From: Happy Dog on
"vernon" <there(a)there> wrote in

> Habitual liars are damned by God.

Which god?

> "Turn the other cheek" has strictly to do with situations where you are
> "legally" required to be punished for whatever reason.

By whose laws?

New at this?

moo


From: Happy Dog on
"The Boom King" <Boom!@boom.boom>
>>> 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.

It was an equally impressive claim.

> 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,

Then you'll have no problem posting links to the research that is so widely
accepted as showing this clear evidence.

> 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.

Ditto for every kind of bullshit scam therapy that is widely hyped by
practitioners and accepted by patients.

> 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.

Nerves in the kidneys? What nerves? There's rather a lot of them.

> 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.

Now, you know that you don't this. You know that there isn't solid theory
to support it. And you know that the clinical trials that should exist to
support it don't.

> The body healed itself, just as it was designed to do.

That's not true. The body evolved to fall apart after child bearing years.
What do you mean by "designed"?

> 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 ;)

You have no idea that this mechanism exists or that you can manipulate it.
You're simply spouting an ancient chiropractic hype line. Don't you guys
have anything new?
>
> 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.

You all can't reliably show that the subluxation exists! You certainly
can't get a group of chiropractors to agree on a diagnosis in a controlled
setting. It should be easy.

> 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.

You are guessing.

>>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?

The idea that the brain "controls" various bodily functions to the point
that almost any ailment can be corrected is an adorable ancient notion.

What diseases can chiropractic never cure?
>
> 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.

Faulty analogy. Weeds exist. Their effects are easily observable. Not so
with subluxations.

moo


From: The Boom King on
Happy Dog wrote:

> "The Boom King" <Boom!@boom.boom>
>
>>>>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.
>
>
> It was an equally impressive claim.
>
>
>>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,
>
>
> Then you'll have no problem posting links to the research that is so widely
> accepted as showing this clear evidence.

Here's the relevant info from the link I originally posted in answer to
this question, for those of you who didn't actually read it.

THE VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION COMPLEX Part 1: An Introduction to the Model
and Kinesiological Component.
Charles A. Lantz , Ph.D., D.C.
Life Chiropractic College
Chiropractic Research Journal 1989; 1 (3): 23-36

http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/FULL/VERTEBRAL_SUBLUXATION_1.html

"...there has been a wealth of knowledge accumulated in the past two
decades that supports the concept of vertebral subluxations as a real
entity (2- 9)"

# 2. Leach, R.A. The Chiropractic Theories. A Synopsis of Scientific
Research 2nd Ed. 1986 Williams & Wilkins Baltimore

# 3. Dvorak , J. & Dvorak, V., Manual Medicine: Diagnostics. 1984,
George Thieme Verlag, Pub. Thieme-Stratton Inc., New York

# 4. Wyke,B. The Neurology of Low Back Pain. In:M.Jayson,Ed. The Lumbar
Spine and Low Back Pain. 1980 Pitman Medical Pub., N.Y.

# 5. Dishman, R.W. Static and Dynamic Components of the Chiropractic
Subluxation Complex: A Literature Review. J Manip Physiol Therap 1988;
11(2):98-107

# 6. Lantz, C.A. Immobilization Degeneration and the Fixation Hypothesis
of Chiropractic Subluxation. Chiro Res J 1988; 1:21-46

# 7. Dishman, R. Review of the Literature Supporting a Scientific Basis
for the Chiropractic Subluxation Complex. J Manipul & Physiol Therap,
1985; 8:163-174.

# 8. Sandoz, R. Newer trends in the pathogenesis of spinal disorders.
Ann Swiss Chiro Assoc 1971; 5:93-180

# 9. Jackson, R. The Cervical Syndrome. 1977 Charles C. Thomas, Pub.,
Springfield, Ill.


But wait, does the Federal Government recognize such a thing?

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/icd9/abticd9.htm

"International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
Modification
(ICD-9-CM)

The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
Modification (ICD-9-CM) is based on the World Health Organization's
Ninth Revision, International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9).
ICD-9-CM is the official system of assigning codes to diagnoses and
procedures associated with hospital utilization in the United States.
The ICD-9 is used to code and classify mortality data from death
certificates.

