Q&A # 52: Subluxation Centered/Focused


It’s not enough to just say we are subluxation-centered. We must clearly explain WHY we are. Subluxation-centered only states WHAT we do. Traditional chiropractic seems to me to leave the WHY open and I fear they do that purposefully (in order to justify “getting sick people well”). Objective chiropractic includes the WHY of subluxation correction, purposefully, to remove the ambiguity of traditional chiropractic. Otherwise subluxation centered and subluxation focused mean the same thing and are not descriptive, clarify or are helpful in explaining the chiropractic purpose or uniqueness. If we do not explain the WHY, do people truly understand what chiropractic is all about?

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 7 comments

  1. Joe Donofrio 12/16/2014, 6:51 pm:

    My understanding is : VS centered = LACVS only ( Straight) and VS based = correct VS and do anything else I please ( by hand only mixer). once again Joe, you introduce new and needless terms which will only serve to confuse. Get with the program friend….lol….

    • Claude Lessard 12/17/2014, 12:07 am:

      Hey Joe D,

      Good to hear from you. 🙂 You posted: “My understanding is : VS centered = LACVS only ( Straight)”. Does this mean that according to your understanding, that it is appropriate for chiropractors, WHO choose to be “VS centered = LACVS only (straight)” to treat diseases and symptoms to get sick people well? And if so, aren’t those chiropractors, WHO choose to be “VS centered = LACVS only ( Straight)”, practicing the medical objective instead of the chiropractic objective?

    • Joe Strauss 12/18/2014, 8:59 pm:

      Joe D, your understanding represents a small minority. Most chiropractors who Locate, Analyze, and Correct Vertebral Subluxation, do so to get sick people well, to correct the cause DIS-EASE which they believe is the cause of disease. A wise man once said years ago: “It’s where you put the period”. Wait a minute that couldn’t have been a wise man. If it was, he’s probably dead by now. Most chiropractors who LACVS don’t put in a period. They just leave it open so everyone is free to add their own personal WHY. It’s sad but a fact of life that we constantly must add “needless terms” to try to clarify chiropractic. Perhaps if the CIC class of 9/67 only had 2 graduates we would not need to.

  2. glenn allen 12/16/2014, 9:21 pm:

    OC, VS, LACVS, OSC, NTC, NTSC, NTOSC, Good Lord, does anyone speak full word English anymore? lol.

    • Claude Lessard 12/17/2014, 1:58 am:


      Your observation describes accurately what happened when we define a profession by WHAT it does and HOW it does it… instead of WHY. Constant separations, divisions, clarifications, confusions and no “full word English anymore” as you mentioned. In 1993 I spoke at ADIO, Sherman and Quest Seminars about professional objectives. I mentioned that the only way to define a profession is by its objective which is the WHY of the profession’S existence. It was not a popular topic then, and today,some 20+ years later, we begin to “see” that it is the ONLY way to define a profession objectively… by its OBJECTIVE. Therefore, WHAT is the chiropractic objective? 😉

  3. Steve 12/17/2014, 9:32 pm:

    If the right thing is done for the wrong reason, does it become less valuable. I am a Chiropractor, I adjust subluxations, period.

  4. David Suskin 12/18/2014, 4:14 am:

    I am a chiropractor,
    I adjust patents for the wrong reason.
    Eg. To over charge their insurance and not collect deductibles or copays and make as much money as possible.
    Patients have a fuller expression of innate intelligence.
    I go to jail.
    All depends on which IT you’re referring to.
    As to not let my last post disappear, I earnestly ask
    Claude has brought up the term DI-PSYCHO, and I do understand his usage of it, basically, but I wanted to hear it from the source, YOU. Perhaps you could define and comment on it, as it seems so very relevant to the effects and use and mis-use of Educated Intelligence.
    Perhaps you could without condemnation on my questioning, afford me that information, even if it goes outside the parameters of this blog and this blogs focus. Whatever. I’d respect your opinions and comments.
    Thank You

Leave a Reply

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