The first part of this article is for the chiropractor and the patient; the second is for the chiropractor only.

“And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” John 8:32. This passage found in the Bible refers to a specific Truth. However, the principle appears to work for all truth. Perhaps if we look at the principle from the end result, we can see that a good guideline for the determination of what truth is would be whether or not it creates greater freedom for the individual or moves that individual in the direction of greater freedom. One of the most important philosophical concepts in chiropractic is that chiropractic sets an individual free. It is far more than just the freedom from pain and suffering. Medicine can do that also. However, medicine, in treating symptoms while neglecting cause, merely changes masters. The patient exchanges the slavery to pain and suffering for the slavery of dependence upon drugs. Chiropractic removes cause.

Chiropractic offers much more, that is, freedom from the fear of disease. The major difference between disease prevention which medicine is now embracing and health maintenance which chiropractic has been practicing for more than 85 years is that one is done based upon fear (of disease) and the other is based upon love (of health). It is interesting that one of these mental attitudes is enslaving , the other creates freedom. Those people who are doing what is necessary to maintain their health, particularly keeping their spines free of nerve interference, do not live their lives in fear of disease, enslaved to certain diets, activity regimens, medical tests, and unenjoyable lifestyles. They are free to enjoy life and its pleasures.

The chiropractic philosophy offers a third freedom, the freedom to be yourself. Medicine attempts to place people into a mold, a mold that says your weight, heart rate, insulin level, blood pressure and every other function must conform to a national average. Chiropractic says that each person is an individual expression of the innate intelligence of his or her body and should be free to be that expression. Setting standards reduces freedom. At times it is necessary to set standards especially for children and the potential criminal. However, that is because the child is unlearned and the criminal thinks incorrectly. The innate intelligence of the body is perfect in its thinking. Setting standards is an insult to that intelligence and the Wisdom which placed it in the human body. The need for laws in society is a manifestation of man’s inability to act responsibly when given freedom. The innate intelligence of the body always acts responsibly. Chiropractic, by removing nerve interference caused by vertebral subluxation, gives it the freedom to do so.
The only dependency that exists in chiropractic care and the only impingement upon the individual’s freedom is the dependency that the patient has upon the chiropractor. People often ask whether they must go to a chiropractor for the rest of their lives once they begin care. Of course the stock answer is “No, only as long as you want to be healthy!” If that is dependency it is no more so than being dependent upon food, water, air, rest, and exercise in order to remain healthy. It is true, however, that the patient must go to a trained practitioner. This restriction is, however, not the fault of chiropractic or its philosophy. It is a limitation of matter! It just so happens that the vertebral column is located in the one part of the human anatomy that is inaccessible to its owner! That is why even chiropractors need chiropractors. If spinal subluxations occurred in the leg everyone could be taught to adjust their own subluxations and chiropractors would be unnecessary, except perhaps to teach the art. We do not teach people to adjust their own subluxations and free them from dependency on a chiropractor because even if we did, it would be anatomically impossible for them to do it! The patient must give up a certain amount of his free time and restrict the free use of some of his money in order to obtain chiropractic care.

Chiropractic care offers a degree of freedom to every individual no matter what their age or health status. It offers greater opportunity to enjoy life, experience the freedom of an active lifestyle and pursue happiness.

As chiropractors perhaps we can apply this truth and freedom concept to our profession.

Practice Management. In theory, practice management programs are designed to free the doctor from financial debt and worries, from the difficulty of being a businessman and from the problems of trying to build a successful practice. But when the doctor trades the slavery of the above to dependence upon a manager or a management consultant, is he/she really free? Is a program based upon truth going to enslave a chiropractor? If a management program requires you to perform certain procedures or techniques with which you are not philosophically or ethically comfortable or forces you to say or do certain things with which you do not agree, then perhaps it is not based upon truth. If you become financially enslaved by a management consultant more than likely the truth is not in him.