The ICD-9-CM consists of:

tabular list containing a numerical list of the disease code numbers in
tabular form;

alphabetical index to the disease entries; and

classification system for surgical, diagnostic, and therapeutic
procedures (alphabetic index and tabular list).

The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services are the U.S. governmental agencies
responsible for overseeing all changes and modifications to the ICD-9-CM."

The ICD-10 CM is the most recent edition and just becoming available.
Below is reprinted section M99.

M99 Biomechanical lesions, not elsewhere classified

Note: This category should not be used if the condition can be
classified elsewhere.

The following supplementary subclassification to indicate the site of
lesions is provided for optional use with appropriate subcategories in M99.

0. Head region occipitocervical
1. Cervical region cervicothoracic
2. Thoracic region thoracolumbar
3. Lumbar region lumbosacral
4. Sacral region sacrococcygeal, sacroiliac
5. Pelvic region hip, pubic
6. Lower extremity
7. Upper extremity acromioclavicular, sternoclavicular
8. Rib cage costochondral, costovertebral, sternochondral
9. Abdomen and other

M99.0 Segmental and somatic dysfunction
M99.1 Subluxation complex (vertebral)
M99.2 Subluxation stenosis of neural canal
M99.3 Osseous stenosis of neural canal
M99.4 Connective tissue stenosis of neural canal
M99.5 Intevertebral disc stenosis of neural canal
M99.6 Osseous and subluxation stenosis of intervertebral foramina
M99.7 Connective tissue and disc stenosis of intervertebral foramina
M99.8 Other biomechanical lesions
M99.9 Biomechanical lesion, unspecified

Please notice ****M99.1 Subluxation complex (vertebral)****


Surely the AMA doesn't recognize the existence of a subluxation or the
treatment of it???

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/3882.html

"Category I CPT Codes

Category I CPT codes describe a procedure or service identified with a
five-digit CPT code and descriptor nomenclature. The inclusion of a
descriptor and its associated specific five-digit identifying code
number in this category of CPT codes is generally based upon the
procedure being consistent with contemporary medical practice and being
performed by many physicians in clinical practice in multiple locations.

In developing new and revised regular CPT codes the Advisory Committees
and the Editorial Panel require:

? that the service/procedure has received approval from the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) for the specific use of devices or drugs;

? that the suggested procedure/service is a distinct service performed
by many physicians/practitioners across the United States;

? that the clinical efficacy of the service/procedure is well
established and documented in U.S. peer review literature;

? that the suggested service/procedure is neither a fragmentation of an
existing procedure/service nor currently reportable by one or more
existing codes; and

? that the suggested service/procedure is not requested as a means to
report extraordinary circumstances related to the performance of a
procedure/service already having a specific CPT code."

CMT (Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy)
98940 1-2 regions of the spine
98941 3-4 regions of the spine
98942 5 regions of the spine

Please note
****the clinical efficacy of the service/procedure is well established
and documented in U.S. peer review literature****


>>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.
>
>
> Ditto for every kind of bullshit scam therapy that is widely hyped by
> practitioners and accepted by patients.
>
It might also be added that much of current medical practice was
developed the same way:

http://www.bayeraspirin.com/questions/hundred_aspirin.htm

"Aspirin History - Who invented aspirin?
The effects of aspirin-like substances have been known since the ancient
Romans recorded the use of the willow bark as a fever fighter. The
leaves and bark of the willow tree contain a substance called salicin, a
naturally occurring compound similar to acetylsalicylic acid, the
chemical name for aspirin.

Many people are curious about who invented aspirin. While no one person
invented aspirin, the origin of aspirin as we know it came about through
research. Aspirin discovery was actually the result of the work of
several aspirin inventors. In 1897, a German chemist with Friedrich
Bayer and Company was searching for a treatment for his father's
arthritic pain and began to research acetylsalicylic acid, which worked
well. His discovery resulted in the development of a product introduced
as Aspirin. By 1899, The Bayer Company was providing aspirin to
physicians to give to their patients. "

Notice the effects of the substance were observed and utilized from
ancient times through the invention of the actual drug. Aspirin
continued to be used for seventy years before science was able to "catch
up" and actually document and prove the mechanism whereby it worked.

