The Non-Therapeutic Chiropractic Objective


Unless and until we entirely leave the therapeutic model and not try to address disease, its cause, or its prevention or in any way associate LACVS with it, we will be in no-man’s land. We will have no argument against the need for diagnosis. To say that we need to be able to rule out or in the need for chiropractic care puts us in the medical model.

Be Sociable, Share!

This article has 16 comments

  1. Steve 07/13/2012, 4:52 pm:

    Hey Joe,
    We must still determine the need for an adjustment which is in effect the ONLY need for chiro. care. Recognizing the presence or absence of a subluxation makes that decision. We must also try to the best of our abilities to ensure the adjustment will not injure the patient, no?

    • Don 07/13/2012, 5:34 pm:

      Steve/ Dr. Jones,
      I thought the same thing until I heard it explained that the adjustment itself would never injure a PM. The reason being that the adjustment is under the control of the innate intelligence. It is the chiropractor’s technique that has the potential if any of causing injury. This occurs when the universal (always potentially destructive) force is introduced. It is called technique trauma.
      These are some of the reasons the lightest force necessary to accomplish the correction is recommended.

      • Claude Lessard 07/13/2012, 6:26 pm:


        Don is correct. The adjustment is performed by the innate intelligence of the body. As long as the person is alive, there can be interference with the transmission of innate forces (pri.29). There are NO contraindications to innate intelligence. With the availability of many CHIROPRACTIC techniques today, the universal forces required are minimal (even though as Joseph mentioned, they are always potentially destructive) (pri.26). It is YOU as a chiropractor WHO is called to choose the necessary technique AFTER you have determined the proper listing. 😉

  2. Steve 07/13/2012, 7:22 pm:

    OK OK I slipped, I meant the adjustive thrust will not injure.

    • Claude 07/13/2012, 8:31 pm:

      The evolutionary process of chiropractic confirms its distinction from EVERYTHING else. Chiropractic is about LIFE and most specifically the second component of the TRIUNE …. FORCE. As such, it does NOT deal with current established conventional wisdom of health care. Chiropractic is NOT health care. The objective of chiropractic is to LACVS for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. –

      – Through OBSERVATION of organization in the universe the LAW OF ORGANIZATION was formulated into the major premise. Through deductive reasoning 32 principles followed. –

      – NOT one principle of chiropractic mention anything about health. –

      – Many times, many of the principles of chiropractic mention LIFE. –

      – We can logically and reasonably deduce that chiropractic is ALL about LIFE. –

      – Chiropractic got “thrown” into the health care system from the very beginning, and as we respect and honor our founder and as we are eternally grateful for his discovering chiropractic, we can also respectfully point out his faulty reasoning. Chiropractic was NEVER a system healing for the cure of deafness. Chiropractic was NEVER the cure of anything whatsoever. That is faulty reasoning based on hubris carried from the beginning of our profession and I contend that WHO Joseph chooses to BE in posting his above opening statement is right on the mark. –

      – It is our responsibility to point out faulty reasoning and bring about true logical reasoning based on the 33 principles ONLY. –

      – The paradox exist in the EXCLUSIVITY and DISTINCTIVENESS of chiropractic which is INCLUSIVE of ALL people WHO are LIVING regardless of their health, wealth, creed or whatever else. –

    • JStraussDC 07/13/2012, 9:05 pm:

      Steve, you’ve learned the slipping and checking lesson, congratulations! Chiropractors, especially chiropractic philosophers, are like sharks…any kind of slip draws blood. But they are forgiving…after they have chewed off your arm!:)

      • Eric Seiler 07/14/2012, 12:41 am:

        The Great White speaks.

    • Don 07/14/2012, 3:41 am:

      Didn’t mean to chew off your arm …. just an nip.. 🙂

      Maybe someone here can help me with these terms I don’t fully understand especially how they differ.
      Which of these are appropriate, inappropriate or most appropriate for the description of what the chiropractor does. He…
      a. applies his technique
      b. applies an adjustic thrust
      c. applies an adustive thrust
      d. makes his technique
      e. applies a force that the bodies innate intelligence chooses to accept or not for the correction of vs

      • Steve 07/16/2012, 7:28 pm:

        Hey Don, that’s ok it was just a flesh wound.
        If you added… applies (an educated / specific) force…. to e., I would think that nearly perfect. This leaves out the manipulators and the shovel guys. Otherwise a. and c. look good too. But lets see what the big boys have to say.

      • JStraussDC 07/17/2012, 11:14 pm:

        Don, how does educating the practice member about chiropractic fit into “the description of what the chiropractor does.”?

        • Steve 07/18/2012, 2:14 pm:

          Hey Joe, I always heard that Dr means teacher. However when I looked it up in the “Oxford”(dictionary/thesaurus), not only did it not say teacher but what it did say caused me rethink the title. I found it somewhat repulsive. 1. qualified to practice medicine, 2.qualified dentist or veterinarian, 3. person who holds a doctorate, 4. treat medically, 5. fix up, 6. adulterate, 7. tamper with; falsify. Attend, cure, heal, repair, patch up, dilute, spike, drug, poison, meddle with, disguise and change were also mentioned. Now I see why some in the profession have suggested we drop the moniker and call ourselves CHIROPRACTORS

          • JStraussDC 07/18/2012, 2:49 pm:

            Steve, I think we probably fall under “3. person who holds a doctorate”. But your right, no choice really is descriptive. I think it is more of an ego thing. That’s why I prefer people call me “Joe”. Although I have to admit when I get free return address labels in the mail that say Mr. Joseph Strauss rather than Dr. or just plain Joseph, I throw them out.

        • Don 07/18/2012, 5:16 pm:

          The way I see it now is in order to educate the practice member about chiropractic we need to be clear about what we do and what we don’t do. I say we find the place in the spine where educatedly apply a gentle force that the body can use to make the adjustment and correct the vs.
          Apply a gentle force, thrust, make my technique…not sure which is philosophically most accurate. I don’t want to be sloppy with my language..:).
          I also see this as very different than manipulation. The body/innate intelligence does the correcting in adjustment and chiropractor “does the correcting” in manipulation.
          Hope this clears it up. If not ask again..thanks.

  3. Don 07/17/2012, 1:28 pm:

    Thanks for the input Steve.
    “applies an educated/specific force that the bodies innate intelligence chooses to accept or not for the correction of vs.”

    Anyone else?

  4. Chiropractor 06611 02/19/2013, 4:45 pm:

    People who have osteoporosis, spinal cord compression, or inflammatory arthritis, or who take blood-thinning medications should not undergo spinal manipulation. In addition, patients with a history of cancer should first obtain clearance from their medical doctor before undergoing spinal manipulation.

    • JStraussDC 02/21/2013, 4:09 pm:

      06611, Do you really think that a medical doctor is competent to determine whether a person, any person, is able to “undergo spinal” adjustment by a qualified chiropractor?

Leave a Reply

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



Follow Us

Subscribe to this blog
via RSS or Email: