Chiropractic

[Realitycheck]

For the past 14 months, I have had a succession of chiropractic interns trying to fix the mess that the first one made. We are finally starting to wrap that up. I would have gone to a professional to get it fixed, but I was really leery of all the leeches that don't want to fix things right, don't know how to, and those that want to charge a gazillion dollars to be that touch above and still don't know everything that the students know, besides the fact that the pain kind of interferes with my cognitive processes sometimes since all of the nerves are way up near my neck.

 

For the previous ten years, I was caught up in their vicious circles of pain that they actually caused, simply because they had not invented an appropriate treatment for whiplash, until last year, when I finally found out, though it is debatable whether I really needed to be treated in the first place, seeing how I wasn't experiencing any pain at the time. I just happened to be living with a chiropractic student.

 

 

I would like to hear about other peoples' opinions and experiences about the addiction to having their bones popped. Of course, vertebrae can be slightly offset and possibly cause discomfort, but I have the opinion that the more you do it, the more easily it falls out of place. Of course, there is also the fact that it releases endorphins when you have it done, at least for a while. I'm not exactly sure when that seemed to stop and it just became necessary to relieve the pain. Of course, that was a long time ago, only a couple of years out of my coma.

 

Anyways, I just wanted to see what other people think about this. Seems to me like they were really pulling the wool over peoples' eyes for a long time and were just getting lucky now and then. I would think that due to this nature of their profession as being an art, literally, that DC's really shouldn't have the same status of respectability as medical doctors, whom they bash on quite often. They only have to study health related subjects for 3 years. Of course, now that my nervous system has become so much more "efficient", I know exactly what everything I eat does to me.

 

Oh, and did I mention that the statute of limitation runs out after they have been working on you for two years, courtesy of the medical lobby?

[ecoli]

The history of chiropractics is interesting and controversal.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiropractic

 

Before we start bashing them, though, please note that not all chiropractors work on the same principles, and so I urge against dismissing the whole practice based on the actions of a few. After all, if we banned every type of medical procedure were mistakes can be made, we wouldn't have gotten very far in medicine.

 

More research should be done to determine the value of chiropractics on human health. Unfortunately, this is hard to do objectively.

[SkepticLance]

To ecoli

 

Plenty of research has already been done on the value of chiropractic treatments. The result = zero.

 

I went to a lecture by a doctor who had practised chiropracty once. This guy was a fully qualified general practitioner, and decided to extend his field. he did the full training course to make him a qualified chiropractor, and began his chiropractic work.

 

He started getting suspicious when he found that all his 'massages' worked equally well. When a patient with a shoulder or neck ache was given the treatment for lower back pain, it worked just as well as when he gave the proper treatment. He also discovered that the results appeared to correlate with noise. The louder the pop, the better the result. After all this, he concluded that the effect was pure placebo, and he gave it away.

 

If you want further information, try http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chiro.html

[Realitycheck]

The National Association of Orthopedics did actually came out and say that, with their newly invented treatment, chiropractic is the best treatment for whiplash. It's just that many of the chiropractors out there are from the old school and just leech off of people without even taking the time to learn about better treatments, or simply don't use it in order to keep people coming in more and more. Been there, done that, and this was someone who was nice, professional, had his office across the street from town hall in a very conservative community.

 

Undoubtedly, this type of thing happens in the medical field, as well. The chiropractors complain about the medical doctors not teaching patients enough about preventing problems, since that drives people through the doors. Ethics are such an easy thing to feign, especially when patients don't take the time to educate themselves.

 

Yeah, there is probably more good done than bad, but it can be hard to punish those who do more harm.

[Revenged]

don't go to a chiropracter... seriously... i met someone who had permanent and irreversible damage because of the 'treatment'... he had compression of the lumbar spine and a right-sided siatica (not uncommon)... he decided to go to a chiropracter who 'manipulated his spine'... after the appointment the man couldn't dorsiflex his right foot (i.e. he couldn't move the foot upwards)... he had total foot drop so whenever he walked he would trip over his right foot... the damage was permanent... chiropracters are not medically trained and do not have access to a patient's medical notes, they do not do MRI scans, they do not know what they are doing and they can cause permanent injury... i myself would never trust one... if you don't want to go to a doctor then you should really go to a physiotherapist (they are just as good and are much better at treating musculo-skeletal pain) - but you should never see a chiropracter!

[ecoli]

don't go to a chiropracter... seriously... i met someone who had permanent and irreversible damage because of the 'treatment'... he had compression of the lumbar spine and a right-sided siatica (not uncommon)... he decided to go to a chiropracter who 'manipulated his spine'... after the appointment the man couldn't dorsiflex his right foot (i.e. he couldn't move the foot upwards)... he had total foot drop so whenever he walked he would trip over his right foot... the damage was permanent... chiropracters are not medically trained and do not have access to a patient's medical notes, they do not do MRI scans, they do not know what they are doing and they can cause permanent injury... i myself would never trust one... if you don't want to go to a doctor then you should really go to a physiotherapist (they are just as good and are much better at treating musculo-skeletal pain) - but you should never see a chiropracter!

 

I met someone who went to a chiropractor and didn't get injured at all. In fact, he even felt better about this neck pain he was having. Judging by this, chiropractors always know what they're doing, and can make you feel better by using a holistic approach to medicine. You should always see a chiropractor.

 

See my point?

[Pangloss]

This is one of those areas of pseudoscience that has become so ingrained into society that it's going to be almost impossible to ever ween it out. It's just too commonly accepted now.

[Realitycheck]

Here is a website devoted to skeptical chiropractors who share information to keep themselves alive, but bash on chiropractic the rest of the time.

 

Sample Forums

Subluxation Dogma

Chiropractic now masquerades as religion

Fair definition of chiropractic Mcfly.org

Confessions of a former quack

Chiro does not add years to your life

There's A Sucker Born Every Day

DC lifespans shorter than MDs and General Pop

 

http://chirotalk.proboards3.com/index.cgi?board=belief

[SkepticLance]

To ecoli

 

I think you missed the point I was alluding to earlier.

 

There has been lots of research into chiropractic treatments. For a control, they normally use a massage or 'subluxation' that is not considered appropriate for the problem. So if they are testing the effect of chiropractic massage on neck pain, they put half the patients into the kind of chiropractic massage that is used for back pain.

 

The end result, if the test is done correctly, is ALWAYS that any chiropractic massage will work as well as any other. In other words, chiropractic treatments are exactly as good as placebo.

 

As revenged points out, chiropractic treatments are not free of risk. There are lots of cases where people suffer permanent and debilitating injury. My quackwatch reference even details a fatality.

 

Do you really want to use a placebo treatment that can kill you?

[ecoli]

the tests aren't great however, because the negative control isn't purely negative.

 

Perhaps if they were allowed to put the patients to sleep, or something like that.

[Realitycheck]

Holy begesus!

 

 

Talk about a bonafide, hellified hospital experience! You know it just wouldn't be hellified until you throw in the morphine and fentanyl. Did you ever see that movie, "Fear and Loathing in ICU?"

 

So anyways, all this time, for who knows how long, the chiropractors were tossing this salad with vertebrae and tumor and nerve roots around c4/c5. What a stupid, ridiculous mess. I still have some function of my delts and biceps, but they are pretty weak.

 

I actually got out of the deal really lucky. They initially wanted to saw one vertebrae in half and part of another and fuse it all together with screws and immobility, in order to get to it. I am starting to think that surely they were joking so they could take credit for making me feel so relieved after I told 3 people on the way to the table that I didn't want to have anything to do with any fusion.

 

So anyways, do you think they were joking?

 

Anybody know what a nursery tumor is, or how it is spelled? Have not found anything yet on the internet. Thinking it will probably take a trip to a medical library. Still just a little bitty piece of useless flesh in there. How do I defuse its expansion? Positive thinking, now that I know that it is there?

 

To ecoli

 

I think you missed the point I was alluding to earlier.

 

There has been lots of research into chiropractic treatments. For a control, they normally use a massage or 'subluxation' that is not considered appropriate for the problem. So if they are testing the effect of chiropractic massage on neck pain, they put half the patients into the kind of chiropractic massage that is used for back pain.

 

The end result, if the test is done correctly, is ALWAYS that any chiropractic massage will work as well as any other. In other words, chiropractic treatments are exactly as good as placebo.

 

As revenged points out, chiropractic treatments are not free of risk. There are lots of cases where people suffer permanent and debilitating injury. My quackwatch reference even details a fatality.

 

Do you really want to use a placebo treatment that can kill you?

 

I wrote to the guy who runs chiroweb.org and his advice to many people thinking about trying chiropractic was that they should see an orthopedist and get physical therapy. The whole deal with your bones falling out of place, falling out of place more easily with each and every snap, crackle, and pop, falling out of place because all of the ligaments gradually get looser ... who really knows. Of course, they would not necessarily give me a biased answer. How much controlled study has been done on the harms of chiropractic? Primarily internal studies?

 

The classic definition of subluxation is a complex condition with a variable number of factors going into it that result in discomfort in the vertebral joint and referred nerves- bone position, nervous condition, chemical condition, etc.- with no real absolute definition, just pop it and fix it. This starts getting out of my league, but this is the gist of it. I'm pretty sure they have progressed their field from this point, but to what level and weighing the benefits vs. the risks is really beyond me. I would be more prone to using the same advice of sending anyone to an ortopedist then risk sending them to a chiro, where everything is subject to human error, human guesswork, human everything, because you just cannot get an MRI done twice a week. Of course, there is still that little detail about the Orthopedists conceding that the chiros do whiplash cases better.

 

Now that I am getting a good long rest in which I would not be able to get my back popped even if I wanted to, I am going to try and make the break. I am hoping that the break from it will give the ligaments in my back time to tighten up and keep from falling out of place so easily, causing discomfort, etc., etc., etc., etc. ...... Maybe it's just a matter of Just Say No and walk away. Take it like a man, and grow rich!

 

PS: Don't forget your glucosamine complex. Got to keep those joints healthy and lubricated.

[SkepticLance]

There was an article in Scientific American about 10 years ago about bad backs. According to that, the only 'proven' treatment for a bad back is exercise. Massage, and even surgery do not appear to have lasting benefits. Only exercise gives real long term assistance.

 

I did my back in 28 years ago, lifting an outboard motor out of a boat. Left me incapacitated for 6 months, and I have had a weak back ever since. I do back exercises 3 times a week, and I now suffer back pain only about 3 times a year. I am told this is an exceptional result for someone with my condition.

[Realitycheck]

Do you think they could feel it in there? Looking back, I had one outside chiropractor say, "I can see where it is in the neck," and another spout out all kinds of crazy stuff other than the actual answer, all while pretending to be my friend. Sounds like its time for another round with the State Board, at least.

 

Again, do you think they could feel the tumor in there, jostling around amongst the vertebrae? I have to figure out exactly where it was positioned. I just have a vague MRI image in my mind.

 

It seems fairly obvious now.

[DrDNA]

Having had extensive experience with chiropractors, orthopedic surgeons, physical therapists, etc I can state with confidence that chiropractors are massage therapists with some greater comprehension of skeletal anatomy, fancier offices and bigger bank accounts. The level of education that a chiropractor recieves qualifies her/him to perform massage. PERIOD. It should be against the law to call them "Dr". In most cases, you would definitely be much better off seeing a physical therapist than a chiropractor. That said, massage is great, but it is just massage.

[SkepticLance]

To DrDNA

 

We use the term 'icecream therapy' for things like massage, counselling, psychotherapy etc. Like eating ice cream, it feels good when it happens, but has no lasting benefit.

[DrDNA]

To DrDNA

 

We use the term 'icecream therapy' for things like massage, counselling, psychotherapy etc. Like eating ice cream, it feels good when it happens, but has no lasting benefit.

 

 

Yeah; like "manipulation of the spine"

[mooeypoo]

The main issue is that the origin of Chiropractic is BULL. The only half decent chiropractors today are the ones who DO NOT follow the true philosophy and practice of Chiropractic. Chiropractors who still deal with 'sublaxation' (however you spell it) are QUACKS.

 

No other way to put it. Q-U-A-C-K-S.

 

Those who deny the stupidity of subluxation and just deal with the bones, while knowing the dangers about these methods (you can seriously make damage to the back if doing it wrong, or treating a patient with actual back problems) are not "true" chiropractors. Actually, there's a movement amongst the new NON-Sublaxation chiropractors to CHANGE their name from chiropractic to something else, so they stop being related to the quacks.

 

 

Check this out, btw (BULLSHIT episode, about quack medicine): http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=7843377

 

Also, these:

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirovisit.html

http://skepdic.com/chiro.html

and of course: Subluxations -> http://www.echiropractic.net/what_is_a_subluxation.htm

 

 

~moo

[Realitycheck]

Oh yeah, did I mention how chiropractic is supposed to make your nervous system more "efficient". End result = sugar makes you that much more jittery, saturated fats make you that much more inflammed, caffein makes you that much more zingy, processed food makes you that much more feel like total !@#$ !

 

Well, I think that's why. Maybe I'm just a getting old borderline type 2 diabetic that just keeps it under control. They still have never found my blood sugar out of range. I really need to get rolling on this stationary bike. That is really the ticket.

[mooeypoo]

To DrDNA

 

We use the term 'icecream therapy' for things like massage, counselling, psychotherapy etc. Like eating ice cream, it feels good when it happens, but has no lasting benefit.

 

I'm not sure I'd include "Psychotherapy" and "Counseling" under such a definition. They tend to have long term effect if done correctly, and some people actually do have mental diseases - or 'conditions' - that require those, and do improve upon receiving treatment. On the long run as well.

 

~moo

[SkepticLance]

To mooeypoo

 

I attended a lecture at the NZ Skeptics Conference on the business of counselling and psychotherapy. According to the speaker, there have been a number of studies looking at effectiveness. These studies can be divided into two types.

 

1. Those that evaluate results by interviewing the subject. Basically asking the question : Did the counselling/psychotherapy help you? Inevitable, the answer is yes.

 

2. Those that use more objective testing methods to evaluate the results. Did the objective measure show benefits from counselling/psychotherapy? Over the longer term (21 months) the answer is no.

 

For example : a British study looked at a large number of people who had suffered bereavement. Half were randomely assigned to counselling. Half were essentially told to go home and get over it. The final evaluation test after 21 months measured how much emotional trauma remained. The group receiving counselling were worse off at that point, by that measure, than the group left to their own devices.

 

The thing is that everyone loves talking about themselves. Counselling/psychotherapy provides the service of active listener to someone talking about themselves. People love it! However, apart from the subjective 'ice cream therapy' factor of the pleasure of talking, there appears to be no long term emotional benefit.

[mooeypoo]

To mooeypoo

 

I attended a lecture at the NZ Skeptics Conference on the business of counselling and psychotherapy. According to the speaker, there have been a number of studies looking at effectiveness. These studies can be divided into two types.

 

1. Those that evaluate results by interviewing the subject. Basically asking the question : Did the counselling/psychotherapy help you? Inevitable, the answer is yes.

 

2. Those that use more objective testing methods to evaluate the results. Did the objective measure show benefits from counselling/psychotherapy? Over the longer term (21 months) the answer is no.

 

For example : a British study looked at a large number of people who had suffered bereavement. Half were randomely assigned to counselling. Half were essentially told to go home and get over it. The final evaluation test after 21 months measured how much emotional trauma remained. The group receiving counselling were worse off at that point, by that measure, than the group left to their own devices.

 

The thing is that everyone loves talking about themselves. Counselling/psychotherapy provides the service of active listener to someone talking about themselves. People love it! However, apart from the subjective 'ice cream therapy' factor of the pleasure of talking, there appears to be no long term emotional benefit.

 

That's interesting. I'd love the resources..

 

But I can't help but wondering: These are anecdotal evidences. Asking people is an evidence that should be taken, but also under consideration that it is anecdotal. Then again, I am not sure how else you can measure that.

 

I can give you another anecdotal evidence to the contrary of what you are saying and tell you that Psycholotherapy/Counselling did help me, and even though it has been a very long time since I had some, it still helps me. I consider it one of the best decisions I've ever make.

 

I am aware, however, that it depends on the person *and* it depends on what type of psychologist/therapist you're going to. I have many friends who were thorroughly disapointed with theirs. The methodology used is also something that should probably be taken into consideration. My therapist was just 'there'. She just listened, and her major role was to "light up" things I've said (without noticing, mostly.. geesh the power of slip-ups ) and caused me to think about them. That how I consider myself to make a difference and progress.

 

But this is anecdotal. It's an experience. It's not much of a proof. And neither are these questionairs, if we are talking about empirical evidence pro/con psychotherapy/counselling.

 

I also noticed that in America the counselling is a bit more directed towards "statements" -> defining 'psychological states' to their patients eventually. In europe (as far as I know of it, at least), it is not as common to reach "statements" at the end of such 'therapy'...

 

In any case, measuring the success of such therapies is hard because the potential effectiveness has a lot of variables; the person receiving it, the person giving it, the methods chosen, the amount of time, the bias of both of them, etc. That's always the case when dealing with psychology, isn't it?

 

~moo

[SkepticLance]

To mooeypoo

 

I am not an expert in this field - just quoting one speaker who was such an expert.

 

In his talk, he lists a total of 8 proper studies that used objective criteria for evaluating results, rather than just asking the patients their view. Overall, results were slightly negative. In other words, it appears that counselling appears to slow down healing. However, patient perception is the opposite, because people are temporarily uplifted by being able to talk at length about their emotions and feelings.

 

I am going by memory on this. I was impressed by the detail of the talk but that does not mean I am 100% accurate in my memory. The speaker's explanation for the negative consequence is a bit like the nasty habit of picking at a scab. If you do that to a physical wound, it slows the healing. Continually talking about an emotional trauma is a bit like picking at that scab. It slows the healing. It seems that the process of forgetting is a vital part of emotional healing, and repeated talking inhibits the healing forgetfulness.

 

That does not mean that talking over a freshly experienced emotional trauma is harmful. We all know the value of a sympathetic shoulder to cry on when we are hurting. It is the prolongued talking long after the subject would normally have been dropped, and forgetting begun, that does the harm.

[iNow]

SkepticLance - Can you share the actual study? I'm extremely curious to see exactly what they measured, exactly how "negative" was parameterized, and what the data was to show that counseling slows healing. This is counter to ALL literature I've encountered in the field.

 

Do you have a citation? Can you find at least the name of this mysterious "expert?" I am genuinely curious. Cheers.

[mooeypoo]

Yeah me too .. I didn't mean to sound mocking or anything, I really do want to see how they decided on measuring these things...it's not as easy as it sounds for sure.

[Psyber]

The best starting point is to find a good Rehabilitation Physician who works with a Physio team. They are not knife happy and are generally interested in designing the treatment of soft tissue injury to suit the injury rather than apply standard techniques. When there is no bone or disk damage to cause the pain, the common problem is muscle shrinkage due to disuse when it hurts to move part of your body so you don't. Once the shrinkage has occurrred it then hurts to stretch the muscles to regain mobility and a lot give up on it.

 

I had a "frozen shoulder" develop in this way after a Supraspinatus muscle tear, and it took about 3 months of very painful exercises to recover full mobility and function.