"Representatives from the Society, the Wisconsin Academy of Family Physicians and the Wisconsin Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics then met with Rep. Wichgers to personally express concerns about the bill and to ask for the data supporting the “more medical training” stance. No information supporting the claim has been provided."
Okay, so you're saying they shouldn't be considered adequate for annual physicals is what you're saying?
Yes.
When you're an old man with back pain you may change your mind
There are people with refractory conditions that seek out naturopathic care. I honestly don't think I can say it's wrong for them to do so, they are desperate and the physicians haven't been able to help, and some may actually feel better...but that doesn't mean it makes sense to let naturopaths claim their training is equal or superior to docs in an area, or let them take over doing exams.When you're an old man with back pain you may change your mind
Then let me say it, every dollar that is wasted on naturopathy is a dollar that could have been spent on anything else toward a greater good. Rewarding them only encourages and increases their war chest.
Oh ofc, I know that. They should not be treated like doctors or say that their training is eqaulavalant.
There have been many studies already done on the subject! Lots of mixed results (very hard to figure out how to do a placebo chiropractic adjustment) and nothing remotely convincing enough to bring chiropractic training into medical school.
I agree, but I doubt a $100 donation to charity has the same level of placebo relief for their back
I think naturopathy is best when combined with scientific medicine, as the benefits feed into one another? Can we agree on that?
You might be surprised.There have been many studies already done on the subject! Lots of mixed results (very hard to figure out how to do a placebo chiropractic adjustment) and nothing remotely convincing enough to bring chiropractic training into medical school.
I agree, but I doubt a $100 donation to charity has the same level of placebo relief for their back
I just want it to be clear to the patients what level of training and legitimacy their provider is offering. As long as you are aware of what a ND or chiropractor's background is like compared to a physician, and that the care they offer you is not supported by clinical evidence, I think you are free to spend money on what you want. The problem is that these groups are constantly and loudly fighting to be treated like physicians.
Right.
Well not really, it would be like going to get shots, keeping your space clear of allergens, and then also paying someone a large amount for a pill of ground up snake tooth because they say the ancient Chinese used that to help inflammation.
Actually, lolpremed22 didn't revive the thread. A spammer inserted a comment and (chiropractic) advertisement link above his post, but it was removed by the mods.No need to revive a two month old post to let me know.
This is probably true, and Chiros aren't completely disliked for treating MSK disorders (which I also disagree with). It is the fact a patient goes for a back problem and that Chiro tells them they can also treat their diabetes.
Yes, you are exactly right, chiros claiming to treat ANYTHING OTHER than MSK is quackery. Any chiro that claims to treat systemic disease has an abhorrent understanding of the scope of practice of DCs and the ethics of patient care. Any systemic disorder should be treated by an MD/DO and I STRONGLY enforce this. Unfortunately, in the chiro profession, there are schools that vary drastically in their philosophy that pump out chiros with philosophies that vary greatly (some are quacks and others know their scope and treat/dx non-surgical MSK only). Some DC programs (like the one I went to) were much more evidence-based (using all medical textbooks including Robbins, Netter, Bates etc) and other programs just teach that manipulation can cure asthma and diabetes. One of the issues with the profession is that there is no standardization in philosophy and these quacks ruin it for the rest of the DCs out there. If a person does decide to see a DC for a non-surgical MSK complaint and back pain/neckpain, the school he/she attended and the DC's adopted philosophy are very important factors to consider. This is one of many other reasons that I ended up leaving chiropractic forever and will never go back. It is important to remember that NOT ALL chiros practice quackery, claiming to cure systemic disease with adjustments, and that there are chiros out there that mobilize, perform gait analysis and rehab and understand their scope of practice and their boundaries. There is evidence to support that joint mobilization supports physiologic chondrocyte expression through mechanotransduction and reduces intracapsular adhesion proliferation. If it didn't work PTs and DOs wouldn't mobilize and wouldn't teach it in their programs (I know many DOs choose not to practice it after school but there is evidence).
Chiropractic manipulation actually doesn't directly cause the initiation of vertebral artery dissections (the amount of force required to start a dissection large enough to cause fatal consequences is drastic), but leads to dangerous complications of an underlying undiagnosed dissection. This is a very rare occurence and it is due to negligence on the chiros part just like negligence in the hospital happens on a daily basis around the world that sometimes cause fatalities and adverse reactions (I am NOT beating up on MDs/DOs, I'm a medical student so I am just providing a neutral informative perspective). Also, more than likely it would be a vertebral artery dissection, not a carotid dissection following UPPER cervical spine manipulation with extreme hyperextension of the neck and excessive rotation following an underlying dissection already in the works. The majority of the time these reported dissections were already developing and the chiro failed to pick up on it (again negligence). One of the symptoms of a vertebral artery dissection is neck pain (particularly inframastoid pain around the C1 transverse process), and another can be dizziness (especially with extension of the neck). However, because the patient had neck pain they decide to seek a chiro. The chiro doesn't pick up on it, the patient is manipulated and subsequent trouble ensues. A thorough neuro exam should be performed and the patient should be referred out, NOT manipulated.
When I’m an old man with back pain I’m going straight to a DO—never to a chiropractor.When you're an old man with back pain you may change your mind
I'm a DO student and I can tell you right now that a DC has WAY more training in manipulation than a DO IF you are looking to get manipulated (figured you probably are otherwise you would have said you'd go straight to an MD). Read my above posts for more information regarding this subject.
It doesn’t seem right, but you would be the one to know. I think I would have a hard time going to one just because of all the quacks there are. The small group of them really tarnished my opinion of all of them, as bad as it sounds. The ones who insanely claim to cure diabetes, hard menstral cycles, etc.
The ones that claim to cure dysmenorrhea and DM are absolute quacks. Stay away from them, FAR away.
I'm curious of what you thought about Chiropractic studies and how they are done. On most chiropractic websites that claim to fix things like child ear infections etc they usually list the study below the claim not thinking someone will actually read them. When I click on and read them they are usually awful, no controls or minimal participants but they usually always use it to prove that the manipulations can cure about anything.
If its a chiropractic study done by only chiropractors, its a small sample size, comes from some chiropractic source/website, is far from a meta-analysis or sytematic review, has no PhDs or MD/DOs or other medical professionals involved its probably biased and doesnt carry a lot of merit; But ESPECIALLY if its attempting to legitimize manipulation as a sound Tx for systemic disease! If it helps with AOM from an URTI I have no idea and im glad if it seemed to help someone suffering from an ear infection like this but to advertise this without sound evidence (myself not having come across any yet) is utter nonsense. Manipulation CAN help with one thing: MSK complaints, and that is about all for which I would ever advertise it.
Thanks for the unbiased opinion. I'm sure you'll be glad you made the switch. Good luck with your career.
I'd say you are mostly correct that unfortunately many DCs practice quackery, this is not the rule though there are also many that practice with a non-surgical MSK approach (the way I have been explaining in previous posts) yet the quacks still probably outnumber the good ones. The quacks really ruin what could be a much better profession than it is. One of the reasons why I switched to medicine and the DO route. The quacks undermine the legitimacy of some of the training, philosophy and efficacy. Any chiro that says you have a subluxation and that it is pinching on a nerve causing some systemic issue is a quack and you should stay FAR far away from him or her.
PTs have not even the slightest training or knowledge compared to that of a DC student. Also, chiros who actually do well in chiro school and attend an evidence based institution (some are quack mills some are actually MSK based and teach as such) are not undertrained quacks. If you would take a look at a chiro curriculum I can guarantee you you'd be surprised. Duke's DPT program, for instance, is nothing compared to a strong MSK based DC curriculum. DPT curriculum is about half the amount of hours and credits.
