[olePigeon]

Texas Medical Association Sues Board of Chiropractic Examiners

I heard about this on Dr. Dean show. I'm grateful that doctors are finally standing up to these quacks. My hope is that this will set precedence for medical boards in other states to sue.

This particular lawsuit is to limit the scope in which chiropractors can operate, specifically, they should not be allowed to make medical diagnosis... because they're not medical doctors.

So far, 2 of the 3 limitations have been supported, and the 3rd is currently being decided (I expect it'll be upheld as well.)

First, Chiropractors are not allowed to perform on patients under anesthesia. The obvious problems posed by this scenario is that the patient can not respond if the Chiropractor's quackery goes awry. Considering Chiropractors in the recent past have killed or permanently disabled patients without anesthesia, it's important for the patient to be able to give feedback during "manipulation."

Second, they're not allowed to administer needle electromyogram tests, which includes inserting special needles directly into muscle tissue. Obvious reasons are because they're not medical doctors and they don't know what they f*ck they're doing or how to even approach a diagnosis for neurological or neuromuscular disorders.

Third, which has still yet to be decided, they're not allowed to make medical diagnosis period, which relates to the first two limitations. They're not medical doctors, so they should not be diagnosing medical conditions.


As much sh*t I give the state of Texas, I'm certainly glad their medical community has stepped up to the plate. Their school board, on the other hand, is a lost cause.

[hyteckit]

All I know is that olepigeon really hates Chiropractors.

You seem to hold a grudge or vendetta against them.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

All I know is that olepigeon really hates Chiropractors.

You seem to hold a grudge or vendetta against them.

I sure do, and so do many doctors and medical professionals. Chiropractors pretend they're doctors without any of the medical training, diagnosing problems they know nothing about, offering treatments for problems they can't possibly treat, and selling snake oil to people who might otherwise get real help from an actual doctor.

People die because they seek alternative medicine instead of seeing a medical doctor. Because alternative medicine practitioners don't see a problem with that scenario, I absolutely despise them and their practices. They are, unequivocally, killing people with their nonsense.


As soon as chiropractors are no longer allowed to make medical diagnosis and are forced to refer their clients to a medical doctor, I'll relax. People can go see a chiropractor or witch doctor all they want so long as any real problems are properly diagnosed.

At least in the state of Texas it's looking very hopeful, and I dearly hope other states will follow.

[hyteckit]

I don't know. I put Chiropractors pretty much on the same level as dentists. One straightens teeth and the other straightens your back. Both help people relieve pain.

I'm more concern with regulating the plastic surgery industry, because right now the cosmetic/plastic surgery is largely self-regulated.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

I don't know. I put Chiropractors pretty much on the same level as dentists. One straightens teeth and the other straightens your back. Both help people relieve pain.

I'm more concern with regulating the plastic surgery industry, because right now the cosmetic/plastic surgery is largely self-regulated.

Talked to a student last night with a bulging disk. Intense, horrible pain for two weeks. One session on traction machine=much better. The alternative was surgery via a regular doctor-not much of an option.

No way this is placebo effect with this guy, and I know him pretty well and he's tough, ex-Army Ranger (it's not another excuse).

So I'm sure they have their place. And their bad eggs.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by finboy 

Talked to a student last night with a bulging disk. Intense, horrible pain for two weeks. One session on traction machine=much better. The alternative was surgery via a regular doctor-not much of an option.

No way this is placebo effect with this guy, and I know him pretty well and he's tough, ex-Army Ranger (it's not another excuse).

So I'm sure they have their place. And their bad eggs.

Exactly. There are those who would avoid back surgery because of the risk, cost, or the long recovery period. I heard the success rate isn't so great either. Chiropractic and acupuncture provide a good alternative to surgery for relieving pain.

I have a friend who's doctor she has been seeing for close to 10 years didn't even know she has a curved spine, until she went to a chiropractic who determined that was the cause of her back pain. I was surprise her doctor for close to 10 years can't determined that she had a curved spine. She told me it was hard to tell from the x-rays.

They just need to weed out the bad 'doctors' or 'healers'.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I agree it's silly when chiropractors make all sorts of dubious claims like their techniques can cure cancer or whatever.

But on the other hand, to claim the whole profession has no value when it comes to matters actually related to back injuries and pain is also dubious.

I know many people who swear by their chiropractors. Never personally heard of anyone whose death was in any way tied to one -though I'm sure you can find examples of misuse of just about ANY medical procedure.

Even IF the treatment was somehow only ever a placebo effect, it still wouldn't bother me. Since I do know people who claim to have been greatly helped by it, what does it really matter if their mind did all the healing after the treatment, or the actual treatment did the healing directly? The result was the same, and the patient is happy and credits the chiropractor, so what's the big deal?

It's better that they should just be given pain killers and told to suck it up? (Which as I understand it is what many doctors fall back on.)

[finboy]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

I heard the success rate isn't so great either. Chiropractic and acupuncture provide a good alternative to surgery for relieving pain.

They just need to weed out the bad 'doctors' or 'healers'.

I don't know anyone who has had successful back surgery, and I've known, in my life, literally DOZENS of people who've had back surgery both minor and major. New techniques, old techniques, you name it. It's really iffy. Sleeping-in-a-rocking-chair for the rest of your life kind of iffy.

I'm sure there are some chiropractors who don't know their stuff, but I can tell you from experience with physical therapy that some folks are more in tune with the human body than others, even doctors. After I was T-boned by a semi-truck a few years ago, several orthopods never understood the injuries, but the PT guy got it immediately, put his finger on the spot on my neck that was pulled. The ligaments are still pulled there, but he gave me exercises to deal with it. The doctors just kind of shrugged and said "oh well, it's permanent."

Beware -- pain is pain. And big steps with the spine is never a good idea. But there are probably some really good chiros out there along with the scum.

[Shaddim]

I still enjoy a good adjustment, it's damned relaxing and makes my back feel better for a couple months.

[olePigeon]

None of the benefits you list can't be addressed through a licensed physical therapist or masseuse. Anecdotal evidence means almost nothing, people swear by their psychics and ion energy bracelets as well.

I know that chiropractors are encouraged to also be a licensed physical therapist or masseuse, but only to lend credibility to the practitioner that will invariably offer chiropractic along with the other new age crap. Chiropractic is not physical therapy.


Here is the bottom line: if chiropractors want to demonstrate that their profession can legitimately be applied (and I'm referring to all their claims), prove it. Set up a double-blind study and demonstrate the effectiveness of their practice.

Why don't they? Instead they lobby congressmen and women so they can sidestep laws that are in place to protect peoples' health.

Unfortunately people seem content in trusting their health and the health of others to talk show hosts, failed actresses, and Playboy models.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Unfortunately people seem content in trusting their health and the health of others to talk show hosts, failed actresses, and Playboy models.

Unfortunately people seem content in trusting their health and the health of others to the government!

I'll trust what a Playboy model has to say over the world's biggest bunch of losers who can't even make TRILLIONS of dollars they're entrusted with into anything but a bigger pile of debt.

I'm starting to suspect a chiropractor groped you or something. Why else all the melodrama over them?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

But on the other hand, to claim the whole profession has no value when it comes to matters actually related to back injuries and pain is also dubious.

Yes, except the entire point of this lawsuit is that they don't know how to diagnos back injuries or back pain. They don't have the proper medical training. So people are entrusting their health with someone who quite literally doesn't know that what they're doing.

If anything, maybe, just maybe this lawsuit will force chiropractors to completely change their curriculum, have the curriculum certified by a medical board, then they can be qualified to actually treat people with back problems.

As it stands, chiropractic has very little to do with any substantiated methods. They're literally just "adjusting" your back... because... well, because some guy in the 1800s claimed he could cure deafness (and 95% of all diseases) by adjusting the back and realigning the energies in the body.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

I put Chiropractors pretty much on the same level as dentists. One straightens teeth and the other straightens your back. Both help people relieve pain.

Chiropractors are not even on the same planet as DDS, much less a bar. A DDS is a medical doctor. They have proper medical training and use established medical techniques in dentistry. Dentists don't pretend to be anything other than a dentist, nor do they claim that fixing your teeth will cure scoliosis, or attempt to sell you herbal remedies and "detox" foot pads.

[BadKosh]

The lousy training Dr.'s get these days doesn't put them much higher in skill level than chiropractors. Medicate, bill and move on.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The lousy training Dr.'s get these days doesn't put them much higher in skill level than chiropractors. Medicate, bill and move on.

There is a problem with compassion in medicine, mostly because doctors are taught not to get emotional with patients. That doesn't mean they aren't skilled physicians, and to even elevate chiropractors to the same level as a surgeon is freakin' insult.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Here is the bottom line: if chiropractors want to demonstrate that their profession can legitimately be applied (and I'm referring to all their claims), prove it. Set up a double-blind study and demonstrate the effectiveness of their practice.

I don't give two shits about all their claims, I just know that the adjustments are great. You having a burr in your ass over them doesn't matter to me.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The lousy training Dr.'s get these days doesn't put them much higher in skill level than chiropractors. Medicate, bill and move on.

and medicate, and medicate, and medicate... Without my chiropractor I'd be on pain meds a good part of the time. I'd much rather go and get my back adjusted every few months than rely on Oxycontin.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I don't give two shits about all their claims, I just know that the adjustments are great. You having a burr in your ass over them doesn't matter to me.

I've been in the same tired debate with Ole countless times. People stress their bodies and mis-align their bones with tense muscles and improper exercise and stretching. Chiropractors might not cure Cancer or split the atom but when it comes to helping people with back pain I've never heard an ill word from anyone I've known or heard about any deaths besides when OlePigeon decides to get his panties in a twist about Chiropractors for the 100th time.

Personally, I think the idea that "my back hurts, give me refined Opiates and slice me open" is a far more retarded treatment than getting a little snap and crack now and then.

Also never heard of any Chiropractor pushing skeletal energies or anything else that OlePigeon keeps going on about, maybe those things are commonplace out in hip California but around here Chiropractors snap backs.

Edit: Obligatory "My father is a home builder and was nearly crippled in his 40s by all sorts of pain, he has been going to a Chiro for years now and can out-work even a spry youngster like me, at the age of 62"

I know, I know, anecdotal bullshit right? Well unfortunately when it comes to advice I trust my father more than some irate Californian on the internet. If I ever start having chronic back pain I am going to a Chiro too.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Chiropractors might not cure Cancer or split the atom but when it comes to helping people with back pain I've never heard an ill word from anyone I've known or heard about any deaths besides when OlePigeon decides to get his panties in a twist about Chiropractors for the 100th time.

Not my claim, I linked to various studies regarding chiropractic from the American Heart Association, Journal of Neurology, Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, and the Annals of Internal Medicine, as well as many, many other studies.

Originally Posted by sek929 

I know, I know, anecdotal bullshit right?

He would most likely have gotten better without the chiropractor. Correlation is not causation.

Originally Posted by sek929 

Well unfortunately when it comes to advice I trust my father more than some irate Californian on the internet. If I ever start having chronic back pain I am going to a Chiro too.

My advice? It's the Texas Medical Association. Go to scholar.google.com and search for chiropractic stroke.

Here's a video for you to watch if you don't feel like reading, complete with anecdotes that you're so fond of.

[CollinG3G4]

Were you molested by a group of chiropractors as a child or something?

[sek929]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

He would most likely have gotten better without the chiropractor. Correlation is not causation.

Complete and utter bullshit. A man in his mid 40s with severe pain from a lifetime of physical labor doesn't get better by himself. He either would have been put on medication and eventually sliced open, or he could pay a little money and get his back snapped every couple of weeks. Which sounds more reasonable and less invasive?

Lemme guess, you are an overweight schlub who sits at a desk for a living and has no idea what it feels like to work your body hard for decades.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

I'm starting to suspect a chiropractor groped you or something.

Originally Posted by CollinG3G4 

Were you molested by a group of chiropractors as a child or something?

No.

[sek929]

Also, if I had the time and wasn't already completely wasting it here, I'd start linking to any number of actual doctors who've killed people. How many people die under anesthesia every year compared to killed in a Chiropractors office?

Can you just admit that you are focusing so hard on this issue that you fail to recognize the inherent danger in treating human beings across the board?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Complete and utter bullshit.

Irony, funny.

Originally Posted by sek929 

Lemme guess, you are an overweight schlub who sits at a desk for a living and has no idea what it feels like to work your body hard for decades.

12 years of martial arts and 4 years of football. I've had my share of broken bones, torn muscles (including several torn lumbar muscles), and general discomfort. I don't think I can compare myself to a product of 1940s, no. I'm sitting behind a desk now, yes, but the low stress environment has done wonders.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Also, if I had the time and wasn't already completely wasting it here, I'd start linking to any number of actual doctors who've killed people.

OK, but that number is meaningless unless you put it in context. The ratio of successful outpatients from doctors is higher than that of chiropractors, probably in part because chiropractors can't actually treat 99% of the crap they peddle.

Originally Posted by sek929 

Can you just admit that you are focusing so hard on this issue that you fail to recognize the inherent danger in treating human beings across the board?

I want chiropractors and alternative medicine in general to be restricted and for their claims to be checked. Currently there are no restrictions, and that is what concerns me, which is why I thought it was important to post about this lawsuit.

Why are you so quick to defend someone who performs procedures they are not properly trained to do? So you see the chiropractor for just your back, yet you don't question their ability to do their job when they are clearly overreaching their abilities and education by extending their "solutions" in areas outside of back pain?

I wouldn't have so much animosity towards chiropractors if the only thing they did was treat back problems using established methods. But they don't. They call themselves doctors, then offer diagnosis, solutions, and treatments they are not qualified to offer.

Currently chiropractic is considered alternative medicine because they (perhaps not all Chiropractors individually, but the practice in general) hold onto the spiritual and unfounded aspects of chiropractic. Don't you think it would be in everyone's best interest if all the quackery was removed from chiropractic, their curriculum overhauled to reflect modern medicine, and chiropractic made into an actual medical profession?

There's no reason to be defensive about studying chiropractic, removing the parts that don't work, and expanding on the parts that do.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Irony, funny.
I'm sitting behind a desk now, yes, but the low stress environment has done wonders.

Sitting all day can be just as stressful on your back as actual labor, especially for people with poor posture. I can recommend a good chiropractor that several people I know use.

[macintologist]

Since I have access to a top-notch medical literature database I did a search on this topic. Here are the titles and abstracts of articles found. No copyright infringement since abstracts are freely available from PubMed.

Database: Ovid MEDLINE(R) <1950 to October Week 1 2010>
Search Strategy:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 *Chiropractic/ (2322)
2 treatment outcome/ or treatment failure/ (464556)
3 1 and 2 (100)
4 limit 3 to ((comparative study or guideline or patient education handout or practice guideline or "review") and last 10 years) (10)

***************************

<1>
Authors
Walker BF. French SD. Grant W. Green S.
Title
Combined chiropractic interventions for low-back pain. [Review] [85 refs]
NLM Journal Name
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chiropractors commonly use a combination of interventions to treat people with low-back pain (LBP). OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of combined chiropractic interventions (that is, a combination of therapies, other than spinal manipulation alone) on pain, disability, back-related function, overall improvement, and patient satisfaction in adults with LBP, aged 18 and older. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: The Cochrane Back Review Group Trials Register (May 2009), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), and MEDLINE (from January 1966), EMBASE (from January 1980), CINAHL (from January 1982), MANTIS (from Inception) and the Index to Chiropractic Literature (from Inception) to May 2009. We also screened references of identified articles and contacted chiropractic researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised trials comparing the use of combined chiropractic interventions (rather than spinal manipulation alone) with no treatment or other therapies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted the data using standardised forms. Both descriptive synthesis and meta-analyses were performed. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 studies involving 2887 participants with LBP. Three studies had low risk of bias. Included studies evaluated a range of chiropractic procedures in a variety of sub-populations of people with LBP.No trials were located of combined chiropractic interventions compared to no treatment. For acute and subacute LBP, chiropractic interventions improved short- and medium-term pain (SMD -0.25 (95% CI -0.46 to -0.04) and MD -0.89 (95%CI -1.60 to -0.18)) compared to other treatments, but there was no significant difference in long-term pain (MD -0.46 (95% CI -1.18 to 0.26)). Short-term improvement in disability was greater in the chiropractic group compared to other therapies (SMD -0.36 (95% CI -0.70 to -0.02)). However, the effect was small and all studies contributing to these results had high risk of bias. There was no difference in medium- and long-term disability. No difference was demonstrated for combined chiropractic interventions for chronic LBP and for studies that had a mixed population of LBP. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Combined chiropractic interventions slightly improved pain and disability in the short-term and pain in the medium-term for acute and subacute LBP. However, there is currently no evidence that supports or refutes that these interventions provide a clinically meaningful difference for pain or disability in people with LBP when compared to other interventions. Future research is very likely to change the estimate of effect and our confidence in the results. [References: 85]
Date of Publication
2010
Link to the Ovid Full Text or citation
Ovid: Welcome to OvidSP

<6>
Authors
Hurwitz EL. Morgenstern H. Harber P. Kominski GF. Yu F. Adams AH.
Title
A randomized trial of chiropractic manipulation and mobilization for patients with neck pain: clinical outcomes from the UCLA neck-pain study.
NLM Journal Name
American journal of public health
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study compared the relative effectiveness of cervical spine manipulation and mobilization for neck pain. METHODS: Neck-pain patients were randomized to the following conditions: manipulation with or without heat, manipulation with or without electrical muscle stimulation, mobilization with or without heat, and mobilization with or without electrical muscle stimulation. RESULTS: Of 960 eligible patients, 336 enrolled in the study. Mean reductions in pain and disability were similar in the manipulation and mobilization groups through 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical spine manipulation and mobilization yield comparable clinical outcomes.
Date of Publication
2002 Oct
Link to the Ovid Full Text or citation
Ovid: Welcome to OvidSP

<8>
Authors
Schiller L.
Title
Effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy in the treatment of mechanical thoracic spine pain: a pilot randomized clinical trial.
NLM Journal Name
Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, no substantiated studies have been performed to investigate the efficacy of spinal manipulative therapy on thoracic spinal syndromes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy in the treatment of mechanical thoracic spine pain. STUDY DESIGN: A single-blind, randomized, comparative, controlled pilot study. SETTING: Technikon Natal Chiropractic Clinic in Durban, South Africa. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty subjects selected from the general population (from 16 to 60 years old) were randomly divided into two different treatment groups of 15 each. METHODS: The objective measurements collected were the thoracic spine ranges of motion with the BROM II goniometer and pain threshold with an algometer. The subjective information required completion of the Oswestry Back Pain Disability Index, short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and Numerical Pain Rating Scale-101 Questionnaire by the patient. These 3 forms and objective measurements were collected before the first and final treatment and again at the 1-month follow-up consultation. The data gathered were then statistically analyzed with use of a 95% confidence level. The nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to compare intergroup and intragroup data, respectively. This was conducted at the alpha =.05 level of confidence. Further assessment of the data was conducted by use of power analysis. INTERVENTIONS: The treatment group received thoracic spinal manipulation. The placebo group received nonfunctional ultrasound application only. The research project was carried out so that both groups received 6 treatments over a period of 2 to 3 weeks. A 1-month follow-up appointment was scheduled after the final treatment to assess the relative long-term benefits of the two different treatments. RESULTS: Statistically significant results (P < or = .025) were noted for the percentage of pain experienced (Numerical Pain Rating Scale) and for right and left lateral flexion during intergroup comparison after the final treatment. The final treatment results were maintained at the 1-month follow-up consultation; however, there were no further statistically significant results. It was noted that the power was weak, so the probability of committing type II error (falsely accepting the null hypothesis) for the other measurements was high. The intragroup analysis showed statistically significant improvements in the group that received spinal manipulative therapy in both subjective and objective measurements between the first to final treatment and the first treatment to the 1-month follow-up consultation. The placebo group analysis showed a statistically significant improvement in sensory pain only (subjective measurement) between the first treatment and the final treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that spinal manipulative therapy has greater benefits than placebo treatment. The sample size was small, therefore the findings of this trial study should not be considered conclusive but rather should be used as a foundation for planning future studies. In further studies a larger sample size will be necessary to identify subtle changes in measurement parameters and to add to the validity of the results.
Date of Publication
2001 Jul-Aug
Link to the Ovid Full Text or citation
Ovid: Welcome to OvidSP

<9>
Authors
Murphy DR.
Title
Chiropractic rehabilitation of the cervical spine. [Review] [20 refs]
NLM Journal Name
Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation has been a part of chiropractic almost since the beginning of the profession. Yet today, relatively few chiropractors provide rehabilitation in any systematic way in their practices. The modern era of health care calls for all spine specialists to emphasize exercise in their management strategies, and the chiropractic profession has the opportunity to establish itself as a leader in the area of rehabilitation in patients with spine-related disorders. OBJECTIVE: To present the principles and techniques of cervical rehabilitation as it is used by the author and explain the rationale for these procedures based on current knowledge of the neurophysiology of the cervical spine. CONCLUSION: Rehabilitation of the cervical spine can be performed by virtually any chiropractor because effective rehabilitative methods can be applied with minimal space and equipment. The methods presented here are designed to assess several essential functions of the cervical spine and apply procedures that are designed to maximize these functions while monitoring the clinical response to the management strategy. Future research in this area should provide more information about cervical function and assist in the development of improved management of patients with cervical spine syndromes. [References: 20]
Date of Publication
2000 Jul-Aug
Link to the Ovid Full Text or citation
Ovid: Welcome to OvidSP

<10>
Authors
Nyiendo J. Haas M. Goodwin P.
Title
Patient characteristics, practice activities, and one-month outcomes for chronic, recurrent low-back pain treated by chiropractors and family medicine physicians: a practice-based feasibility study.
NLM Journal Name
Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic low-back pain is a significant public health problem for which few therapies are supported by predictable outcomes. In this report, practice activities and 1-month outcomes data are presented for 93 chiropractic patients and 45 medical patients with chronic, recurrent low-back pain. DESIGN: A prospective, observational, community-based feasibility study involving chiropractors and family medicine physicians. SETTING: Forty private chiropractic clinics, the outpatient clinic of the Department of Family Medicine at Oregon Health Sciences University, and 5 other Portland area family medicine clinics. Outcomes Measures: The main outcome measures were pain severity, functional disability, sensory and affective pain quality at 1 month, and patient satisfaction assessed at 7 to 10 days and at 1 month. RESULTS: Although differences were noted in age, sex, education, and employment, the patients were closely matched at baseline with respect to frequency, severity, and type of low-back pain and the psychosocial dimensions of general health. The treatment of choice for chiropractors was spinal manipulation and physical therapy modalities; for medical physicians antiinflammatory agents were most frequently used. Chiropractic patients averaged 4 visits, and medical patients averaged 1 visit. On average, chiropractic patients showed improvement across all outcomes: 31% change in pain severity, 29% in functional disability, 36% in sensory pain quality, and 57% in affective pain quality. Medical patients showed minimal improvement in pain severity (6%) and functional disability (1%) and showed deterioration in the sensory (29%) and affective (26%) dimensions of pain quality. Satisfaction scores were higher for chiropractic patients. Outcomes for medical patients were heavily dependent on psychosocial status at baseline. CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic low-back pain treated by chiropractors show greater improvement and satisfaction at 1 month than patients treated by family physicians. Nonclinical factors may play an important role in patient progress. Findings from the Health Resources and Services Administration-funded project will include a report on the influence of practice activities, including more frequent visits by chiropractic patients, on the clinical course of low-back pain and patient outcomes. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2000;23:239-45).
Date of Publication
2000 May
Link to the Ovid Full Text or citation
Ovid: Welcome to OvidSP

[el chupacabra]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

[url=http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=19987]
they should not be allowed to make medical diagnosis... because they're not medical doctors.

.

And who should decide who is and isn't a doctor? The government? The same people who've done everything they can to drive up health care costs and cater to big pharmaceutical and big insurance... The people that have been lobbied to turn medical occupations into occupations of nothing more than overpaid ultra elite status quacks?

[ghporter]

macintologist, those studies were completely valid-and limited to interventions that chiropractors are (supposedly) actually trained and experienced in. Note that the interventions were specifically linked to relatively localized issues, such as cervical manipulation for neck pain... You probably won't find anything in Ovid that documents real research about a chiropractic intervention that uses spinal manipulation to improve digestion or relieve symptoms of GERD, but you will certainly be able to find chiropractic practices advertising that they can help with these issues.

el chupacabra, the definition of a medical doctor is a person who has completed a course of study that results in the award of an M.D. degree. This definition is based on a collaboration among the medical profession and various levels of government-state governments license MDs based on the recommendation of the the medical profession. It's important to note that one hallmark of a profession is self-policing; this not only includes specifying who qualifies for inclusion in the profession but also sanctioning members who violate professional standards. I have yet to see anything like a public notice that "chiropractor Joe Smith has been sanctioned by his profession for violating principle X of the chiropractic profession." The AMA regularly ejects doctors that violate their code of ethics and other professional principles.

It's also important to note that state governments are the biggest enforcers of medical practice rules (the AMA really isn't well organized to sanction physicians for individual incidents). Your state legislature is where you need to push for better regulation. Of course it's also important to first go after stupid stuff like "publishing negative reports about a specific physician is considered slander, whether it's true or not." Word of mouth shuts down more practices than state governments.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

There is a problem with compassion in medicine, mostly because doctors are taught not to get emotional with patients. That doesn't mean they aren't skilled physicians, and to even elevate chiropractors to the same level as a surgeon is freakin' insult.

