Opposing Schools of Thought


When it comes to our philosophy there are two opposing schools of thought- those who want to expand the philosophy and those who want to expand our understanding of the philosophy. To determine which group you belong to, you must fall back on your objective-correcting vertebral subluxation to enable the forces of the innate intelligence of the body to be more fully expressed. Some use the trappings of chiropractic philosophy but ignore the objective, use the terms but add others that are inconsistent with the objective. The attempt is to embrace other things in order to expand our acceptance. To do that the chiropractic objective must be denigrated and ultimately rejected. The greatest threat to chiropractic is not medicine but expanded chiropractic.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 12 comments

  1. Jamie Richards 03/07/2014, 7:19 pm:

    I agree 100% joe – chiropractic is that singular objective and nothing else.

  2. Don 03/09/2014, 5:21 pm:

    Two questions come to mind.
    1. Is chiropractic a profession or something else?
    2. What defines a profession (or that something else)?

    The answers to these two questions give a very good glimps into that person viewpoint.

    An example,
    person A answers, chiropractic is the pursuit of LACVS to enable the innate forces of the ii of the bidy to be fully expressed.
    person B answers, chiropractic is a profession and the government determines the definition of chiropractic.

    Just a thought, can they both be correct?
    If not, how are these two positions reconciled?

    • JoeStrauss 03/09/2014, 9:44 pm:

      Don, interesting questions. I think that presently both 1 &2 are correctly answered yes, yes and the state board. I would answer as person A but I agree that B is also correct that the state licensing board (a government agency) determines the definition of chiropractic. Thus far, the minimum requirements for the practice of chiropractic that the state boards have created do not, in my opinion, require chiropractors to do something that would conflict with OSC philosophy. Some people have concluded that (in some states at least) it requires us to perform a diagnosis but others (myself included) maintain that locating, analyzing (which would include classifying) a vertebral subluxation in the broadest sense qualifies as a “chiropractic diagnosis” and that is what creates the uniqueness (non duplicative) practice of chiropractic. I believe that to require chiropractors to perform a medical diagnosis would be overreaching on the part of the chiropractic state board and such a requirement could and would be challenged in court. Perhaps that is why no state has yet to try to do it. Perhaps also that is part of the desire to introduce prescription drugs into chiropractic practice, to create another argument for medical diagnosis (and I am not ordinarily a conspiracy theorists). Requiring a medical diagnosis would be an interesting scenario which one day may occur and would have far reaching ramifications for the practice of chiropractic, especially if and when our approach to chiropractic becomes more widespread. Since it would be an issue that would probably cross state lines and since the federal government seems to be more and more anxious to control the health care system it would probably have to be decided in federal court. This is the plot of a fictional work that I am presently writing and so I am hesitant about divulging any more of the scenario. My last novel did not exactly reach the NYT bestseller list.

  3. Don 03/09/2014, 10:10 pm:

    I see that the minimum requirements are being disputed in some areas.
    I do see that you used the term “chiropractic diagnosis” interchangebly with locating/analyzing. Could you elaborate on what you mean by that?
    I have had some discussions with people from differing schools of thought on this matter. I find it fascinating. Admittedly, I don’t understand the all the nuances of the positions.
    Btw, I thought non-fiction was your genre. Nice to see I was wrong.

    • JoeStrauss 03/10/2014, 12:52 am:

      It’s hard for me to even use the term “chiropractic diagnosis” but inasmuch as a auto mechanic uses diagnosis, I figure I can use it as long as people know I am speaking of a chiropractic finding and not a medical one. I only use it interchangeably because others do, just as long as people know it is not a medical finding but a chiropractic one. VS is not a medical finding, the medical profession does not recognize its existence (at least not in the context that we use it).
      My genre is non-fiction. My oldest daughter is the historical fiction writer (over 10 books published). My one attempt at historical fiction did not convince anyone differently.

      • Claude Lessard 03/10/2014, 11:35 am:

        I heard a talk given by David Koch a few years back saying that chiropractors use differential diagnosis of a vertebral subluxation whenever they analyze the vertebral subluxation and come up with a listing for the VS.. According to him, the listing ASRP is the differential diagnosis of the subluxation as compared to the listing ASLA. –

        – Since we have created our own chiropractic lexicon, from the beginning of the history of chiropractic, which is called the LOCATION and ANALYSIS of a vertebral subluxation to find the appropriate LISTING of the vertebral subluxation, it seems absolutely unnecessary to use medical terms. It simply distort chiropractic and confuses rather than clarify. –

        – We must ALWAYS remember that chiropractic is SEPARATE and DISTINCT from EVERYTHING ELSE and is INCLUSIVE of EVERYONE regardless of creed, race, culture, health status or financial ability to pay.

        • Claude Lessard 03/10/2014, 11:37 am:

          … nothing more, nothing less and nothing else! PERIOD.

          • Don 03/10/2014, 9:28 pm:

            Dr. Lessard,
            Be that as it may, in speaking with others on the subject, there does seem to be something more to the interpretation of the language and use of terms in government statutes. These require clarification. This is the reason for my asking.

      • Don 03/10/2014, 6:26 pm:

        Thanks for clarifying that Joe.
        Some government agencies seem to be making a point of the term diagnosis. Unfortunately, not everyone will know you are referring to a chiropractic finding using that term. I would like to believe adding the qualifier to diagnosis, making it chiropractic diagnosis would distinguish it. I fear in the minds of some, it won’t.
        I can now understand why it is hard for you to even use the term “chiropractic diagnosis”.
        As for your venture into historical fiction, only you will know if you have that book still in you. 😉

  4. Tom 03/10/2014, 1:20 pm:

    Here’s Reggie on Diagnosis vs Analysis. Enjoy!


    • Don 03/10/2014, 9:24 pm:

      Reggie mentions “chiropractic diagnosis” in This audio from Tom at 40:20.
      Tom let me know your thoughts.
      Thanks Tom.

    • RichieBDC 03/11/2014, 1:05 pm:

      Thanks: Tom

Leave a Reply

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