Q&A #48


Is chiropractic trying to get into the practice of medicine or is medicine trying to absorb the practice of chiropractic and does it matter?

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 22 comments

  1. RichieBDC 05/13/2014, 2:14 pm:

    Joe: I think it does matter. Chiropractic is a philosophy, science and art, separate and distinct from the practice of medicine. Medicine needs no help from the Chiropractic profession as history has shown, but the majority of the profession wants and needs to be accepted as equals. This has been happening from within the profession probably from the beginning. BJ spoke and wrote about it……This is from within, I don’t have all the answers or solutions but I am aware of the problem and am still adjusting VS because it is there. What do others think and what solutions do you see?

  2. Charles Hollensed DC 05/13/2014, 3:46 pm:

    I have worked with over two dozen medical doctors in clinics in third world countries. I address only VS. They love having me there since my effect on the patient is more dramatic and longer lasting. They see the power of the adjustment in permitting the body to work better. They see us as different but valuable. The MDs I have worked with will accept what we do if it is presented in terms of chiropractic and not medical wannabee

  3. Tom 05/13/2014, 11:28 pm:

    All one has to do is look at the direction chiropractic education is taking to CLEARLY see that chiropractic is moving TOWARDS medicine and AWAY from chiropractic. The vast majority of chiropractic education (anatomy, physiology, pathology, diagnosis, etc) is geared towards arriving at a differential diagnosis to which one of two conclusions must be made: can the problem/disease be handled “chiropractically” or must it be turned (back) over to medicine. Look at the scope of practice allowed by law and see the direction chiropractic is taking. Clearly more medical.
    As far as medicine trying to absorb chiropractic, another yes. Medical doctors are not stupid. They see what is “working” and by law they can use/do EVERYTHING (including manipulation) that a chiropractor may use/do, AND use everything a chiropractor may NOT do/use. They have the gamut covered.
    Does it matter? NO, it doesn’t. Either scenario is not good for the chiropractic profession. As long as the majority of chiropractors have the medical objective (which is why chiropractic is defined as a “form of alternative medicine”) of getting sick people well it’s not looking too good for chiropractic. And the scary thing is that the “other” side, the medical objective side is MUCH larger than chiropractic objective side and the other side is growing exponentially. As long as either of the two scenarios that Joe asked about exists and grows, chiropracTIC is in a world of trouble.

    • Claude Lessard 05/13/2014, 11:47 pm:


      HOW, in your opinion, can we create a NEW possibility that will MOVE and INSPIRE chiropractors toward the chiropractic objective?

      • Claude Lessard 05/14/2014, 12:34 pm:

        … of course, in a way that will RESONATE with chiropractors. 😉

      • Straight DC 05/14/2014, 6:23 pm:

        My comment of 5/14/2014 5:55pm is in response to Claude Lessard’s question on 5/13/2014, 11:47pm

  4. Straight DC 05/14/2014, 5:55 pm:

    IMO the chiro objective must be LIVED by the OSCtor & this hopefully should attract other DC’s. The freedom that the philosophical DC lives by, should be something that is noticeable & a source of curiosity for non-philosophical DC’s. However, when a DC’s objective is to just make a living (& I think this is the main reason for most DC’s to be working), it’s just the BOTTOM LINE that counts.
    So to answer your question, unless the chiropractor is LOOKING FOR something deeper & more fulfilling , I do not know what will MOVE & INSPIRE chiropractors toward the chiro objective.

    • Claude Lessard 05/14/2014, 6:47 pm:


      Thank you for your response. 🙂

      • Claude 05/14/2014, 9:13 pm:


        When you see prospective members at your office, what are they looking for?

        • Straight DC 05/14/2014, 10:19 pm:

          relief of their symptoms

  5. Claude Lessard 05/14/2014, 10:36 pm:


    HOW do you INSPIRE them to choose to MOVE from “the relief of their symptoms”, in a way that RESONATES with them, toward a full expression of their innate forces?

    • Straight DC 05/16/2014, 3:49 pm:

      This is what I call “my job”. The best way to describe how to explain chiropractic to them is to relate to them. After years of talking “at” people & explaining it, I try simply to let them know their body could be depleted of some vital information that can be restored by the adjustment of their vertebrae. Taking this step is a movement toward a better life.

      • Claude 05/16/2014, 4:56 pm:


        Very well. Therefore, you relate to them even though they’re not “LOOKING FOR something deeper & more fulfilling” as you mentioned about chiropractors. It is you WHO you choose to BE relating to your practice members regardless of their NOT looking for something deeper. Couldn’t it be you WHO could choose the same for chiropractors WHO are not “LOOKING FOR something deeper & more fulfilling”?

        • Claude Lessard 05/16/2014, 6:09 pm:

          … in other words, couldn’t you “simply to let them know their practice could be depleted of some vital information that can be restored by (practicing the chiropractic objective). Taking this step is a movement toward a better life.”

        • Straight DC 05/16/2014, 6:23 pm:

          It’s quite a bit different with chiropractors. Chiropractors have pretty well made up their minds that philosophy is not “where it’s at”. Even though patients come in looking for symptom relief they are still more of a “captive audience”. Chiropractors are not. They know it’s a harder road & takes more effort to educate a practice member than it does to use chiropractic to treat a symptom or do something to give the practice member what they want.

          • Claude Lessard 05/16/2014, 9:17 pm:


            I got what you said to me and what you did not say. Do you understand the chiropractic objective as rising from the 33 principles?

  6. Straight DC 05/16/2014, 9:29 pm:

    No reply button in the box – Claude Lessard 05/16/2014, 9:17pm, but I am responding to your question:
    Do you understand the chiropractic objective as rising from the 33 principles?
    By the way you ask the question, I guess I do not.

    • Claude Lessard 05/16/2014, 11:07 pm:


      Let me change the way I ask the question. Do you understand that the chiropractic objective is a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body and that WHO practices it is LACVS. PERIOD! ?

      • Straight DC 05/17/2014, 4:14 pm:


  7. Claude Lessard 05/17/2014, 7:48 pm:


    – Let us observe, together without condemnation, the 33 principles giving rise to the chiropractic objective. –

    – A full expression (expression is the ONLY function of e/matter [pri.13]) of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body (the living body has an innate intelligence (pri.20), which is ALWAYS normal (pri.27), that has the ONLY function, which is also ALWAYS normal (pri.27), of adapting universal forces and e/matter (pri.23), without breaking a universal law (pri.24). HOW to practice the chiropractic objective is LACVS since the transmission of innate forces through or over the nerve system in animal bodies (pri.28) can be interfered with (pri.29) ALWAYS by vertebral subluxation which is violating the integrity of The Principle of Coordination (pri.32). –

    – Do you NOW understand that the authority of the chiropractic objective is the 33 principles?

  8. Claude Lessard 05/17/2014, 7:54 pm:

    … in other words, based on the authority of the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science, the chiropractic objective is: LACVS for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. —

    – Do you NOW understand that the authority of the chiropractic objective is the 33 ABSOLUTE principles of chiropractic’s basic science?

    • Straight DC 05/19/2014, 2:35 pm:

      As far as I understand what you are saying, YES, I believe that is true.

Leave a Reply

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