So, I don't have time to do a thorough reply. but I'll do my best. I'm off to hong kong for about a month in 2 daysish.
Few points:
1. Chiros are doctors. Portal of entry. They should not be compared to a PT. Chiros are trained 1st to rule out serious pathology. PTs follow orders. Doctors are trained to diagnose, PTs technically are not. they are told to do. Chiros are taught to watch for these red flags and are given the power of referral. I can't stress this enough.
2. Chiros are not simply musculoskeletal. They are specialists in it, but more so they are functional neurologists. Like both you know, the body is run by nerves. The "pinched nerve" model is a chiros way of explaining it to a layman, its not nearly that simple. Pinched nerve technically is a myth. BUT, the neurologic function of the body is facilitated by the chiropractor.
why is this important?
because we CAN "cure" colds. etc etc.
don't bash me yet. 1st ask, what is a cold? yep, infection of some microorganism to the system right? we are ALWAYS under attack. what does chronic stress do to the system? decreases immunity. Therefore you remove the chronic stress to the nerves, to the body. facilitate the communication between the nervous system to the ORGANS (might I remind you), and you increase immunity. Therefore in a sense you may have "cured" a cold. Yes this model can be used for anything that causes stress, but this is the root of those claims. and until you understand that a cold, that cancer, etc etc, is not just something you have or do not have, you can't understand the system. The body fights "colds" and "cancer" daily. chiropractors help the body to heal itself. So, in all reality, chiropractors do not cure anything, the body does. But chiropractors help a ton.
3. calling chiropractic a pseudoscience.... wow. here we go. chiropractors have MORE hours of most every subject than a MD.
here:
http://www.positivemotionchiropractic.com/downloads/How-Well-Educated-Is-Your-Chiropractor.pdfthe fact is we are real life. we USE scientific information, methods, to interpret our results. YOU try to do better. the reason there are 50 plus techniques is because every technique thought they had a better way of exactly what you are trying to do. re-invent the wheel you might say. we've ALL gone down your train of thought, but in practical application it is impossible to do what you are saying.
concerning straight and mix, you are absolutely wrong. Straights are the guys who believe that the spinal manipulation cures everything. mixers are the ones who believe anything might be needed to fix the body (broadly speaking).
concerning supplements. know your terms. most supplements are food. that's all. if you want to argue that food is unstudied, go for it.
. drugs are studied because they make the drug, and put everything they want into it. which means that usually its unnatural, and stressful to your body. you can't do a study on food because you don't know EVERYTHING in the food. you can simplify it, but you can't know everything. Intrinsic factor is a prime example.
Another example of structure vs function. We chiros have promoted that the appendix is NOT just a residual something or other. because its there. why else would it be there? so SCIENCE states that it is useless....
even now most people believe that to be so. but then this study comes out.... that says that the appendix stores good bacteria to the gut, and may reproliferate the gut after the good bacteria gets wiped out for some reason. huh.
that's called reverse science. and that's REAL life. you look at something, and you go, "i wonder why?" NOT "It doesn't exist until it is proven". difference.
oh, and considering the testing subject morality. chemotherapy. look it up. look at what results THEY get. or look at the high cholesterol diets. look at the results. moral schmoral. you have to compare. what's better for the patient? my opinion? good intent 1st. 2nd in our oath- DO NO HARM.
whoops.
yeah, take an extreme example and say crystal waver to cure cancer. that's dumb. but IF the doc and the patient believes in it, who knows? they might have something. you can't deny it if it works. I know, its unscientific, but there has to be a line drawn where you realize that science is not God and that even placebo is good if it helps the patient. it is not the BEST way. and it should not stop there. but who are you to say that the crystal waving didn't actually work? how are you going to study that? I say the crystal waver did a better job if the patient is cured, and happier, than the chemotherapist who kills the body (kinda like the leeches in the old day) and claims that its scientific.
I guess my point is that I'm a doctor. So I see the world as patient first. you are probably a student, or someone maybe just better fit for research. those are two very different things. neither is bad, but both are narrow minded. I'll be the first to raise my hand on that one.
I guess my ultimate point is that the idea that scientific studies come before use is a flawed idea. the use of the scientific method was to test and then improve already used practices (when it comes to health care). In this is its core problem. See, the scientific method is awesome. but it is limited in that it takes specifically: time, and resources. and, it needs something to test. variables persay to play with.
for instance, some studies of preventative medicine take tens of years if not several generations. and even then some things may not be conclusive. chiropractic just hit the 100 plus years mark. it would be arrogant to think that you would be the first to declare that chiropractic needs more evidence. i know several people that devote their lives to studying it. but the scientific method needs to be able to have something to test, and the best that all of us doctors can do is find things to test.
it goes like this. "hey, i helped so and so patient with this! try it and tell me what you find!" this from MDs, PTs, osteopaths, etc etc. and when it gains enough momentum as our resources are limited (gotta use your tme wisely), then the scientific method comes in and tests that theory. that's what health care is all about, and with time, we get better and better.
and then there are those things that are impossible to test. because it is impossible to test something in a natural environment WHILE isolating the variable. sucks huh? so the chinese in a way got it right. thousands and thousands of years of trial and error. because when it comes to practicality, every day care, there is no better way. or else we'd be paralyzed by inaction. Your criticism is against health care, from a researchers point of view. try to say the same thing when a patient walks in and claims inability to move at at due to pain, and all they care about is being out of pain. my 2 cents. chiropractic just happens to be much more broad (as in the WHOLE body) than just the eyes, or the ears, or the internal organs. it is so much more complicated than any of those.
most of your last e-mail presents issues that could be applied to any profession. I would first challenge all health care first as a whole.
