From: The Boom King on

"Happy Dog" <happydog(a)sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:d1cag.7723$aa4.141092(a)news20.bellglobal.com...
> "The Boom King" <Boom!@spamsux.com> wrote in message
>
>> Yes, quite right. Good analogy. To someone who doesn't know what
>> they're talking about and is ignorant of the anatomy and physiology,
>> chiropractic looks like magic. But, if you ask the magician to show you
>> how its done and explain it, you're usually surprised at how simple and
>> logical it is. I have occasionally heard the word "miracle" come out of
>> my patients mouths and been quick to assure them that their own body is
>> doing the real work, not me.
>
> Whatever.

Impressive reply.


>When did chiropractors start being able to explain the mechanism by which
>spinal manipulation resolves non-musculo-skeletal pathology? moo

You know after giving the short direct response, I got to thinking about
what the real issues are behind these questions. I notice that each time I
fully answer one of these questions, there's no "Thanks for clearing that
up, I'm better off understanding that now", just on to the next question
culled from the list of "Questions to Ask Doctors of Chiropractic That They
Probably Can't Answer". And you know, this one is my favorite, not only
because it gets to the heart and soul of the practice, but it demonstrates
clearly when people don't understand what we really do. Wouldn't it be
better to fully understand something before you presume to criticize it?

Anyway, here goes. BTW, you can copy this and send it to all your friends
who think chiropractors believe they can cure disease. The Vertebral
Subluxation Complex has been clearly demonstrated to exist, but the degree
of neurological effect it has on the body is the subject of much debate.
Spinal manipulation has been recommended by the surgeon general for the
treatment of acute back pain
(http://www.drkoop.com/encyclopedia/93/166.html), but what in the world are
chiropractors doing adjusting people who have stomach complaints? A valid
question whose answer has a subtle distinction that causes most of the
controversy.

Chiropractic was "discovered" and developed by practitioners adjusting the
spine and observing the results. Through practice and observation,
chiropractors knew what they were doing was working (so did the patients
obviously), but began the long struggle to understand how things were really
working. You may have heard chiropractic referred to as a deductive science
(vs. inductive) because of the way it has developed its philosophy.
Inductive logic is used also in the development of theory and practice.
But, the main point here, that applies to your question is that subluxations
were observed to cause interference with the normal functioning of nerves.
This has been easily demonstrated over and over as chiropractic has had
outstanding results treating sciatica. In cases where there is lumbar
radiculitis due to a subluxation of the L5/S1 Functional Spinal Unit, in the
absence of disc bulge, or with a bulge that does not compress the nerve, an
adjustment has been shown to reduce and eliminate the nerve irritation.
People come in with burning pain down the back of the leg that would
medically be attributed to disc herniation, the MRI shows none, and the
chiropractor resolves the problem. Notice the subluxation causes nerve
compression/irritation that can be felt as a symptom by the patient and
clearly felt when it is resolved.

Now, move the subluxation to the T5/T6 level and lets assume (without
getting into a complex neurological discussion) that the nerves that exit
the spine at this level innervate the stomach. Nerve compromise here will
alter the complex system of afferent and efferent feedback continously going
on with the stomach in order for the brain to maintain communication and
coordinate proper function. Lets just say it compromises function 10%, no
big deal? How about 40%? Maybe it takes 50% for the person to feel some
sort of symptoms. Nobody really knows because we can't measure the current
nerve supply to an organ vs. potential supply. But what is clear is that a
subluxation can and DOES impede proper nerve function, and removal of the
subluxation restores it. Are you walking around with your pancreas working
at 80% of its potential?

So here's where everyone gets confused. A subluxation is impeding nerve
supply to the stomach, the Doctor adjusts it, the patients chronic heartburn
goes away. The Doctor cured the stomach, right?

No.

The Doctor removed the impediment to the normal function of the stomach and
the brain was then able to coordinate proper function and return the stomach
to homeostasis with its environment. The body healed itself, just as it was
designed to do. Did the stomach have too much sympathetic input? Not
enough parasympathetic? We don't know. But the brain does. So when we
restore communication between the CNS and the affected organ, healing
occurs. It's as simple as dropping your keys ;)

How does this become such a point of contention? The biggest issue I see is
that when people want pull small chunks of this out of context and rip it
apart, they're not keeping in mind the big picture. Does this say all
heartburn can be fixed by popping T5? No. But if there is a subluxation
impeding nerve flow to the digestive tract, the body has its best chance of
healing itself if that subluxation is removed. I've seen many chronic
conditions resolve after the spine has been cleared of subluxations (most
recently a 5 year case of I.C. has fully resolved after correcting a chronic
L5 subluxation). I didn't know the complex details of the nerve
interference to the bladder, but once I began to clear the subluxation the
brain took over and got everything back on track. Did the "spinal
manipulation resolves non-musculo-skeletal pathology"? NO. The body did.


