Interesting topic...
Unfortunately, many aspects of chiropractic are marred in pseudo-science. I think there are some very good "chiropracTORS", however I have a problem with many of the philosophies of "chiropracTIC". Unfortunately, both PT's and Chiro's and Osteos can choose to which degree they decide to pursue additional knowledge. The PT who just irons..errrrr... ultrasounds and hot-packs Px's isn't a better option. Oftentimes the treatments overlap between professions. In this case we must look at specific interventions vs. professions.
I have been fortunate in my experiences with PT's - seeing those who continuously seek further knowledge and specialize. They have the same scope as chiros and do manips as well. The difference I've observed is that PT's use manips. as an adjunct therapy - not a primary one. I've had intramuscular stimulation, adjustments as well as mobilizations to treat some of my msk complaints.
Back to chiropracTIC. Some of the aspects of it that leave me distrusting:
Subluxation: This is a diagnostic apparition - a fanciful fad diagnosis that has NEVER been shown to be a primary cause of disease or dis-ease. This is the magical buzzterm that chiros are permited to bill for and you are almost guaranteed to by Dx'd with "subluxations" if you see one.
Adjustments = health: I'm left with a bad taste in my mouth when I hear chiros promote their services as "essential to health". They prescribe "maintenance adjustments" to those who are perfectly healthy and tell Px's that it should be treated like going to the dentist for check-ups (except more often).
The notion that treatments will make organs work better and curing childhood ailments are other aspects of the philosophy that bother me. I'm also not a fan of chiros charging for nutritional advice and selling supplements.
You may say it's a few apples that spoil the bunch, but I would contend that there are a few good apples that have been spoiled by an overwhelming bunch of bad apples.
|