patrick.net

Here's what I notice about everyone I know who goes to a chiropractor. They are never cured. They often talk about how great they think their chiropractor is, but invariably, after a few weeks, they have to go back. Seems almost like an addiction.

There is obviously a huge disparity on this forum with strong opinions on chiropractic care. It seems that each individuals' opinion reflects their experience at a chiropractors office.

Personally, I have had great success, and never had to go back for treatment more than 2 times for an injury.

I like this explanation of the history of chiropractic care.

cvos says

Personally, I have had great success, and never had to go back for treatment more than 2 times for an injury

How many times have you seen a chiropractor in your life?

robertoaribas says

it is total quackery...

Get a massage, and start stretching, eating better.

100% agree.

They are probably the biggest quacks in the medical field.

@homeboy 3 different times, about 3 years between each.

I have no personal experiences because my grandfather, the orthopedic surgeon, always warned me against them--"chiropractors break people and we have to fix them."

My good friend is a chiro. I don't believe half the stuff he says. He intimates chiro can cure all sorts of things...in theory like colds and vertigo. But I don't believe it, and he doesn't really know how to make it happen anyway. It's all theoretical.

That being said, I think a chiro can help alleviate pain temporarily for people with spinal misalignments. Or if you have something out of alignment that's minor, they can put it back. But with stretching and time it would probably go back anyway. Anything seriously wrong with your back, it's just temporarily relief.

I agree with the sentiment that there are good chiropractors out there, but many (most?) in the field are charlatans and quacks.

I saw a chiro once, he gave me an obvious baffle-em-with-BS answer to specific questions. My sister once ended up at a chiro over lower back pain; he did an adjustment but the pain remained because the underlying cause was a UTI. This one also gave a lengthy, irrelevant, and flat-out WRONG explanation.

To the carpenter who is ONLY a carpenter, the entire world is made of wood (and every tool is a hammer.)

If someone has a predisposition to a particular ideology or method of treatment then it is likely they will have success or failure depending on their belief.

Thus if you are rigidly skeptical of chiropractic, it is unlikely you will see benefit from it and you should seek treatment elsewhere.

If you believe in chiropractic medicine, it will likely work wonders for your pain.

There are some good astrologers and some bad ones (but of course astrology is complete nonsense regardless)

New comment by robertoaribas in What's your opinion Chiropractors?:

"chiropractic and astrology are roughly the same in terms of their science basis...

The most recent, large scale, scientific study done, showed that pins stuck randomly into you was 90% as effective as when the chiro puts them in the right place... The newspapers ran with it as, "chiro is so effective, it doesn't matter where you put the pins..." horseshit!

[for the scientifically illiterate, it is kind of hard to perform a true double blind study of chiropractic care; people tend to notice things like pins being stuck into their body, and hence the placebo effect is impossible to eliminate]

Ok, so do you want 90% of the effectivity of chiropractic for pennies on the dollar? go buy some needles and sterile swabs at your local Walgreens, and have a friend stick you wherever the f**k he/she wants to... bingo 90% as effective, and it will cost you $5 for a years worth of treatment!"

Er.....I do believe you are speaking about acupuncture, and this topic is about chiropractic. Two totally different modalities. Needles vs. cracking.

Although, since you mention it, Acupuncture has been around for over 3000 years. How do you explain this medicine's longetivity? (Western Medicine has been around for roughly 500 years, and modern medicine since the 19th century)

@indiana

"The most recent, large scale, scientific study done, showed that pins stuck randomly into you was 90% as effective as when the chiro puts them in the right place"

I would love to see the link for this study.

Indiana Jones says

Acupuncture has been around for over 3000 years. How do you explain this medicine's longetivity?

Astrology and faith healing have been around even longer.

OTOH, some customers of modern medicine might not be around much longer:

What's new is that CT is being marketed as a preventive or proactive health care measure to healthy individuals who have no symptoms of disease [but there are] No Proven Benefits for Healthy People

Beware of anyone trying to sell you stuff, especially if they try to make it mandatory. The harder they try to sell it, the more likely it serves their interest but not yours.

My chiropractor spared me from choosing between enduring on pain killers or spine surgery in my neck, like Elliemae's experience, my chiropractor only started his work after medical clearance.

Astrology is not a medicine.

Faith Healing is religious.

Acupuncture and chiropractic do not need the individual to believe in them for the treatment to work. Nor does the medicines need validation from western medicine.

The fact that these modalities still exist, that people obtain relief and feel better, is proof they work, at least for part of the population. Especially in light of the fact that both professions have in the past been viciously attacked by the AMA. Chiropractors and acupuncturists thrown in jail for practicing "without a license", (as if pharmaceutical drugs and cutting people up are the only treatments that constitute "medicine"). Attacks continue today, although more subtle. Take their trying to shut down supplements and herbal products.

I think Chiropractic works for some people. However for others like me, it totally does not. Back quacks don't explain this. Instead they present it as a one size fits all solution. Even though everyone has different kinetics. By the way; Kinetics are another field of study rarely taken into account by back quacks.

I also don't see any medical proof or science behind Chiropractors claims. At best they show the "best examples" using X-ray photos which they credit to back snapping. But I think the healing comes from:

1) The Placebo Effect
2) Cracking your neck or spine which causes some kind of self correction body response/effect in a large amount of people.

If you combine the two reasons above it's easy to see why people are "healed".

The quacks also don't focus on the muscles as being the source of the problems. Just the joints. So they treat the symptoms instead of the root cause which is the muscle(s).

Back quacks also have no business claiming Chiropractic cures all these other things (stomach pains, stress, etc) when there is no proof. I think these might have something to do with Chi. Some kind of side effect from the bodies self correcting mechanism after being cracked.

In any case I think they just want your money. You will notice how they want you to take pain pills (which mask the pain and can make things worse in the long run) and "bed rest" with "some walking" etc.

This is because they just want your money. They want to keep you a "patient" for a certain amount of time before you are "healed". Taking matters into your own hands means less money for these charlatans.

I thought chiropractic was quackery till I tried it. And the only reason I tried it was because traditonal medicine only offered meds to deal with the pain or else surgery near the spine in the neck. Nothing to lose by trying the chiropractic.

The interaction with my chiropractor was clinical as with the physicians. It seemed to me like he was performing physical therapy. Perhaps I could have got the same result with a physical therapist, but it did not occur to me at the time, and the docs did not suggest it.

Check out QUACKWATCH

Indiana Jones says

The fact that these modalities still exist, that people obtain relief and feel better, is proof they work, at least for part of the population.

Actually, no. The only way to actually PROVE that a given medical treatment works is to do a valid double-blind scientific study.

I think most chiropractors are well-meaning folks who truly believe in the wonders of their chosen profession. To me a quack is one who knowingly deceits people for profit. I also think some treatments to work while some don't. Some treatments don't do much, while some cause harm.

B.A.C.A.H. says

traditonal medicine only offered meds to deal with the pain or else surgery near the spine in the neck. Nothing to lose by trying the chiropractic.

The interaction with my chiropractor was clinical as with the physicians. t it

It sounds like you had a good experience, who did you go to?

B.A.C.A.H. says

traditonal medicine only offered meds to deal with the pain or else surgery near the spine in the neck. Nothing to lose by trying the chiropractic.

What happens when you keep snapping a rubber band?

This to the MD's who bash chiropractic.
I am tired of hearing you call us quacks. Although I regret becoming a chiropractor due to the struggles that we go through getting decent insurance reimbursement, considered alternative, and people like yourselves that bash our profession - I still think it is a very good healing art. There are some bad apples in our profession as there are in yours. By stereotyping you show your ignorance. I myself realize the ridiculousness of attributing all causes of disease to misalignments in the spine, although you as an MD will have to agree that distortions to spinal nerves can affect conditions other than just causing back pain such as paresthesias and other things - as published in your own medical journals. Also many chiropractors work with nutrition and natural healing methods, a thing that most MD's gave up long ago due to the corrupt influence of the pharmaceutical industry. What ever happened to - you are what you eat, an apple a day, a teaspoon of cod liver oil ? Have you guys sold your soul to the devil or something. The pharmaceutical industry is like witches and warlocks conjuring up evil potions that merely treat symptoms with all kinds of horrible side effects. It is the body that heals itself, not your medicines. God gave us what we needed on this planet for healing, however the distortion of nature to make medicines fueled by the root of all evil (money and the pharmaceutical industry has merely played on the weaknesses of peoples lack of discipline to eat right, exercise, etc. Or is it still more sinister than that - yes I think it is. Since birth we are inundated with television commercials promoting medicine for each and every possible symptom. Symptoms are warning signs from the body that something is wrong. Don't cover them up thinking you have fixed the problem. C'mon, take your head out of your asses MD's. If you paid attention in school, you know that medicine is hard on the liver, and our bodies can only take so much, then the kidneys go, etc, etc. Whatever happened to your hippocratic oath "first do no harm" oh, I know, you thought it meant to be hypocrites. I myself come from a country where the average life expectancy is in the 90's, most people never get sick, and live long healthy lives - a country where so called alternative medicine and the medical field work together to achieve the best results possible. Here our healthcare system is a disgrace, and is money driven instead of results driven. There is a place for medicine, but not as a first line. Benefits should outweigh the risks, and if there is a safer more natural way, then that should be explored first. The trouble is that you are not educated in these areas ever since the money grubbing big pharma took over. In conclusion, I think it is many (not all) the MD's in this country that are the quacks working like legalized drug pushers using potions and concoctions made by satan and his minions. What a wonder that the medical symbol is a snake. Just like Satan, you give something to entice (treatment of symptoms) for the weak and unsuspecting victims to enjoy, but it is full of horrible side effects. The most stunning statistic, however, is that the total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per year. It is now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the US. (By contrast, the number of deaths attributable to heart disease in 2001 was 699,697, while the number of deaths attributable to cancer was 553,251.5) I honestly don't know how you can sleep at night. I will pray for you all, and your victims.

Dr. Paul, you sound like a quack. If I got syphilis, I would go get some penicillin, not some fucking ground up herbs or apples or whatever nonsense you guys are peddling. And if my appendix blows up, I'm gonna have a real doctor cut it out of me, not go meditate on a mountain and hope my body "heals itself".

Earlier this year I read a Stanford magazine article about John Ioannidis's study of medical studies. According to his research, about 40% of medical studies are biased and therefore are not true. That means that medical doctors of all professions are working with about 60% correct information. I would say that it's about right.

I've gone to three chiropractors over 15 years. 2 were pretty bad and one is great. Yes, for certain problems and injuries he is ineffective, but for some he can really help. It's important to recognize the limitations of the provider.

Good diet, mild stretching, tai chi, walking or similar exercises are essential to good orthopedic health.

treatmentreport says

Earlier this year I read a Stanford magazine article about John Ioannidis's study of medical studies. According to his research, about 40% of medical studies are biased and therefore are not true. That means that medical doctors of all professions are working with about 60% correct information. I would say that it's about right.

Researchers generally try to duplicate findings in multiple studies. This corrects for mistakes. If a study finds a particular result, but that result cannot be duplicated, then it tends to cast doubt on the study. You build up a body of evidence, and when that body of evidence is large enough, you can be fairly certain of your conclusions.

You can criticize the scientific method if you like, but what is the alternative? Just guessing? Blind faith? Science is the most reliable method we have of discovering the truth. Even if it were only 60% reliable (which is false, of course), it still would be better than 0% reliable. People who believe in nonsense "alternative" medicine fear the scientific method, because deep down they know their beliefs won't stand up to scrutiny.

Stretching does nothing and can actually be harmful. Waste of time.

Diet and exercise? Of course it's beneficial. You don't need any b.s. "alternative" sources to learn that. ANY doctor will tell you that.

Homeboy,

I am not criticizing the scientific method. What I am saying is that if 40% of the medical studies are biased, then doctors should not rely on them to give medical advise. Bias is many times intentional to get the desired results.

Mild stretching is good. I agree that most people don't stretch correctly and probably harm themselves in the process.

treatmentreport says

I am not criticizing the scientific method. What I am saying is that if 40% of the medical studies are biased, then doctors should not rely on them to give medical advise.

Perhaps, but 100% of "evidence" provided by chiropractors, acupuncturists, homeopathic doctors, astrologers, etc. is bias. Yes, I agree that they should not be relying on that evidence to provide advice, medical or otherwise.

OK, maybe 100% was a little harsh as they do sometimes cite actual scientific studies. So, it is more like 98% biased information.

WAIT! no, it is 100% bias, because they only pick the studies that supported their preconceived notions and ignore anything contrary.

leo707,

please read some of the research that John has done http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/John_Ioannidis before you hyperbole the argument back to homeopaths.

treatmentreport says

Homeboy,

I am not criticizing the scientific method. What I am saying is that if 40% of the medical studies are biased, then doctors should not rely on them to give medical advise. Bias is many times intentional to get the desired results.

That makes no sense. Of course you are criticizing the scientific method. You just claimed that 40% of medical studies are wrong and that doctors should ignore them.

Again I will ask you: If not scientific studies, then what? How do you propose people should obtain knowledge about medicine, without using scientific studies?

treatmentreport says

Mild stretching is good

I don't stretch, and I have never had to visit a chiropractor. You stretch, and you have had to visit chiropractors multiple times. What is your evidence for believing stretching is good?

I think most suck for many reasons, most of which have been discussed above. The good ones will not claim to be able to cure the common cold, do not pressure you to visit them on a regular basis, spend a substantial amount of time with their patients, and recommend other methods - - - yoga, pilates, swimming, etc. Unfortunately, the good ones are hard to find.

There are plenty of crappy "real" doctors out there too. My brother is an anesthesiologist, and he says he wouldn't let some of the surgeons he works with anywhere near him if he needed surgery.

Homeboy says

I don't stretch, and I have never had to visit a chiropractor. You stretch, and you have had to visit chiropractors multiple times. What is your evidence for believing stretching is good?

Stretching is good because if FEELS good to do it. What more "evidence" do you need than what your body is telling you? Have you never stretched in the morning after waking up? It feels great to stretch! It is a natural, human thing to do. Everyone stretches! Animals stretch. You feel less tense after stretching. You feel more relaxed.

This is one of the many issues with Allopathic or western medicine: It promotes the disconnection of the mind from the body, such that you get people who don't stretch, and actually believe that stretching hurts you. Unbelievable.

Indiana Jones says

Stretching is good because if FEELS good to do it. What more "evidence" do you need than what your body is telling you?

It feels good to fart, but it wouldn't make me any healthier to pump air up my ass all day just so I can fart more. Doing stretches beyond what your body naturally does when you have been immobile for a long period does NOT feel good. You have just convinced yourself that it does because a long time ago someone came up with a theory that you would injure muscles if you didn't stretch them first. Problem is, there is zero evidence to support that theory.

Have you never stretched in the morning after waking up? It feels great to stretch! It is a natural, human thing to do. Everyone stretches! Animals stretch. You feel less tense after stretching. You feel more relaxed.

This is one of the many issues with Allopathic or western medicine: It promotes the disconnection of the mind from the body, such that you get people who don't stretch, and actually believe that stretching hurts you. Unbelievable.

This is the problem I have with the "alternative medicine" crowd. You can't discuss anything without throwing in jargon and nonsense talking points you memorized.

I said stretching CAN hurt you, and treatment report agreed, so that's 2 opinions against your one. Studies have shown that stretching doesn't do any good, and can cause harm if done wrong. What's your basis for your belief that stretching makes you healthier? Because you "feel" that it does? Sounds more like religion than medicine.

Homeboy says

Again I will ask you: If not scientific studies, then what? How do you propose people should obtain knowledge about medicine, without using scientific studies?

Look up Model-Based Inquiry as a step in the right direction away from the traditional Scientific Method.

Indiana Jones says

Homeboy says

Again I will ask you: If not scientific studies, then what? How do you propose people should obtain knowledge about medicine, without using scientific studies?

Look up Model-Based Inquiry as a step in the right direction away from the traditional Scientific Method.

I didn't ask you. Also, if you have a point to make, then make it. I'm not going to "look up" anything for you.

Homeboy says

Studies have shown that stretching doesn't do any good, and can cause harm if done wrong. What's your basis for your belief that stretching makes you healthier? Because you "feel" that it does? Sounds more like religion than medicine.

How is feeling something in my body religious? This is a very practical matter. Stretching (when I find time to do it), helps my body to feel better. This is based on my own, direct experience and awareness of what makes my body feel better, or worse.

Maybe stretching for you makes your body feel worse. That is your personal experience. This does not mean that for anyone else, stretching in itself is a "waste of time", or that if you stretch, this means you will need to go see a chiropractor.

Homeboy says

I didn't ask you. Also, if you have a point to make, then make it. I'm not going to "look up" anything for you.

I didn't write that for your benefit.