>So it isn't claimed that anything but sore backs and necks are affected?
>No claims that, for instance, the immune system is "strengthened" by spinal
>manipulation?

Just apply the above model to anything the brain controls using nerves
(which is basically everything) and removal of interference to that control
has got to help. Removal of irritation to the nervous system just *sounds*
like a good idea, doesn't it?

Think of it this way: You're growing a plant, but a big weed grows up next
to it and blocks its sunlight. Its not growing so well. So you come along
and chop down the weed. The plant does great. Did you make the plant grow?
Did you heal it? Did you coordinate all of the complex processes of
photosynthesis, etc.? NO. You chopped down a weed.

--
boom.


From: Hyderman DC on

"The Boom King" <Boom!@boom.boom> wrote in message
news:ylNag.52371$MM6.39310(a)bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Happy Dog" <happydog(a)sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:d1cag.7723$aa4.141092(a)news20.bellglobal.com...
>> "The Boom King" <Boom!@spamsux.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> Yes, quite right. Good analogy. To someone who doesn't know what
>>> they're talking about and is ignorant of the anatomy and physiology,
>>> chiropractic looks like magic. But, if you ask the magician to show you
>>> how its done and explain it, you're usually surprised at how simple and
>>> logical it is. I have occasionally heard the word "miracle" come out of
>>> my patients mouths and been quick to assure them that their own body is
>>> doing the real work, not me.
>>
>> Whatever.
>
> Impressive reply.
>
>
>>When did chiropractors start being able to explain the mechanism by which
>>spinal manipulation resolves non-musculo-skeletal pathology? moo
>
> You know after giving the short direct response, I got to thinking about
> what the real issues are behind these questions. I notice that each time
> I fully answer one of these questions, there's no "Thanks for clearing
> that up, I'm better off understanding that now", just on to the next
> question culled from the list of "Questions to Ask Doctors of Chiropractic
> That They Probably Can't Answer". And you know, this one is my favorite,
> not only because it gets to the heart and soul of the practice, but it
> demonstrates clearly when people don't understand what we really do.
> Wouldn't it be better to fully understand something before you presume to
> criticize it?
>
> Anyway, here goes. BTW, you can copy this and send it to all your
> friends who think chiropractors believe they can cure disease. The
> Vertebral Subluxation Complex has been clearly demonstrated to exist, but
> the degree of neurological effect it has on the body is the subject of
> much debate. Spinal manipulation has been recommended by the surgeon
> general for the treatment of acute back pain
> (http://www.drkoop.com/encyclopedia/93/166.html), but what in the world
> are chiropractors doing adjusting people who have stomach complaints? A
> valid question whose answer has a subtle distinction that causes most of
> the controversy.
>
> Chiropractic was "discovered" and developed by practitioners adjusting the
> spine and observing the results. Through practice and observation,
> chiropractors knew what they were doing was working (so did the patients
> obviously), but began the long struggle to understand how things were
> really working. You may have heard chiropractic referred to as a
> deductive science (vs. inductive) because of the way it has developed its
> philosophy. Inductive logic is used also in the development of theory and
> practice. But, the main point here, that applies to your question is that
> subluxations were observed to cause interference with the normal
> functioning of nerves. This has been easily demonstrated over and over as
> chiropractic has had outstanding results treating sciatica. In cases
> where there is lumbar radiculitis due to a subluxation of the L5/S1
> Functional Spinal Unit, in the absence of disc bulge, or with a bulge that
> does not compress the nerve, an adjustment has been shown to reduce and
> eliminate the nerve irritation. People come in with burning pain down the
> back of the leg that would medically be attributed to disc herniation, the
> MRI shows none, and the chiropractor resolves the problem. Notice the
> subluxation causes nerve compression/irritation that can be felt as a
> symptom by the patient and clearly felt when it is resolved.
>
> Now, move the subluxation to the T5/T6 level and lets assume (without
> getting into a complex neurological discussion) that the nerves that exit
> the spine at this level innervate the stomach. Nerve compromise here will
> alter the complex system of afferent and efferent feedback continously
> going on with the stomach in order for the brain to maintain communication
> and coordinate proper function. Lets just say it compromises function
> 10%, no big deal? How about 40%? Maybe it takes 50% for the person to
> feel some sort of symptoms. Nobody really knows because we can't measure
> the current nerve supply to an organ vs. potential supply. But what is
> clear is that a subluxation can and DOES impede proper nerve function, and
> removal of the subluxation restores it. Are you walking around with your
> pancreas working at 80% of its potential?
>
> So here's where everyone gets confused. A subluxation is impeding nerve
> supply to the stomach, the Doctor adjusts it, the patients chronic
> heartburn goes away. The Doctor cured the stomach, right?
>
> No.
>
> The Doctor removed the impediment to the normal function of the stomach
> and the brain was then able to coordinate proper function and return the
> stomach to homeostasis with its environment. The body healed itself, just
> as it was designed to do. Did the stomach have too much sympathetic
> input? Not enough parasympathetic? We don't know. But the brain does.
> So when we restore communication between the CNS and the affected organ,
> healing occurs. It's as simple as dropping your keys ;)
>
> How does this become such a point of contention? The biggest issue I see
> is that when people want pull small chunks of this out of context and rip
> it apart, they're not keeping in mind the big picture. Does this say all
> heartburn can be fixed by popping T5? No. But if there is a subluxation
> impeding nerve flow to the digestive tract, the body has its best chance
> of healing itself if that subluxation is removed. I've seen many chronic
> conditions resolve after the spine has been cleared of subluxations (most
> recently a 5 year case of I.C. has fully resolved after correcting a
> chronic L5 subluxation). I didn't know the complex details of the nerve
> interference to the bladder, but once I began to clear the subluxation the
> brain took over and got everything back on track. Did the "spinal
> manipulation resolves non-musculo-skeletal pathology"? NO. The body
> did.
>
>
>>So it isn't claimed that anything but sore backs and necks are affected?
>>No claims that, for instance, the immune system is "strengthened" by
>>spinal manipulation?
>
> Just apply the above model to anything the brain controls using nerves
> (which is basically everything) and removal of interference to that
> control has got to help. Removal of irritation to the nervous system just
> *sounds* like a good idea, doesn't it?
>
> Think of it this way: You're growing a plant, but a big weed grows up
> next to it and blocks its sunlight. Its not growing so well. So you come
> along and chop down the weed. The plant does great. Did you make the
> plant grow? Did you heal it? Did you coordinate all of the complex
> processes of photosynthesis, etc.? NO. You chopped down a weed.
>
> --
> boom.


Awesome Jack, just awsome.....

Hyderman DC


From: Jan Drew on

"Mark Thorson" <nospam(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
news:446B345C.61EEC54F(a)sonic.net...
> vernon wrote:
>>
>> I wasn't inferring such. I was trying to emulate Jan.
>
> And you fooled me for a couple seconds.

Shows how little you know about vernon.

newsgroup alt.bible
Wed, May 3 2006 11:42 am

vernon wrote:

You are literally a "God Damned Liar"


From: Jan Drew on
All of these *opinions* here... do not matter.

FACT:

People are seeing chiropractors because it HELPS them!

Period!

"Hyderman DC" <drsbh(a)REMOVE.telus.net> wrote in message
news:BvNag.9698$zn1.1075(a)clgrps13...
>
> "The Boom King" <Boom!@boom.boom> wrote in message
> news:ylNag.52371$MM6.39310(a)bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "Happy Dog" <happydog(a)sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>> news:d1cag.7723$aa4.141092(a)news20.bellglobal.com...
>>> "The Boom King" <Boom!@spamsux.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> Yes, quite right. Good analogy. To someone who doesn't know what
>>>> they're talking about and is ignorant of the anatomy and physiology,
>>>> chiropractic looks like magic. But, if you ask the magician to show
>>>> you how its done and explain it, you're usually surprised at how simple
>>>> and logical it is. I have occasionally heard the word "miracle" come
>>>> out of my patients mouths and been quick to assure them that their own
>>>> body is doing the real work, not me.
>>>
>>> Whatever.
>>
>> Impressive reply.
>>
>>
>>>When did chiropractors start being able to explain the mechanism by which
>>>spinal manipulation resolves non-musculo-skeletal pathology? moo
>>
>> You know after giving the short direct response, I got to thinking about
>> what the real issues are behind these questions. I notice that each time
>> I fully answer one of these questions, there's no "Thanks for clearing
>> that up, I'm better off understanding that now", just on to the next
>> question culled from the list of "Questions to Ask Doctors of
>> Chiropractic That They Probably Can't Answer". And you know, this one is
>> my favorite, not only because it gets to the heart and soul of the
>> practice, but it demonstrates clearly when people don't understand what
>> we really do. Wouldn't it be better to fully understand something before
>> you presume to criticize it?
>>
>> Anyway, here goes. BTW, you can copy this and send it to all your
>> friends who think chiropractors believe they can cure disease. The
>> Vertebral Subluxation Complex has been clearly demonstrated to exist, but
>> the degree of neurological effect it has on the body is the subject of
>> much debate. Spinal manipulation has been recommended by the surgeon
>> general for the treatment of acute back pain
>> (http://www.drkoop.com/encyclopedia/93/166.html), but what in the world
>> are chiropractors doing adjusting people who have stomach complaints? A
>> valid question whose answer has a subtle distinction that causes most of
>> the controversy.
>>
>> Chiropractic was "discovered" and developed by practitioners adjusting
>> the spine and observing the results. Through practice and observation,
>> chiropractors knew what they were doing was working (so did the patients
>> obviously), but began the long struggle to understand how things were
>> really working. You may have heard chiropractic referred to as a
>> deductive science (vs. inductive) because of the way it has developed its
>> philosophy. Inductive logic is used also in the development of theory and
>> practice. But, the main point here, that applies to your question is that
>> subluxations were observed to cause interference with the normal
>> functioning of nerves. This has been easily demonstrated over and over as
>> chiropractic has had outstanding results treating sciatica. In cases
>> where there is lumbar radiculitis due to a subluxation of the L5/S1
>> Functional Spinal Unit, in the absence of disc bulge, or with a bulge
>> that does not compress the nerve, an adjustment has been shown to reduce
>> and eliminate the nerve irritation. People come in with burning pain down
>> the back of the leg that would medically be attributed to disc
