Chiropractic - skeptics only.

[Admin]

Yes those nasty skeptics criticise chiropractic for being the quackery that it is.

But, here we have a chiropractor deal with those criticisms: http://www.premierhealthcaresc.com/skeptics.html

That's me convinced!! ;D

No dodgy arguments in that article then.

[Araneus]

There can't be many skeptics who would be convinced by that tosh, I assume that by "skeptics" they just mean "people who don't yet believe in chiropractic", not true skeptics.


The nervous system controls every cell of your body.

Oh really. So adrenaline and insulin are figments of my imagination, then?


Yet, chiropractic results have been experienced by newborns, infants, pets and others for whom the power of suggestion isn't possible!

And how would you know what a newborn infant or pet is experiencing? Can you ask it?


the mortality rate from stroke in the chiropractic patient population is less than half that of the general population. So, we could conclude that by having chiropractic care, your chances of having a stroke are reduced by more than 50%.

You can conclude that only if you don't understand the first thing about statistics. Unless the chiropractic patient population is an exact cross-section of the general population, which it almost certainly isn't, this conclusion isn't even remotely valid.

[Malamute]

Critics mislead by suggesting that adjustments to the neck can subject patients to unnatural stress or compromise blood supply to the brain. But if the spine were that fragile, people would fear bending over to tie their shoe laces or looking up to enjoy an evening sunset!

What they fail to tell the public in their article is that the spine and neck are kept realigned by the stabilising muscles of the body also as is every joint in the body. So if a joint is cracked back into place, but no stabilising exercises given to the patient the joint will not remain in place permanently. Hence the need for repeated visits. Also what a lot of them fail to do is to examine the body as a whole, if one stabilising muscle around the spine or pelvis is either too weak or tight, this can have a knock on effect to all other parts of the body.

From my own experiences I would not see another chiropractor, and on one visit I was totally unaware of all of the joint cracking that they did, and as I have said on a previous thread, one left me with a shoulder injury. A few years ago I suffered a car accident which left me with whiplash mainly on the right hand side of my neck, I went to see one local chiropractor, who on examination told me that my neck would need to be realigned, that I would need 3 visits per week for the first month at a cost of £35 each visit :o and then weekly visits for several months thereafter. It was then that I went to see another one who decided to jolt my should blade against the couch, hence I ended up with an unstable shoulder, which is now corrected after extensive physio. A friend also went to see one for neck pain and ended up with nerve pain in the lumbar region.

[Mojo]

the mortality rate from stroke in the chiropractic patient population is less than half that of the general population. So, we could conclude that by having chiropractic care, your chances of having a stroke are reduced by more than 50%.

You can conclude that only if you don't understand the first thing about statistics. Unless the chiropractic patient population is an exact cross-section of the general population, which it almost certainly isn't, this conclusion isn't even remotely valid.


And as far as assessing the safety of chiropractic is concerned there are other problems. In a talk Edzard Ernst gave to the Medico-Legal Society last year (published in the Medico-Legal Journal Vol. 74 p. 56), he talked about the reporting of adverse events:
We have conducted a survey with all British neurologists. We had a very good response rate. Most of them participated, and we asked them whether they had seen any neurological complications after upper spinal manipulation within a year's time, and this discovered 35 cases, including 9 strokes and other serious complications after chiropractic. Now 35 cases is not a lot, chiropractors would say, and I hope there is a chiropractor here, because I like discussions, and particularly heated ones. I would disagree, because we then looked these cases up and traced them down and found that none of these 35 cases had previously appeared anywhere; nobody knew about these cases; in other words, under-reporting in this series was precisely 100%. Now, if under-reporting is 100%, any estimation of incidence figures is nonsensical and the true incidence of these complications is anybody's guess. Chiropractors say complications are extremely rare. I hope they are extremely rare, but unless we have proper data we don't know and, as I said, with under-reporting of 100% estimates are nonsensical.

An abstract of the survey he is talking about can be found here (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=11285788).

[Blue Wode]

Chiropractic is different… because it avoids drugs…

Does it?

“Many patients continue to take NSAIDs while undergoing spinal manipulation. Moreover, spinal manipulation can frequently cause an exacerbation of pain, which might cause some patients to increase or initiate NSAID therapy. [Ernst E. Prospective investigations into the safety of spinal manipulation. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 21(3): 238-242, March 2001]."

- snip -

"Manipulation is much more expensive that NSAID treatment. So if both are equally effective, manipulation would be much less cost-effective.”

http://www.chirobase.org/18CND/03/03-03.html

Let’s not forget that the most up-to-date evidence on spinal manipulation for low-back pain shows that it is no more effective than medication for pain:
http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab000447.html


"Chiropractic results are 'All in your head' ?"

There's no question that the power of suggestion can be an important ally in the healing process. However, it can't begin to explain the millions of clients who have been helped with chiropractic care.

But this might:

How ineffective treatments appear to work
http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=how_ineffective_treatments_appear_to_work. php


I've heard "Don't let the chiropractor adjust your neck because it will cause a stroke." Those in the medical profession who make this statement either have unknowingly been misinformed or they choose to spread misleading and inaccurate information.

Victims of neck manipulation (10 pages):
http://www.neck911usa.com/vict_deta.htm?id=2585751.56094907

Manipulation of the cervical spine: a systematic review of case reports of serious adverse events, 1995–2001. Edzard Ernst, Medical Journal of Australia, 2002
http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/176_08_150402/ern10520_fm.html


After enjoying initial relief, many patients choose to continue with periodic checkups. Decide for yourself whether you want… Wellness Care for non-symptomatic elective care.

Also known as elective care of chiropractors’ wallets.

[median]

Quote
The nervous system controls every cell of your body.

Oh really. So adrenaline and insulin are figments of my imagination, then?



Araneus, for info, the activity of these hormones is mediated by the autonomic nervous system. This occurs through afferent/efferent connections via the spinal column

[Physiotherapist]

Just to add to this, the release of adrenalin causes a sympathetic nervous system response - 'fight or flight'. The sympathetic nervous system is also known as the thoraco-lumbar division as the nerves are coming from the thoracic vertebra and stop at the level of L2. They have short pre-ganglionic fibres and long post ganglionic fibres.

The parasympathetic nervous system or 'rest and digest' is known as the cranio-sacral division because the fibres come from the cranium and sacrum S2,3,4. They have long pre-ganglionic fibres and short post ganglionic fibres.