What's wrong with chiropractors?

Thanatos

I've been intending to make this thread for awhile, but really have just had the urge to today. While I see a healthy skepticism on the part of most people with regards to chiropracty, a lot of people, when it comes up, seem to decide "well, it's snake oil, but if it makes people feel better, where's the harm?" The first time I'd ever really thought about it was when I went to the doctor because I had managed to somehow injure my back (not badly). I had been putting up with some annoying amount of pain for a couple weeks, and when I went into his office, he asked me a few questions to make sure it wasn't a kidney problem, then said "well, it's probably just going to get better. Usually, it's about two weeks until stuff like this starts to get better, which is how chiropractors make their money: you get tired of it after two weeks, go and see one, and then you get better." So, you know, you figure "hey, just like any other placebo, right? No harm, no foul." And if there actually were no harm, yeah, sure, that would be fine. But the reality is that chiropractors are selfish charlatans, who put their own enrichment ahead of public health. In the interests of full disclosure, I feel I should admit that my employment is tangentially related to the insurance industry, so my perspective may be skewed.

The first big issue with chiropractors is that they want your children to die. "Oh, Thanatos, there you go, exaggerating again." Sorry, no, no exaggeration, here. Chiropractors engage in at least a couple of different lobbying efforts to put the welfare of children at risk. The first one I read about actually had to do with concussions, in a quite good article put out by Village Voice Media. You can read the whole article here, but this is the money shot:

"No billis better than a bad bill," says Florida state Senator Dennis Jones, a working chiropractor who in May helped to kill a concussion law.

Florida is one of the few states to balk at concussion legislation for youth athletes, a nationwide trend that began in 2009 when Washington gave a thumbs-up to the Zackery Lystedt Law. A prototype for dozens to come, such an act requires any athlete under 18 who suffers a suspected concussion to receive written consent from a medical professional before returning to play. (There is no similar federal law.)

In Texas, Natasha's Law, named after former soccer player Natasha Helmick, was signed by Governor Rick Perry in June after the Senate passed the bill by a 31-0 margin. And, beginning on January 1, 2012, Colorado's Jake Snakenberg Act will take the Lystedt Law one step further by requiring every coach in youth athletics to complete an online concussion-recognition course.

Florida, however, recoiled from its own version of concussion safety because Jones was miffed that the language did not include the back-cracking set among "medical professionals." Jones didn't help his cause by talking on the Senate floor about how standard MRIs can be used to detect concussions, which is a fallacy. Jones filed an amendment to include chiropractors and the House refused to vote on the amended bill, which died on the floor.

So, because this piece-of-shit snake oil salesman couldn't get his, he shut down a bill designed to protect high school athletes from brain damage. This, in spite of being lobbied by a brain-damaged high school athlete.

Furthermore, chiropractors are huge in the anti-vaccination movement. "Don't worry," they say, "your kids don't need vaccinations; just have us fix their subluxations." And as we all know, this puts not only the kids of parents who buy into this bullshit at risk, but also the kids of anyone they come into contact with. When we have another polio outbreak (probably on Vashon Island), chiropractors are going to be at least partially responsible.

"Okay, Thanatos," you say, "so they advocate for some really fucking stupid shit; but there are people in every profession advocating for some really fucking stupid shit, right? I mean, if that's all you got, then whatever. If people want to give a chiropractor money, it's their money; they can do what they want with it." Au contraire, mi amigo. It's not their money that they're spending at the chiropractor; it's your money and my money. Because the chiropractor's true specialty isn't medical: it's financial. They know how to market, and they know how to bill insurance companies, especially for unnecessary treatment. This drives up the cost of insurance (especially auto insurance) for those of us who have the sense to avoid snake oil salesmen. Insurance companies spend tons of money fighting this sort of thing, but with guys like the above Florida legislator against them, it's tough.

So, just to be clear, here, and finish up: chiropractors are so bad that they actually make insurance companies into the good guys. So, weigh in on why you think your chiropractor is awesome, and totally not one of these evil snake oil salesmen.

bowen

I did not know they did some of that stuff. I knew they were bullshit but all that other stuff, wow what the fuck?