>> herniation, the MRI shows none, and the chiropractor resolves the
>> problem. Notice the subluxation causes nerve compression/irritation that
>> can be felt as a symptom by the patient and clearly felt when it is
>> resolved.
>>
>> Now, move the subluxation to the T5/T6 level and lets assume (without
>> getting into a complex neurological discussion) that the nerves that exit
>> the spine at this level innervate the stomach. Nerve compromise here
>> will alter the complex system of afferent and efferent feedback
>> continously going on with the stomach in order for the brain to maintain
>> communication and coordinate proper function. Lets just say it
>> compromises function 10%, no big deal? How about 40%? Maybe it takes
>> 50% for the person to feel some sort of symptoms. Nobody really knows
>> because we can't measure the current nerve supply to an organ vs.
>> potential supply. But what is clear is that a subluxation can and DOES
>> impede proper nerve function, and removal of the subluxation restores it.
>> Are you walking around with your pancreas working at 80% of its
>> potential?
>>
>> So here's where everyone gets confused. A subluxation is impeding nerve
>> supply to the stomach, the Doctor adjusts it, the patients chronic
>> heartburn goes away. The Doctor cured the stomach, right?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> The Doctor removed the impediment to the normal function of the stomach
>> and the brain was then able to coordinate proper function and return the
>> stomach to homeostasis with its environment. The body healed itself,
>> just as it was designed to do. Did the stomach have too much sympathetic
>> input? Not enough parasympathetic? We don't know. But the brain does.
>> So when we restore communication between the CNS and the affected organ,
>> healing occurs. It's as simple as dropping your keys ;)
>>
>> How does this become such a point of contention? The biggest issue I see
>> is that when people want pull small chunks of this out of context and rip
>> it apart, they're not keeping in mind the big picture. Does this say all
>> heartburn can be fixed by popping T5? No. But if there is a subluxation
>> impeding nerve flow to the digestive tract, the body has its best chance
>> of healing itself if that subluxation is removed. I've seen many chronic
>> conditions resolve after the spine has been cleared of subluxations (most
>> recently a 5 year case of I.C. has fully resolved after correcting a
>> chronic L5 subluxation). I didn't know the complex details of the nerve
>> interference to the bladder, but once I began to clear the subluxation
>> the brain took over and got everything back on track. Did the "spinal
>> manipulation resolves non-musculo-skeletal pathology"? NO. The body
>> did.
>>
>>
>>>So it isn't claimed that anything but sore backs and necks are affected?
>>>No claims that, for instance, the immune system is "strengthened" by
>>>spinal manipulation?
>>
>> Just apply the above model to anything the brain controls using nerves
>> (which is basically everything) and removal of interference to that
>> control has got to help. Removal of irritation to the nervous system
>> just *sounds* like a good idea, doesn't it?
>>
>> Think of it this way: You're growing a plant, but a big weed grows up
>> next to it and blocks its sunlight. Its not growing so well. So you
>> come along and chop down the weed. The plant does great. Did you make
>> the plant grow? Did you heal it? Did you coordinate all of the complex
>> processes of photosynthesis, etc.? NO. You chopped down a weed.
>>
>> --
>> boom.
>
>
> Awesome Jack, just awsome.....
>
> Hyderman DC
>


From: Hyderman DC on

Jan Drew <jdrew1374(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:uIOag.73040$_S7.58668(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Mark Thorson" <nospam(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:446B345C.61EEC54F(a)sonic.net...
> > vernon wrote:
> >>
> >> I wasn't inferring such. I was trying to emulate Jan.
> >
> > And you fooled me for a couple seconds.
>
> Shows how little you know about vernon.
>
> newsgroup alt.bible
> Wed, May 3 2006 11:42 am
>
> vernon wrote:
>
> You are literally a "God Damned Liar"

"Turn the other cheek"