I'm NOT elevating the chiropractors, I'm lowering the Doctors.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

macintologist, those studies were completely valid-and limited to interventions that chiropractors are (supposedly) actually trained and experienced in. Note that the interventions were specifically linked to relatively localized issues, such as cervical manipulation for neck pain... You probably won't find anything in Ovid that documents real research about a chiropractic intervention that uses spinal manipulation to improve digestion or relieve symptoms of GERD, but you will certainly be able to find chiropractic practices advertising that they can help with these issues.

Not to mention that in those research papers, it states in the conclusion: "However, there is currently no evidence that supports or refutes that these interventions provide a clinically meaningful difference for pain or disability in people with LBP when compared to other interventions."

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

I'm NOT elevating the chiropractors, I'm lowering the Doctors.

i don't think it matters which way your dunce cap is facing.

[bstone]

It was always interesting when I worked on an ambulance (as an EMT) and we would go to the office of a chiropractor because the patient he was working on was in such horrible pain because of the manipulation and needed to be taken to an ER for pain meds, X-Rays and consultation.

I worked with a guy who responded to a chiropractor's office because the patient had stroked out due to a cervical spine manipulation.

[olePigeon]

American Heart Association has some frightening statistics on stroke related cervical spine adjustments that I linked to earlier. It should be illegal, along with pediatric chiropractic. They have no business pointlessly messing around with a developing child's skeletal structure.

I saw the Penn & Teller Bullsh*t episode on chiropractic, it was painful to watch a toddler's neck manipulated in such a fashion.

[bstone]

YouTube - Bullshit! - Chiropractic

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

i don't think it matters which way your dunce cap is facing.

LOL! Your opinions stated as fact again? Who even cares? Your attitudes and bias reek in every one of your posts.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

LOL! Your opinions stated as fact again? Who even cares? Your attitudes and bias reek in every one of your posts.

Do you think you are objective?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

LOL! Your opinions stated as fact again? Who even cares? Your attitudes and bias reek in every one of your posts.

My opinion? I was relating the concerns of the Texas Medical Association as well as a whole list of medical organizations. Yes I have a very strong opinion on the subject, and yes I'm very biased towards chiropractors; I already admitted as much at the beginning of this thread.

You could try reading some of the literature I linked to instead of taking my word for it.

Tell me, BadKosh, why are you against holding chiropractors to safe, medical standards?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by bstone 

YouTube - Bullshit! - Chiropractic

Man that's hard to watch. That poor little girl.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

My opinion? I was relating the concerns of the Texas Medical Association as well as a whole list of medical organizations. Yes I have a very strong opinion on the subject, and yes I'm very biased towards chiropractors; I already admitted as much at the beginning of this thread.

You could try reading some of the literature I linked to instead of taking my word for it.

Tell me, BadKosh, why are you against holding chiropractors to safe, medical standards?

I'm not. I think chiropractors work for some people, like my uncle, dad and myself. Doctors these days are on some fast-track education system and most fight symptoms and don't do the work to know for sure what they are dealing with. I'd like ALL of the 'professionals' to perform to safe standards. the chiropractor I had was able to get me on my feet when an orthopedic surgeon wanted to cut. 35 years later...still no need to cut. you have QUACKS in all areas of employment. Doctors and chiropractors are no exception.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

I'm not. I think chiropractors work for some people, like my uncle, dad and myself. Doctors these days are on some fast-track education system and most fight symptoms and don't do the work to know for sure what they are dealing with. I'd like ALL of the 'professionals' to perform to safe standards. the chiropractor I had was able to get me on my feet when an orthopedic surgeon wanted to cut. 35 years later...still no need to cut. you have QUACKS in all areas of employment. Doctors and chiropractors are no exception.

Wow, call up hell and check the temp, I actually agree with BadKosh...

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Wow, call up hell and check the temp, I actually agree with BadKosh...

You think 14 years of rigorous study and residency is a fast track?

[Uncle Skeleton]

I avoid doctors whenever possible too. They don't seem to be connected to reality.

As for alternative medicine, I am a strong believer in the placebo effect. So if a patient thinks that alternative medicine will help, that thought alone makes it worth trying. Customer is always right, etc.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

The bias against doctors in here is interesting. People who think that doctors are somehow "not as good as they used to be" are sadly, yet predictably, wrong.

In other news, it's called "physiotherapy." I've said that word time and time again in these threads, but that's it. Do you go to a chiropractor to feel better every couple weeks/months? Well then you should be going to a physiotherapist to figure out why you're having these problems in the first place, and what exercises you should be doing, and movements you should be avoiding, in order to fix your problem. All this bs about "oh it works for my father/brother/me"? Sure - but physio/massage therapy would work better, 98% guaranteed.

(Coming from someone who saw a chiropractor who was very willing to regularly "fix" the problem, but ended up with several trips to a physiotherapist who showed me how to fix it myself.)

(On the other hand, big fan of placebo effect myself.)

greg

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

In other news, it's called "physiotherapy." I've said that word time and time again in these threads, but that's it. Do you go to a chiropractor to feel better every couple weeks/months? Well then you should be going to a physiotherapist to figure out why you're having these problems in the first place, and what exercises you should be doing, and movements you should be avoiding, in order to fix your problem.

Here in the States we call it "physical therapy," but your point is 100% valid.

Entry level for a PT here is doctorate degree-we're talking about an extensive, scientifically based program that produces professionals who apply evidence-based interventions to fix the root of the problem (as much as possible). Any PT that has a regularly repeating customer starts thinking very seriously about malingering and hypochondria. But most chiropractors welcome "regulars" for often weekly "adjustments."

Interestingly enough, all it takes to get into a Texas school of chiropractic is basically an associate degree; 36 or so credit hours in some specific subject areas. The Texas Chiropractic College program takes 10 "trimesters" - you're done in a little over 3 years. Does that sound like a doctoral program to anyone here? Not to me.

Another issue: by the state practice act, PTs and doctoral-level occupational therapists are PROHIBITED BY LAW from referring to themselves in a clinical setting as "doctor" anything; this is to prevent patients from confusing these professionals with physicians. But chiropractors call themselves "doctor" all the time...

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Here in the States we call it "physical therapy," but your point is 100% valid.

I also agree. One of the main criticisms of chiropractic is its reliance on repeat business.

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Entry level for a PT here is doctorate degree-we're talking about an extensive, scientifically based program that produces professionals who apply evidence-based interventions to fix the root of the problem (as much as possible). Any PT that has a regularly repeating customer starts thinking very seriously about malingering and hypochondria. But most chiropractors welcome "regulars" for often weekly "adjustments."

I read that only 1 in 3 finish postdoctoral requirements after medical school, and of that group, only 1 in 3 will finish their residency. These are some of the smartest people in the world, after spending all that money and studying to finish medical school, don't complete their training because the mental and also physical strain on becoming an MD is absolutely grueling.

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Interestingly enough, all it takes to get into a Texas school of chiropractic is basically an associate degree; 36 or so credit hours in some specific subject areas. The Texas Chiropractic College program takes 10 "trimesters" - you're done in a little over 3 years. Does that sound like a doctoral program to anyone here? Not to me.

Oh, that bugs me to no end. One of the arguments I hear all the time is, "chiropractors spend more time in college than doctors! They know more than doctors!" There isn't a website for chiropractic that doesn't advertise that. What they conveniently leave out is the work done per hour for study and application. I'd wager conservatively that doctors do 10x the work load of a chiropractor per classroom hour, not including postdoctoral work.

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Another issue: by the state practice act, PTs and doctoral-level occupational therapists are PROHIBITED BY LAW from referring to themselves in a clinical setting as "doctor" anything; this is to prevent patients from confusing these professionals with physicians. But chiropractors call themselves "doctor" all the time...

Federal quackery. The founder of homeopathy, Joseph Roy, claimed there was a mysterious bacteria responsible for every disease (just like chiropractic claimed all diseases come from a misaligned spine, and reflexology claimed all diseases come from the feet.) Roy claimed he found the cure in a Long Island duck liver. It's where we got the term "quack" from. Lobbiests successfully got several bills passed regarding alternative medicine and homeopathy, so chiropractors and homeopaths are allowed to call themselves doctor.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Oh, that bugs me to no end. One of the arguments I hear all the time is, "chiropractors spend more time in college than doctors! They know more than doctors!" There isn't a website for chiropractic that doesn't advertise that. What they conveniently leave out is the work done per hour for study and application. I'd wager conservatively that doctors do 10x the work load of a chiropractor per classroom hour, not including postdoctoral work.

From my experience, med students spend a lot more time in class than the catalog for the chiropractic school I read indicates their students spend. That's just classroom time-there is a LOT of required work outside the classroom. All the chiropractic school training requirements are done in the school. It's all classroom in one way or another. I also can't find a single mention of required practical experience outside the chiropractic school, while MDs need at least a year of residency before they can apply for a medical license.