Confessions of a Quackbuster

This blog deals with healthcare consumer protection, and is therefore about quackery, healthfraud, chiropractic, and other forms of so-Called "Alternative" Medicine (sCAM).

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

Chiropractic Divorce

The idea of dividing the profession pops up once in awhile.

G. Douglas Andersen, DC had this to say:

I understand there are many who feel that a "real" chiropractor would
not practice this way. Fine. If being a real DC means wellness care,
asymptomatic care, excessive x-rays, poor working relationships with
MDs, rejection of scientific data, bizarre techniques, outrageous
claims, and the same treatment each visit regardless of the problem,
then I don't want to be a "real" DC.

The only thing "real" DCs and I agree upon is that we would both like
the public to look at our title and have an idea of what we do. Maybe
all DCs would benefit if those of us who reject pseudoscientific
subluxation-based philosophical chirobabble (designed to addict the
world to manipulation) had a different title. I would proudly introduce
myself as a medipractor, a treatipractor, a physical medicine therapist,
a doctor of chiropractic medicine, or whatever it would take to inform
the public there is a basic difference.

In any profession, there will be differences in how one approaches
various conditions. Generally speaking, healthy scientific debate
benefits both patients and clinicians. However, I fail to see any common
ground between those who try to see each patient as many times as
possible, regardless of symptoms, and those who see each patient as few
times as possible to eliminate symptoms. Maybe the best way for both
sides to flourish in the new millennium is with a formal division.

and Dana R. Miller, DC had this to say:


Dear Editor:

After being part of the chiropractic profession for over 16 years, it is
very obvious that time has come for a major change. I have been on the
sidelines watching the straight-mixer war deteriorate the profession,
hoping that we would one day be unified and all would be well.

The merger almost happened. We all rejoiced together at the Wilk, et
al., victory. We all feel proud when chiropractic is viewed positively
in the media, and our chiropractic leaders don't openly bicker in every
chiropractic publication that comes through the mail. I had a glimmer of
hope that we could come together to help chiropractic achieve its
potential. I know now -- it's not going to happen. Never. It has become
very clear over the years that no matter how many good things come to
us, we will never stop competing against each other. That leaves only
one option open to us if we are to thrive and grow instead of
self-destruct. That option is that we must divide into two professions.
I know this idea is nothing new, but now is the time. To continue in the
manner in which we have is nothing different than staying in a bad
marriage waiting for things to get better. There comes a point where we
have to someday realize that things aren't going to get better, and we
will be happier and more productive apart. It is time for a divorce.

I know that a divorce can be messy; lawyers get involved and both
parties fight for their property, but all the wrinkles could be worked
out after a year or so of getting the ground rules laid out. The
straights could be SCs (straight chiropractors) and the mixers could be
DCs, for example. The motto for the SCs, "a subluxation free world," and
DCs may be "whatever it takes to make sick people well" or something to
that effect. All DCs would need to decide from the start what they want
to be. Each profession would have their own schools and accrediting
agency. Each state would have their own examining board and be
responsible for its own profession. Each profession would then be
allowed to grow unrestricted in the direction they want to go without
worrying about what the other side is thinking. Much more progress would
be made legislatively, without one side contradicting the other, and
then each profession would achieve the legal rights they seek. Patients
would no longer be confused by getting contradictory advise from one DC
to another, but they would chose their doctor by their own experience.
The benefits of two professions seem endless.

When a marriage is on the rocks, a counselor will tell each partner to
make a list of pros and cons of staying married to each other. Then the
couple can weigh the differences. It's time our leaders made a list for
the profession. Are we, as professionals with so much potential, better
off together or apart? Call in the lawyers, I'm ready for the single

Dana R. Miller, D.C.
Rexburg, Idaho

Here are a couple more links: