babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » Chiropractic school faces opposition

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Chiropractic school faces opposition
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764

posted 18 January 2005 06:49 AM      Profile for Snuckles   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
TALLAHASSEE, Florida (AP) -- Some Florida State University professors have been circulating a parody map showing the campus of the future, with a new Bigfoot Institute, a School of Astrology and a Crop Circle Simulation Laboratory.

It's a not-so-subtle jab in a growing debate over a proposal to build a chiropractic college on this campus -- the first such school at a public university in the nation.

More than 500 professors, including the university's two Nobel laureates, have signed a petition opposing the school and a handful have even threatened to resign rather than teach alongside what they consider a "pseudoscience."


Read it here.


From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764

posted 18 January 2005 06:51 AM      Profile for Snuckles   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Some Florida State University faculty members beat me to the punch line.

Those who oppose the creation of a chiropractic school there say the proposal is an embarrassing attempt to create an appearance of unearned scientific legitimacy for a field that is based on wishful thinking and quackery.

If an FSU school is created to turn out America's future chiropractors, that will be a public relations coup for an industry long lumped in with snake oil salesmen. And it would also be good for University of Florida grads, like me, who would have more material for razzing Seminoles.

So some FSU faculty members have suggested that if that major state university is forced to accept that school at the insistence of well-lobbied legislators, then lawmakers should also add a Bigfoot Institute and a Crop Circle Simulation Laboratory.

That's a bit unfair. And I don't mean unfair to Bigfoot believers or UFO buffs. I mean to me. That's the kind of crack columnists, not colorless academics, are supposed to make. I could suggest that FSU consider a School of Phrenology, or a College of Creation Science, but the faculty has already trumped me.


Read it here.


From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 18 January 2005 07:22 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm of two minds about this. I don't buy the subluxation theory of disease, in the sense of being able to cure any/most diseases and disorders with adjustment of the spine.

At the same time, I know that licensed chiropractors go through several years of rigorous med-school style training including anatomy and physiology and the sort.

And I have no problems believing that some musculoskeletal problems could present as spinal anomalies and that adjusting those anomalies could relieve the underlying problem.

Any takers? I don't use chiropractic treatment myself but know people who do. I'm not prepared to defend it to the death, but I'd argue there's a substantial gap between a school of chiropractic and a school of Bigfoot studies. Chiropractic has clinical results and empirical studies, for one.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 18 January 2005 10:36 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, universities here in Canada already have "Phys-Ed" programs, ostensibly at a baccalaureate level (but, I suspect, the only real way to get athletes for their sports teams).

So, what's one more non-academic program amongst friends?


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 18 January 2005 11:05 AM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
In my experience, chiropractors are fine if they stick to dealing with back pain and spinal adjustments. When they start trying to talk people out of vaccinating their kids, I draw the line.
From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
brebis noire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7136

posted 18 January 2005 11:31 AM      Profile for brebis noire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm extremely leery about chiropractors, having been under the care of two of them in the past. One of them was a real quack. However, the idea of using the comprehensive study of anatomy as a basis for understanding some of what ails us is no worse than using biochemistry (i.e. pharmacoceuticals). Physiotherapy and osteopathy are better choices, I think.
From: Quebec | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 18 January 2005 11:50 AM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Scott Piatkowski:
In my experience, chiropractors are fine if they stick to dealing with back pain and spinal adjustments. When they start trying to talk people out of vaccinating their kids, I draw the line.

In April, it will be two years since we were in a car accident that left me with a whiplash and soft tissue injury. The combination of chiropractc and massage really helped me get through it. I agree with Scott, generally, about there being limits to my use of the practice.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 18 January 2005 12:10 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The difference between physiotherapy and chiropractic is roughly analagous to the difference between obstetrics and midwifery, in my experience.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 18 January 2005 02:03 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ronb:
The difference between physiotherapy and chiropractic is roughly analagous to the difference between obstetrics and midwifery, in my experience.

So, ronb, just what experience have you had with obstetrics and midwifery?

Most of the opposition to chiropractics comes from medical doctors, who don't exactly have a perfect record for saving people. Doctors see chiropractrs as competition.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 18 January 2005 02:47 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I had the dad's experience - second hand I guess. As it were.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 18 January 2005 03:40 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I agree with most of the posters. There seem to be definite applications to spine manipulation (although I hear there may be reasons to be a bit cautious up around the neck area), especially accompanied by massage. But those applications are the sort of common-sense-ish ones you'd expect. What chiropractic needs to do is jettison the legacy of bizarro quack theory they brought as baggage from the nineteenth century. Unfortunately, I think there's a flip side to the "doctors not wanting competition" problem: Chiropractors wanting to be more than just specialized physiotherapists. Some of them are unwilling to abandon the territory and potentially prestige that an overarching "back can solve everything" theory gets them.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
TemporalHominid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6535

posted 18 January 2005 03:54 PM      Profile for TemporalHominid   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Link to Chirobase


Some people who have been through chiropractic schools and training share their insights and concerns, along with questionable diagnostic and treatment Practices.


If a chiropractor insists on you getting an x-ray, get out of the office!

quote:
Most chiropractors claim that x-rays help them locate the "subluxations" that D.D. Palmer envisioned. But they do not agree among themselves about what subluxations are. Some chiropractors believe they are displaced bones that can be seen on x-rays and can be put back in place by spinal adjustments. Others define subluxations vaguely or say they do not necessarily show on x-rays. But what chiropractors contend about x-rays also depends upon who asks and how the question is posed.



btw... a map... maybe speculative

[ 18 January 2005: Message edited by: TemporalHominid ]


From: Under a bridge, in Foot Muck | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 18 January 2005 04:51 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Most chiropractors nowadays practice some form of physiotherapy, and most physiotherapists practice some form of manipulation. The lines are a lot less sharply drawn than they used to be, and most practioners of either art tend to be more open-minded than in the past.

I go to a chiropractor whenever I have musculoskeletal issues, and while she does minor adjustments and uses acupuncture (she is a trained acupuncturist as well) when there is a need, most of the time it is exercise prescription. She is a fantastic diagnostician and I've had a superb experience with her working through several injuries.

On the contrary, my GP misdiagnosed a herniated disc as innocuous muscle pain and prescribed forward flexion exercises that greatly exacerbated the posterior herniation.

In medicine "let the patient beware" is a good motto. No medical artist (surprisingly little medicine is based on sound science -- hence the up-and-coming field of "evidence based medicine") knows everything, and most are only minimally competent. It's the patient's duty, whenever possible, to research the health problem in order to evaluate the advice given by the medical practicioner. By the way, when you do this, doctors and so forth tend to also give you more precise information and better advice.


From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764

posted 18 January 2005 11:44 PM      Profile for Snuckles   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wasn't York University in a similar controversy a few years ago over chiropractic? A chiropractic group wanted to established a School of Chiropractic affiliated with York U., or something along those lines, and there was an uproar about it?

Anyone have more info?


From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
maestro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7842

posted 19 January 2005 04:29 AM      Profile for maestro     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Wasn't York University in a similar controversy a few years ago over chiropractic? A chiropractic group wanted to established a School of Chiropractic affiliated with York U., or something along those lines, and there was an uproar about it?

See Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 26, No.1 - January/February 2002 for a good article on that particular episode.

"A University's Struggle With Chiropractic" by Michael De Robertis.

It took place over a period of six years, and ended on April 26, 2001.

Apparently even though the Board Of Governors of the University accepted affilitation, they couldn't find a host faculty willing to merge.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764

posted 19 January 2005 04:53 AM      Profile for Snuckles   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Found it, thanks.

A University's Struggle With Chiropractic

I also found this site which includes a chronology of the whole affair.

Does this mean that I can tell my friend, who graduated from Osgoode law school, that he got his degree from Bone Cracker U.?


From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 20 January 2005 06:53 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
To go back to the question of the medical value of chiropractic, the fact is that most of the nostrums that pass for medical truths about the low back have no basis in science. The low back and disorders of the low back are poorly understood (especially by the average GP). Slowly work is being done to correct this, and at University of Waterloo's Biomechanics department, we have one of the world's leading authorities on the low back -- Stuart McGill, author of Low Back Disorders, a superb and pioneering book that anyone who deals with patients who have low back problems should read. To my knowledge there is no similar book on the neck.

As for finding clinicians to treat the low back, one of the keys is not necessarily the discipline they are formally credentialled in, but how curious and open-minded they are, and how catholic they are in their study and practice. Those who are dogmatic and blinkered by their disciplinary training are unlikely to be the best therapists.

I find it interesting that no one is questioning the "scientific" or medical credentials of GPs or surgeons when, for example, discectomies have been shown to have a poor success rate and often exacerbate disc problems. GPs and other medical professionals rely on forward flexion as a measure of back health even though studies correlate greater spinal mobility with increased risk of injury (the practice is not driven by science but by the insurance industry's need for a quantifiable metric to deny or approve claims). To editorialize a bit -- I think the rise of the psychosocial theory of back pain ("malingering") is correlated less with scientific evidence than with the lack of a concerted research programme to model and understand the extraordinarily complex mechanics of the spine and low back, and consequent on this, the poor success rate of therapists in treating chronic low back problems, coupled with medical professionals' stake in maintaining their own legitimacy and authority (=blame the patient if you can't explain it). Chiropractic is not the only place one can find questionable theories and models, or the absence of viable ones. Much of medical "science" is full of folk wisdom and falsehoods of this sort.


From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca