Chiropractors? Real medicine or quacks?

[mill4023]

Doctors have been using leeches and maggots and honey for ate least the last 34 years that I've been a nurse. I know this because I have applied them. They're not just any old leeches you find in the creek. They and the maggots come from medical supply houses and they are used for specific things. Leeches are often used in areas where circulation is poor because they have an anticoagulant in their saliva which keeps the blood from clotting--I've seen this used on children suffering from meningicoccal meningitis to try to save fingers and feet. Maggots are used for recalcitrant infections. And honey is used often for bedsores and other slow-healing ulcers.

I think this is pretty clear evidence that most doctors are willing to use whatever treatments work, even if they aren't what you think of as traditional medicine.

Contrary to popular belief, most people aren't opposed to "alternative" medicine simply because it's different. They are opposed to it because it's ineffective.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

So for those of you that have had good luck with a chiropractor, what should I look for in picking out one of the good ones? Are there any particular questions I should ask ahead of time? Are x-rays a good thing or a bad thing?

I would certainly interview them.

1. If they insist on their own xrays, I would run. I used one that insisted and he positioned my body to make my scoliosis appear MUCH worse than it was.

2. I like an intuitive care provider. One that doesn't ask just were it hurts, since I sometimes forget. But when they check a spot and then ask, has _____ been bothering you, I get impressed . Hard to I'd specifics as that would require sharing more than I care to....but I loOk for that same quality in all care providers.

3. Our insurance is usually a good lead. If they are listed there, then I can at least trust them enough to check them out since our insurance doesn't cover quackery.

4. I don't go to chiropractors that claim to be cure all specialist. While it *could* help, it won't always so don't pretend that it does. A chiropractor who is honest in that regard is more legit in my eyes than one making cure all claims. I went to one claiming he could cure my morning sickness with accupuncture. While it did improve, it did not get cured and after 1 or 2 treatments, each subsequent treatment would cause me to get sick. He found the spot, but it did opposite of what he claimed.

I do believe they can help beyond the backbone. But I have nothing bbut anectdotes.

Sitting in the office right now waiting for the occupational therapist h
That I will be using in conjunction with chiropractic care. Adjustments alone have only gotten me so far with my shoulder. I need some treatments in all the muscles of the shoulder and some exercises to get to 100%.

A bad chiropractor would insist that he alone can be the magic man. That was bad x-ray doc and I ran from the hills from him.

Chiropractic care should NOT make you worse....if it does, then that is bad and something else must be done before the damage is irreversible.

 

[Geoff_M]

It may not be recognized as acupuncture practiced in the West today but it is the acupuncture that has been practiced in the East for thousands of years. Don't forget we think in the West that we invented everything.
Oh and as for bloodletting, many doctors are now using leeches because they've been found to help. They also use honey and maggots all of which were pooh poohed by "modern" medicine for years as quackery. Is the best way to treat an illness giving patients poison because that is what medicine is. It kills the bacteria but it also affects other parts of the body. Watch a tv commercial for pain relievers, arthritis meds or any other medication.
Also, are you a doctor? I'm just wondering why there seems to be a problem with alternative medicine.

Nope, I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV. Nor did I equate all bloodletting with quackery. As I said earlier, here's the deal... if something can be reasonably shown to work, then great, I'm fine with it. So-called "Western" medicine has had no historical problem incorporating effective treatments derived from such "alternative" areas such as herbal medicine (ex Digitalis, Taxol), or the "East".

What bothers people like me is when people start promoting mysticism-wrapped woo and then pooh pooh the notion that it can be subjected to "Western" medical standards. It's the whole "Our woo is too cleaver for your science to detect!" meme.

As for the whole drugs = poison thing... I'm sorry, that's complete horse manure. Toxicity is dependent on concentration, for anything! Find me something that doesn't have an LD50 in humans. Water is a poison beyond a certain level, and even "poisons" can have therapeutic benefits at low levels (heck, even homeopathic quacks will tell you that!). So are Chinese herbalists also peddling "poison" too?

 

[npmommie]

Do you have any unbiased proof that these things don't work? Or do only believe studies by the MDs?

From one of the studies:




Seems that one is no better than the other. Should we call MDs quacks and a sham?

If you read the study and the findings from the 3rd link, you will see that the risk of a stroke is identical in patients visiting a chiropractor or an MD. I didn't say it doesn't happen but rather the statement that chiropractors increase the risk dramatically is not supported in evidence.

This is similar to the supposed link between autism and vaccines. Even when presented with evidence that there isn't a link, people still believe it to be true.

I think the studies are saying that in young people who present to their MD or chiropractor with neck pain, they may have ALREADY injured the artery, so the chiropractic care did not cause it, the injury may have already been there prior.

We can go on and on about the details, but it's kind of pointless, and like a lot of other topics on the DIS, people are going to keep posting anecdotal evidence, which for people who think logically, is really not evidence at all.

The problem with chiropractic is that the entire thing is founded on a theory that is complete nonsense. The theory is that virtually all disease is caused by misalignment of the spine, or what they call a subluxation, and that fixing this misalignment by performing adjustments will cure the disease.

The fact is that there is no such thing as a subluxation and short of an actual injury, it is impossible for the spine to get "mis-aligned". And if it can't get "mis-aligned", it certainly can't be fixed by an "adjustment".

So regardless of whether some people get relief from back pain by seeing a chiropractor, that relief is not due to any "adjustments" and the basic theory of chiropractic is still complete and utter nonsense.

So can chiropractic help with a sore back? Sure.
Would I suggest anyone see a chiropractor for a sore back? Absolutely not.
You can get the same kind of relief by seeing someone who actually understands how massage and physical therapy can help and has been trained based on scientific evidence, not nonsense theories.

red highlighted.
you keep saying this, but I think orthopedic textbooks would disagree with you, there is such thing as subluxation.
in the vertebrae yes its rare, but it does and can happen.

 

[declansdad]

No. Why would I? I never made that claim.

I think this is pretty clear evidence that most doctors are willing to use whatever treatments work, even if they aren't what you think of as traditional medicine.

Contrary to popular belief, most people aren't opposed to "alternative" medicine simply because it's different. They are opposed to it because it's ineffective.

For someone who states they are open-minded, you seem to be very stuck in an opinion that you don't back up with proof.

 

[Geoff_M]

I think the studies are saying that in young people who present to their MD or chiropractor with neck pain, they may have ALREADY injured the artery, so the chiropractic care did not cause it, the injury may have already been there prior.

Perhaps, but as this points out, that doesn't necessarily absolve the chiroprator even if true:

Recent reports produced by chiropractors argue that the incidence of stroke among persons who have had neck manipulation is “…to the same order of magnitude as that occurring in the general population,”4 and that there is “…no evidence of excess risk of VBA [vertebrobasilar artery] stroke associated with chiropractic care compared with primary care.”7 But these reports fail to distinguish strokes caused by trauma to the vertebral arteries of young healthy people from the type of strokes that occur among predisposed persons, especially the elderly. No consideration is given to the possibility that many strokes caused by neck manipulation may go unreported. When patients seek medical care for paralytic symptoms caused by release of a blood clot that was formed days or weeks earlier by neck manipulation, for example, a connection between neck manipulation and stroke may not be made. Such strokes may then be reported by primary care physicians who are unaware of preceding trauma caused by neck manipulation, thus sparing chiropractors of any blame.

The most recent chiropractor-headed study of the association between chiropractic visits and vertebrobasilar artery stroke, based on billing records, concluded that strokes associated with chiropractic neck manipulation occur because patients with headache and neck pain caused by vertebrobasilar dissection seek chiropractic care for relief of symptoms: “The increased risks of VBA stroke associated with chiropractic and PCP [primary care physician] visits is likely due to patients with headache and neck pain from VBA dissection seeking care before their stroke.”7 In other words, the report implies that a chiropractor is not to be blamed for making an incorrect diagnosis and then manipulating the neck of a patient who presents the symptoms of a stroke in progress. It goes without saying, however, that it is the responsibility of the chiropractor to recognize symptoms of stroke before manipulating the patient’s neck, especially if the chiropractor practices independently or portrays himself or herself as a primary care physician. But you cannot depend upon the diagnostic acumen of a chiropractor who believes that he or she can improve health by adjusting the spine. Physicians and therapists who refer patients to chiropractors must be cautious in selecting patients for referral, and they must take responsibility for the diagnosis when making such referrals.

you keep saying this, but I think orthopedic textbooks would disagree with you, there is such thing as subluxation.
in the vertebrae yes its rare, but it does and can happen.