KalTorak

Forget it, Homer - it's Chirotown.

mrt144

I'll tell you one thing my seldom used chiropractor told me that led to me not having back pain; lose the weight, be more active, stretch your muscles and work on your terrible posture. Started doing those things and bow, haven't been in more than 2 years.

Eat it You Nasty Pig.

I could also have told you that

[Tycho?]

To me, your thread boils down to your doctor saying that back pain usually goes away in a few weeks so chiropracty doesn't work.

Can I see some studies, or something? I've never been to a chiropractor myself, and frankly I think pretty well the whole medical industry is pretty crooked.

taliosfalcon

The OP does seem to have some logical fallacies. I've never been a fan of chiropractors but there's nothing in the op to influence my opinion one way or another other than thanatos says this.

AngelHedgie

Let's start with "the field is based on pseudoscience ".

spool32

Dishonest snake oil salesmen, like nearly all of them. I've taken my wife to a chiropractor because she has actual issues with a transitional vertebra but it's only temporary pain relief, and was only a couple of times ever. I have, though, heard them make claims as ridiculous as curing motherfucking cancer.

It seems there are two kinds of chiropractors... ones who actually help you sort out your back injury, and ones who are into "chiropractic", used as a noun.

"You need to get some chiropractic!"
No, I really don't.

Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud

I will post the science in like a couple of hours I hope. Science-Based Medicine has reams of citations to deal with this stuff. I'll post some of the current "research" in chiropract...ery/aticing/ation... It boils down to a spinal version of phrenology. Also, anecdotal but dear to me, my grandmother had horrible back pain, went to a chiropractor who strung her along for 6 months, then she went to a real doctor and it was cancer causing the pain. These people do real damage and one of the greatest tenets of practicing medicine is that YOU MUST BE RESPONSIBLE BECAUSE YOU ARE DEALING WITH LAYPEOPLE WHO WILL BELIEVE ANYTHING YOU SAY. Chiropractors take absolute advantage of that tenet.

Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud

AngelHedgie wrote:

Let's start with "the field is based on pseudoscience ".

Not even based, it IS pseudoscience.

Modern Man

Wait, are chiropractors the Asian women who give you rub and tugs in massage parlors? Who has anything against them?

bowen

There's actually more science for that than chiropractors.

Preacher

Modern Man wrote:

Wait, are chiropractors the Asian women who give you rub and tugs in massage parlors? Who has anything against them?

No those are massage therapists or accupuncturists. Either of which are more effective than chiropractery.

darkmayo

Chiropractors, good ones, will adjust your spine when you eff it up. The moment they start saying the subluxations are causing all of your ills and you should get adjusted every week is when you are getting fleeced.

My ex (love her dearly) had a chiro she went to all the time, I was having some back issues due to bad posture so I decided I would check hers out. Went in for a visit, he checked me out, didnt adjust anything, got a history etc and sent me off to get an xray of my neck/spine.

Visited him again after he received the xrays, he pointed out some neck stuff (my neck is straight, which apparently. inst the way it is suppose to be) got an adjustment (I forget what, was a back and neck if I recall) and then scheduled me for a informative thing at his clinic, about back health.

Everything was going ok, he was a nice guy, he looked before he lept (in regards to xray before adjusting anything) but then at the informative back health thingy... he started going into subluxations and how they are the key to your total body health.....

Never went back, I have a gym membership now, and do taekwondo so I am getting in shape and other than muscle pain from overuse my back and neck are fine.


conversely I have had several family friends that were/are Chiropractors, they acknowledge the pseudo-science types exist and push bad science, there are things cause subluxations but there has been no correlation between that and all the maladies that some Chiros claim to be able to fix.

Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud

Accupuncture is on par with chiropractation.

Preacher

Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud wrote:

Accupuncture is on part with chiropractation.

Look when my father who is hardcore GOP gets a bunch of needles stuck into him and electocuted? I feel better immediately, I don't need science to tell me that fuzzy.

darkmayo

Preacher wrote:

Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud wrote:

Accupuncture is on part with chiropractation.

Look when my father who is hardcore GOP gets a bunch of needles stuck into him and electocuted? I feel better immediately, I don't need science to tell me that fuzzy.

If I recall that inst your "traditional" acupuncture (where you put needles in precise points in the body to manipulate chi or something) or even called acupuncture.

spool32

Preacher wrote:

Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud wrote:

Accupuncture is on part with chiropractation.

Look when my father who is hardcore GOP gets a bunch of needles stuck into him and electocuted? I feel better immediately, I don't need science to tell me that fuzzy.

I... I don't...

Hi, Preacher!

bowen

What exactly are these subluxations? I understand the term but don't exactly know what it means to a chiropractor.

Feral

[Tycho?] wrote:

Can I see some studies, or something?

Let's start with Quackwatch/Chirobase: http://www.chirobase.org/

This website has been around since the 1990s so there's a good chance you've seen it before. There are a ton of articles here about why chiropractic is useless at best, harmful at worst.

From http://www.chirobase.org/01General/skeptic.html

Chiropractic's uniqueness is not in its use of manipulation but in its theoretical basis for doing so -- which also explains why chiropractors overutilize spinal manipulation therapy (SMT), often applying it without justification.

Chiropractic is the brainchild of Daniel D. Palmer, a late-nineteenth century dabbler in metaphysical approaches to health care. Palmer had practiced phrenology and magnetic healing, and had some osteopathic training. He reported that a spiritualist medium inspired him in his search for "the single cause of all disease." He puzzled over the fact that pathogenic germs were found in both healthy and sick people and searched for an explanation. (Today, we know that the immune system makes the difference.) He claimed that in 1895 he restored the hearing of janitor Harvey Lillard and concluded that the spine was the key to health and disease.

Palmer contrived the notion that "subluxations" of the spine impinge nerves, interfering with nerve flow, which he dubbed the Innate Life Force, and that all a practitioner had to do was to adjust the spine -- the healing powers of nature would do the rest. Neither Palmer nor any other chiropractor has ever been able to reliably demonstrate the existence of "subluxations," much less validate their importance to health and disease. Nevertheless, chiropractic has thrived and now has about 60,000 practitioners in the United States.

A comprehensive critique of chiropractic's lack of scientific validity was published by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of the Province of Quebec in 1963 and remains relevant today. It stated:

Chiropractors claim that subluxations, or partial displacements, of the vertebrae cause a perturbation of the distribution of nervous impulses to tissues and cells. Neurophysiologists have developed methods of recording the passage of impulses in nerves. Exceptionally sensitive apparatus is available to anyone wishing to use it. No scientific study has ever been published on the subject by a chiropractor. No chiropractor ever defined, either quantitatively or qualitatively, what chiropractic means by perturbation of nervous impulses. Is it their number, their amplitude, their frequency, or their wave patterns which are affected? All of these qualities can be identified, recorded, and studied. It is no longer permissible to accept empirical statements. Proof should have preceded practical application. With the first point untenable, the rest crumbles.

You may also be interested in Chirobase's list of "significant journal reports" - http://www.chirobase.org/02Research/journals.html

A representative article from that list: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10820295?dopt=Abstract

This study of commonly used chiropractic diagnostic methods in patients with chronic mechanical low-back pain to detect manipulable lesions in the lower thoracic spine, lumbar spine, and the sacroiliac joints has revealed that the measures are not reproducible. The implementation of these examination techniques alone should not be seen by practitioners to provide reliable information concerning where to direct a manipulative procedure in patients with chronic mechanical low-back pain.

or http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9820258?dopt=Abstract

As an isolated intervention, spinal manipulation does not seem to have a positive effect on episodic tension-type headache.

or http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9761803?dopt=Abstract

We randomly assigned 321 adults with low back pain that persisted for seven days after a primary care visit to the McKenzie method of physical therapy, chiropractic manipulation, or a minimal intervention (provision of an educational booklet)... For patients with low back pain, the McKenzie method of physical therapy and chiropractic manipulation had similar effects and costs, and patients receiving these treatments had only marginally better outcomes than those receiving the minimal intervention of an educational booklet. Whether the limited benefits of these treatments are worth the additional costs is open to question.

Preacher

bowen wrote:

What exactly are these subluxations? I understand the term but don't exactly know what it means to a chiropractor.

