What's the difference?

[OSUdoc08]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Macman,

If you want to get personal we can, I was trying not to. This whole argument stemmed from your idiotic statement which was this:

So by your logic, all chiro research done by D.C.'s is suspect? all medical articles by M.D.'s a problem for you?.....come on!

You cannot hide behind your "eloquent" writing. How in any way does me saying that I didn't think the author was being objective mean that all reserch done by DO's is suspect? You cannot back this statement up because I never implied that! You are the one that is creating an argument out of thin air! I never said, implied or assumed what you said in your above statement. I simply said that I felt that he was biased, as a DO saying that DC's stole manipulation from AT Still. How does that possibly equate to I question the validity of ALL DO'S! Again you have the faulty logic. You may know your SI joint mechanics, but your debate skills are suffering!!

Taking the Primrose path,

BMW-

You keep arguing against valdity of this because it was "written by a DO." Ironically, it has been published in multiple chiropractic journals. It has also been proven as a fact, due to written records.

Check out the journal:

"Palmer lived but a short distance from Still and several Missouri chiropractors reported seeing D.D. Palmer's name in A.T. Still's guest book in the early 1890s. The historian, Booth, named Obie Stothers as the DO who taught Palmer the "old doctor's" (Still's) osteopathic techniques."

http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/10/14/02.html

 

[BMW19]

Read further and you will see this:


"Palmer recognized this controversy as well as the similarities between chiropractic and osteopathy. Palmer stated that he was not "the fist person to replace subluxated vertebrae, for this art has been practiced for thousands of years. I do claim, however, to be the first to replace displaced vertebrae by using the spinous and transverse processes as levers." Palmer went on to devote much of his textbook, The Chiropractor's Adjustor, to refuting the osteopaths' claims that chiropractic was, in fact, osteopathy"

This does not change the fact that Macman claims that I denounced all validity of DO's writing articles, which I did no such thing. We can argue back and forth all day long about who manipulated what first. The argument btwn Macman and I is the issue of him putting words in my mouth. At no time did I ever question the validity of all DO's writing articles. This was his spin on things.

(By the way it is very easy to cut and paste snippets of articles to make yourself seem correct)

BMW-

You keep arguing against valdity of this because it was "written by a DO." Ironically, it has been published in multiple chiropractic journals. It has also been proven as a fact, due to written records.

Check out the journal:

"Palmer lived but a short distance from Still and several Missouri chiropractors reported seeing D.D. Palmer's name in A.T. Still's guest book in the early 1890s. The historian, Booth, named Obie Stothers as the DO who taught Palmer the "old doctor's" (Still's) osteopathic techniques."

http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/10/14/02.html

 

[OSUdoc08]

Read further and you will see this:


"Palmer recognized this controversy as well as the similarities between chiropractic and osteopathy. Palmer stated that he was not "the fist person to replace subluxated vertebrae, for this art has been practiced for thousands of years. I do claim, however, to be the first to replace displaced vertebrae by using the spinous and transverse processes as levers." Palmer went on to devote much of his textbook, The Chiropractor's Adjustor, to refuting the osteopaths' claims that chiropractic was, in fact, osteopathy"

This does not change the fact that Macman claims that I denounced all validity of DO's writing articles, which I did no such thing. We can argue back and forth all day long about who manipulated what first. The argument btwn Macman and I is the issue of him putting words in my mouth. At no time did I ever question the validity of all DO's writing articles. This was his spin on things.

(By the way it is very easy to cut and paste snippets of articles to make yourself seem correct)

BMW-

You wouldn't make a good defense attorney. He never denied visiting DO's prior to "inventing" chiropractics.

Being that he did not deny these visits, it cannot be proven that he did not use some of this information to his benefit.

Ask yourself this question:

If it was already around before DO's, why did he keep visiting them?

P.S. You DID denounce the validity of DO's writing articles about other professions. It was a VERY CLEAR implication.

 

[BMW19]

"P.S. You DID denounce the validity of DO's writing articles about other professions. It was a VERY CLEAR implication."

Please show me the post in which I said this. I suppose you would make a good attorney, making up things that I posted. Perhaps neither of us would make good attorneys and that is why we are in medical school!

Please don't call it chiropractics
it is embarrasing to me and yourself. I don't care what you think about the profession, if you cannot pronounce it or spell it correctly then you should not be talking at all. Its like me saying Osteopathics medicine and expecting to have credibility (dont' say it was a typo because it is like the third time you did it).

Wow you have the same disorder as Macman, "can'treaditis". I never denied that he may have developed some of his thought processes based on other techniques. He even admits that manipulation was going on for thousands of years. Does that mean that Still stole it from ancient egyptians because they had it in heiroglyphics? What I did say is that we don't know exactly what happened and for all we know Palmer was the first to use TP's and SP's as levers as he states in your article. In fact if you go back and read my post I agreed with you. Even if it wasn't all that original it supported my argument. If DC's are using the same techniques as DO's from the 1800's then why are DC's considered quacks when they do it but when DO's do it it is evidence based treatment.

Continuing on the primrose path,

BMW-

You wouldn't make a good defense attorney. He never denied visiting DO's prior to "inventing" chiropractics.

Being that he did not deny these visits, it cannot be proven that he did not use some of this information to his benefit.

Ask yourself this question:

If it was already around before DO's, why did he keep visiting them?

P.S. You DID denounce the validity of DO's writing articles about other professions. It was a VERY CLEAR implication.

 

[OSUdoc08]

"P.S. You DID denounce the validity of DO's writing articles about other professions. It was a VERY CLEAR implication."

Please show me the post in which I said this. I suppose you would make a good attorney, making up things that I posted. Perhaps neither of us would make good attorneys and that is why we are in medical school!

Please don't call it chiropractics
it is embarrasing to me and yourself. I don't care what you think about the profession, if you cannot pronounce it or spell it correctly then you should not be talking at all. Its like me saying Osteopathics medicine and expecting to have credibility (dont' say it was a typo because it is like the third time you did it).

Wow you have the same disorder as Macman, "can'treaditis". I never denied that he may have developed some of his thought processes based on other techniques. He even admits that manipulation was going on for thousands of years. Does that mean that Still stole it from ancient egyptians because they had it in heiroglyphics? What I did say is that we don't know exactly what happened and for all we know Palmer was the first to use TP's and SP's as levers as he states in your article. In fact if you go back and read my post I agreed with you. Even if it wasn't all that original it supported my argument. If DC's are using the same techniques as DO's from the 1800's then why are DC's considered quacks when they do it but when DO's do it it is evidence based treatment.

Continuing on the primrose path,

BMW-

1. I never said DO's are quacks. I find it odd that you continue bringing that up when responding to my posts.

2. You wrote the following sarcastic post "Seems like a pretty objective article by Dr. Pearson, D.O.!!!" followed by this admission "I simply said that I felt that he was biased, as a DO saying that DC's stole manipulation from AT Still." Therefore it is quite obvious you believe that the author was incapable of writing an objective, unbiased article, due to his earned degree.
I then showed you that this information was found elsewhere, in a Chiropractic journal.

3. We know what happened. It is a fact that Palmer visited the American School of Osteopathy prior to the existence of Chiropractic(s). You have to be pretty slow to not figure that one out.

4. I use the term Chiropractics for a reason. I will let you think carefully as to why I do. On a side note, I find it amusing that the profession uses an adjective as a noun.

Osteopathic & Chiropractic are both English adjectives.

Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (Notice the adjective precedes the noun.)

Doctor of Chiropractic (where is the noun? it is supposed to be 'medicine', but since DC's aren't full medical physicians, the word had to be removed.)

 

[BMW19]

I never accused you of saying that DO's were quacks. Why would I do that? I am going to be one!

You clearly have twisted and mangled my words to your benefit. It is plainly obvious that the only reason I said that the author was biased was the content of his article Meaning that DC's stole manipulation. That had nothing to do with his merit of earning a DO. Simply stated, he felt that DC's stole it. That does not discredit every DO that ever wrote an article!! When one Republican scoffs at a liberal idea does that discredit every Republican? That is ridiculous. As Macman said, each is judged by their merit.

You only posted a portion of the article to your benefit. The rest of the article went on to say that DD Palmer vehemently refuted the fact that he "stole manipulation". In fact no one ever disputed that Palmer was the first to use the TP as a lever to adjust (something that OMM uses on a regular basis)

That is nice that you misuse the term for the profession of chiropractic by saying chiropracitc(s) for your own little game. Perhaps you will let us in on your secret?

Look up the word medicine and then get back to me.....

BMW-

1. I never said DO's are quacks. I find it odd that you continue bringing that up when responding to my posts.

2. You wrote the following sarcastic post "Seems like a pretty objective article by Dr. Pearson, D.O.!!!" followed by this admission "I simply said that I felt that he was biased, as a DO saying that DC's stole manipulation from AT Still." Therefore it is quite obvious you believe that the author was incapable of writing an objective, unbiased article, due to his earned degree.
I then showed you that this information was found elsewhere, in a Chiropractic journal.

3. We know what happened. It is a fact that Palmer visited the American School of Osteopathy prior to the existence of Chiropractic(s). You have to be pretty slow to not figure that one out.

4. I use the term Chiropractics for a reason. I will let you think carefully as to why I do. On a side note, I find it amusing that the profession uses an adjective as a noun.

Osteopathic & Chiropractic are both English adjectives.

Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (Notice the adjective precedes the noun.)

Doctor of Chiropractic (where is the noun? it is supposed to be 'medicine', but since DC's aren't full medical physicians, the word had to be removed.)

 

[macman]

Thank for proving my point-I hope you are enjoying left field. You make less sense everytime you post.

Macman,

If you want to get personal we can, I was trying not to. This whole argument stemmed from your idiotic statement which was this:

So by your logic, all chiro research done by D.C.'s is suspect? all medical articles by M.D.'s a problem for you?.....come on!

You cannot hide behind your "eloquent" writing. How in any way does me saying that I didn't think the author was being objective mean that all reserch done by DO's is suspect? You cannot back this statement up because I never implied that! You are the one that is creating an argument out of thin air! I never said, implied or assumed what you said in your above statement. I simply said that I felt that he was biased, as a DO saying that DC's stole manipulation from AT Still. How does that possibly equate to I question the validity of ALL DO'S! Again you have the faulty logic. You may know your SI joint mechanics, but your debate skills are suffering!!

Taking the Primrose path,

BMW-

 

[BMW19]

I really hope you know that you bolded your own quote. If you do then what point was proven by that? You love to say that your point was proven but still have not explained how.

Lets try it again....

How does me saying that one DO was biased in his article proclaim that all DO's are biased and then assume that all research done by chiropractors is suspect....This makes absolutely NO SENSE

If I am in left field you are in the parking lot my friend.....

BMW-

Thank for proving my point-I hope you are enjoying left field. You make less sense everytime you post.

 

[BMW19]

Since this thread has turned into nothing more than me vs. Bonnie and Clyde over there, I am going to refrain from posting down this idiot path where you guys dissect my words to your benefit. My point was just that DO's and DC's use similar techniques. They should both be respected. That was it! Is that voodoo Mac?

So unless Batman and Robin here have anything else to add, I will wait until someone outside the justice league of America posts with a view on this subject. Its been great fellas.....


BMW-

Thank for proving my point-I hope you are enjoying left field. You make less sense everytime you post.

 

[Krazykritter]

I have to say...I'm quite amazed at the ridiculous cut & paste war this has turned into. I have nothing against DC's except for the ones who overstep their bounds. Hell, I feel the same way about nurses I've worked w/ (when working in nursing) who feel that it is the inherent duty to question physician's orders. Everyone has their specialty and they should stick to it.

As you all have pointed out...Palmer did "visit" Still and may have learned some techniques from him...that fact has been documented. However, saying that Palmer STOLE manipulation from osteopathy (why do I hate that word so much??) is a litte harsh and, frankly, biased. Each profession has their place thanks to the wonderful capitalist economic system we live under.

Let's face it...not enough DO's want to practice manipulation full-time to meet the demand from the public. As stated for the standards of care for back pain:

1. Anti-inflammatory drugs
2. Postural adjustment
3. MANIPULATION

DO's are the only group that can provide all three. DC's have their niche in providing #3 quite effectively for the people who utilize their services.

 

[mysophobe]

You cannot hide behind your "eloquent" writing.

Yeah Macman, damn you and your logic!

 

[BMW19]

Thank you for an intelligent post. I thought I was in the twilight zone for a while there.

B-

I have to say...I'm quite amazed at the ridiculous cut & paste war this has turned into. I have nothing against DC's except for the ones who overstep their bounds. Hell, I feel the same way about nurses I've worked w/ (when working in nursing) who feel that it is the inherent duty to question physician's orders. Everyone has their specialty and they should stick to it.

As you all have pointed out...Palmer did "visit" Still and may have learned some techniques from him...that fact has been documented. However, saying that Palmer STOLE manipulation from osteopathy (why do I hate that word so much??) is a litte harsh and, frankly, biased. Each profession has their place thanks to the wonderful capitalist economic system we live under.

Let's face it...not enough DO's want to practice manipulation full-time to meet the demand from the public. As stated for the standards of care for back pain:

1. Anti-inflammatory drugs
2. Postural adjustment
3. MANIPULATION

DO's are the only group that can provide all three. DC's have their niche in providing #3 quite effectively for the people who utilize their services.

 

[uacharya]

I in addition said they wanted to SPECIALIZE in manipulation and go FURTHER. I never said they were quacks if that is what you are incinuating (since you so selectively chose to quote part of me). I was just giving the knowledge that I was given in hopes to help differentiate the two. I believe chiropractors are in great need, especially since D.O.'s in a medical environment due to health care restraints can't always do manipulation. And over time Chiros have become their own seperate entity as has D.O.s from M.D.s

Sorry if I offended anyone. Not my intention.

 

[BMW19]

Yeah Macman, damn you and your logic!

This coming from someone who I am sure will have a wonderful bedside manner.......

Quote:
Originally Posted by YouDontKnowJack
when you guys become attendings, are you gonna treat your slaves like sh8?



Yes. (mysophobe)
__________________
Beware the baked snack cracker.

 

[macman]

I really hope you know that you bolded your own quote. If you do then what point was proven by that? You love to say that your point was proven but still have not explained how.

Lets try it again....

How does me saying that one DO was biased in his article proclaim that all DO's are biased and then assume that all research done by chiropractors is suspect....This makes absolutely NO SENSE

If I am in left field you are in the parking lot my friend.....

BMW-

I bolded your quote, not mine-please look again.

I agree, this discussion should end, I hope you were not taking me too seriously, and it appeared you were not taking your self completely seriously either.

You, IMHO, engage in much double talk, but again, we will never agree, so cont. debate is pointless. However, your efforts to defend D.C.'s are admirable.

 

[BMW19]

macman,

I am so happy that you completely proved my point at the end of this debate!! As I said all along you have either "can'treaditis" or you just like to post without reviewing your own quotes!! That was your quote that I have bolded once again for your reading pleasure. Those are impressive credentials at the bottom but they sure ain't mine yet. So I don't know what is worse, my double talk or you not knowing your own statements. Be it as it may, you are correct that we agree to disagree.

BMW-




Your logic is faulty

So by your logic, all chiro research done by D.C.'s is suspect? all medical articles by M.D.'s a problem for you?.....come on!
If you want to attack the article, attack it on substance

I know some argue here that chiro is the red headed step child of osteopathy , maybe it is, but each profession has to stand on its own two feet today. Osteopathy is very different now, and allopathy was prescribing poisons then! I'm not sure what point is you make there.
__________________
Class of '05- DMU-COMS

2005-2006: Med Pre-lim, Univ. Of Massachusetts Med. Center

2006-2009: PM&R, Mayo Clinic

I bolded your quote, not mine-please look again.I agree, this discussion should end, I hope you were not taking me too seriously, and it appeared you were not taking your self completely seriously either.

You, IMHO, engage in much double talk, but again, we will never agree, so cont. debate is pointless. However, your efforts to defend D.C.'s are admirable.

 

[macman]

BMW-

1) nice graceful exit from the debate

2) look above at your post #108, responding, I assume, to my post #107, where I quote you, not myself....if you want to split hairs-the bold of my writing was in your quote, which I quoted. Is your head spinning yet????????????

good night and good luck..................

someone end the madnessssssssssssss!!!!!!

 

[Raven Feather]

I have to say...I'm quite amazed at the ridiculous cut & paste war this has turned into. I have nothing against DC's except for the ones who overstep their bounds. Hell, I feel the same way about nurses I've worked w/ (when working in nursing) who feel that it is the inherent duty to question physician's orders. Everyone has their specialty and they should stick to it.
As you all have pointed out...Palmer did "visit" Still and may have learned some techniques from him...that fact has been documented. However, saying that Palmer STOLE manipulation from osteopathy (why do I hate that word so much??) is a litte harsh and, frankly, biased. Each profession has their place thanks to the wonderful capitalist economic system we live under.

Let's face it...not enough DO's want to practice manipulation full-time to meet the demand from the public. As stated for the standards of care for back pain:

1. Anti-inflammatory drugs
2. Postural adjustment
3. MANIPULATION

DO's are the only group that can provide all three. DC's have their niche in providing #3 quite effectively for the people who utilize their services.

So ending the war and changing the subject:

It is the nurses duty to question physician's orders to clarify things in general or things they feel questionable---after all, in most states, if the nurse goes through will something (ex: giving a large dose of a drug the Dr ordered) it would legally be his or her fault. It is called C.Y.A.--covering your a$$. I know I have caught several mistakes by questioning physician's orders--most not detrimental anyway, but still. It is not over-stepping one's bounds, but adhering to their scope of practice.

Not trying to start an argument or anything, just trying to point out somethings b/c I think, often times, people (nurses) are misconceived in why they do what they do. Of course, there are probably many that think they are know-it-alls---I've seen plenty of them too.

 

[mysophobe]

This coming from someone who I am sure will have a wonderful bedside manner.......

Quote:
Originally Posted by YouDontKnowJack
when you guys become attendings, are you gonna treat your slaves like sh8?



Yes. (mysophobe)
__________________
Beware the baked snack cracker.

What does how I treat my residents have to do with how I act towards my patients? 😕 😕 😕

If you use that logic, you will be accusing your patients of not being objective towards their diseases and making stuff up.

 

[BMW19]

Yes my head is spinning because I really feel like I am in the twilight zone. "Do Do Do......" PLEASE go back to post #77 and see where you made the ridiculous statement that since I said ONE DO was biased in his article it meant that all chiro and MD research is suspect!! You said that, not me. Don't try and weasel out of it like OSUDoc says that he calls chiropractic- chiropractic(S) for his own secret reasons (LOL).

Yes my exits usually are graceful, however on this ridiculous thread my exit feels bumpy like I have hemorrhoids!!

Myosphobe,

So we are to assume that you will treat your residents like absolute **** but your patients like Gold? Ok we will give you the benefit of the doubt.

Gracefully exiting................

BMW-

BMW-

1) nice graceful exit from the debate

2) look above at your post #108, responding, I assume, to my post #107, where I quote you, not myself....if you want to split hairs-the bold of my writing was in your quote, which I quoted. Is your head spinning yet????????????

good night and good luck..................

someone end the madnessssssssssssss!!!!!!

 

[OSUdoc08]

So ending the war and changing the subject:

It is the nurses duty to question physician's orders to clarify things in general or things they feel questionable---after all, in most states, if the nurse goes through will something (ex: giving a large dose of a drug the Dr ordered) it would legally be his or her fault. It is called C.Y.A.--covering your a$$. I know I have caught several mistakes by questioning physician's orders--most not detrimental anyway, but still. It is not over-stepping one's bounds, but adhering to their scope of practice.

Not trying to start an argument or anything, just trying to point out somethings b/c I think, often times, people (nurses) are misconceived in why they do what they do. Of course, there are probably many that think they are know-it-alls---I've seen plenty of them too.

Yes, it is the nurse's duty to question the physician. This is what prevents medical mistakes.

There is no such thing as over-stepping one's bounds. Any perception by the physician of this can be resolved by a stickinassectomy.

 

[611]

The difference is that OMT is done by a licensed physician whereas chiropractic manuevers are not.

Incorrect 👎

 

[611]

😴

 

[OSUdoc08]

Incorrect 👎

How is that incorrect?

 

[611]

Atleast in my state, Chiropractors are licensed physicians. The licensing board is actually called Chiropractic Medicine, which frankly I don't understand. But that's the way it is.

 

[OSUdoc08]

Atleast in my state, Chiropractors are licensed physicians. The licensing board is actually called Chiropractic Medicine, which frankly I don't understand. But that's the way it is.

They may be called licensed physicians, but this is a misnomer, since they don't have all of the full practice rights that an MD/DO has.

 

[BMW19]

611 thanks for solidifying my point that it took like 700 posts to get across!

BMW-

Atleast in my state, Chiropractors are licensed physicians. The licensing board is actually called Chiropractic Medicine, which frankly I don't understand. But that's the way it is.