However, the orthopedic definition of "Subluxation" is different that the chiropractic definition:

In the eyes of the public, the chiropractic vertebral subluxation theory has confused the definition of the word “subluxation,” a common medical term. Unlike the mysterious, undetectable and asymptomatic chiropractic “vertebral subluxation complex” alleged to be a cause of disease, a real vertebral subluxation, that is, an orthopedic subluxation, can be a cause of mechanical and neuromusculoskeletal symptoms but has never been associated with organic disease.

Subluxations: Real and Imaginary

An orthopedic subluxation, recognized and named as such since the days of Hippocrates, is a painful partial dislocation. Simple misalignment of a vertebra, also referred to as a “subluxation,” is commonly caused by disc degeneration, curvatures, spondylolysis, and structural abnormalities. Such a subluxation may or may not be mechanically symptomatic and can be seen on a plain x-ray image. In the absence of pathology such as disc herniation or osteophyte formation, these common vertebral subluxations or misalignments rarely affect spinal nerves and have never been associated with organic disease. Spinal nerves supply musculoskeletal structures. The body’s organs are supplied primarily by autonomic nerve ganglia and plexuses located outside the spinal column and by cranial and sacral nerves that pass through solid bony openings, providing overlapping nerve supply independent of any one spinal nerve that passes between two vertebrae.

An orthopedic subluxation, a true vertebral misalignment, or a mechanical joint dysfunction that affects mobility in the spine is not the same as a “chiropractic subluxation” that is alleged to cause disease by interfering with nerve supply to organs. Such a subluxation has never been proven to exist. There is no plausible theory and no credible evidence to support the contention that “nerve interference” originating in a single spinal segment can cause an organic disease.

Unable to provide evidence that commonly occurring vertebral misalignment can cause organic disease, advocates of the subluxation theory have reasoned that there must be some other type of joint dysfunction that can affect general health. They have chosen, by consensus, to call this undetectable lesion a “vertebral subluxation complex,” which “embraces the holistic nature of the human body, including health, well-being, and the doctor/patient relationship as well as the changes in nerve, muscle, connective, and vascular tissues which are understood to accompany the kinesiologic aberrations of spinal articulations.”1

Some chiropractors claim to be able to locate these elusive subluxations by using surface electromyography, thermography, vibratory instruments, leg length checks, or by palpating the spine.

A largely ignored landmark review of the literature by a Ph.D. and a chiropractor (Nansel and Szlazak), published in 1995, concluded that there is not a single appropriately controlled study to indicate that any dysfunction in structures of the spinal column is a cause of organic disease.2 The review noted that pain and other symptoms referred from a spinal segment can “create overt signs and symptoms that can mimic, or simulate (rather than cause), internal organ disease,” lending no support to the vertebral subluxation theory. Spinal nerves are commonly irritated or compressed, causing pain and other symptoms in the musculoskeletal structures supplied by the affected nerve. But even the most severe compression of a spinal nerve does not cause organic disease.

A review of the current evidence on the epidemiology of the subluxation construct (Mirtz, et al, 2009) also failed to find any credible evidence supporting the chiropractic vertebral subluxation theory. This paper, authored by three chiropractors and a Ph.D., concluded that “No supportive evidence is found for the chiropractic subluxation being associated with any disease process or of creating suboptimal health conditions requiring intervention. Regardless of popular appeal this leaves the subluxation construct in the realm of unsupported speculation. This lack of supportive evidence suggests the subluxation construct has no valid clinical applicability.”3

While there is justification for use of the word “subluxation” when referring to a mechanical-type spinal problem, there appears to be no justification whatsoever for suggesting that a “chiropractic subluxation” can affect general health.

