When I talk of Chiropractors that claim extraordinary abilities, I am only speaking of chiropractors that follow the “innate intelligence” theory created by Daniel David Palmer.
I do realize that there are good chiropractors out there that stay within the specialty of lower back joint decompression.
I would simply say “joint decompression” but cervical adjustments have led to over 700 documented deaths due to vertebral dissection. (This is when the inner lining of either of the vertebral arteries is torn, creating a clot that later becomes dislodged and causes a stroke.) Many chiropractors now limit adjustment to the thoracic and lumbar area of the back because of this.
My main concern is not with chiropractors that stay within the confines of evidence based medicine, but those that try to push their patients into viewing them as a primary care provider.
Here is the data. 
I actually began researching the phenomenon of vertebral dissection after I saw a news program that investigated the death of Laurie Mathiason, a 21 year old Canadian.
In Febuary 1998, she was adjusted and immediately began experiencing symptoms of clumsiness, and an acute drop in the ability to coordinate eye-hand movements. She went back to her chiropractor the next day, where she was adjusted again, and immediately died on the table as the clot, formed from the appointment the previous day, was dislodged.
That is actually the case that made the AMA and other world health organizations look into the link of vertebral dissection and chiropractic medicine. The process of vertebral dissection is very unique and only occurs with high velocity, low amplitude movements, such are used in chiropractic adjustments.
The coroners jury attributed Laurie’s death to ‘traumatic rupture of the left vertebral artery’, and the coroner declared: ‘So at this point, the public knows that Laurie died of a ruptured vertebral artery, which occurred in association with a chiropractic manipulation of the neck.’
I will now quote a section from a book written by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst, MD.
“Perhaps the most significant study was published by Canadian researchers in 2001, concluding that the risk of artery damage is one incident per 100,000 individuals receiving chiropractic neck manipulation.
The results showed that patients under 45 years of age who had suffered torn arteries were five times more likely to have visited a chiropractor in the week prior to the damage being recognized than healthy individuals of a similar age. This implies that chiropractic treatment can increase the risk of damaged arteries by a factor of five.
To date, about 700 cases of serious complications have been documented in these publications.”
If you would like, I can post more sources, and clinical trials.
When I say that Chiropractors are not doctors, what I mean is that they are not Medical Doctors. (MD) Chiropractors receive the same type of doctorate that doctors of philosophy or literature receive. Chiropractors also are only required to go through 4 years of school without the mandatory bachelors degree that is required for an MD.
Answer: well..i see two cases. In fact, though, the risk of a vascular accident occurring following a high-velocity, low amplitude thrust is more like 1 in 5-10 million, as opposed to the claim made here.
All too often, as i mentioned in another post, the cases are ascribed to chiropractic whether or not the person performing the maneuver was trained in chiropractic. Moreover, the accidents are much more often associated with, rather than caused by, the maneuver. Correlation doesn’t equal causation by any stretch, yet this simple fact is often ignored in favor of the fear tactics…i.e. chiropractic care kills!!!
Now, I am not denying that cases do happen…again, 1 in 5-10 million or so. It is also unknown how many people have the tears before being examined or treated by a chiropractor, since head and neck pain are a major reason why people seek care in the first place, and thus, would be common with people who have tears in their cervical vasculature to begin with.
Answer: Of Course Chiropractors aren’t MDs. Why would they be? Nor are MDs chiropractors, with little to no training in musculoskeletal diagnoses and treatment in their schooling, much less palpation and spinal anatomy and motion.
What does trouble me though, is that people such as yourself go to great lengths to point out that we chiropractors aren’t trained in medicine, yet then turn around and give us grief because we don’t practice as medical doctors practice. We get blasted because our profession is based on promoting health, rather than treating disease, and aims to optimize function, rather than simply return test values back to the average range.
Which is it? If we aren’t medical doctors, why should we practice like them? If we aren’t medical doctors, why then are our principles of practice viewed through the reductionist, mechanistic lens of medicine? I.e. treatment for this disease, that condition. Chiropractic only good for low back pain because that is the main area that has been heavily studied. Forget tenets of balance, and coordination, or even concepts like interdependence. Nope….its one weapon vs. one enemy, despite that practice having the distinguished title of 4th leading cause of death in the USA. Why is that model being hailed as the gold standard???
A Man:
Evidence based medicine
The reason many feel that the practice of diagnosing and treating disease should have a consistent standard can be found in the history of medicine.
When we base treatment, or even the promotion of health, on scientific clinical evidence, rather than conjecture, the effectiveness of treatment and the overall quality of health in a society go up dramatically.
A great example is Florence Nightingale, who saved thousands of lives in the mid-1800’s by providing clear statistical evidence that cleanliness of medical facilities was directly correlated to the mortality rate of those institutions.
I understand that it may seem that the “medical institution” is trying to put down chiropractic medicine because it is competition, but in truth, evidence based medicine welcomes any treatment that can be shown in clinical trials to work.
This actually opens up the field for all types of alternative treatments, as long as the effectiveness of the treatment is validated.
Using scientific and evidence based platforms for our medical community allows us to be objective about the truth of a practice’s efficacy.
If evidence based medicine was not effective, our mortality rates and life expectancy would be continually getting worse, or stagnating. This is not the case. Evidence based medicine saves lives.
Similar Posts:
- Acute vs. chronic pancreatitis. Confused about pancreatitis diagnosis?
- Medical no longer provides service for persons with Chronic back pain
- Free Drugs Medications for Poor and Low income family?
- Is it NC Law 2 drug test me to get pain meds?
- Male or guy seeing a female doctor?
Uncategorized No Comments