A Man’s Gotta Know His Limitations

34

The above is probably the second most famous statement right after “make my day” made by the Clint Eastwood character, Detective Harry Callahan. The storyline in the filmMagnum Force is about a secret group on the police force that was acting as judge, jury, and executioner toward criminals, clearly going beyond their role as policemen.
The chiropractic message is there. We chiropractors know our limitations. We are not medical doctors. That does not make us inferior, anymore than a policeman is inferior to a judge. It is just a different job, a different but equally important role. All are important parts of the judicial system, or in our case, the “healthcare” sytem.
Once a man knows his limitations, he is free to reach his full potential in his area of expertise and not waste time and energy (or break the law) trying to do something or accomplish something he is not able or qualified, or, like the policemen above, attempt to accomplish another professional objective. It seems to me that chiropractic began as an alternative approach to the practice of medicine and was held in contempt by the medical profession because it had the same objective as medicine, i.e., the treatment and cure of disease (historically, deafness) and the medics felt that what was important was the objective, not the methodology, the technique or the procedure being applied. (It is also why so many so easily slipped into “mixing.”) In 1927, BJ, through the writings of Stephenson, clarified that disease was not the issue, correcting the cause of DIS-EASE was and that was a different objective. There is nothing in the 33 principles that addresses or even mentions disease, or a medical condition. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the earlier focus on curing medical conditions left the idea that “chiropractic gets sick people well” in the minds of many of the profession, despite BJ’s sometimes confusing attempts to distance chiropractic from it. It was not until Reggie Gold and others clearly delineated the non-therapeutic approach of chiropractic that the distinction was made. Whether that was too little, too late and chiropractic will go the way of osteopathy and be absorbed by medicine remains to be seen. Meanwhile, it does not help in our effort to keep it separate to link chiropractic to medicine in any manner including as an alternative.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 34 comments

  1. Steve 04/10/2013, 7:09 pm:

    Hey Joe,
    This speaks to the debate,or what should be debated as to the distinction or being a “primary care physician” or a “portal of entry” Dr.. A PCP would be expected to evaluate medical conditions and offer treatment or recommendations. A POE is merely the first professional seen, works within his training and refers out the rest. If we stick to subluxation care and educate that all else is medical, we have fulfilled or mission, as we were trained, as POE doctors. That would truly make my day.

  2. Richie Barone 04/10/2013, 8:04 pm:

    Hey Steve, I hear you but by definition if you are Dr. POE you must refer everyone out because you do not diagnose or treat symptoms and if you say an adjustment will treat their problem you R practicing medicine And the powers that be want you treating only musculo-skeletal disorders up to a point…. I am not Dr.POE

    • Steve 04/10/2013, 10:11 pm:

      Hey Richie,
      Yes by definition that would be correct. The trouble with referral is you must know who to refer to, that would take some diagnostic skill.The other option (as mentioned above) for Dr.POE is to educate the patients as to what is and what is not chiro, in effect teaching the patient when to self-refer.
      POE also means no referral necessary to see you the chiro.. Can I assume you go along with that?

      • Richie Barone 04/11/2013, 2:52 pm:

        Hey Steve: assume away (yes I agree) that is why as Joe D says The Orientation Is The Most Important Thing That We Do (TOITMITTWD) + I do not want to nor should we take responsibility for someone else s health or medical care or decisions.

        • Claude 04/11/2013, 4:33 pm:

          … that’s WHY we are chiropractors WHO choose to practice the chiropractic objective and that the first thing we do is to explain the chiropractic objective at the beginning of any conversation with all people. 😉

          • Claude Lessard 04/11/2013, 6:31 pm:

            … WE are OBJECTIVE CHIROPRACTORS !!!

