Confusion in Chiropractic

13

We are not responsible for everyone or anyone (for that matter) grasping or accepting chiropractic. We are just responsible for making it clear to everyone. Imagine if we had done that from the beginning of our history?

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 13 comments

  1. Claude Lessard 04/21/2017, 3:10 pm:

    “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work” –
    – Thomas A. Edison –

    – Carry on. ADIO.

    • Joe Strauss 04/23/2017, 6:19 pm:

      I recall being invited to a time-share demonstration. I assured the sales person despite the promise of a free gift whether I bought or not that I would be wasting his time and the company’s money because I was simply not interested. He told me that if 97% say no,he can still make a good living on the 3% that say yes and that he expects and wants to get 97 no’s in order to get the 3 affirmatives and that my negative response would get him one person closer to the 3 yeses. I took the same attitude in explaining chiropractic. If they rejected it, rather than become dejected or disappointed my reaction was “okay have nice life…next!” Our job is not to convince people of the value or benefit of chiropractic but to plant a seed and water it (give them a clear understanding) time will allow fruition to occur for me or perhaps the next chiropractor. It helped me build a large practice and saved me a lot of unnecessary (and unwarranted) self-flagellation.

    • Joe Strauss 04/24/2017, 12:37 pm:

      I guess that made Edison the ultimate optimist!….he still kept on trying until hr found one.

  2. Greg Dutson 04/24/2017, 5:53 pm:

    My experience over the past 30 years is that we as a profession have clearly failed to present a clear message to the public as to what chiropractic is (& is not.) I can fully understand and appreciate their confusion. Because of this failure, chiropractic has no cultural authority. Medicine and Dentistry have clearly established cultural authority in their specific areas. We clearly have not. Despite having had the opportunity to have done so over the past 100+ years. However, I still choose to hold out hope for, and work towards, providing clarity to the public as to what chiropractic is and just as importantly what it is not. When we as a profession insist on playing outside our lane it only serves to add to the ongoing confusion for the public. Very recently at the Chiropractic Society of Texas’ annual conference I listen to Dr. Rob Sinnott speak on the research from around the world concerning our body’s innate range and quality of adaptability via the nervous system. I got home from the conference and immediately read his new book “Textbook of Human Adaptability.” It has added to my depth of understanding which I trust will serve to enhance my ability to think and speak with additional clarity and confidence concerning chiropractic. Like Edison, it’s important that we keep trying to bring clarity to both the chiropractic profession and the public’s perception of chiropractic. Despite the present state of affairs concerning how chiropractic is viewed and commonly practiced, I think it’s important and essential that we keep working to preserve and put the spotlight on the principles of chiropractic. With the trust and hope that the profession and public will eventually begin to acknowledge and appreciate what chiropractic brings to the table. If we don’t do it, who will?

    “Minds, like old earth, must be shaken from center to circumference when reconstruction is desired.” –JH Tilden, MD

  3. Richard 04/25/2017, 5:18 pm:

    If we could understand that 2 different outcomes could be equaly perfect, we could understand that subluxated and un-subluxated states have distinct and perfect outcomes.

    It is our partial understanding of chiropractic that justify our differences.

    FFT !
    Rich

    • Joe Strauss 04/25/2017, 8:12 pm:

      Can you give an example of “2 different outcomes” of anything that are “equally perfect?’

      • Rich 04/25/2017, 9:24 pm:

        As much as the accelerated degenerative changes caused by a subluxation might be the perfect consequence of one’s disregard for his health (e.g. the “victim or medical minded” individual), the regenerative change associated with the correction of a similar subluxation might be the perfect consequence for someone who’s perspective leans toward a “responsible” attitude. Although theses consequences seem contradictory, they might perfectly be serving these individuals.

        Instead of discriminating against on or the other, taking a few steps back to appreciate the distinct context, might pretty well bring a new light on the way we translate theses outcomes.

        • Joe Strauss 04/26/2017, 8:28 pm:

          As people are faced with health issues they become interested in “health” (as they understand it to be), the “cure” or treatment of symptoms. We must distinguish between natural and normal. It’s perfectly natural for someone with arthritis to be all crippled up and have painful joints. But that is the natural consequence of arthritis and not normal. Most people’s again, mistaken reality of normal is, unfortunately “feeling good”. That is the objective of the practice of medicine and “getting sick people well” (feeling good), for most chiropractors. Some will use whatever means, they can legally get away with to accomplish that objective-mixers (MxC). Others will adhere to traditional chiropractic (TSC) and only adjust, they are what Dr. Healey has referred to as conservative mixers. Both, TSC and MxC have the same objective as medicine.
          However, the average person realizes that is only a “temporary false reality”, the treatment of symptoms but are willing to accept that because it creates an equilibrium, a balance somewhere between full life and death, knowing that they will eventually experience the latter. They know that the treatment of symptoms by either medicine, TSC or MxC is not full life because they see people who have that full life and want it. They just don’t know how to acquire it. They want the expression of( I)/intelligence through matter what objective chiropractic (OC) has to offer on the physical level. It does not relate to the spiritual level, the area of theology/religion, (which also has their own problems of mixing), although the Palmer’s tried (unsuccessfully) to relate it to that, just as they tried to relate chiropractic to getting sick people well (unfortunately more successfully-TSC). Objective Chiropractic is based upon the Objective reality found in the 33 principles. What you describe/imply as an alternative “responsible attitude” is irresponsible to their life (and health) and why we do not practice TSC,MxC or medicine but choose to practice/promote OC, while tolerating/accepting the others…it is a different desired outcome. So which outcome do you desire and why?

          • Richard 04/27/2017, 1:51 am:

            I have a good grasp of the differences between MxC/TSC/OC. Thank you for clarifying. (I’ve been practicing “near OC” for close to 35 years).

            If I use a simplistic example such as a switch. The patient ‘switch is Off (subluxated) and we turn it On (adjustment). As long as the switch is On, the patient will be as Healthy or “Alive” as can be. This example does not address the cause of the Off state. Chemical, emotional or mechanical stress or imbalance, although it could certainly participate in such a state, it does not explain how the organism (innate) produce the subluxation. The real, concrete path between stress and subluxation is almost never discussed. It is as if subluxation was the telepathic end game of the subluxation fairy! Most of the time, We avoid discussing or defining Innate expected outcome in creating the subluxation.

            It does not mean that turning the switch back On is useless, but it does mean that health/state and context are far more complex then comprehended. A better understanding might provide effective clues on how to prevent the recurrence of subluxation. The reason why Innate produce the subluxation is at least, part of the answer. The On state and the Off state are both perfect and distinct outcomes. There is an intelligent reason behind each and getting adjusted alone, is not the complete or definitive answer.

          • Joe Strauss 04/27/2017, 11:27 pm:

            Richard, I’m not sure your example of flipping a switch meets the criteria. Flipping a switch on/off has two different objectives.ONE, whem you are going to sleep or going out. The OTHER when you are at home and need the light. An adjustment creates more life, a subluxation create less life. How can you say that they are both good or both bad, both are creating different results. My analysis was always to determine that the innate intelligence of the body did not want a vs and was doing something to correct/reduce it.

        • Joe Strauss 04/30/2017, 8:10 pm:

          Rich,jumping out of a 10 story window has a perfect outcome, so does standing on two feet on the ground. Both demonstrate the universal law (of gravity) perfectly. Both demonstrate universal intelligence perfectly (P. #1), one, as universal matter, dead but existing as a corpse. The other exists as innate matter. “There is a universal intelligence in all matter…, the jumper and rock express same principle as the corpse lying on the ground but the person standing on the ground also expresses innate intelligence, the corpse no longer expresses innate intelligence (the rock never did). Both are perfect for what they are just as a corpse and a rock are both perfect expressions of universal intelligence as is a person existing/standing on two feet.
          A vertebral subluxated person is not “discriminated against” by a chiropractor any more than a dead person is. We just choose not to adjust dead people, only live ones with vertebral subluxation. I don’t see how a vertebral subluxation “serves” a person any more than being dead does. Please explain inasmuch as VS is “partial death” (DIS-EASE), according to our chiropractic philosophy

  4. Rich 05/01/2017, 12:26 am:

    Hi,
    Btw, I did not refer to a light switch, only a switch! It’s alright! The discrimination argument was about the judgement of good versus bad (Non-VS versus VS) as opposed to two perfect and distinct outcomes.

    The elephant in the room: how is a vertebral subluxation produced? I remember Reggie explaining that he would adjust a VS in the direction of the contracted muscles arguing that Innate was unsuccessfully attempting to self adjust and only needed an extra hand! Still, he would not address the mechanism causing the subluxation, beside the “emotional, chemical and/or mechanical” stress. As for most of us, the actual path was always avoided.

    I do not need to remind anyone that VS generally reproduce themselves (recurrence) in a regular pattern. Such a pattern cannot be reproduced outside the realm of Innate. In a normal environment (eg. without major lost of integrity such as a fracture), there is no empty space where a vertebra can be displaced to. A vertebra cannot be push out of place. There is no position a vertebra can be without the knowledge of Innate. A vertebra cannot be held in a static, locked position without the knowledge and will of Innate. A vertebra cannot be moved or adjusted without the knowledge and will of innate. A VS can only be adjusted in a consistent manner if Innate recognise this option as viable. The return of a VS cannot be explain by a pseudo vertebral memory, but likely by the associated outcome as privileged by Innate. We therefore need to understand why and how. We need to think outside the box.

    Obviously, this is absolutely far from a complete answer but it stresses a point: if we do not invest intelligence, time and resources in discovering the complex mechanism behind the production of VS, it will be relegated to a mere belief, haunting the memory of a few, until a new “discoverer” sees the light.

    Chiropractic is infinitely more complex than we ever envisioned.

    • Joe Strauss 05/01/2017, 3:32 pm:

      Rich, aren’t you making a judgement, implying that a VS is good whereas I determine it is bad by deduction (the 33 principles)The medical profession does not even recognize its existence. What criteria do you use, empirical, reasoning, authority/faith to conclude that vs is good/natural/normal.
      1. “A vertebra cannot be moved or adjusted without the knowledge and will of innate“Agreed although I would not use the phrase “will of innate “. Principles or laws do not have a will only the (C)reator of that law or principle can have a will (and He was not BJ)
      2. The elephant in the room: how is a vertebral subluxation produced? I remember Reggie explaining that he would adjust a VS in the direction of the contracted muscles arguing that Innate was unsuccessfully attempting to self adjust and only needed an extra hand! Still, he would not address the mechanism causing the subluxation, beside the “emotional, chemical and/or mechanical” stress. As for most of us, the actual path was always avoided. The cause is always limitations of matter (external invasive forces (EIF) overcoming internal resistive forces (IRF)[innate forces and matter] This technique analysis called Muscle palpation/ADIO analysis/ vertebraille was what Reggie was referring to.
      3 “….VS generally reproduce themselves (recurrence) in a regular pattern. Such a pattern cannot be reproduced outside the realm of Innate. In a normal environment (eg. without major lost of integrity such as a fracture….” Chiropractor maintain that “emotional, chemical and/or mechanical stress” are a major factor in loss of integrity and cause EIF . Apparently you and the medical profession do not agree. That’s your viewpoint. But then why did you become a chiropractor?
      4. “The return of a VS cannot be explain(sic) by a pseudo vertebral memory, but likely by the associated outcome as privileged by Innate.” Disagreed. It is caused by limitations of matter, in spite of the “knowledge and will of innate”.
      5. Your last point: “if we do not invest intelligence, time and resources in discovering the complex mechanism behind the production of VS, it will be relegated to a mere belief…” Agreed. I’m not sure we can do that until and unless we abandon research into medical conditions and research chiropractic. Meanwhile the philosophy of our 33 principles will have to suffice because the human boy, the principle and “Chiropractic is infinitely more complex than we ever envisioned. Thanks for the discussion.

Leave a Reply

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