Not a flame but one has to take what they have to offer that works for most, including me (fixing acute back problems) and rejecting all the rest (vitamins, return "maintenance" visits, X-Rays, cancer treatment, etc.)
I think you're right, because I know many people like this myself.
There probably can be a certain amount of good done for particular back and neck problems (that is, specific muscular tension related or out-of-alignment problems) by chiropractic "adjustments," which after all are nothing but deep massages. However, claiming that they can treat everything, and that a patient is never really "cured," is fraudulent (sort of like Freudian psychotherapy, which dates back to the same time).
I think this is stupid. FSU does not need to be turning out quacks, particularly minority quacks, and thereby destroying any credibility it may have and weakening the credibility of everybody who has gone through its med school. The school is trying to build its reputation, not destroy it. And Jim King, who is supporting this, is a RINO of the worst kind.
My mom has a dreadful back problem - she was (still is) a professional dancer and has been for 60 years. That puts a lot of strain on your back. She's had multiple laminectomies, fusions, the works. So our whole family has perforce gotten educated on this issue.
Chiropractic (from a reputable guy, not a quack) gave her temporary relief from pain, but here's the problem: your spine is supported by the ligaments that run alongside the vertebrae. Repeated frequent chiropractic adjustments stretch those ligaments, so the vertebrae are not held in place any more and fall out of alignment more easily. So you get temporary relief but you're setting yourself up for a long term problem.
On the other hand, a friend of mine who was paralyzed by polio back in the 40s began having phantom pains in his legs recently. The M.D.s couldn't do anything but throw pain pills at him, so he went to a chiropractor (and this is a guy who has condemned all chiros as quacks his whole life long.) He said, "I still think they're quacks, but I don't hurt any more."
I think careful occasional use (after using a conventional neurologist/orthopedist to rule out serious problems - which is probably what happened to your dad) is probably o.k. But the auto accident/3x week adjustments are a prescription for dependency and disaster.
Without doubt, you are correct in 95% of cases. I went to a chiropractor a couple of times and while he did not damage me, he did throw my entire system into shock. No thank you! Chiropractic is rough stuff. Bodies do not need to be jerked around. Gentle coaxing works better.
I would agree, for most chiropractors. However, there are several different approaches to the art. I've had back troubles since college. It got to the point where I started going to back-crackers, but each adjustment lasted shorter and shorter. It got to the point where I could lay on the floor and twist my body and my back would pop back into place. However, it would just as easily pop out. I was working my way towards the twice-a-week adjustment level when we moved away.
When I got to NJ, a co-worker referred me to a chiropractor who used what is called the sacro-occipital approach. I'm not sure of the exact name, as now I only see here once a year or so, when I've done something not-so-bright.
When I first started, the treatments were twice a week. However, her treatments always lasted longer each time I went. I then went to once-a-week and within a couple of months, I stopped regular treatment.
With this approach, they never crack your back. The idea is that it weakens the back and makes it easier to pop out. The manipulation technique seems magical, more of a light massage, combined with moving the legs and arms around to help flexibility, and some gentle pressure on hips and joints to straighten things out. She avoids the painful area entirely, and yet at the end the pain is gone, and I'm walking upright. The assigned home work is to walk more, drive less, and keep good posture, and do the same exercises as suggested by the orthoped I'd gone to.
And, I've never heard her claim to handle anything but back troubles.
YMMV, of course.
My Mom is 83. She had a vertebrae crushed when she was young. She sees a Chiropractor often. One hubby forced her to see a REAL doctor so that he could inform her that she was okay and did not need to see a chiropractor. He xrayed her, and told them both to keep doing whatever was working, because from the looks of the x-rays, she should be in a wheelchair.
She has frequent pain from her 5th lumbar being crushed, but she's still very active.
I vote FOR chiropractors.
I'll never forget seeing a young woman being transferred into the SICU when she lost all below-neck movement following a chriopractor's manipulation. To the chiropractor's credit, he's the one who called the ambulance. However, there are too many conditions which compromise vertebral integrity that chiropractors are not qualified or equipped to diagnose. Chirpractors' heavy-handed manipulations can be devastating in such situations.
I know today that there are many primary care physicians who refer patients to chiropractors. I only hope those physicians first provide an appropriate diagnostic workup and screening of chiropractors.
I'll never forget seeing a young woman being transferred into the SICU when she lost all below-neck movement following a chriopractor's manipulation. To the chiropractor's credit, he's the one who called the ambulance. However, there are too many conditions which compromise vertebral integrity that chiropractors are not qualified or equipped to diagnose. Chirpractors' heavy-handed manipulations can be devastating in such situations.
I know today that there are many primary care physicians who refer patients to chiropractors. I only hope those physicians first provide an appropriate diagnostic workup and screening of chiropractors.
I'm not going to flame you at all. Someone should check out the Chiropractor's credentials though. Some people are unethical no matter what profession they are in.