Chiropractic as useless as Scientology

Religions > Atheism > Chiropractic as useless as Scientology

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 3 of 8

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"The Last Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile"
Date:	17 Jan 2005 07:06:17 PM
Object:	Chiropractic as useless as Scientology

http://religionnewsblog.com/9938/Doctors--Others-Deride-Chiropractic-School
Doctors, Others Deride Chiropractic School
Associated Press, via Sun-Sentinelcom, Jan. 16, 2005
Brent Kallestad, Associated Press Writer
www.sun-sentinel.com
TALLAHASSEE, Florida -- Some Florida State University professors
have been circulating a parody map showing the campus of the
future, with a new Bigfoot Institute, a School of Astrology and a
Crop Circle Simulation Laboratory.
It's a not-so-subtle jab in a growing debate over a proposal to
build a chiropractic college on this campus -- the first such
school at a public university in the United States.
More than 500 professors, including the university's two Nobel
laureates, have signed a petition opposing the school and a
handful have even threatened to resign rather than teach alongside
what they consider a "pseudoscience."
The dispute -- the biggest academic furor in recent memory at
Florida State -- is heading to a showdown decision later this
month, pitting FSU faculty and doctors against chiropractors and
powerful lawmakers who pushed the $9 million (euro7 million)
proposal through the Legislature.
T.K. Wetherell, the normally blunt president of Florida State, has
been unusually reticent on the chiropractic flap, deferring to his
provost.
"There's a small number of faculty who would like it to happen,
there is another group of faculty who would like it to die as
painful a death as possible, and then there's another group that
has a lot of concerns that they would like answered before
anything else happens," provost Larry Abele said.
Supporters of the school, which would add 100 faculty members, say
the affiliation with a major university would quickly make it the
nation's premier program and a magnet for federal grants in
alternative medicine.
But the parody map sums up the views of many faculty -- and
physicians. They worry that chiropractic isn't based on real
science and that such a program could hurt the university's
academic reputation.
Last week, the faculty committee that oversees curriculum voted
22-0 to stop the proposed chiropractic program until it at least
had a say-so in the decision.
"There's no demonstrated need. We have more chiropractors than any
other state except California and New York," said Ray Bellamy, a
local orthopedic surgeon and associate at the medical school.
For now, the 38,000 students at Florida State have largely stayed
on the sidelines in the debate, although a few exercise physiology
majors have spoken out in support of the school.
For chiropractors, the issue is bigger than just the fight at
Florida State. It's part of an ongoing battle to win respect and
credibility in the medical community for their profession. A
chiropractic school at FSU would supply a long sought affiliation
with an established university and a major boost.
Chiropractic, which focuses on manipulating the spine to lessen
back pain and improve overall health, has won wider acceptance
over the years; it's now covered by most health insurance plans.
But in the 110 years since the profession was created, the
established medical community has largely boycotted it --
challenging its scientific validity in courts and legislative
bodies. In 1990, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found the
American Medical Association guilty of conspiracy to destroy the
profession.
"Chiropractic falls under the same umbrella as any number of
therapies including homeopathy, naturopathy, meditation, prayer,"
said Dr. Bill Kinsinger, an Oklahoma anesthesiologist and longtime
critic of chiropractors who is working with Florida doctors to
block the new school. "There's no more evidence for chiropractic
than there is for any of these other therapies."
The Florida Chiropractic Association says it's unfair for
opponents to try to deny them the opportunity to create the
school.
"On the one hand, they say there is no science behind what we do,"
said John Van Tassel, a Tallahassee chiropractor who tends to
Florida State's football players. "At the same time, they're
trying to prevent the very research (at a university) they say is
needed."
The university system's Board of Governors, which faces a decision
on the standoff Jan. 27. The fledgling board, which was created in
2002, has been accused of bowing to the wishes of the governor and
the legislature on higher education issues.
While not an outspoken supporter, Gov. Jeb Bush signed off on the
chiropractic school proposal in the last legislative session to
appease the House speaker and Senate president.

---
http://lastliberal.org
Guns don't kill people: Republicans kill people.
.

User: "Mark K. Bilbo"
Title: Re: [LONG] Chiropractic as useless as Scientology: the facts	24 Jan 2005 09:32:05 AM

In our last episode <0i39v01dhcg0kpjo1b6c0plragsi1d4et0@4ax.com>,
AngryJohn lumbered into the room and mumbled:

I went to a chiropractor one time. When they began the hard sell process
I asked him outright how his treatment was going to address the symptom he
had identified. When he waffled and said I just had to believe him and
that it could take 4-40 visits I lost all desire to be there. My next
question was to ask him to abstain from charging me until he had provided
an actual effective treatment. He, for some odd reason, preferred for me
to pay for something like 4 years treatments in advance.

I know some people that swear by it. Taken in small doses, usually once
or twice a year. [shrug} anyone is free to do with their money what they
desire.

Apparently one of the big problems is that the quackery is mixed in with
some things that are actually useful. Like massage therapy which is often
beneficial and makes people feel better. Sorting things out is apparently
tricky.
People should be able to do what they want to themselves and with their
money but the problem is the chiro lobby has litigated and agitated its
way into "legitimate" status. All of us should be able to expect the stamp
of legitimacy in the field of medicine to carry some serious science
behind it. Not just lawyers...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: [LONG] Chiropractic as useless as Scientology: the facts	22 Jan 2005 04:12:39 PM

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In our last episode <kZsId.447$Z71.117@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net>, Danny
Kodicek lumbered into the room and mumbled:

"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:FeudnZqJh5Buk3LcRVn-vg@megapath.net...

In our last episode <358gqaF4j1bj4U1@individual.net>, The Last Liberal
/ ShyDavid / Desertphile lept out of the bushes shouting:

The following article explains the issue very well.

<snipping for space>

Well, in my case, you're preaching to the choir. I was sent to one
once, man almost sent me to the hospital. I knew better than to go but
got talked into it. Never made that mistake again...

I've been staying out of this debate because I know nothing about chiro
at all, but I can't help asking one question: why is it that when
someone claims chiro helped them, everyone shouts 'placebo', but when
someone claims it injured them, everyone blames the treatment? It seems
to me that whatever their claims about the mechanism (which, as I say, I
know nothing about), 'placebo' is an insufficient response to a physical
treatment. Placebo is a reasonable claim for homeopathy, where the drugs
have no active ingredient, but if a treatment is capable of injuring,
then it can't be a placebo.

But if people are claiming benefit subjectively when none can be found in
rigorous testing, what else do you call it?

But no one has offered me an example of rigorous testing. The
statistical analysis that claims chiropractic has the same success rate
as placebo (but more effective than laminectomy) doesn't break down
individual chiropractic practices, so "I can cure your asthma" is
included in the same statistical soup with "I can relieve pressure on
your sciatic nerve". The results are meaningless.
I asked for a breakdown of which chiropractic procedures that had been
tested, and was told I was shifting the burden of proof. At the same
time, I'm being told that there has been no rigorous testing because
chiropracters will refuse to participate, yet chiropracters are trying
to establish ties with a University because it will legitimize their
practices.
My own search through http://www.chirobase.org/index.html (link provided
by Mike Painter) finds that that it's about as effective as physical
therapy, but gets results quicker. This seems to be a balanced source of
information, and provides a list of chiropracters who are willing to
support a list of medical guidelines. (Quoted below) None of my current
or previous chiropractors are on it, but I will take the guidelines to
my current one and ask him what he thinks.
http://www.chirobase.org/13RD/chiroguidelines.html
Quote:
My practice is limited to the care of musculoskeletal problems. I may
also counsel patients about lifestyle improvements and give practical
science-based tips about the management of common ailments. My approach
to back pain parallels the AHCPR Clinical Practice Guidelines that lie
within the scope of chiropractic. For medical problems outside my scope,
I refer patients to appropriate physicians.
I publicly endorse immunization, fluoridation, and other standard public
health measures. I reject biotheistic notions that "subluxations" and/or
"nerve interference" are the cause or underlying cause of disease. I do
not make claims about curing diseases. I do not try to get patients to
sign contracts for lengthy treatment, promote regular "preventive"
adjustments, use scare tactics, or disparage scientific medical
treatment. I do not routinely perform or order x-ray examinations
because most patients do not need them. I do not utilize 14" x 36"
full-spine x-ray examinations.
I do not offer or advocate the use of Biological Terrain Assessment,
computerized "nutrient deficiency" testing, contact reflex analysis,
contour analysis (also called moire contourography), cytotoxic testing,
other improper allergy testing, blind spot mapping, electrodermal
screening, Functional Intracellular Analysis (FIA), hair analysis,
herbal crystallization analysis, iridology, leg-length testing (to check
for "subluxations"), live blood cell analysis (also called nutritional
blood analysis or Hemaview), testing with a Nervo-Scope, Nutrabalance,
NUTRI-SPEC, pendulum divination, reflexology, saliva testing, spinal
ultrasound testing to "measure progress," surface electromyography
(SEMG), thermography, testing with a Toftness device, weighing on a
twin-scale device (Spinal Analysis Machine), or any other diagnostic
procedure that is unsubstantiated and lacks a scientifically plausible
rationale.
I do not utilize or promote acupuncture for treating disease. I do not
use or advocate the use of Activator Methods, applied kinesiology, Bio
Energetic Synchronization Technique (B.E.S.T.), chelation therapy,
Chiropractic Biophysics� (CBP�), colonic irrigation, cranial or
craniosacral therapy, laser acupuncture, magnetic or biomagnetic
therapy, Neuro Emotional Technique (NET), Neural Organization Technique
(NOT), NeuroCranial Restructuring (NCR), NeuroModulation technique
(NMT), or any other treatment modality that is unsubstantiated and lacks
a scientifically plausible rationale. I do not "prescribe" homeopathic
products. I do not sell or promote the use of unproven dietary
supplements or herbal products for the treatment of disease.
End Quote.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Mark K. Bilbo"
Title: Re: [LONG] Chiropractic as useless as Scientology: the facts	23 Jan 2005 08:31:25 AM

In our last episode <41F2CFD7.8080008@att.net>, Glenn Arnold lumbered into
the room and mumbled:

I asked for a breakdown of which chiropractic procedures that had been
tested, and was told I was shifting the burden of proof. At the same time,
I'm being told that there has been no rigorous testing because
chiropracters will refuse to participate, yet chiropracters are trying to
establish ties with a University because it will legitimize their
practices.

That's part of the problem. A medical procedure not backed by studies. The
"discipline" forced its way into acceptance by *lawsuits. That alone tells
me there's something deeply wrong. It's the same way creationists are
pushing their "science."
Chiropractors could not convince the AMA with studies and results so they
sued. Their quest for legitimacy has been legal and political. They may be
trying to establish "ties" with universities. But so are creationists eh?
It really is up to the chiropractic community to persuade the science
consensus with studies, evidence, and results. "Prove me wrong" is not a
option...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.

User: "Mark K. Bilbo"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 05:57:31 PM

In our last episode <UnCHd.598$Jg7.446@fe51.usenetserver.com>, Android Cat
lept out of the bushes shouting:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In our last episode <357q5vF470j1nU1@individual.net>, Robibnikoff lept
out of the bushes shouting:

True, but did you read the part where I shrunk two inches and then,
after chiropractic treatment, got it back?

<blink> <blink>

Wow, Robyn has talents I never suspected...

That happens all the time when I take a cold shower.

If Robyn can do *that, she's got powers of which should not speak...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.

User: "Robibnikoff"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 07:00:15 PM

"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:b8OdnfM_JuYqb3PcRVn-hA@megapath.net...

In our last episode <UnCHd.598$Jg7.446@fe51.usenetserver.com>, Android Cat
lept out of the bushes shouting:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In our last episode <357q5vF470j1nU1@individual.net>, Robibnikoff lept
out of the bushes shouting:

True, but did you read the part where I shrunk two inches and then,
after chiropractic treatment, got it back?

<blink> <blink>

Wow, Robyn has talents I never suspected...

That happens all the time when I take a cold shower.

If Robyn can do *that, she's got powers of which should not speak...

I don't believe "shrinkage" applies to me ;)
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.

User: "stoney"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	20 Jan 2005 11:54:35 PM

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:00:15 -0500, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:b8OdnfM_JuYqb3PcRVn-hA@megapath.net...

In our last episode <UnCHd.598$Jg7.446@fe51.usenetserver.com>, Android Cat
lept out of the bushes shouting:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In our last episode <357q5vF470j1nU1@individual.net>, Robibnikoff lept
out of the bushes shouting:

True, but did you read the part where I shrunk two inches and then,
after chiropractic treatment, got it back?

<blink> <blink>

Wow, Robyn has talents I never suspected...

That happens all the time when I take a cold shower.

If Robyn can do *that, she's got powers of which should not speak...

I don't believe "shrinkage" applies to me ;)

Outstanding does..... :))
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.

User: "Lady Chatterly"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	21 Jan 2005 03:18:29 AM

In article <d861v0d7k9behp8r98uar3q08vc0nv42d3@4ax.com>
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:00:15 -0500, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:b8OdnfM_JuYqb3PcRVn-hA@megapath.net...

In our last episode <UnCHd.598$Jg7.446@fe51.usenetserver.com>, Android Cat
lept out of the bushes shouting:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In our last episode <357q5vF470j1nU1@individual.net>, Robibnikoff lept
out of the bushes shouting:

True, but did you read the part where I shrunk two inches and then,
after chiropractic treatment, got it back?

<blink> <blink>

Wow, Robyn has talents I never suspected...

That happens all the time when I take a cold shower.

If Robyn can do *that, she's got powers of which should not speak...

I don't believe "shrinkage" applies to me ;)

Outstanding does..... :))

EHg5H0xlBHqUFUIJJayOG0IYqQIkrUSTGGV1n0u6M0uSoHSeoxywZ0tlEJcT
IUSUpUuaD1c4pTkZZzAfPaRmrGSjH0y3EGNjn0qVqIMZFRyxHUywZ3WHM2cW
FxSQpUu5DHMFI1yZZTAKFUqFn0uIqJEiFRyLJxuwIjcTHaxlEGSKLHuuH0Mh
rzgDEGSOL0qFqIqOF09WE0uOoxyEFIMSrHyGEREwoaRmqJMSZUIuEwV1FRWW
qIDXEzSWMHMGIwEiFUSTGGV1n0u6MwWSrTAYoyWAZ0MUEIqlFUyUE1ISq0EV
FGEPFx1cpxuWF0c5EQEiFUufPxEWLyuiZIAFDxD9CD==
--
Lady Chatterly
"It appears dear Bot, that there are no more real people posting in
ARJ-W. They are all BOTS, Sock-Puppets, Jabriols, remailers and other
assorted riff-raff...." -- Will
.

User: "The Last Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 07:32:36 PM

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:13:28 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <357q5vF470j1nU1@individual.net>, Robibnikoff lept out
of the bushes shouting:

True, but did you read the part where I shrunk two inches and then, after
chiropractic treatment, got it back?

<blink> <blink>
Wow, Robyn has talents I never suspected...

Such claims are extremely common among faith healers. Scientology
can even make women's breasts bigger--- one said so.

--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger

---
http://lastliberal.org
Guns don't kill people: Republicans kill people.
One cannot really be a Catholic and grown up.
.

User: "Mike Painter"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 08:53:24 PM

Robibnikoff wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:sjyHd.12508$wZ2.7322@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...

Robibnikoff wrote:

Here's my two cents on chiropratic treatments. When I was a
sophmore in high school, I reached my full height of 5'5". Four
years later, I was two inches shorter. Went to a chiropractor for
other issues and was told that I had some vertebrae that were
twisting (torquing?). After approximately a year of treatment, I
noticed that the top of my desk appeared to be slightly closer when
I stood next to it. At my next visit to the chiropractor, I
insisted that he measure my height, which he did. I was once again
5'5". He compared it to my chart and saw that I indeed had somehow
gotten my height back.

You assumed you reached full height as a sophmore.

True, but did you read the part where I shrunk two inches and then,
after chiropractic treatment, got it back? And considering that I've
remained 5'5" ever since (30-something years later), I'm positive
that I had reached my full height as a sophmore. Or are you saying
that I might wake up tomorrow and be 5'7"? :)

I'm saying that you have no way to know if you reached full height when you
said you did and that there is no way to know if or how anybody could have
recovered two inches from your body. Vertibrae twist every time you move,
that's why you have a flexible back.
If you are on your feet a lot during the day you will find, at your young
age, that you are taller when you get up in the morning, then when you go to
bed.
.

User: "Al Klein"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 11:02:32 AM

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:49:24 -0500, Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net>
said in alt.atheism:

Not quite sure what you're saying here. I don't think acupuncture could
move the bulge from my disc away from the nerve. Massage therapy might
work for some cases, but I don't see how it could have worked in mine.
And it didn't.

I have a herniated disc at L5. Acupressure keeps the pain at
tolerable levels.
--
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is human
concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind cannot
begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an old
religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has
been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in its
simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.

User: "Fredric L. Rice"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 01:10:23 AM

Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Because it kills, maims, and defrauds people.

I'm curious as to you claim that it kills people. "Maims" I can
understand, because it's possible to injure someone while doing a
chiropractic adjustment, but you're really stretching it if you claim it
kills.

There have been homicides resulting from neck manipulation and from
the outrageous notion that there are "subluxactions" and that spinal
manipulation can cure diseases and other problems like broken bones.
"Chiropractic: The Greatest Hoax of the Century?" contains a number
of homicides that have resulted from what is in effect occult ritual.
---
Stop Elmer Fudd web site: http://www.ElmerFudd.US/
Covert text file server: http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 04:18:49 PM

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Because it kills, maims, and defrauds people.

Cite? Examples? Why is it that when I had wisdom teeth pulled I had to
sign a form saying that the oral surgeon might break my jaw (like Johnny
Cash?) and when I had back surgery I signed a form saying that I knew I
might not wake up from the anesthesia?
Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no such
notification/affirmation?
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Happy Dog"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 08:24:22 PM

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> > Fredric L. Rice wrote:

"Chiropractic: The Greatest Hoax of the Century?" contains a number
of homicides that have resulted from what is in effect occult ritual.

Were you having the above done to cure a sore foot?

Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no such
notification/affirmation?

Think.
moo
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 09:24:55 PM

Happy Dog wrote:

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> > Fredric L. Rice wrote:

"Chiropractic: The Greatest Hoax of the Century?" contains a number
of homicides that have resulted from what is in effect occult ritual.

Were you having the above done to cure a sore foot?

Your point is...?
Actually, a sore leg, if you will. A herniation in my L4-L5 disc was
compressing my sciatic nerve, as seen in an MRI. When I used my right
foot to apply the brake pedal, I got a shooting pain in my left leg.

Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no such
notification/affirmation?

Think.

I am thinking. And what comes from that process is the realization that
anyone who claims that chiropractic is nearly as dangerous as either of
the procedures I listed above is out of touch with reality.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Happy Dog"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	20 Jan 2005 12:15:28 AM

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in message

"Chiropractic: The Greatest Hoax of the Century?" contains a number
of homicides that have resulted from what is in effect occult ritual.

Were you having the above done to cure a sore foot?

Your point is...?
Actually, a sore leg, if you will. A herniation in my L4-L5 disc was
compressing my sciatic nerve, as seen in an MRI. When I used my right foot
to apply the brake pedal, I got a shooting pain in my left leg.

Ouch. Anyway, my point is that you can't compare chiropractic to the
medical procedures you underwent because, although they are dangerous,
they're proved to work as claimed and the science behind them is sound. In
the case of chiropractic, the twisting neck adjustments they use are
potentially lethal and are lacking in both theoretical and empirical
evidence of efficacy.

Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no such
notification/affirmation?

Think.

It isn't. But some types of adjustments are dangerous. And chiropractors
are fighting like mad to keep them from being banned. That's an
unscientific and irresponsible approach. There's very little real science
behind chiropractic. The research that reveals the danger of some of its
practices is one of the few bits of real science in the field. And it
wasn't done by anyone in the field.
moo
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	20 Jan 2005 03:26:20 PM

Happy Dog wrote:

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in message

"Chiropractic: The Greatest Hoax of the Century?" contains a number
of homicides that have resulted from what is in effect occult ritual.

Were you having the above done to cure a sore foot?

Your point is...?
Actually, a sore leg, if you will. A herniation in my L4-L5 disc was
compressing my sciatic nerve, as seen in an MRI. When I used my right foot
to apply the brake pedal, I got a shooting pain in my left leg.

Actually, no they aren't. Laminectomy (which I had, twice) has about an
85% failure rate. The brake pedal incident was between the two
surgeries. (BTW for a measure of pain, how's this? When I hit the brake
pedal, there was a car coming through the intersection. I consciously
considered whether hitting the car would be more or less painful that
holding the brake down)

In
the case of chiropractic, the twisting neck adjustments they use are
potentially lethal and are lacking in both theoretical and empirical
evidence of efficacy.

Aspirin is lacking in theoretical and empirical evidence of efficacy.
That is, I've never been able to correlate a pain that I've had with the
reduction of that pain after taking aspirin. Codeine, yes, but aspirin no.
On the other hand, I have hobbled into my chiropractors office,
basically unable to walk, and unable to stand straight up. After an
adnjustment, I could stand straight up, and bear my full weight on my
leg. Tell me how that isn't empirical evidence?

Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no such
notification/affirmation?

Think.

It isn't. But some types of adjustments are dangerous.

Ok.

And chiropractors
are fighting like mad to keep them from being banned. That's an
unscientific and irresponsible approach. There's very little real science
behind chiropractic. The research that reveals the danger of some of its
practices is one of the few bits of real science in the field. And it
wasn't done by anyone in the field.

Which is a good reason to build a school of chiropractic into an
existing medical school. As long as the two fields remain in opposition,
no one is going to find out where chiropractic is valid and where it's
not.
I don't know how long you've been following this thread, but my point
has not been to defend *all* of chiropractic. I began by conceding that
it's origins are flaky, and that a lot of baggage has been handed down.
But the same is true for medicine.
That said, I will defend most of the chiropractic treatment that I've
gone through, and point out that the only treatment I recieved that
wasn't appropriate was terminated by the chiropractor when he decided
that he couldn't help me for that particular problem. He referred me to
a physiatrist.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Happy Dog"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	20 Jan 2005 10:45:08 PM

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in

Actually, no they aren't. Laminectomy (which I had, twice) has about an
85% failure rate.

So does street CPR (not quite, but close). What was your alternative?

In the case of chiropractic, the twisting neck adjustments they use are
potentially lethal and are lacking in both theoretical and empirical
evidence of efficacy.

Aspirin is lacking in theoretical and empirical evidence of efficacy.

Now you're just being stupid.

That is, I've never been able to correlate a pain that I've had with the
reduction of that pain after taking aspirin. Codeine, yes, but aspirin no.

That's personal experience. Asprin doesn't work for everyone and for every
type of pain.

On the other hand, I have hobbled into my chiropractors office, basically
unable to walk, and unable to stand straight up. After an adnjustment, I
could stand straight up, and bear my full weight on my leg. Tell me how
that isn't empirical evidence?

It's personal experience. I believe you. But that isn't the whole issue
here. You are trying to justify Chiropractic as a clinical procedure. You
have anecdotal evidence. There are logically equivalkent claims for
everything from prayer to bizarre "Psychic Surgery". Don't take it
personally. But Chiropractic needs to prove it's basic claims and start
behaving like 21st, or even 20th century science demands.

And chiropractors are fighting like mad to keep them from being banned.
That's an unscientific and irresponsible approach. There's very little
real science behind chiropractic. The research that reveals the danger
of some of its practices is one of the few bits of real science in the
field. And it wasn't done by anyone in the field.

It won't happen there either. Chiropractic will close ranks. They don't
need public funds to prove their basic claims.

I don't know how long you've been following this thread, but my point has
not been to defend *all* of chiropractic. I began by conceding that it's
origins are flaky, and that a lot of baggage has been handed down. But the
same is true for medicine.

Evidence based medicine corrects itself. Not perfectly. But it happens on
a daily basis. Almost nothing has ever changed in chiropractic.

That said, I will defend most of the chiropractic treatment that I've gone
through, and point out that the only treatment I recieved that wasn't
appropriate was terminated by the chiropractor when he decided that he
couldn't help me for that particular problem. He referred me to a
physiatrist.

What treatment was that? A chiropractor tried treating a psychiatric
problem? Really?
moo
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	21 Jan 2005 07:30:50 PM

Happy Dog wrote:

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in

Actually, no they aren't. Laminectomy (which I had, twice) has about an
85% failure rate.

So does street CPR (not quite, but close). What was your alternative?

Chiropractic, "tincture of time", physical therapy, drugs. I've been
though them all. The only one that consistently and repeatedly gave me
relief was chiropractic.

In the case of chiropractic, the twisting neck adjustments they use are
potentially lethal and are lacking in both theoretical and empirical
evidence of efficacy.

Aspirin is lacking in theoretical and empirical evidence of efficacy.

Now you're just being stupid.

No, just an RAA hypothesis. Not quite rigorous though.

That is, I've never been able to correlate a pain that I've had with the
reduction of that pain after taking aspirin. Codeine, yes, but aspirin no.

That's personal experience. Asprin doesn't work for everyone and for every
type of pain.

Neither does chiropractic.

It's personal experience. I believe you. But that isn't the whole issue
here.

It is the whole issue here. How many times do I have to repeat this? I'm
NOT arguing that all of chiropractic's claims are valid, or that some
modern chiropractors don't use quackery.

You are trying to justify Chiropractic as a clinical procedure.

I'm trying to justify SOME chiropractic as a clinical procedure.

You
have anecdotal evidence. There are logically equivalkent claims for
everything from prayer to bizarre "Psychic Surgery". Don't take it
personally. But Chiropractic needs to prove it's basic claims and start
behaving like 21st, or even 20th century science demands.

And chiropractors are fighting like mad to keep them from being banned.
That's an unscientific and irresponsible approach. There's very little
real science behind chiropractic. The research that reveals the danger
of some of its practices is one of the few bits of real science in the
field. And it wasn't done by anyone in the field.

It won't happen there either. Chiropractic will close ranks. They don't
need public funds to prove their basic claims.

Bzzzz! That's what started this thread, remember? A medical college is
trying open a school of chiropractic, and *Medical Doctors* are trying
to shoot it down.

Evidence based medicine corrects itself. Not perfectly. But it happens on
a daily basis. Almost nothing has ever changed in chiropractic.

What treatment was that? A chiropractor tried treating a psychiatric
problem? Really?

Read the word again. I didn't misspell it.
http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?query=physiatrist&action=Search+OMD
Also, where are you posting from? I'd like to remove unnecessary
headers. I'm in alt.atheism..
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Happy Dog"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	21 Jan 2005 07:46:35 PM

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net>

Actually, no they aren't. Laminectomy (which I had, twice) has about an
85% failure rate.

So does street CPR (not quite, but close). What was your alternative?

Chiropractic, "tincture of time", physical therapy, drugs. I've been
though them all. The only one that consistently and repeatedly gave me
relief was chiropractic.

And what is the clinical success rate for that? You understand that it's an
odds game, no?

In the case of chiropractic, the twisting neck adjustments they use are
potentially lethal and are lacking in both theoretical and empirical
evidence of efficacy.

Aspirin is lacking in theoretical and empirical evidence of efficacy.

Now you're just being stupid.

No, just an RAA hypothesis. Not quite rigorous though.

The biological mode of action for asprin is understood.

That is, I've never been able to correlate a pain that I've had with the
reduction of that pain after taking aspirin. Codeine, yes, but aspirin
no.

That's personal experience. Asprin doesn't work for everyone and for
every type of pain.

Neither does chiropractic.

But asprin clearly has a chemical effect. The results can be tested and
measured. No such thing with chiropractic. They positively flee from tests
of their basic claims.

It's personal experience. I believe you. But that isn't the whole issue
here.

