www.nycc.edu/webdocs/registrar/DC_Curriculum.pdf

First Trimester
Cell & Tissue Biology
Neuroscience I
Gross Anatomy I
Principles of Biochemistry

Second Trimester
Gross Anatomy II
Neuroscience II
Biochemistry of Nutrition & Metabolism
Issues in Chiropractic Research
Spinal Radiology
Systems Physiology

Third Trimester
Gross Anatomy III
Basic Human Nutrition I
Clinical Microbiology
Principles of Physiopathology
Extremities Radiology

etc.

In order to be admitted into the Doctor of Chiropractic program, candidates must have completed the equivalent of three academic years of undergraduate study (90 semester hours) at an institution accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education or an equivalent foreign agency with a grade point average in these designated 90 hours of not less than a 3.0 on a 4.0 scale.

The 90 hours will include a minimum of 24 hours in life and physical science courses and must include at least 1 course in each of the following topics:
  • General Biology (or Anatomy, Physiology, Cell Biology, Microbiology, Human Biology, Zoology)
  • General Chemistry
  • Organic Chemistry or Biochemistry
  • Physics



I am by no means suggesting these guys are equal in knowledge to an MD, but it is really not a stretch to imagine that some of them may know a lot about anatomy.
 
ChrisMack390 said:
Many of you are being ignorant about chiropractors. There is a sub-population of chiropractors that are total lunatics (the ones that claim to be able to cure obscure conditions). There is also a large population of them that specialize in neck and back pain and do a damn good job of it. I am confident that if an LCME accredited school had hired someone to teach in their school, it would be one of that latter.

Also - is this guy truly teaching all of MS1 anatomy? I'd bet he just did a lecture or two on musculoskeletal stuff.
Click to expand...

Anytime I find out one of my friends' friends, friends' significant others, or friends' family members is aa chiropractor, I look up their website. I have never come across a single one who didn't promote some ridiculous crap (antivax, manipulation to prevent flu/cancer/cure allergies, whatever). I've never come across a single one I'd refer a patient to for musculoskeletal therapy based on the other crazy crap they promote. Patients can go to PT
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Sorry, I'd rather have the guy with a phd in anatomy
I would greatly prefer that a physical therapist teaches musculoskeletal anatomy over a chiropractor any day
Learning anatomy from a chiropractor is probably much worse than learning medicine from a nurse practitioner
 
Cytarabine said:
I have never come across a single one who didn't promote some ridiculous crap (antivax, manipulation to prevent flu/cancer/cure allergies, whatever).
Click to expand...

To be fair, chiropractors probably have to advertise to folks who are suspicious of "western/modern/mainstream" medicine in order to stay in business.
 
Cytarabine said:
Anytime I find out one of my friends' friends, friends' significant others, or friends' family members is aa chiropractor, I look up their website. I have never come across a single one who didn't promote some ridiculous crap (antivax, manipulation to prevent flu/cancer/cure allergies, whatever). I've never come across a single one I'd refer a patient to for musculoskeletal therapy based on the other crazy crap they promote. Patients can go to PT
Click to expand...

I personally know a chiropractor who is very outspoken against the fringe-y part of the practice. His interest is relieving pain and that is all that he does.
 
Temeraire said:
To be fair, chiropractors probably have to advertise to folks who are suspicious of "western/modern/mainstream" medicine in order to stay in business.
Click to expand...

Is that supposed to change my impression of them in a positive way?

ChrisMack390 said:
I personally know a chiropractor who is very outspoken against the fringe-y part of the practice. His interest is relieving pain and that is all that he does.
Click to expand...

That's great. I'd consider referring to him. Once chiropractic has about 10000% more of people like him, they become involved in chiropractic boards to keep people from practicing voodoo, etc, maybe the field can establish more credibility
 
ChrisMack390 said:
Many of you are being ignorant about chiropractors. There is a sub-population of chiropractors that are total lunatics (the ones that claim to be able to cure obscure conditions). There is also a large population of them that specialize in neck and back pain and do a damn good job of it. I am confident that if an LCME accredited school had hired someone to teach in their school, it would be one of that latter.

Also - is this guy truly teaching all of MS1 anatomy? I'd bet he just did a lecture or two on musculoskeletal stuff.
Click to expand...

Go talk to an ortho/neuro spine doc about how this plays out.
 
ChrisMack390 said:
http://www.nycc.edu/webdocs/registrar/DC_Curriculum.pdf

First Trimester
Cell & Tissue Biology
Neuroscience I
Gross Anatomy I
Principles of Biochemistry

Second Trimester
Gross Anatomy II
Neuroscience II
Biochemistry of Nutrition & Metabolism
Issues in Chiropractic Research
Spinal Radiology
Systems Physiology

Third Trimester
Gross Anatomy III
Basic Human Nutrition I
Clinical Microbiology
Principles of Physiopathology
Extremities Radiology

etc.

In order to be admitted into the Doctor of Chiropractic program, candidates must have completed the equivalent of three academic years of undergraduate study (90 semester hours) at an institution accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education or an equivalent foreign agency with a grade point average in these designated 90 hours of not less than a 3.0 on a 4.0 scale.

The 90 hours will include a minimum of 24 hours in life and physical science courses and must include at least 1 course in each of the following topics:
  • General Biology (or Anatomy, Physiology, Cell Biology, Microbiology, Human Biology, Zoology)
  • General Chemistry
  • Organic Chemistry or Biochemistry
  • Physics



I am by no means suggesting these guys are equal in knowledge to an MD, but it is really not a stretch to imagine that some of them may know a lot about anatomy.
Click to expand...

9 credit hours of anatomy?
 
All of you guys need to get off your high horse. I had DC cadaver lab professor in undergrad and he was one of my favorite teachers. No, he didn't buy into the BS of chiropractic theory; everything he taught was straight out of Gray's or the clinical anatomy book. Please don't assume every chiropractor is bad news, they can be very beneficial for patients if the treatment is appropriate.
 
Not sure if this professor has a PhD or not, but it turns out that he is doing 5 hours worth of lecture for them. Based on my knowledge of chiropractors (very little and based on biased sources), I wouldn't want this guy teaching me. I was told he's doing a pretty good job though so maybe my linking all chiro's to quacks is off base. Then again, he could be the exception (or have a PhD or something).

EDIT: and by quacks I mean I consider them along the same lines of acupuncture, naturopathy, homeopathy, etc
 
ridethecliche said:
Go talk to an ortho/neuro spine doc about how this plays out.
Click to expand...

To be fair, their outcomes aren't very either for chronic pain. Spinal fusion outcomes for pain are pretty crappy. That said most of them are seeing elderly patients with real pathology whereas a lot of chiros see younger healthy patients with acute pain that would've improved on its own. Some chiros seem to have good spine and msk knowledge, it's their clinical applications that are frequently terrifying.

I have one chiropractor in my area that seems reasonable, and seems to refer to our clinic appropriately. That said I would go with PT 99% of the time.
 
DubVille said:
To be fair, their outcomes aren't very either for chronic pain. Spinal fusion outcomes for pain are pretty crappy. That said most of them are seeing elderly patients with real pathology whereas a lot of chiros see younger healthy patients with acute pain that would've improved on its own. Some chiros seem to have good spine and msk knowledge, it's their clinical applications that are frequently terrifying.

I have one chiropractor in my area that seems reasonable, and seems to refer to our clinic appropriately. That said I would go with PT 99% of the time.
Click to expand...

Depends on the reason for fusion.
 
Dave_Med17 said:
Not sure if this professor has a PhD or not, but it turns out that he is doing 5 hours worth of lecture for them. Based on my knowledge of chiropractors (very little and based on biased sources), I wouldn't want this guy teaching me. I was told he's doing a pretty good job though so maybe my linking all chiro's to quacks is off base. Then again, he could be the exception (or have a PhD or something).

EDIT: and by quacks I mean I consider them along the same lines of acupuncture, naturopathy, homeopathy, etc
Click to expand...

Might want to do some more research on accupuncture in treating pain, esp of the chronic variety.
 
ridethecliche said:
Might want to do some more research on accupuncture in treating pain, esp of the chronic variety.
Click to expand...
From what I have read, acupuncture is not based in science or evidence. As far as my knowledge, there are no real studies that show it's effectiveness besides modest effectiveness due to placebo effect
 
Dave_Med17 said:
From what I have read, acupuncture is not based in science or evidence. As far as my knowledge, there are no real studies that show it's effectiveness besides modest effectiveness due to placebo effect
Click to expand...

Huh. My mistake. I believe I'd read a few studies showing the effectiveness in fibromyalgia relative to current treatment modalities. I'll do a cursory lit search later to see what turns up. Given how research in this stuff often goes, it's possible I might have just ended up reading the 'false positive' study so to speak.

Fair enough though.
 