  3. Bob Berkowitz 04/11/2013, 12:52 am:

    Perhaps a blanket referral is in order. Should they bring to my attention about a particular part or system in their body, I tell them that if it concerns them, have it checked out by their ‘parts doctor.’ Meanwhile, if they have what ever it is that they are concern about, their body still would be better off without a subluxated vertebrae than with. PCP, POE, IUD, DOA, PMS, ETC; matters NOT to me.

  4. Tom 04/11/2013, 10:09 pm:

    Ok, first we were SCors, then OSCors, then NTOSCors, now OCors…guys, I’m spending a fortune on business cards! 😉

    The more I think about it though, the more I’m liking “spinologist” more and more!!!

    • Claude Lessard 04/12/2013, 4:40 am:

      Tom,

      “WHO is a “spinologist”?

      • JStraussDC 04/12/2013, 3:16 pm:

        So Claude, what’s the difference between a Spinologist and an Objective chiropractor…just a title?

        • Claude 04/12/2013, 4:20 pm:

          Joseph,

          That’s WHAT would be nice to know. It’s Tom “WHO” said: “The more I think about it though, the more I’m liking “spinologist” more and more!!!” I asked Tom: WHO is a “spinologist”. He hasn’t answered yet.

          • Claude 04/12/2013, 4:21 pm:

            Let us inquire, together without condemnation, into the nature of the word “spinologist” starting with the question: WHO is a “spinologist”?

          • Straight DC 04/12/2013, 7:26 pm:

            Not being on the level of “esteemed chiropractic philosophers” as you guys are, I was under the impression Reggie Gold, in an attempt to practice the philosophy as pure as possible decided to split entirely away from the way chiropractic was going. He changed the name, started a different school & wanted to make a clean start where chiropractic was nothing more than adjusting subluxations because they were in and of themselves detrimental to one’s health. In my meager understanding, I would say a “spinologist” is one who practices the chiropractic objective – nothing more – nothing less. It may have the same effect as telling someone you are an objective chiropractor, since you would have to explain exactly what a spinologist does since the public is not at all aware of the term.

  5. Claude 04/12/2013, 9:11 pm:

    Joseph,

    It is YOUR impression of Reggie Gold and YOUR understanding of WHO a spinologist is. I get that. –

    – I still want to know WHO is a “spinologist” according to Tom, since he’s the one WHO “is liking “spinologist” more and more.” 😉

    • Don 04/12/2013, 10:21 pm:

      The more I learn about it, I am liking spinologist more and more too. 🙂
      I enjoy the videos made by the Director en Centro de Spinología de Valencia Enrique Borreda’s. His videos are available on the internet. They are very informative and also include a demonstration of the technique used for the correction of spinal obtrusions.

    • Claude 04/12/2013, 10:48 pm:

      Straight,

      This was addressed to YOU and not Joseph.

      It is YOUR impression of Reggie Gold and YOUR understanding of WHO a spinologist is. I get that. –

      – I still want to know WHO is a “spinologist” according to Tom, since he’s the one WHO “is liking “spinologist” more and more.” 😉

      • Michael Duncan 04/13/2013, 3:25 pm:

        Tom IS a Spinologist as per Reggie. But with regard to what Joe asked, there is very little difference between Spinology and OC other than title (if that’s what we’re using now), especially those of us that use AMP/Vertabraille as a means of analysis.

        • Claude 04/14/2013, 3:39 pm:

          Michael,

          That’s WHY it is necessary for our inquiry, together without condemnation, to have Tom’s input to keep us on track. 😉

          • Michael Duncan 04/15/2013, 5:21 pm:

            Claude,

            I agree that Tom’s answers would be helpful and appreciated. However, Joe and others (you and myself included), I suspect, already know the answer. 🙂

  6. Steve 04/15/2013, 2:45 pm:

    Hey Ya’ll,
    While we’re at it can someone tell me why the spinology movement stopped?