It is the whole issue here. How many times do I have to repeat this? I'm
NOT arguing that all of chiropractic's claims are valid, or that some
modern chiropractors don't use quackery.

You're just saying that you got a backrub and felt better. OK. NOBODY
denies that you did. So why are you still here?

You are trying to justify Chiropractic as a clinical procedure.

I'm trying to justify SOME chiropractic as a clinical procedure.

And failing. Your personal experience is just one anecdote. It's logically
equivalent to people who claim to have been healed by voodoo. If it works
for them, great. Means nothing for anyone else.

It won't happen there either. Chiropractic will close ranks. They don't
need public funds to prove their basic claims.

Bzzzz! That's what started this thread, remember? A medical college is
trying open a school of chiropractic, and *Medical Doctors* are trying to
shoot it down.

No. A university is.

Read the word again. I didn't misspell it.

http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?query=physiatrist&action=Search+OMD

Old age. My apologies. So what was the condition that chiropractic
couldn't treat?

Also, where are you posting from? I'd like to remove unnecessary headers.
I'm in alt.atheism..

sci.skeptic
moo
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	21 Jan 2005 09:35:30 PM

Happy Dog wrote:

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net>

Actually, no they aren't. Laminectomy (which I had, twice) has about an
85% failure rate.

So does street CPR (not quite, but close). What was your alternative?

Chiropractic, "tincture of time", physical therapy, drugs. I've been
though them all. The only one that consistently and repeatedly gave me
relief was chiropractic.

And what is the clinical success rate for that? You understand that it's an
odds game, no?

In the case of chiropractic, the twisting neck adjustments they use are
potentially lethal and are lacking in both theoretical and empirical
evidence of efficacy.

Aspirin is lacking in theoretical and empirical evidence of efficacy.

Now you're just being stupid.

No, just an RAA hypothesis. Not quite rigorous though.

The biological mode of action for asprin is understood.

I looked it up. Some of it is, some of it isn't. And what is known
wasn't understood until the 1970's. Before that, effectiveness was
judged by statistical analysis of personal anecdote. See below.

That is, I've never been able to correlate a pain that I've had with the
reduction of that pain after taking aspirin. Codeine, yes, but aspirin
no.

That's personal experience. Asprin doesn't work for everyone and for
every type of pain.

Neither does chiropractic.

But asprin clearly has a chemical effect. The results can be tested and
measured. No such thing with chiropractic. They positively flee from tests
of their basic claims.

It's personal experience. I believe you. But that isn't the whole issue
here.

It is the whole issue here. How many times do I have to repeat this? I'm
NOT arguing that all of chiropractic's claims are valid, or that some
modern chiropractors don't use quackery.

You're just saying that you got a backrub and felt better. OK. NOBODY
denies that you did. So why are you still here?

You are trying to justify Chiropractic as a clinical procedure.

I'm trying to justify SOME chiropractic as a clinical procedure.

And failing. Your personal experience is just one anecdote. It's logically
equivalent to people who claim to have been healed by voodoo. If it works
for them, great. Means nothing for anyone else.

In all this debate, I still have not seen any disproof that chiropractic
does exactly what I have claimed. I haven't seen anyone who did
comparative before and after MRI's. You don't need the chiropracters
permission to do that. They would never need to know.
I've seen claims that upper neck adjustments can cause strokes. That's a
real concern. But those data were also statistical. I haven't seen a
description of the physical cause of the stroke. I would think it would
be pretty easy to tell if it was a bleed or a clot.
I've seen statistical data that suggests that success rate is the same
as placebo, but those numbers are higher than the success rate for
laminectomy, (and as you say CPR).
They also don't make any attempt to break down success rate based on the
application. In other words, if someone is being treated for asthma or
sinus problems, it doesn't belong in the same statistic as sciatic pain.
Have you seen those numbers broken out?

It won't happen there either. Chiropractic will close ranks. They don't
need public funds to prove their basic claims.

Bzzzz! That's what started this thread, remember? A medical college is
trying open a school of chiropractic, and *Medical Doctors* are trying to
shoot it down.

No. A university is.

Semantic argument. What difference does it make? The point is that it
would subject chiropractic to scientific scrutiny, so why stop it?

Read the word again. I didn't misspell it.

http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?query=physiatrist&action=Search+OMD

Old age. My apologies. So what was the condition that chiropractic
couldn't treat?

A hip problem that no one ever diagnosed, other than "hip pain"
apparently involving the psoas major. If you look at a diagram, you can
see why a chiropractor would think he might be able to treat it, but
ultimately, he said he thought it was actually happening somewhere in
the pelvis or hip, that tissue might be torn or something.
The physiatrist never definitively located or diagnosed any damage, and
called it a repetitive use injury. He told me to stop working on cars,
which turned out to be a great opportunity. I got a job as a
"professional pyromaniac" after that. (industrial combustion research)
Great job, except that that was where I blew my disc.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Happy Dog"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	22 Jan 2005 03:34:52 AM

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in message

The biological mode of action for asprin is understood.

I looked it up. Some of it is, some of it isn't. And what is known wasn't
understood until the 1970's. Before that, effectiveness was judged by
statistical analysis of personal anecdote. See below.

It's 2005. Do you really want to use ASA as an example of a thing not
understood?

And failing. Your personal experience is just one anecdote. It's
logically equivalent to people who claim to have been healed by voodoo.
If it works for them, great. Means nothing for anyone else.

Ditto for Voodo and Psychic Surgery. You're shifting the burden of proof.
You had a good backrub. Leave it at that.
You don't need the numbers "broken out". You've already been healed.

Bzzzz! That's what started this thread, remember? A medical college is
trying open a school of chiropractic, and *Medical Doctors* are trying to
shoot it down.

No. A university is.

Semantic argument. What difference does it make? The point is that it
would subject chiropractic to scientific scrutiny, so why stop it?

The point is that it wouldn't. And your statement that a "medicel college"
is trying to open a school of chiropractic is wrong to the point of
hilarity.

Old age. My apologies. So what was the condition that chiropractic
couldn't treat?

Interesting. Never heard of a chiropractor sayinhg there was some muscular
pain thing they couldn't treat.
moo
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	22 Jan 2005 01:54:57 PM

Happy Dog wrote:

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in message

The biological mode of action for asprin is understood.

I looked it up. Some of it is, some of it isn't. And what is known wasn't
understood until the 1970's. Before that, effectiveness was judged by
statistical analysis of personal anecdote. See below.

It's 2005. Do you really want to use ASA as an example of a thing not
understood?

And failing. Your personal experience is just one anecdote. It's
logically equivalent to people who claim to have been healed by voodoo.
If it works for them, great. Means nothing for anyone else.

Ditto for Voodo and Psychic Surgery. You're shifting the burden of proof.
You had a good backrub. Leave it at that.

Burden of proof applies when the claim is not testable, but truth is
truth, it doesn't matter who proves it.
You see, I'm arguing, and debating. You're fighting. Your trying to be a
winner. I'm looking for the truth, and using you to get me closer,
because you've stocked up on rebuttals. Of course, I could point out how
many of my questions you've avoided answering, or how many times you've
snipped my references to my neurologist, and the MRIs taken on my spine
at the chiropractor's request. That's a tactical issue. For you, you're
avoiding the tough questions, for me, I'm (or was) trying to avoid
really pissing you off by accusing you of not fighting fairly. But
you're starting to repeat yourself, and it's clear that your not here to
find the truth.

You don't need the numbers "broken out". You've already been healed.

Bzzzz! That's what started this thread, remember? A medical college is
trying open a school of chiropractic, and *Medical Doctors* are trying to
shoot it down.

No. A university is.

Semantic argument. What difference does it make? The point is that it
would subject chiropractic to scientific scrutiny, so why stop it?

The point is that it wouldn't. And your statement that a "medicel college"
is trying to open a school of chiropractic is wrong to the point of
hilarity.

Please explain how putting a chiropractic school under the control of an
accredited university would NOT subject chiropractic to scientific scrutiny.
And criticizing a slight failure in memory on my part, regarding whether
the college was a medical school or not is petty and childish.

Old age. My apologies. So what was the condition that chiropractic
couldn't treat?

Interesting. Never heard of a chiropractor sayinhg there was some muscular
pain thing they couldn't treat.

You also missed the part about my other chiropractor recommending
surgery, and codiene. Buried in an "anecdote" so it isn't important.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Happy Dog"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	22 Jan 2005 06:25:36 PM

"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in message

Ditto for Voodo and Psychic Surgery. You're shifting the burden of
proof. You had a good backrub. Leave it at that.

Burden of proof applies when the claim is not testable, but truth is
truth, it doesn't matter who proves it.

Chiropractic makes easily testable claims. But they refuse to allow testing
of many of their claims That is a fact.

You see, I'm arguing, and debating. You're fighting. Your trying to be a
winner. I'm looking for the truth, and using you to get me closer, because
you've stocked up on rebuttals. Of course, I could point out how many of
my questions you've avoided answering, or how many times you've snipped my
references to my neurologist, and the MRIs taken on my spine at the
chiropractor's request. That's a tactical issue. For you, you're avoiding
the tough questions, for me, I'm (or was) trying to avoid really pissing
you off by accusing you of not fighting fairly. But you're starting to
repeat yourself, and it's clear that your not here to find the truth.

You don't have the truth. You have a personal experience. It came from a
controversial medical procedure that is used by a group of people with a
severe anti-science bias. I don't believe that there is an "Innate Life
Force" or Subluxations(tm) or that general health can be improved by
adjusting the spine. I don't believe it because Chiropractors absolutely
refuse to engage in easy, definitive tests that could prove the existence of
either. But they utterly refuse, instead, arguing that evidence-based
medicine isn't perfect (like creationists argue that the theory of evolution
isn't perfect) and this gives weight to their claims. It doesn't.

The point is that it wouldn't. And your statement that a "medicel
college" is trying to open a school of chiropractic is wrong to the point
of hilarity.

Please explain how putting a chiropractic school under the control of an
accredited university would NOT subject chiropractic to scientific
scrutiny.

Look at U Arizona and Gary Schwartz. He believes that showbiz mediums, like
John Edwards, really communicate with dead people and he claims to have the
research that proves it. It's a complete joke. A college at an accredited
university has academic freedom to go in, pretty much, whatever direction
they like. There are numerous examples of debacles because of this. But
great successes too. But allowing Chiropractic to get a foothold when thay
are so anti-science in a scientific field is ludicrous. The academics are
correct in opposing it. Once it's established, there's very little the
other colleges can do to force them to follow the rules of science.

And criticizing a slight failure in memory on my part, regarding whether
the college was a medical school or not is petty and childish.

I wasn't criticizing that. I was poining out that there is no "medical
school" (they certainly exist) trying to open a school of Chiropractic.
That's all.

Interesting. Never heard of a chiropractor sayinhg there was some
muscular pain thing they couldn't treat.

You also missed the part about my other chiropractor recommending surgery,
and codiene. Buried in an "anecdote" so it isn't important.

It's a good sign. But there isn't enough of it in Chiropractic and no
requirement that they all behave this way. Maybe you found a good one.
m
.

User: "Douglas Berry"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	22 Jan 2005 11:02:16 AM

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:46:35 -0500, "Happy Dog"
<happydog@sympatico.ca> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following

And what is the clinical success rate for that? You understand that it's an
odds game, no?

So's cancer treatment. I was given a 60/40 chance of living out my
first year after my Hodgkin's diagnosis. That was with aggressive
treatment.
Medicine is an art. Everybody reacts differently to treatments, there
are no guarantees.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.

User: "Mike Painter"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 09:01:28 PM

Glenn Arnold wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Because it kills, maims, and defrauds people.

Cite? Examples? Why is it that when I had wisdom teeth pulled I had to
sign a form saying that the oral surgeon might break my jaw (like
Johnny Cash?) and when I had back surgery I signed a form saying that
I knew I might not wake up from the anesthesia?

Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no
such notification/affirmation?

Because one is medicine and the other is not. Cites for the homocides have
been provided and are easy to find.
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 09:28:17 PM

Mike Painter wrote:

Glenn Arnold wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Because it kills, maims, and defrauds people.

Cite? Examples? Why is it that when I had wisdom teeth pulled I had to
sign a form saying that the oral surgeon might break my jaw (like
Johnny Cash?) and when I had back surgery I signed a form saying that
I knew I might not wake up from the anesthesia?

Yet for some reason this deadly practice of Chiropratic requires no
such notification/affirmation?

Because one is medicine and the other is not. Cites for the homocides have
been provided and are easy to find.

No they haven't, and no they're not. You made the claim, you back it up.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "The Last Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 10:27:54 AM

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:10:23 GMT,

(Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:

Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Because it kills, maims, and defrauds people.

The dangers of Chiropractic are so well known, practitioners felt
they had to *SUE* people to shut them up about those dangers: just
like Scientology Inc. does.
IF CHIROPRACTIC WORKED, EVEN PHYSICIAN IN THE WORLD WOULD BE
PERFORMING IT. (I had to yell because some people just do not "get
it.") If Chiropractic worked, hundreds of billions of dollars
would be saved every year and health care would be affordable to
the porest of citizens. Physicians would demand Chiropractic in
every hospital and clinic; physicians would demand more schools to
teach Chiropractic. Physicians do not do so because they know
Chiropractic is pseudoscience and dangerous.

---
Stop Elmer Fudd web site: http://www.ElmerFudd.US/
Covert text file server: http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html

---
http://lastliberal.org
Guns don't kill people: Republicans kill people.
"I am pro-life. I'm in agreement that not only is the abortionist a mass
murderer, but that the mother who consented to the abortion is a
murderer. Both are worthy of the death penalty." -- Arthut Biele
.

User: "Glenn Arnold"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 04:32:32 PM

The Last Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile wrote:

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:10:23 GMT,

(Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:

Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote:

Fredric L. Rice wrote:

Because it kills, maims, and defrauds people.

The dangers of Chiropractic are so well known, practitioners felt
they had to *SUE* people to shut them up about those dangers: just
like Scientology Inc. does.

Cite? (The actual court cases should be a matter of public record) I
can't imagine a court supporting a chiropractor who had killed someone
anymore than a court supporting a doctor who was guilty of some sort of
malpractice. That's why obstetricians are getting out of the business,
since they are in a business where "accidents" happen too often. Even if
it's not their fault, they are still held liable.

IF CHIROPRACTIC WORKED, EVEN PHYSICIAN IN THE WORLD WOULD BE
PERFORMING IT. (I had to yell because some people just do not "get
it.") If Chiropractic worked, hundreds of billions of dollars
would be saved every year and health care would be affordable to
the porest of citizens. Physicians would demand Chiropractic in
every hospital and clinic; physicians would demand more schools to
teach Chiropractic. Physicians do not do so because they know
Chiropractic is pseudoscience and dangerous.

No, not every physician, anymore than every physician installs tubes in
the ears. However, neurologists and general practitioners regularly give
referrals to chiropractors. (veterinarians are starting to perform
adjustments too, hmm, I just thought of that. Does my dog respond to the
"placebo effect"?)
Conspiracy theory is getting a little thick around here.
Glenn Arnold
.

User: "Mike Painter"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 09:08:29 PM

Glenn Arnold wrote:

Cite? (The actual court cases should be a matter of public record) I
can't imagine a court supporting a chiropractor who had killed someone
anymore than a court supporting a doctor who was guilty of some sort
of malpractice. That's why obstetricians are getting out of the
business, since they are in a business where "accidents" happen too
often. Even if it's not their fault, they are still held liable.

http://www.chirobase.org/#dangers has several.
All the articles are of interest, especially the ones on scripts and
advertising. A significant part of the training of a chiropractor is in
marketing himself.
The birthday clubs and "tell your friend about me" signs are common.
.

User: "Android Cat"
Title: Re: Chiropractic as useless as Scientology	19 Jan 2005 09:19:22 PM

Mike Painter wrote:

Glenn Arnold wrote:

Cite? (The actual court cases should be a matter of public record) I
can't imagine a court supporting a chiropractor who had killed
someone anymore than a court supporting a doctor who was guilty of
some sort of malpractice. That's why obstetricians are getting out
of the business, since they are in a business where "accidents"
happen too often. Even if it's not their fault, they are still held
liable.

http://www.chirobase.org/#dangers has several.

All the articles are of interest, especially the ones on scripts and
advertising. A significant part of the training of a chiropractor is
in marketing himself.

The birthday clubs and "tell your friend about me" signs are common.

Scientology makes a big point of recruiting chiropractors (and doctors,
dentists, vets...) through their WISE* "Hubbard Management" operations.
After they've been through the Scientology mill, I'm sure that they and
their staffs will be geared for /production/ in a way that might not be for
the best interests of their customers. (MLM hard-sell married to a cult.)
* World Institute of Scientology Enterprises.
--
Ron of that ilk.
.

Page 3 of 8

&nbs