"In a piece of research for which he was awarded both a Nobel Prize in
Physiology or Medicine in 1982 and a knighthood, John Robert Vane, who
was then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed in
1971 that aspirin suppresses the production of prostaglandins and
thromboxanes. This happens because cyclooxygenase, an enzyme that
participates in the production of prostaglandins and thromboxanes, is
irreversibly inhibited when aspirin acetylates it."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin

Does anyone suggest aspirin was a "bullshit scam" because the mechanism
whereby it worked was not fully scientifically documented? It worked,
patients and doctors knew it worked, but didn't know why. The science
had not yet been invented. That was the case as "skeptics" claimed that
chiropractic was ineffective, placebo, quakery, etc., ad nauseum. Then
researchers were able to demonstrate the efficacy of chiropractors and
the same "skeptics" quickly switched to challenging the subluxation's
neuropathology component, which can be demonstrated to exist, but the
extent to which it may affect distal structures is still awaitng further
developments in science to substantiate.

I know, I know. Prove it. It's why I posted the excellent link in the
first place...

http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/FULL/VERTEBRAL_SUBLUXATION_2.html

THE VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION COMPLEX Part 2: The Neuropathological and
Myopathological Components
Charles A. Lantz, Ph.D., D.C.
Life Chiropractic College - West

Chiropractic Research Journal 1990; 1 (4): 19-38

"The neurological component of the Vertebral Subluxation Complex (VSC)
is, for many, the cornerstone of chiropractic theory.(1) For those who
see beyond the application of chiropractic and other manipulative
procedures as merely a means of relieving head ache and low back pain,
the nervous system is the mediator of vitality and health to the
individual organs and tissues(2). Today, more than ever before, basic
scientific and medical research supports this fundamental concept of
chiropractic.(3-7)."

# 1. Palmer DD. The science, art and philosophy of chiropractic.
Portland: Portland printing House, 1910.

# 2. Janse J. Principles and practice of chiropractic. Hildebrandt RW,
ed. Lombard IL: National College of Chiropractic, 1976.

# 3.Korr IM. The collected papers of IM Korr. Colorado Springs, CO: Am
Acad Osteopathy, 1979.

# 4.Sato A, Swenson R. Sympathetic nervous system response to mechanical
stress of the spinal column in rats. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1984;
7(3): 141-147.

# 5.Vernon HT, Dhami MS, Howley TP, Amnett R. Spinal manipulation and
beta-endorphin: A controlled study of the effect of spinal manipulation
on plasma beta-endorphin levels in normal males. J Manipulative Physiol
Ther 1986; 9(2):115-123.

# 6.Briggs L., Boone W. Effects of a chiropractic adjustment on changes
in pupillary diameter: A model for evaluating somatovisceral response. J
Manip Phys Ther 1988; 11(3):181-189.

# 7.Yates G, Lamping D, Abram N, Wright C. Effects of chiropractic
treatment on blood pressure and anxiety: A randomized, controlled trial.
J Manip Physiol Ther 1988; 11(106):484-488.


>>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.


> Nerves in the kidneys?
Sure.

> What nerves?
Try Gray's Anatomy.

>There's rather a lot of them.
An accurate assertion.


>>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.
>
>
> Now, you know that you don't (do?) this.

Actually, I do. The issue is, you don't. You can't be expected to.
You haven't earned the Degree of Doctor of Chiropractic and you haven't
tried doing it.

>You know that there isn't solid theory
> to support it.

Aha! Let me grab Gray's for you...

"THE NERVOUS SYSTEM is the most complicated and highly organized of the
various systems which make up the human body. It is the mechanism
concerned with the correlation and integration of various bodily
processes and the reactions and adjustments of the organism to its
environment."
Henry Gray (1821?1865). Anatomy of the Human Body. 1918.

Our SOLID THEORY: The subluxation interferes with the proper
coordination of neural function, we remove it, and proper neural
function returns (keys drop again as health returns to affected organ).

Not totally proven at the very end, but thats what makes it a solid
*theory*.

>And you know that the clinical trials that should exist to
> support it don't.

It's getting late, see previous post covering this.

>
>>The body healed itself, just as it was designed to do.
>
>
> That's not true. The body evolved to fall apart after child bearing years.

I'm curious, when you cut your finger how many white blood cells do you
conciously send in to ward off infection. How can you do other things
when you're concentrating on all the complex biochemical processes
needed for tissue repair? How do you fix your own broken arm? 40 year
olds' cuts don't heal? My cells don't repair and renew themselves,
millions per day on an ongoing basis? I should be more careful :)

> What do you mean by "designed"?
>

"evolved" or "designed"... irrelevant to the discussion. Good try though.


>>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 ;)
>
>
> You have no idea that this mechanism exists or that you can manipulate it.
> You're simply spouting an ancient chiropractic hype line. Don't you guys
> have anything new?

Yes, but we still like this one.


>>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.
>
>
> You all can't reliably show that the subluxation exists! You certainly
> can't get a group of chiropractors to agree on a diagnosis in a controlled
> setting. It should be easy.

See above and previous.


>>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.
>
>
> You are guessing.

I'm following established protocol. Observing the results and comparing
them to the best model I've seen established to explain those results.
They fit quite well.


>>>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?
>
>
> The idea that the brain "controls" various bodily functions to the point
> that almost any ailment can be corrected is an adorable ancient notion.

Also happens to be true. See above reference from Gray.

> What diseases can chiropractic never cure?

All of them.


>>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.
>
>
> Faulty analogy. Weeds exist. Their effects are easily observable. Not so
> with subluxations.
>
> moo

And finally, after establishing do exist, their effects are
observable... I really liked this one. Made it up myself.

--
Boom. AKA Weedkiller.
From: David Wright on
In article <1147551514.188145.326460(a)j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Max C. <maxc246(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>That was a fantastic rebuttal, BK. I often feel sorry for people that
>need to see "randomly-controlled double blind longitudinal studies" in
>order to believe anything is real.

Personally, I feel sorry for people who need to set up straw men and
then argue against them.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
From: Max C. on
That was a brilliant reply, Boom. You'll find out, though, that many
here won't be interested in your links if they disagree with their
current positions.

Max.

The Boom King wrote:
> Happy Dog wrote:
>
> > "The Boom King" <Boom!@boom.boom>
> >
> >>>>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.
> >
> >
> > It was an equally impressive claim.
> >
> >
> >>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,
> >
> >
> > Then you'll have no problem posting links to the research that is so widely
> > accepted as showing this clear evidence.
>
> Here's the relevant info from the link I originally posted in answer to
> this question, for those of you who didn't actually read it.
>
> THE VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION COMPLEX Part 1: An Introduction to the Model
> and Kinesiological Component.
> Charles A. Lantz , Ph.D., D.C.
> Life Chiropractic College
> Chiropractic Research Journal 1989; 1 (3): 23-36
>
> http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/FULL/VERTEBRAL_SUBLUXATION_1.html
>
> "...there has been a wealth of knowledge accumulated in the past two
> decades that supports the concept of vertebral subluxations as a real
> entity (2- 9)"
>
> # 2. Leach, R.A. The Chiropractic Theories. A Synopsis of Scientific
> Research 2nd Ed. 1986 Williams & Wilkins Baltimore
>
> # 3. Dvorak , J. & Dvorak, V., Manual Medicine: Diagnostics. 1984,
> George Thieme Verlag, Pub. Thieme-Stratton Inc., New York
>
> # 4. Wyke,B. The Neurology of Low Back Pain. In:M.Jayson,Ed. The Lumbar
> Spine and Low Back Pain. 1980 Pitman Medical Pub., N.Y.
>
> # 5. Dishman, R.W. Static and Dynamic Components of the Chiropractic
> Subluxation Complex: A Literature Review. J Manip Physiol Therap 1988;
> 11(2):98-107
>
> # 6. Lantz, C.A. Immobilization Degeneration and the Fixation Hypothesis
> of Chiropractic Subluxation. Chiro Res J 1988; 1:21-46
>
> # 7. Dishman, R. Review of the Literature Supporting a Scientific Basis
> for the Chiropractic Subluxation Complex. J Manipul & Physiol Therap,
> 1985; 8:163-174.
>
> # 8. Sandoz, R. Newer trends in the pathogenesis of spinal disorders.
> Ann Swiss Chiro Assoc 1971; 5:93-180
>
> # 9. Jackson, R. The Cervical Syndrome. 1977 Charles C. Thomas, Pub.,
> Springfield, Ill.
>
>
> But wait, does the Federal Government recognize such a thing?
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/icd9/abticd9.htm
>
> "International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
> Modification
> (ICD-9-CM)
>
> The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
> Modification (ICD-9-CM) is based on the World Health Organization's
> Ninth Revision, International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9).
> ICD-9-CM is the official system of assigning codes to diagnoses and
> procedures associated with hospital utilization in the United States.
> The ICD-9 is used to code and classify mortality data from death
> certificates.
>
> The ICD-9-CM consists of:
>
> tabular list containing a numerical list of the disease code numbers in
> tabular form;
>
> alphabetical index to the disease entries; and
>
> classification system for surgical, diagnostic, and therapeutic
> procedures (alphabetic index and tabular list).
>
> The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the Centers for
> Medicare and Medicaid Services are the U.S. governmental agencies
> responsible for overseeing all changes and modifications to the ICD-9-CM."
>
> The ICD-10 CM is the most recent edition and just becoming available.
> Below is reprinted section M99.
>
> M99 Biomechanical lesions, not elsewhere classified
>
> Note: This category should not be used if the condition can be
> classified elsewhere.
>
> The following supplementary subclassification to indicate the site of
> lesions is provided for optional use with appropriate subcategories in M99.
>
> 0. Head region occipitocervical
> 1. Cervical region cervicothoracic
> 2. Thoracic region thoracolumbar
> 3. Lumbar region lumbosacral
> 4. Sacral region sacrococcygeal, sacroiliac
> 5. Pelvic region hip, pubic
> 6. Lower extremity
> 7. Upper extremity acromioclavicular, sternoclavicular
> 8. Rib cage costochondral, costovertebral, sternochondral
> 9. Abdomen and other
>
> M99.0 Segmental and somatic dysfunction
> M99.1 Subluxation complex (vertebral)
> M99.2 Subluxation stenosis of neural canal
> M99.3 Osseous stenosis of neural canal
> M99.4 Connective tissue stenosis of neural canal
> M99.5 Intevertebral disc stenosis of neural canal
> M99.6 Osseous and subluxation stenosis of intervertebral foramina
> M99.7 Connective tissue and disc stenosis of intervertebral foramina
> M99.8 Other biomechanical lesions
> M99.9 Biomechanical lesion, unspecified
>
> Please notice ****M99.1 Subluxation complex (vertebral)****
>
>
> Surely the AMA doesn't recognize the existence of a subluxation or the
> treatment of it???
>
> http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/3882.html
>
> "Category I CPT Codes
>
> Category I CPT codes describe a procedure or service identified with a
> five-digit CPT code and descriptor nomenclature. The inclusion of a
> descriptor and its associated specific five-digit identifying code
> number in this category of CPT codes is generally based upon the
> procedure being consistent with contemporary medical practice and being
> performed by many physicians in clinical practice in multiple locations.
>
> In developing new and revised regular CPT codes the Advisory Committees
> and the Editorial Panel require:
>
> · that the service/procedure has received approval from the Food and
> Drug Administration (FDA) for the specific use of devices or drugs;
>
> · that the suggested procedure/service is a distinct service performed
> by many physicians/practitioners across the United States;
>
> · that the clinical efficacy of the service/procedure is well
> established and documented in U.S. peer review literature;
>
> · that the suggested service/procedure is neither a fragmentation of an
> existing procedure/service nor currently reportable by one or more
> existing codes; and
>
> · that the suggested service/procedure is not requested as a means to
> report extraordinary circumstances related to the performance of a
> procedure/service already having a specific CPT code."
>
> CMT (Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy)
> 98940 1-2 regions of the spine
> 98941 3-4 regions of the spine
> 98942 5 regions of the spine
>
> Please note
> ****the clinical efficacy of the service/procedure is well established
> and documented in U.S. peer review literature****
>
>
> >>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.
> >
> >
> > Ditto for every kind of bullshit scam therapy that is widely hyped by
> > practitioners and accepted by patients.
> >
> It might also be added that much of current medical practice was
> developed the same way:
>
> http://www.bayeraspirin.com/questions/hundred_aspirin.htm
>
> "Aspirin History - Who invented aspirin?
> The effects of aspirin-like substances have been known since the ancient
> Romans recorded the use of the willow bark as a fever fighter. The
> leaves and bark of the willow tree contain a substance called salicin, a
> naturally occurring compound similar to acetylsalicylic acid, the
> chemical name for aspirin.
>
> Many people are curious about who invented aspirin. While no one person
> invented aspirin, the origin of aspirin as we know it came about through
> research. Aspirin discovery was actually the result of the work of
> several aspirin inventors. In 1897, a German chemist with Friedrich
> Bayer and Company was searching for a treatment for his father's
> arthritic pain and began to research acetylsalicylic acid, which worked
> well. His discovery resulted in the development of a product introduced
> as Aspirin. By 1899, The Bayer Company was providing aspirin to
> physicians to give to their patients. "
>
> Notice the effects of the substance were observed and utilized from
> ancient times through the invention of the actual drug. Aspirin
> continued to be used for seventy years before science was able to "catch
> up" and actually document and prove the mechanism whereby it worked.
>
> "In a piece of research for which he was awarded both a Nobel Prize in
> Physiology or Medicine in 1982 and a knighthood, John Robert Vane, who
> was then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed in
> 1971 that aspirin suppresses the production of prostaglandins and
> thromboxanes. This happens because cyclooxygenase, an enzyme that
> participates in the production of prostaglandins and thromboxanes, is
> irreversibly inhibited when aspirin acetylates it."
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin
>
> Does anyone suggest aspirin was a "bullshit scam" because the mechanism
> whereby it worked was not fully scientifically documented? It worked,
> patients and doctors knew it worked, but didn't know why. The science
> had not yet been invented. That was the case as "skeptics" claimed that
> chiropractic was ineffective, placebo, quakery, etc., ad nauseum. Then
> researchers were able to demonstrate the efficacy of chiropractors and
> the same "skeptics" quickly switched to challenging the subluxation's
> neuropathology component, which can be demonstrated to exist, but the
> extent to which it may affect distal structures is still awaitng further
> developments in science to substantiate.
>
> I know, I know. Prove it. It's why I posted the excellent link in the
> first place...
>
> http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/FULL/VERTEBRAL_SUBLUXATION_2.html
>
> THE VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION COMPLEX Part 2: The Neuropathological and
> Myopathological Components
> Charles A. Lantz, Ph.D., D.C.
> Life Chiropractic College - West
>
> Chiropractic Research Journal 1990; 1 (4): 19-38
>
> "The neurological component of the Vertebral Subluxation Complex (VSC)
> is, for many, the cornerstone of chiropractic theory.(1) For those who
> see beyond the application of chiropractic and other manipulative
> procedures as merely a means of relieving head ache and low back pain,
> the nervous system is the mediator of vitality and health to the
> individual organs and tissues(2). Today, more than ever before, basic
> scientific and medical research supports this fundamental concept of
> chiropractic.(3-7)."
>
> # 1. Palmer DD. The science, art and philosophy of chiropractic.
> Portland: Portland printing House, 1910.
>
> # 2. Janse J. Principles and practice of chiropractic. Hildebrandt RW,
> ed. Lombard IL: National College of Chiropractic, 1976.
>
> # 3.Korr IM. The collected papers of IM Korr. Colorado Springs, CO: Am
> Acad Osteopathy, 1979.
>
> # 4.Sato A, Swenson R. Sympathetic nervous system response to mechanical
> stress of the spinal column in rats. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1984;
> 7(3): 141-147.
>
> # 5.Vernon HT, Dhami MS, Howley TP, Amnett R. Spinal manipulation and
> beta-endorphin: A controlled study of the effect of spinal manipulation
> on plasma beta-endorphin levels in normal males. J Manipulative Physiol
> Ther 1986; 9(2):115-123.
>
> # 6.Briggs L., Boone W. Effects of a chiropractic adjustment on changes
> in pupillary diameter: A model for evaluating somatovisceral response. J
> Manip Phys Ther 1988; 11(3):181-189.
>
> # 7.Yates G, Lamping D, Abram N, Wright C. Effects of chiropractic
> treatment on blood pressure and anxiety: A randomized, controlled trial.
> J Manip Physiol Ther 1988; 11(106):484-488.
>
>
> >>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.
>
>
> > Nerves in the kidneys?
> Sure.
>
> > What nerves?
> Try Gray's Anatomy.
>
> >There's rather a lot of them.
> An accurate assertion.
>
>
> >>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.
> >
> >
> > Now, you know that you don't (do?) this.
>
> Actually, I do. The issue is, you don't. You can't be expected to.
> You haven't earned the Degree of Doctor of Chiropractic and you haven't
> tried doing it.
>
> >You know that there isn't solid theory
> > to support it.
>
> Aha! Let me grab Gray's for you...
>
> "THE NERVOUS SYSTEM is the most complicated and highly organized of the
> various systems which make up the human body. It is the mechanism
> concerned with the correlation and integration of various bodily
> processes and the reactions and adjustments of the organism to its
> environment."
> Henry Gray (1821-1865). Anatomy of the Human Body. 1918.
>
> Our SOLID THEORY: The subluxation interferes with the proper
> coordination of neural function, we remove it, and proper neural
> function returns (keys drop again as health returns to affected organ).
>
> Not totally proven at the very end, but thats what makes it a solid
> *theory*.
>
> >And you know that the clinical trials that should exist to
> > support it don't.
>
> It's getting late, see previous post covering this.
>
> >
> >>The body healed itself, just as it was designed to do.
> >
> >
> > That's not true. The body evolved to fall apart after child bearing years.
>
> I'm curious, when you cut your finger how many white blood cells do you
> conciously send in to ward off infection. How can you do other things
> when you're concentrating on all the complex biochemical processes
> needed for tissue repair? How do you fix your own broken arm? 40 year
> olds' cuts don't heal? My cells don't repair and renew themselves,
> millions per day on an ongoing basis? I should be more careful :)
>
> > What do you mean by "designed"?
> >
>
> "evolved" or "designed"... irrelevant to the discussion. Good try though.
>
>
> >>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 ;)
> >
> >
> > You have no idea that this mechanism exists or that you can manipulate it.
> > You're simply spouting an ancient chiropractic hype line. Don't you guys
> > have anything new?
>
> Yes, but we still like this one.
>
>
> >>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.
> >
> >
> > You all can't reliably show that the subluxation exists! You certainly
> > can't get a group of chiropractors to agree on a diagnosis in a controlled
> > setting. It should be easy.
>
> See above and previous.
>
>
> >>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.
> >
> >
> > You are guessing.
>
> I'm following established protocol. Observing the results and comparing
> them to the best model I've seen established to explain those results.
> They fit quite well.
>
>
> >>>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?
> >
> >
> > The idea that the brain "controls" various bodily functions to the point
> > that almost any ailment can be corrected is an adorable ancient notion.
>
> Also happens to be true. See above reference from Gray.
>
> > What diseases can chiropractic never cure?
>
> All of them.
>
>
> >>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.
> >
> >
> > Faulty analogy. Weeds exist. Their effects are easily observable. Not so
> > with subluxations.
> >
> > moo
>
> And finally, after establishing do exist, their effects are
> observable... I really liked this one. Made it up myself.
>
> --
> Boom. AKA Weedkiller.