  7. Tom 04/17/2013, 1:57 am:

    Claude, when I said what I did above, I said it half in jest, but the fact is spinologist is a clearly defined term, whereas chiropractor, no matter how you dress it up (SC, OSC, NTOSC or OC), all contain the phrase that quite frankly has no one specific, congruent meaning – chiropractor. We have states, organizations and individual chiropractors that all define it differently. Is it any wonder the public has no idea what the heck we do. Hence my poking fun of just one more name change.

    A spinologist is anyone who has successfully completed a spinology program which consists of ONLY those subjects absolutely essential in becoming, and practicing as, a spinologist. Upon completion of the program they must have signed an Affiliation Agreement stating that in order to be given the privilege of using the title spinologist they agree to uphold the philosophical principles and art as taught in the program. IOW, NO deviation from what is taught in the program. They only title they may use is certified spinologist, regardless of prior education or experience. Hence, former chiropractors are just that, a former chiropractor and may NOT use the title doctor regardless of the reason. One may not make health claims or associate themselves with anyone in the healing arts. While all of this may seem a fine line to walk, and it is, it is done to further make the distinction between spinology and the therapeutic healing arts.

    Steve asks why was the spinology movement stopped. It didn’t, Reggie just stopped leading it and returned to chiropractic. Only he knows the true reason why he did that. It doesn’t really matter why he did, as spinology is still going on.

    • Claude Lessard 04/17/2013, 12:08 pm:

      Tom,

      Thank you very much. As you stated: “A spinologist is anyone who has successfully completed a spinology program which consists of ONLY those subjects absolutely essential in becoming, and practicing as, a spinologist…. One may not make health claims or associate themselves with anyone in the healing arts.” –

      – It is crystal clear that spinology has NOTHING to do with chiropractic. Therefore, we conclude, together without condemnation, that chiropractic IS NOT spinology and that at this moment in time, we are NOT dealing with “only” a title. –

      – Back in the early 1980s, three weeks after his departure from ADIO, Reggie came to my home asking me to help him start spinology. He mentioned that “religion” was protected by the constitution under the “separation of Religion and State”. Reg believed that the “Church of Spinology” would have a “chance” to be free from prosecution as long as its “church members” would consent and adhere to the tenets of the Church, where he, Reggie, would have FULL and COMPLETE control. I told him flat out, as he ALWAYS taught me, that religion has to do with theological concepts and that the LAW of LIFE has NOTHING to do with theology. For that reason ALONE, it is me WHO chose to decline his request and we parted ways… until he came back to chiropractic. –

      – WHY did Reggie abandoned spinology and returned to chiropractic? –

      – WHO knows! –

      – You mentioned that your comment was “half in jest, but the fact is spinologist is a clearly defined term”. Tom, don’t we ALL know that a chiropractor is one WHO chooses to practice the chiropractic objective? That any “chiropractor” adding to the chiropractic objective is MIXING chiropractic with something else? Philosophically, does it really matter that, as you say: “We have states, organizations and individual chiropractors that all define it differently”… and that “Is it any wonder the public has no idea what the heck we do?” This is what’s so… RIGHT NOW. –

      – Can we “see” that something NEW is going on right now. That it’s NOT about “one more name change”. On the contrary, this NEW observation, points to the FACT that –

      1- Chiropractic is WHAT it is regardless of one’s personal opinion. –

      2- Chiropractic stands on its major premise and is COMPLETELY backed by its subsequent 32 principles. –

      3- That’s WHAT the public and the profession need to “see”. That’s the MESSAGE made simple which needs to be told to EVERYONE. –

      4- OUR responsibility IS to begin from scratch, one person at a time, starting with ourselves first. Let us have the COURAGE to LIVE into that reality. Doing so, might just transform our way of thinking. If it does, and that is a big IF, chiropractic has the POSSIBILITY to fulfill its objective. It is up to WHO will choose to reveal the chiropractic objective. –

      – As we inquire, together without condemnation, we MOVE deeper into the nature of the truth of chiropractic and WHO we say we are in relationship to that truth. It is a “stripping” away from ALL the “add-ons” over the last 100+ years of history. It is OBSERVING afresh WHAT truly happened on September 18, 1895 with the introduction of the FIRST educated universal force into the spine of Harvey Lillard by DD Palmer. Can YOU see that something NEW is going on?

      – There is NO need “to have one more change of name”. On the contrary, we are stripping down to the genesis of WHO we are. We have ALWAYS been defined as you say…”with a clearly defined term”. WE ARE CHIROPRACTORS WHO CHOOSE TO PRACTICE THE CHIROPRACTIC OBJECTIVE… in other words, I AM AN OBJECTIVE CHIROPRACTOR!

      – Let us carry on the work. ADIO.

  8. Steve 04/17/2013, 2:08 pm:

    Hold on Claude, Tom
    What is the goal of spinology? Other than being a religion, as Chiropractic might easily have become, how does it differ? Is it not about locating and removing interference to the nerve system?

    • Claude 04/17/2013, 2:41 pm:

      Steve,

      You asked:

      “Is it not about locating and removing interference to the nerve system?”
      Nerve interference could be “anything” that interferes with the nerve system. Is that the chiropractic objective? Or is the chiropractic objective to LACVS for a full expression of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD! –

      – I do not know exactly the objective of spinology, Tom might be able to answer that question. I

    • Tom 04/17/2013, 4:04 pm:

      The goal of spinology is to be a factor in helping to restore harmony to all the people of the world. To help people more fully express their genetic potential in all areas of their life and therefore help them to get more out of life.

      • Claude 04/17/2013, 4:49 pm:

        Tom,

        Would you say that the distinction between the chiropractic objective and the goal of spinology is found with WHO chooses to expect an outcome (restore harmony, express more fully genetic potential, get more our of life) like the spinologist and with WHO chooses to detach from any outcomes ( only LACVS for a full expression of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD!) like the objective chiropractor?

        • Bob Vano 04/17/2013, 6:22 pm:

          I object!!………………nahhhh…..doesn’t sound right!

  9. Steve 04/17/2013, 7:06 pm:

    Hey Tom,
    Was that factor an adjustment? Was an LACVS the contributing factor or were other things added?

    Hey Claude,
    A full expression of the Innate Forces is an outcome. Understandably it is unmeasurable but so is harmony, genetic potential, or getting more out of life. Besides that, aren’t those the reasons we want the fullest expression of Innate Intelligence. I don’t mean to confuse the issue or belittle either approach but let’s not fool ourselves, they seem pretty similar. Additionally, if that is the case (they are that similar) then one is unnecessary. That said I prefer OC, as it is from what I know now, simpler and undoubtedly the original.

    • Claude 04/17/2013, 7:22 pm:

      Steve,

      What are innate forces?

  10. Steve 04/17/2013, 8:45 pm:

    Hey Claude,
    I know what Chiropractic is, I am curious as to the similarity or dis-similarity to spinology, in purpose and method.

  11. Claude 04/17/2013, 9:15 pm:

    Steve,

    Do innate forces bring about harmony all the time? Do they have you get more out of life all the time? Or sometimes… Innate forces are NOT an outcome. It is MOTION that is the outcome as principle 14 states: “force is MANIFESTED by (read “is the outcome of”) motion in matter”. The chiropractic objective is detached from any outcome. A full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body will bring about outcomes for sure. And that is NOT the chiropractic objective. –

    – Do you see the distinction?

    • Claude 04/17/2013, 9:19 pm:

      … force is MANIFESTED by motion in matter (read “motion is the outcome of force in matter”)

      • Steve 04/17/2013, 10:16 pm:

        Hey Claude,
        It is a fine line you draw in the sand, a very fine line indeed. Yes I see, thank you. The expression of II. is not the objective. A man’s gotta know his…professional…limitations.
        Thanx Joe, Good post

Leave a Reply

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