I was under the impression that chiropractery sprung up out of that whole magnetic body belief. Like if the magnetism in your body is off it causes you pain, I could be confusing it with some other form of quackery.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Johannen

I think chiropractors are like every other medically-linked industry in that there are a lot of financially driven lunatic back crackers who want to get you back in as often as possible to cure your ailments etc etc, and there are some who are legitimate professionals who know what they are talking about.

Osteopaths are the alternative right? It's all alternative medicine and it is what it is. I myself went to a chiropractor twice, the first time he looked me over and told me a load of exercises I should do to strengthen my back muscles so that I am not as affected by back pain (went to a physio who said that's sound advice too), and he "adjusted" me which I thought was a load of nonsense and was obviously just momentary relief. He gave me a lot of information though and didn't push me to go again at all, and I went back the second time to see if I had improved from the first time, he said I had because I had obviously worked out the muscles supporting the joints a lot (which I had so I couldn't call bullshit on him or anything).

This one seemed fine and legitimate enough but there must be some money grabbing idiots out there too obviously, although in the UK I didn't get that on the NHS or anything it was all my own money and only cost around 30 pounds for both sessions together.

Feral

bowen wrote:

What exactly are these subluxations? I understand the term but don't exactly know what it means to a chiropractor.

Since I already have a tab open at chirobase, I'll just use their article on it: http://www.chirobase.org/01General/chirosub.html

If you are examined by a chiropractor, you may be told that you have one or more subluxations of your spine. This article examines what this means and how you should react.

Chiropractic theory is rooted in the notions of Daniel David Palmer, a grocer and "magnetic healer" who postulated that the basic cause of disease was interference with the body's nerve supply. Approximately a hundred years ago, he concluded that "A subluxated vertebrae . . . is the cause of 95 percent of all diseases. . . . The other five percent is caused by displaced joints other than those of the vertebral column." [1] He proclaimed that subluxations interfered with the body's expression of "Innate Intelligence"—the "Soul, Spirit, or Spark of Life" that controlled the healing process. He proposed to remedy the gamut of disease by manipulating or "adjusting" the problem areas.

Over the years, chiropractors have gone beyond Palmer's theories, although some still cling to them for dear life. Some describe subluxations as "bones out of place" and/or "pinched nerves"; some think in terms of "fixations" and/or loss of joint mobility; some occupy a middle ground that includes any or all of these concepts; and a small percentage renounce Palmer's notions as biotheistic nonsense—which they were.

Keep in mind, though, that there is a second definition to "subluxation" that doesn't rely on any mystical vital force nonsense:

Subluxation is also a medical term. The medical definition is incomplete or partial dislocation—a condition, visible on x-ray films, in which the bony surfaces of a joint no longer face each other exactly but remain partially aligned. No such condition can be corrected by chiropractic treatment.

darkmayo

Well when the Chiropractor who was doing his "presentation" to me the subluxations interfere with bloodflow/energy yadda yadda there for cause your body to do weird stuff.. like get sick or get cancer or whatever...

non retarded Chiropractors also use Subluxation to refer to a partial dislocations but dont buy into the energy flow stuff.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

bowen

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

darkmayo

electricitylikesme wrote:

Chiropractors, depending on their background, may or may not have learned enough physiotherapy to be useful. It's just, it's physiotherapy that's useful, not the...chiropathy.

THIS

Thanatos

taliosfalcon wrote:

The OP does seem to have some logical fallacies. I've never been a fan of chiropractors but there's nothing in the op to influence my opinion one way or another other than thanatos says this.

My point wasn't "chiropractors are bullshit." My point was "chiropractors are not harmless bullshit, but harmful bullshit."

Schrodinger

electricitylikesme wrote:

Acupuncture is most probably pseudoscience as well. It's just highly resistant to scientific studies because its so hard to develop an effective control.

As far as I know, every improved control has resulted in subsequently decreased effectiveness of acupuncture.

Couldn't you just stick the needles in different places?

Feral

Johannen wrote:

Osteopaths are the alternative right?

Physical therapists are the closest analogs to chiropractors within objective medicine.

darkmayo

bowen wrote:

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

well.. professionals in there own field, which they might say is medical. In all honesty if you really have back problems, go a real doctor who will likely refer you to a physiotherapist, who may have chiropractor certifications as well.

Feral

bowen wrote:

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

Yes, for two reasons.

First, significant lobbying by chiropractic schools to be recognized as medical professionals.

Second, reform within chiropractic itself to make it more scientific and less superstitious. From http://www.acsh.org/healthissues/newsID.656/healthissue_detail.asp

Five of the 16 chiropractic colleges in the U.S. and several in other countries have productive research departments. Thus, there has been a growing stream of published studies on chiropractic treatments. Some of the findings from such studies have not been favorable to chiropractic. For example, in a study funded and conducted by chiropractors and published in an October 1998 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine, researchers found that SMT had not been effective against childhood asthma.

Such investments in science have created a chiropractic research culture whose dedications and values derive largely from its membership in the scientific community rather than from its membership in the chiropractic profession. That the profession has an autonomous scientific researchcommunity that upholds skepticism and disinterested inquiry distinguishes chiropractic from other modes of alternative medicine.

...

In many ways chiropractic is two professions: one that accepts the validity of scientific inquiry and one that considers scientific inquiry extraneous or even unfavorable to the aims of chiropractic. This schism is profound. How it will be resolved is unclear.

Bagginses

darkmayo wrote:

bowen wrote:

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

well.. professionals in there own field, which they might say is medical. In all honesty if you really have back problems, go a real doctor who will likely refer you to a physiotherapist, who may have chiropractor certifications as well.

What about problem with the nervous system running through the spine? Neurologist?

Feral

darkmayo wrote:

bowen wrote:

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

well.. professionals in there own field, which they might say is medical. In all honesty if you really have back problems, go a real doctor who will likely refer you to a physiotherapist, who may have chiropractor certifications as well.

Yes, this. Getting a degree in chiropractic gives a physical therapist a means to work more independently, attract more business, and - most importantly - bill higher rates to insurance companies than just being a PT. So some people go get chiropractic education, knowing that the tradition of chiropractic is bunk, for business reasons, or out of an idealistic attitude that they'll reform chiropractic from the inside.

So even though the general philosophy of chiropractic is bullshit, there are rational chiropractors out there.

darkmayo

The problem I have seen with people buying into the pseudo-science over actual proven treatment is that the pseudo science practitioners have more time to give the patient the warm fuzzies, to explain in detail why there homeopathic wombat extract will cure them of there whatever. They can sell it better, they can spend the time gaining the trust of the patient, meanwhile your GP has 5 minutes to visit you before he has to go to his next patient.

Feral

Bagginses wrote:

darkmayo wrote:

bowen wrote:

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

well.. professionals in there own field, which they might say is medical. In all honesty if you really have back problems, go a real doctor who will likely refer you to a physiotherapist, who may have chiropractor certifications as well.

What about problem with the nervous system running through the spine? Neurologist?

Probably.

That's the crux of the problem with chiropractic. Some conditions are caused by pinched nerves; some complaints can be treated by manual manipulation of the joints or spine.

However, chiropractic as a school of thought believes that completely unrelated conditions can be treated this way. At best, it's a harmless waste of money; at worst, they can make existing spinal problems worse.

darkmayo

Bagginses wrote:

darkmayo wrote:

bowen wrote:

That's what I thought they meant by it, though that energy flow stuff is lolerific. These guys are medical professionals?

well.. professionals in there own field, which they might say is medical. In all honesty if you really have back problems, go a real doctor who will likely refer you to a physiotherapist, who may have chiropractor certifications as well.

What about problem with the nervous system running through the spine? Neurologist?

Most definitely a Neurologist (fascinating field, my fiancee really enjoyed her rotation in the neuro-wing of the hospital, its amazing and scary what a little bit of damage to the nerves can do)

mrt144

Eat it You Nasty Pig. wrote:

I could also have told you that

But immediate non chemical back pain relief? Worth the $10 co pay.

Atomika

If nothing else, I wish there was a law prohibiting chiropractors from using the title, "doctor," in their practice and advertising. Almost all of them will, and all of them are Ph.Ds, at best. I don't se how that's not fraudulent.

I would get sued for running a medical business if my degree was in literature, I dont see why bullshit homeopathy should be any different.