Techniques. Many of the new techniques that are being promoted are restrictive. The instructor says you must use it exclusively. You are dependent upon a certain procedure, a specific instrument or certain x-ray views that must be taken. If there is no room for your individual expression of that technique then perhaps…..

Insurance. There is no doubt that insurance is enslaving. Almost every week I hear a chiropractor say “I wish I could get away from an insurance practice.” It takes away a certain amount of the chiropractor’s freedom. Most of the insurance reporting that chiropractors do is not based upon truth. Diagnosis, prognosis, and claiming vertebral subluxations were caused by a certain injury or accident is not consistent with the truth of chiropractic. The forms can be filled out honestly but the claims are more likely to be paid if the chiropractor plays their game (disease and injury treatment) and by their rules (medical standards). We must compromise, just a little, in order to get all claims paid but compromise is denying the truth.

Legislation. Almost every piece of legislation that has affected the chiropractic profession in the past 75 years has been enacted supposedly for the purpose of giving chiropractors greater freedom to practice chiropractic. In the beginning the issue was freedom from medical persecution. Some of the legislation served that purpose, some did not. Much of it has been limiting. The effects of legislation upon the number of chiropractors practicing, appears to be inversely proportional throughout the history of our profession. More laws, less chiropractors. Apparently much of our legislation has in fact, taken away more freedom than it has given us. We will undoubtedly see more legislation in the not too distant future. Much of it aimed at denying chiropractors the freedom to practice where they want, see as many patients as they desire, charge or not charge as they deem necessary. Most of all, it will deny them the right to practice chiropractic as they were taught and as they understand it. This type of legislation , if it takes away freedom, is not based upon truth. No one should stand by and allow another’s freedom to be taken away by the whim of legislation supposedly done for the good of the profession. When someone is denied freedom by that manner, truth is hidden, error prevails, and everyone is denied a little bit of freedom.

If chiropractic is a truth and we assume it is, then every aspect of its practice, philosophy and profession should be based upon truth and give all chiropractors the freedom to pursue their objectives. v4n6


Be Sociable, Share!

This article has 3 comments

  1. David Suskin 09/26/2015, 6:55 am:

    As you present here, quite some time ago, your ideas and views, do you maintain these same thoughts and how how have they changed, if at all and why?
    With Respect and Admiration,

    • Joe Strauss 09/28/2015, 2:32 pm:

      I think that’s a good and legitimate question. Generally speaking, I would say that we do not “change the truth”, truth does not change. We may get a deeper understanding of the truth and may even express it a little differently as that understanding is better grasped. By analogy, looking at an object through a microscope may give you a better understanding but it does not change your overall perception. With the use of microscopes we have a better understanding of bacteria but that does not change our overall perception of what they do and what they do not do. That has been around since Pasteur and Beauchamp and depends upon their and our world and life viewpoint.
      When Reggie says that his idea of chiropractic took on a new meaning when he realized that the purpose of chiropractic was not to get sick people well but to enable the innate intelligence of the body to be more fully expressed, (he was not saying that everything he believed when he graduated from PSC was wrong) just that he had a deeper understanding of what chiropractic could do, what it could not do, what its purpose was and was not, and a deeper understanding of the purpose and function of the innate intelligence of the body (grow the arm if it could be grown with limitations of matter). Something he probably realized all along. My appreciation for what chiropractic can do and what it cannot do has not changed. If anything it has grown because of my deeper understanding (not because I have seen arms grow. I haven’t).I knew all along that I was not “getting sick people well” in my TSC days. (pre 1976). It’s just that now I know that what was being expressed in my pre 1976 terms. if I were to express it today, I would now be expressing a half truth, not “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. Knowing what BJ knew and expressed about the innate intelligence of the body, I don’t think he ever believed that he or chiropractic was getting sick people well. It’s just that was the frame of reference and vocabulary that he had at the time. I don’t believe that DD ever thought he was curing deafness either. He too was just speaking from the frame of reference that he had at the time. All we are doing is clarifying or trying to clarify the truth that they were trying to convey, hopefully doing it a little better having their history, knowledge and experience (both good and bad). In doing that, perhaps in some ways I am making it less clear. I hope not. Perhaps others will come after me and clarify what I have said and people will remark “boy that Joe Strauss was an idiot.”
      Since you are specifically addressing something I wrote about 20 years ago, I would hopefully make it clearer now, I am often amazed at how clear I was even that long ago. Other times I say to myself, “How could I have written that?” (My family has strict instructions not to publish anything I have written, posthumously). If you could address specific examples, I would be happy to clarify or further confuse.