Last edited:
ridethecliche said:
Huh. My mistake. I believe I'd read a few studies showing the effectiveness in fibromyalgia relative to current treatment modalities. I'll do a cursory lit search later to see what turns up. Given how research in this stuff often goes, it's possible I might have just ended up reading the 'false positive' study so to speak.

Fair enough though.
Click to expand...

Lol treating fibromyalgia isn't exactly the most convincing argument for treatment effectiveness
 
My point is just that chiropractors do have a background in basic science and human anatomy and that not all chiropractors are quacks. Someone said "1 in 1000" are not quacks. I disagree, but even if that is right, fewer than 1 in 1000 work at medical schools so the point is moot.
 
We had a chiropractor who was an instructor in the lab, but didn't give lectures. His teaching, dissecting skill, and knowledge of anatomic variation was far superior to a PhD anatomist who couldn't go 5 minutes without name dropping his mentors or mentioning he writes board questions. Dude was also super dedicated. He was there for every weekend and late night open lab. Owe him a lot.
 
KinesiologyNerd said:
We had a chiropractor who was an instructor in the lab, but didn't give lectures. His teaching, dissecting skill, and knowledge of anatomic variation was far superior to a PhD anatomist who couldn't go 5 minutes without name dropping his mentors or mentioning he writes board questions. Dude was also super dedicated. He was there for every weekend and late night open lab. Owe him a lot.
Click to expand...

No, actually he was a quack and an idiot. I know this because of the letters after his name. 😕
 
I feel your pain. My PhD colleagues all wince when this subject gets brought up here.

The best I can say is take a deep breath, and see if anything useful comes out of the lectures/labs. There might be something useful, even if the explanation is a palpatory delusion.

NontradCA said:
On a related note, we're currently learning cranial manipulation at my school. Poor MDs, I bet you guys didn't even know you can palpate the Primary Respiratory Mechanism (of the brain).
Click to expand...
 
Psai said:
Learning anatomy from a chiropractor is probably much worse than learning medicine from a nurse practitioner
Click to expand...

lmao learning medicine from a nurse practitioner.. i wouldn't learn ****
 
If you looked hard enough, maybe you could find a barista at Starbucks who happens to have a lifelong passion for anatomy and knows way more than your average anatomy PhD. Doesn't mean that all Starbucks baristas should now be allowed to teach medical school anatomy... Same goes for chiropractors teaching things other than chiropractic medicine and nurse practitioners teaching anything other than nursing.
 
Re: teacher's credentials.

Pretty sure my anatomy professor 'just' has a masters, but seeing her lecture and having worked with her in dissections has convinced me that I'd prefer not to learn from anyone else.
 
I'd be suspicious if this individual was the course director, or if this was common practice, OP's DC professor might be a fantastic anatomy instructor, at least for some subjects. A good, not fringe-y chiropractor likely has a pretty good handle on musculoskeletal anatomy; they likely use it more every day than your average internist. 5 hours isn't that much over the course of an entire course, so I'd be willing to bet he's only lecturing on the areas he's well-versed in, and not their primary contact for respiratory or GI or whatever. His degree might be in a profession associated with quackery, but that association doesn't necessarily disqualify him. Especially because it's not like the medical field is free of quackery, either; DOs' have cranial and MDs' have Dr. Oz.

Edit: typo
 
If the chiropractor knows anatomy well enough to teach it, then peace be upon her. (Or him, whatever.) The chiropractic degree doesn't make one automatically ignorant of anything but spinal anatomy. It is entirely possible that this professor/instructor is well versed in the topic. If so, it would be kind of ridiculous to discriminate against her.

We had a few lectures given by a wonderful man who has a PhD in a non-medical/science field. He is well educated in other areas, and isn't uninformed of anatomy... but his lack of clinical / hard science background meant that there were times when he pronounced a word oddly or couldn't immediately answer a question. The class was extremely sensitive to those moments and was quite harsh in its judgment of him.

If the chiropractor doesn't know her stuff, a room full of bright, curious, neurotic medical students will tear her to bits... and you will have your answer about whether she was qualified to teach. If she holds her own, I'm going to guess that she was qualified.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
anatomy
Replies
2
Views
780
pablo213
pablo213
Future Dr. Hopefully
Anatomy before starting medical school
Replies
13
Views
2K
guytakingboards
G
C564
Trying to get pregnant... how to approach anatomy/formalin exposure?
Replies
11
Views
3K
C564
C564
G
  • Question Question
Texas Tech Anatomy Questions
Replies
2
Views
2K
graciexexsc
G
P
Anki Deck for Anatomy Remediation?
Replies
0
Views
2K
PieceOfGum1
P
Top