 

[mill4023]

I think the studies are saying that in young people who present to their MD or chiropractor with neck pain, they may have ALREADY injured the artery, so the chiropractic care did not cause it, the injury may have already been there prior.




red highlighted.
you keep saying this, but I think orthopedic textbooks would disagree with you, there is such thing as subluxation.
in the vertebrae yes its rare, but it does and can happen.

Please point out some evidence that a subluxation in chiropractic terms (not an injury that can be seen on an x-ray) actually exists.

 

[npmommie]

Please point out some evidence that a subluxation in chiropractic terms (not an injury that can be seen on an x-ray) actually exists.

I never said it did.
I said in ortho terms it does.

 

[Jennasis]

Someone asked what they should ask/look for when choosing a chiro.

1. X-rays are bare minimum a must, but MRI's are the gold standard for diagnosis. Having been through what I've been through and spent oodles of hours online on back pain forums discussing my experience with others, I will never allow another person be it Doctor, PT or the Dalai Lama to touch my back or neck without a an MRI to diagnose the problem. X-rays were unable to detect the MASSIVE herniation in my L5. X-rays only show the bone. If you want to see the discs and other stuff, you need an MRI.

2. The chiro should allow you to bring x-rays from your medical doctor or outside imaging practice. It is very common for shady chiropractors to take your x-ray and then switch out your films for someone else's with a very messed up spine/neck. I have had this happen to friends and family, and covered MANY stories on this when I worked in tv news.

3. Ask for references or seek them out through talking to your doctor, physical therapis and friends and family or insurance company.

4. trust your gut. If something doesn;t seem right, RUN. Things should not hurt worse after treatment (I don't care what anyone says). It may not heal after one treatment (or 20, but I digress) but you should never be worse off then when you came in. Many will disagree with me on this point, but frankly, I don't care. I was in agony walking in to the chiros office, and in EXCRUCIATING agony walking out. A week later I was under the knife with an orthopedic surgeon....I went in to surgery in EXCRUCIATING agony, and woke up in recovery 90% pain-free (without any pain meds or ANY lidocaine).

 

[Geoff_M]

For someone who states they are open-minded, you seem to be very stuck in an opinion that you don't back up with proof.

I'm not mill4023, but I said effectively the same thing and offered two quick plant-based treatments that have been embraced by "Western" medicine. In addition, if you scan leading medical journals you'll find lots of articles about studies that look into into the effectiveness of the incorporation of "non-traditional" treatments such as acupuncture, chiropractics, meditation, and such. The new term in vogue for such things is "complimentary medicine". In fact, there's even a program in the NIH concerning it. So tell me again how "Western" medicine rejects anything outside the orthodoxy and is closed-minded?

 

[Jennasis]

I never said it did.
I said in ortho terms it does.

Everyone was CLEARLY referring to chiropractic subluxation. And I agree with the others...it's bunk (in chiro terms for those who are unsure of my meaning).

 

[mill4023]

For someone who states they are open-minded, you seem to be very stuck in an opinion that you don't back up with proof.

It is not my job to prove that something doesn't work. It is the responsibility of the seller to prove that what they are trying to sell me actually works before I will consider buying it.

Chiropractors have a financial interest in convincing people that their methods are effective. If they haven't provided any scientific evidence that this is true, it's because they cannot. What other possible reason could there be?

Drug companies also have a financial interest in convincing people that their drugs are effective. The difference is that they actually have provided scientific evidence in the form of properly conducted double-blind studies.

When I go to a doctor and they prescribe an antibiotic to treat an infection, the reason I take it is because there is clear scientific evidence that it works. My decision is not based on the fact that there isn't any proof that it doesn't work.

 

[npmommie]

Everyone was CLEARLY referring to chiropractic subluxation. And I agree with the others...it's bunk (in chiro terms for those who are unsure of my meaning).

some of the posts were kind of long winded
I skimmed, and just caught, " there is no such thing as subluxation"
and yes there is,
and it can happen in the spine. mostly due to injury....... thats all I am sayin

 

[mill4023]

I never said it did.
I said in ortho terms it does.

I re-read my post. Considering the context (the basic founding theories of chiropractic "medicine"), I think it was pretty clear what I was talking about.

 

[npmommie]

I re-read my post. Considering the context (the basic founding theories of chiropractic "medicine"), I think it was pretty clear what I was talking about.

I think I will nit pick.

I get what you are saying. and no I don't believe chiro is correct in saying other organ diseases or problems are all due to spinal misalignment.
what they call subluxation.
but................a spinal subluxation does exist and is possible. you said there is no such thing, but there IS.
but the chiro takes it a step further and blames it for other ailments.
the ortho does not and treats it as the anatomical problem that it is, thereby helping the neuro complaints that come along with it.

 

[jamimb]

You've got a significant number of chiropractors who've been more receptive to medical insights gleaned over the past century. Such new-breed chiropractors are often affiliated with hospitals or doctors' practices and typically conduct thorough intake exams (including X-rays, MRIs, etc) as a matter of course. They'll use spinal manipulation to treat non-disease-related back disorders, but they're willing to break out some other tools in the therapeutic toolbox as well, which may include ultrasound, electric muscle stimulation, rehab exercises, and the like; they'll also provide suggestions about lifting and bending techniques, diet, and ergonomics. Science-friendly chiropractors tend to have good success rates in combating lower back pain and tension headaches.

 

[tiggger1]

I love my chiropractor. I had severe back/hip pain when I was pregnant with my daughter. One day a few weeks after I delivered I woke up one morning shortly after and could barely walk. I went to the ER and all they could give me was a muscle relaxer. It didnt work. 4 days later I was in so much pain I couldn't take care of my dd. I finally went to a chiropractor. He took xrays and told me my left hip was 2 inches lower than my right. He adjusted me and told me because I my muscles where so used to that position I would be sore but it would be better in a few days. I went every day for a week and by the 2nd day I was walking again without much pain. I went weekly when I was pregnant with my son and actually got adjusted on the way home from the hospital after I delivered. he has helped me a ton, I also go get my ears adjusted... I know it works because I have issues with my ears not draining well causing constant ear infections if not treated ( I am also seeing a ENT and nothing he is doing is working so he wants me to get tubes) and immediately after getting them adjusted I can feel my ears and sinus drain and all the pressure is gone!

 

[mill4023]

I think I will nit pick.

I get what you are saying. and no I don't believe chiro is correct in saying other organ diseases or problems are all due to spinal misalignment.
what they call subluxation.
but................a spinal subluxation does exist and is possible. you said there is no such thing, but there IS.
but the chiro takes it a step further and blames it for other ailments.
the ortho does not and treats it as the anatomical problem that it is, thereby helping the neuro complaints that come along with it.

The difference is in what they mean by subluxation, not just what it causes or doesn't cause. A real subluxation is visible on an x-ray because it's an actual injury, where there has been an actual dislocation. A chiropractic subluxation is not visible on an x-ray because it doesn't exist. When they say subluxation, they are trying to imply that the spine can somehow become slightly mis-aligned and that they can correct it with an adjustment. All of that is nonsense.

If you're interested, there's a pretty good explanation on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subluxation

 

[jamimb]

My Chiropractor does not claim to be able to heal every ailment. He says it's all about spinal health and seeing him once a month is more like going to the dentist to get my teeth cleaned. He may be a quack but I can tell you this I can definitely feel a difference with my lower back pain when I don't go to see him. My posture has improved a hundred percent as well. There may be some out there that claim they can heal everything wrong with the body but some actually believe it's all about back health.

 

[npmommie]

The difference is in what they mean by subluxation, not just what it causes or doesn't cause. A real subluxation is visible on an x-ray because it's an actual injury, where there has been an actual dislocation. A chiropractic subluxation is not visible on an x-ray because it doesn't exist. When they say subluxation, they are trying to imply that the spine can somehow become slightly mis-aligned and that they can correct it with an adjustment. All of that is nonsense.

If you're interested, there's a pretty good explanation on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subluxation

yes that is what I was trying to say.
LOL, I thought you were saying there is no such thing as a subluxation period.
but, I will admit, I am guilty of not reading thoroughly thru the thread.

so we do agree