  2. David Suskin 09/28/2015, 4:56 pm:

    About 20 years ago? Try 28!
    Yes Joe. Did I write this? or I can’t believe I wrote this? 🙂 >> 🙁
    Certainly Joe there are threads that are remarkably similar to the present. You’re viewpoint has remained steady, on course.
    In this earlier post, I’d say, there was more of a sense of idealism, or maybe this IS the Truth then vs now humbly I just know what is NOT the truth. Maybe? or what Chiropractic IS, not may be, or could be, or should be.
    I think, and perhaps I should speak for myself, that many came to Chiropractic with a hope, a dream that there was or IS something better then what is, was, out there.
    You said:
    ‘Chiropractic offers much more, that is, freedom from the fear of disease. The major difference between disease prevention which medicine is now embracing and health maintenance which chiropractic has been practicing for more than 85 years is that one is done based upon fear (of disease) and the other is based upon love (of health). It is interesting that one of these mental attitudes is enslaving , the other creates freedom. Those people who are doing what is necessary to maintain their health, particularly keeping their spines free of nerve interference, do not live their lives in fear of disease, enslaved to certain diets, activity regimens, medical tests, and unenjoyable lifestyles. They are free to enjoy life and its pleasures.’

    It’s almost like to state deductions in a FACTUAL (empirical) style, can be a difficult thing to chew on, or at least live by.
    Claude speaks about abandoning Educated, about holding onto paradoxes. You speak of an ADIO viewpoint vs OIBU viewpoint. Completely different and difficult to straddle both.
    With the greater detail and information Today that constitutes mechanism (biochemistrys of living matter), one can either say
    Wow, look at all of this intricacy and mechanism. Isn’t the human machine awesome, and how screwed up it can get, but at least we have science to control some of these reactions to combat disease (OIBU), or we can say look at all of this biochemistry? To think that this all has developed, to support the intelligence that runs it, that adapts it, that normalizes it and uses it to as much perfection as it can. Life drives, orients, momentizes(??), to Life. It’s amazing that it doesn’t screw up more. Amazing Isn’t it (ADIO).
    So you mention the word fear? What drives fear? Viewpoint drives fear, but fear does rear it’s ugly head, very individualistically, and is very driven by experience and the workings of Educated Intelligence.
    A complex subject.
    The truth shall set you free.
    Does Chiropractic truth, as it stands today (LACVS for a full expression of ii) set one free within the ADIO (MP standing as P1) viewpoint.
    I know I want it to or at least to contribute to that. Yet, what I want and what is might be 2 different things.
    Joe Strauss! You are NO IDIOT. and even if you were, what does that make everyone else? And you’re beautiful, and loved and come on. so bright and you have a big big agenda. How could you not?
    Is the Universe Perfect?
    Some would say yes and some would say no.
    That’s a big viewpoint-choice, one (me), has to make and maybe allowably vascilate on. I’d guess I am not alone.
    Thank you for your reply. I’m sure Claude, if he put’s in his 2 cents is going to concretize all of this into 33 principles is chiropractic, anything else is not, and going deeper cannot steer one away from the center of the forest where WHO decides >> (in order >> ui>>ii>>ei NOT ei >>ii>>ui) amazing isn’t it, blah blah blah.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *