All your questions about CHIROPRACTIC answered (2 Viewers)

[Kwayera]

hi extensorendicis yeah i am really keen to do some post grad stuff. hopefully sports after a couple of years at a hospital, your a first year? how is the course in syd? kwayera you still arent grasping the point that chiro is and will continue to be allied health, meaning it is involved in medicare as much as a physio or pod ect making it of different rank to acupuncture and homeopathy. i personally believe physio is a much more stable and trustworthy proffesion (as a whole), however i do respect the wave of modern australian chiropractors and there posetive transition is clear to the well informed.

Point?

 

[catandmouse]

yes, you are saying that chiropractic is at the same 'rank' as homeopathy and acupuncture. Is this your opinion or what you believe to be the opinion of the australian health system? does that put us physio's as the same rank as homeopathy aswell? you will not find many legitimate sources backing up your opinion, but i think you just enjoy stirring the pot lol

 

[xeuyrawp]

but i think you just enjoy stirring the pot lol

I think she likes professions to be able to back-up their claims when it comes to messing with people's health?

 

[Kwayera]

yes, you are saying that chiropractic is at the same 'rank' as homeopathy and acupuncture. Is this your opinion or what you believe to be the opinion of the australian health system? does that put us physio's as the same rank as homeopathy aswell? you will not find many legitimate sources backing up your opinion, but i think you just enjoy stirring the pot lol

Physiotherapy is based on and backed by real science- and evidence-based medicine. That is why it is mainstream medicine, not "alternative" or "complementary".

Chiropractic, homeopathy and acupuncture, in contrast, are not.

 

[extensorindicis]

Catandmouse:

this =

Physiotherapy is based on and backed by real science- and evidence-based medicine. That is why it is mainstream medicine, not "alternative" or "complementary".

Chiropractic, homeopathy and acupuncture, in contrast, are not.

Uni is alright finding it hard but yeah after a few years @ hosp i'd do the sports or manip. syd is okay i guess, hows csu? i heard its like really small class size? are you originally from sydney area? have you started pracs?

 

[extensorindicis]

You ignorance and misconceptions really do take a new and profound turn everytime you reply!

You are about to embark on becoming a manipulative physiotherapist and you somehow got this misconception that it is only chiropractic that is dangerous?

You are WRONG again! And this is where I would have thought you'd atleast do some research considering this is your future.
As with all treatment methods. All practice of manipulation carries an inherent risks! What you think physios are immune? you think physio never caused a stroke or death? Your more ignorant than I thought!


All memebers of all health professions have at one time or another come accross adverse side effects.

Your arguments seem to be pretty weak now mate. You haven't even responded to the numerous counter arguments to your laughable views - particularly the chiro's performing manip in surgery.

I said i 'think whateva chiro's do' because of YOU the dichotomy between chiro and physio has been blurred. You've now presented you're view that there isn't a difference, "virtually all techniques taught to manipulative physio, a chiropractor can perform. " what is the minimal difference.

Obviously each treatment performed by physios have some form of risk - very low and insignificant. The difference between chiro cervical spine manip and physio cervical spine manip is that chiro's use significantly more force in terms of the torque applied to the neck! thus ripping arteries near the neck of attachments twisting artery's etc causing strokes.

physios do it in a more gentle manner.

Well done how long did it take you to find the physio-stroke article? did you manage to overlook the dozens of chiro -stroke DEATHS?

out of hundreds out there here are a few extracts from What's the harm in going to a chiropractor?:

Kristi A. Bedenbaugh
Age: 24
died:1993

Kristi sought relief from sinus headaches from her chiropractor. A neck manipulation caused a brain stem stroke and she died three days later. The chiropractor later paid a $1000 fine.

Frances S. Denoon
Age: 28
Bristol, England
Stroke
March 1998

She visited a chiropractor to relieve some neck pain. On her second visit, "my world went into a dizzy spin" with nausea and loss of speech. The neck manipulation had caused a brain stem stroke. She now runs a web site for victims.

Linda Epping
Age: 8
Los Angeles, California
Died December 29, 1961

Linda was scheduled for surgery to remove a tumor, when her parents met a chiropractor who said he could cure her. He had her swallowing up to 124 pills a day for months. He was convicted of second-degree murder in 1967.


John Hoffman
Age: 39
Gaithersburg, Maryland
Died August 5, 2004

His wife found him collapsed in their stairwell. He had had a chiropractic adjustment 3 hours earlier. His stroke was ruled to have been caused by the adjustment. He died 6 days later.
]

So do you want to explain why there is a smorgasbord of chiro stroke victims and death?

Please explain why chiro is not a pseudoscience and present some journal articles proving the tangible medical viability of chiro treatment. You have yet to do that. Your arguments lack any credibility. Just because you've completed 5 years of uni in chiro, does not discount the fact that its quack quack quack.

 

[Kwayera]

Remember folks: anectodes are not the singular form of data.

 

[Planck]

quackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquack
quackquackquackquackquackquackquack

quackquackquackquackquackquackquackquack


quackquackquackquackquackquack

quackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquackquack
quaaaackkkkk

 

[:kaz.n:]

There has been alot posted on this thread since I read it last so apologies for not being able to specifically quote what people have said in specific instances, but I thought I would just clear up a few more things.

I am repulsed by the term subluxation, it is chiropractic dogmatism personified. For chiropractors to create and define a lesion and proclaim that they are the only profession fit to rid you of these disease causing entities is just rubbish. The sooner the chiropractic profession gets rid of this term the better. I would never, ever tell any of my patients I can cure any disease that is not biomechanical in nature because I simply cannot - there is a reason why surgery and drugs were invented.

What I will do however is really concentrate on finding abberations in segmental joint movement restrictions in the spine (as opposed to just looking at global ROM), and correct those specific joint restrictions. The spinal nerves which innervate or 'power' all of our muscles and internal organs leave the spine at specific segment levels - as far as I know this is a proven fact.

Where it becomes 'quackery' is when a chiropractor feels your spine and says a specific segment has an abnormal pattern/range/quality of movement and links it to a specific systemic disease. Take it from a final year chiropractic student, that is pure bullshit.

However, if those spinal nerves are influenced by the sudden fast thrust of the manipulation, it may have an affect on the nerve and hence what the nerve innervates. As far as I know proprioception (joint position sense) inhibits nociception (pain), and manipulation (be it chiropractic, osteopathic, physiotherapy administered etc.) is strongly hypothesised to increase proprioception.

So spinal manipulations might have some affect on things other than just the joint it is being adminstered on. But to carry that so far forward and claim to cure disease is just utter rubbish.

In my chiropractic program we are taught a large range of soft tissue manipulation techniques (Deep tissue massage, cross friction, PNF [including PIR], ultrasound, infarential, TENS) and we also study alot of Lewit and Janda's research from the Prague school (upper cross syndromes, lower cross syndromes, functional assessments etc). Furthermore, we also do learn a range of rehabilitative exercises (Cat-Camel, Bird-dog, Quadruped, Back bridge etc).

Something I feel very strongly about is the more healthcare modalities work together, forming multimodal networks to serve the public, the healthier the population will be.

I cannot speak for every chiropractic student out there, but my goal is to finish off uni and get into serving the public, aiming to help as many individuals as I can whilst bettering my skills in the process. Where I feel that I have not got the required expertise to treat someone, I am more than happy to refer to a good medical doctor, physiotherapist, dentist etc.

I hope that at the end of the day the people who have chosen to study and become health professionals are in it to make their patients more healthy (as opposed to making their bank balances more healthy) - this is part of the reason I created this thread. Even though it has become a rather argumentative in nature, I beleive it is still useful in letting prospective students know what they are in for and this will do nothing but aid them in choosing their course of study.

K.

 

[BoREd^7]

1. Your arguments seem to be pretty weak now mate.
2.You haven't even responded to the numerous counter arguments to your laughable views - particularly the chiro's performing manip in surgery.

3. I said i 'think whateva chiro's do' because of YOU the dichotomy between chiro and physio has been blurred. You've now presented you're view that there isn't a difference, "virtually all techniques taught to manipulative physio, a chiropractor can perform. " what is the minimal difference.

4. Obviously each treatment performed by physios have some form of risk - very low and insignificant. The difference between chiro cervical spine manip and physio cervical spine manip is that chiro's use significantly more force in terms of the torque applied to the neck! thus ripping arteries near the neck of attachments twisting artery's etc causing strokes.

5. physios do it in a more gentle manner.

6. Well done how long did it take you to find the physio-stroke article? did you manage to overlook the dozens of chiro -stroke DEATHS?

1. My arguement is weak? you got no arguement!!! just random comments. I answer one of your questions and you throw in another one of your stupid comments.. whats the point its like a revolving door. You got no f***en clue what a chiro does, and the more you talk its sounding like you got no clue what a physio does either.

What year of your degree are you in??? you still have not answered me that

2. Don't have time anymore for your useless shit, some of us have to do our "pseudoscience" because somehow patients keep booking out all my days for 2 weeks straight, must be all that "quackery", because they must all be getting no results, and they must all be that stupid that they just keep on giving me money for no reason, huh?

3. So now its "blurred" line between physio/chiro, few posts back, it was completely different story and no chiro did soft tissue, exercises, rehab, etc... right?face it you got no clue. Anyone should be able to see that now.

As for minimal diff between chiro/physio manipulation techniques... look it up yourself, i don't have time to fucken teach you everything from scratch (thats why it takes 5 years to learn not something that fits into a forum post), if you know nothing, learn dickhead! Knowledge you demonstrated to date is below minimal!

4. Like i said, and unless your stupid... all forms of treament has inherent risk as minimal as it is, you just seem to think that the physio title lowers that risk... idiot

5. all physio/chiro/osteo adjustment use minimal "force" they all rely on "speed, tissue pull, line of drive and contact", your just an idiot who knows nothing about manipulation of ANY kind be it chiro or physio kind (and you keep proving that very nicely)

6. Unless your illiterate, which i am starting to suspect aswell; i said "all form of manipulation, including all practitioners be it physio/chiro/osteo or a medical doctor have all been reported to have caused stroke, VBI, disc herniations, and adverse reactions" and "since chiro was the first (you know when physiotherapy was not even around) and still is the biggest modality in the world to utilise manipulation, who do you think are usually more associated with it?" Why do you think it was the chiro profession which actually researched into the area, developed, and fine tuned the screening tests to minimise the risk (you know the very test even you as a physio will have to learn to perform if you want to be manipulative therapist!)

So there would be no point digging up the thousands of references world wide, no one has argued it doesn't happen you illiterate idiot


In the end all i can see is that your intelligence is on the level of the marine scientist... so maybe instead of treating patients you two can stick to playing with dolphines
(just don't lay your hands on any whales, they are indangered as is, wouldn't want your capable ass of killing off the remaining few left)

 

[BoREd^7]

Sorry i have to do it in point form, seems to be the fastest as i got to leave in few minutes.

1. I am repulsed by the term subluxation, it is chiropractic dogmatism personified. For chiropractors to create and define a lesion and proclaim that they are the only profession fit to rid you of these disease causing entities is just rubbish. The sooner the chiropractic profession gets rid of this term the better. I would never, ever tell any of my patients I can cure any disease that is not biomechanical in nature because I simply cannot - there is a reason why surgery and drugs were invented.

2. Where it becomes 'quackery' is when a chiropractor feels your spine and says a specific segment has an abnormal pattern/range/quality of movement and links it to a specific systemic disease. Take it from a final year chiropractic student, that is pure bullshit.

3. So spinal manipulations might have some affect on things other than just the joint it is being adminstered on. But to carry that so far forward and claim to cure disease is just utter rubbish.

4. In my chiropractic program we are taught a large range of soft tissue manipulation techniques (Deep tissue massage, cross friction, PNF [including PIR], ultrasound, infarential, TENS) and we also study alot of Lewit and Janda's research from the Prague school (upper cross syndromes, lower cross syndromes, functional assessments etc). Furthermore, we also do learn a range of rehabilitative exercises (Cat-Camel, Bird-dog, Quadruped, Back bridge etc).

5. I cannot speak for every chiropractic student out there, but my goal is to finish off uni and get into serving the public, aiming to help as many individuals as I can whilst bettering my skills in the process. Where I feel that I have not got the required expertise to treat someone, I am more than happy to refer to a good medical doctor, physiotherapist, dentist etc.

6. I hope that at the end of the day the people who have chosen to study and become health professionals are in it to make their patients more healthy (as opposed to making their bank balances more healthy) - this is part of the reason I created this thread.

K.

1. Any good chiro agrees with that statement, most don;t use subluxation in diagnosis, especially not in any medicolegal report
use Biomechanical joint dysf. (BMJD) with assoc. MFPS to be correct, its correct medico terminology

2. thats called NET, and anyone that practices it and calls themselves a chiro should be shot (my opinion and that of most chiros).

3. Treat the initial complaint (neck pain, etc) and if patient tells you something like "ohh ever since started treatment i seem to improve in this and that aswell", just say, hey thats great, but don't claim to cure it. Human body is one hell of weird thing, one treatment does nothing for one person, but great improvement on another.

4. Well according to physio over there, no chiro is taught anything... we must all be dreaming, those 5 yrs of uni were just a figment of imagination

5. Sounds like your on the right track so far and not as narrow minded as idiot... errr mr physio over there. If i don't get to talk to you again, i wish you all the best in your future, you sounded like an open minded person and good luck to you in neurology, in my opinion that is one of best areas and hope to once meet you in a coming neurology seminar. You will probably find first year out a little hard to take in (we all did/do), and usual pay is pretty average in first year as no one willing to gamble large portion of patient base on a newly grad incase they don't do the job (or are as dumb/dangerous as mr physio over there).

6. Exactly what i been trying to suggest

What you will find is healthy patients make up your healthy bank balance, you cure their problem, next week you got two more of their friends/family sitting in your waiting room, asking to help them with this and that problem.


Again, sorry for point form, got to run, and all the best K

 

[extensorindicis]

1, What year of your degree are you in??? you still have not answered me that

2, As for minimal diff between chiro/physio manipulation techniques... look it up yourself, i don't have time to fucken teach you everything from scratch (thats why it takes 5 years to learn not something that fits into a forum post), if you know nothing, learn dickhead! Knowledge you demonstrated to date is below minimal!

3, Like i said, and unless your stupid... all forms of treament has inherent risk as minimal as it is, you just seem to think that the physio title lowers that risk... idiot

6. Unless your illiterate, which i am starting to suspect aswell; i said "all form of manipulation, including all practitioners be it physio/chiro/osteo or a medical doctor have all been reported to have caused stroke, VBI, disc herniations, and adverse reactions" and "since chiro was the first (you know when physiotherapy was not even around) and still is the biggest modality in the world to utilise manipulation, who do you think are usually more associated with it?" Why do you think it was the chiro profession which actually researched into the area, developed, and fine tuned the screening tests to minimise the risk (you know the very test even you as a physio will have to learn to perform if you want to be manipulative therapist!)

So there would be no point digging up the thousands of references world wide, no one has argued it doesn't happen you illiterate idiot


In the end all i can see is that your intelligence is on the level of the marine scientist... so maybe instead of treating patients you two can stick to playing with dolphines
(just don't lay your hands on any whales, they are indangered as is, wouldn't want your capable ass of killing off the remaining few left

1 - bit rich coming from a person who initially failed to reveal they even did chiro and acted like an outsider with no personal predilections.

2 - trust me i wouldn't ask you to teach me quackery

3 - yes considering that physio atar requirments range from 97ish-98ish and chiro programs are a good 10-15 lower, i can only conclude that i am an illiterate imbecile. I think the adage "for those that didn't make the cut at any mid/high level health programs but still want to play doctor, become a chiro" still stands.


Lol sorry to burst you're bubble, but chiropractic is only regarded (once upon a time now) in the US with such a large population and degree mills of chiro schools its no wonder chiro is the largest treatment modality in the world, but, per capita, per country physio is used more often and is accepted. Chiro has a small following and very low exceptance in the UK, euro, asian, middle easter, asia pacific, africa and south america - where it doesn't even exist in most cases, and physio is utilised - another weak weak argument. Again your proving yourself to be illiterate, I acknowledged physio also has certain risks, but the fact that there are hundreds of strokes caused by chiro, and only a few cases of strokes caused by physio despite being a more widely used modality in the world(cos we don't all live in the US) shows you're arguments have no substance.

Actually, Physio was initially practiced by physicians like Hippocrates and later Galenus who advocated massage, manual therapy techniques and hydrotherapy to treat people in 460 B.C.

The earliest documented origins of actual physical therapy as a professional group date back to Per Henrik Ling “Father of Swedish Gymnastics” who founded the Royal Central Institute of Gymnastics (RCIG) in 1813 for massage, manipulation, and exercise.

In 1894 four nurses in Great Britain formed the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy.The School of Physiotherapy at the University of Otago in New Zealand in 1913, and the United States' 1914 Reed College in Portland, Oregon, which graduated "reconstruction aides."

This is in contrast to Palmer the quackhead who meddled with some guys spine and apparently cured his deafness in the 1890s? how come you guys can't do that now?

You have ignored the samples of stroke victims i stated, click the link there are more. You need to take a page from kaz n's book, and accept that chiro has some serious flaws that cannot just be eradicated by simply moving towards medically accepted manip modalities like physio, but rather, as a new crop of chiros, you need to evaluate and drop the chiro philosophy that is in this day and age a fallacy. Mr. Bored you fail to admit to these major weaknesses. Untill then, no matter how long you've been at uni, your still appear to be a quack-head chiro.

Reply with some evidence published in reputable medical journals about the authenticity of chiropractic treatment through a medical evidence based guise and we may continue this discussion further.

Till then your a disgruntled chiro unable to deal with the insecurities posed by the publics perception of the chiro philosophy. Only you can transform it, and you've failed so far.

 

[katie tully]

I don't support chiro, and I am currently compiling a heap of evidence to the contrary but can I just point out....

So do you want to explain why there is a smorgasbord of chiro stroke victims and death?

One needs to be careful when making these claims. Generally when we consider things like stroke or VBA stroke we must acknowledge that often strokes or the lead up to strokes can be symptomatic well before the stroke occurs. What has been found is that the incident rate for VBA stroke is higher in those who have sought chiropractic care, but that chiropractic care does not increase the risk.

So basically;

The increased risks of VBA stroke associated with chiropractic and PCP visits is likely due to patients with headache and neck pain from VBA dissection seeking care before their stroke. We found no evidence of excess risk of VBA stroke associated chiropractic care
compared to primary care.

If you accept that these people were symptomatic, headaches, neck pain, etc and looked to chiropractic care to relieve the symptoms, then we can assume that the chiropractic treatment increases VBA stroke but doesn't cause VBA stroke.

I mean either way, it's dodgy as fuck. But generally I don't think chiro *causes* these things, it just exacerbates an underlying condition. And having been to a chiro for headaches, I've never been asked whether I am on blood thinners, whether I have a history of cardiac problems or other haematological disorders, which is worrying

 

[katie tully]

FUCK.
Journals I refuse to read articles about chiropractic from;
Spine
Evidence based complementary and alternative medicine

 

[extensorindicis]

I don't support chiro, and I am currently compiling a heap of evidence to the contrary but can I just point out....



One needs to be careful when making these claims. Generally when we consider things like stroke or VBA stroke we must acknowledge that often strokes or the lead up to strokes can be symptomatic well before the stroke occurs. What has been found is that the incident rate for VBA stroke is higher in those who have sought chiropractic care, but that chiropractic care does not increase the risk.

So basically;


If you accept that these people were symptomatic, headaches, neck pain, etc and looked to chiropractic care to relieve the symptoms, then we can assume that the chiropractic treatment increases VBA stroke but doesn't cause VBA stroke.

my bad, thats what i mean

 

[katie tully]

my bad, thats what i mean

Either way though, the manipulation of the blood supply to the spine when there may already be a clot or blockage or whatever is cause enough to wtf wtf wtf

 

[Kwayera]

Well there's those cases (at least 5 I believe) where cervical maniupulation didn't cause a stroke but actually tore the carotid artery, resulting in the patient bleeding out pretty much ASAP. It was detailed in Ben Goldacre's Bad Science.

 

[katie tully]

Well there's those cases (at least 5 I believe) where cervical maniupulation didn't cause a stroke but actually tore the carotid artery, resulting in the patient bleeding out pretty much ASAP. It was detailed in Ben Goldacre's Bad Science.

31 arteries supplying the spinal cord alone.

Entirely possible. Especially when they do that whole neck snap thing. wtf.

 

[BoREd^7]

You rank alongside acupuncture and homeopathy - depraved pseudosciences that delude both its victims: patients and ignorant practitioners.

How did i forget to reply to this one??
You in effect are actually insulting your buddy boy mr physio there!

Dry Needling, is a Western medicine name given to acupuncture, uses all the same sites as those of "ashi" points which 98% correlate to trigger points (ones that don't correlate are in some weird places).

And which profession uses, endorses and puts their "unproven" faith into such a treatment? Which profession "delude" its "victims" in this method? *Drum Roll* .......Physiotherapists!!!!!


Note: before you go saying its only done in US. I am pretty sure you might find one or two wankers here. And remember, your putting down chiro on what you read on a US site without listening to what chiro maybe here.

 

[BoREd^7]

As below

1 - bit rich coming from a person who initially failed to reveal they even did chiro and acted like an outsider with no personal predilections.
Wow. So simply one click on my name reveals that astonishingly hidden secret… right!
And theres a difference between trying to be impartial and neutral and writing misconceptions

As for eluding things... what year of your degree you in? you still can not answer this!

2 - trust me i wouldn't ask you to teach me quackery

You have not said anything worthy for me to be able to “trust” you. You know nothing, which you’ve proven consistently, you take no effort in trying to find out facts for yourself, just simply state useless crap whenever you feel like it! You get caught out on your stupidity, but you still keep going... its actually become amusing now

3 - yes considering that physio atar requirments range from 97ish-98ish and chiro programs are a good 10-15 lower, i can only conclude that i am an illiterate imbecile. I think the adage "for those that didn't make the cut at any mid/high level health programs but still want to play doctor, become a chiro" still stands.
In Australia, Chiro is not very well known (you even seem to grasp this point *shock*), that is a fact.

Lol sorry to burst you're bubble, ... but, per capita, per country physio is used more often and is accepted.
Actually, if you work it out worldwide, that same per capita argument actually puts you further behind. If you isolate Australia, then it is right.
(Bubble remains unburst... your stupidity still at full throttle)

Chiro has a small following and very low exceptance in the UK, euro, asian, middle easter, asia pacific, africa and south america - where it doesn't even exist in most cases, and physio is utilised - another weak weak argument.
As usual, wroooooooonnnnnngggggggg again.
Remember, just because you said it, does not make it fact!!! Idiot
All countries mentioned above have chiropractic practitioners, in fact its even funnier considering in some Asian companies, chiropractic/manipulation is so well spread that doctors use it. (but then again acupuncture and

Again your proving yourself to be illiterate, I acknowledged physio also has certain risks, but the fact that there are hundreds of strokes caused by chiro, and only a few cases of strokes caused by physio despite being a more widely used modality in the world shows you're arguments have no substance.
Good that you finally acknowledge that... considering it a page ago, according to you it was “only” chiro that caused stroke
Again, just because you state it as fact does not make something fact/true!
Look up reality!! Hundreds of incidents caused by all professions, if you look there is even studies done to compare which found equal risk! (no I am not going to spend time searching for an idiot like you).

Actually, Physio was initially practiced by physicians like Hippocrates and later Galenus who advocated massage, manual therapy techniques and hydrotherapy to treat people in 460 B.C.... in contrast to Palmer in the 1890s?
Congratulations on your ability to use wikipedia... you maybe brighter than you sound!
But in the end, who cares? bone crackers been around since cave-age, whats your point? Like I said before, medicine involved magic potions and snake oils at one stage, one stage surgeons were regarded as barbarians and shunned from medicine as they effectively break Hippocratic oath (you brought it up) by cutting the body, is it all still the same now?

Fact is physio was established after chiro, so who officially manipulated first?

how come you guys can't do that now?
Because these days... snake oils are no longer a recognised form of treatment for cancer either...

You have ignored the samples of stroke victims i stated, click the link there are more.
Actually, as I been saying there are cases, stories, and incidents in all profession, so whats the point of reading more? You think we have not heard all of this during our studies? First thing they tell you is that chiro has risks, first year they introduce you to the dangers, first year they make you read these cases and contrary to your belief they make us analyse them, so we are aware, more so than you!

You need to ... accept that chiro has some serious flaws that cannot just be eradicated by simply moving towards medically accepted manip modalities like physio, but rather, as a new crop of chiros, you need to evaluate and drop the chiro philosophy that is in this day and age a fallacy. Mr. Bored you fail to admit to these major weaknesses.
Actually if you read (correctly) what I said, I never adhere to the philosophies.
If you read correctly, I was the first to suggest that the very misconceptions you kept bringing up (from your favourite websites) were old fable stories, incorrect and that chiro schools especially here in Australia do not teach it. That Aust schools actually focus evidence-based teaching.


Reply with some evidence published in reputable medical journals about the authenticity of chiropractic treatment
You did this for me... you showed with your article that manipulation, whether it is performed by a physio or chiro is equally effective as the other.


...your a disgruntled chiro unable to deal with the insecurities posed by the publics perception of the chiro philosophy.
This is exactly why I call you illiterate.
1. I am not disgruntled... that would mean I’m dissatisfied or disappointed with chiro, I am not. I am the one here backing it up and clearing up misconceptions that you keep putting out. I am pleased I chose chiro.
Like I said, I actually did my research before I made the choice, I researched it properly and talked to (you know, as opposed to just jumping on two websites and thinking I know everything like some) all modalities that interested me incl. Physio, Chiro, Osteo, Radiographers, Rad. Therapy, Nuc. Medicine, and orthopaedic surgeon and sports med. I had a better idea back then of what each entails than what you (appear) to know about physio at this point.

2. I deal with those publics insecurities all the time, what you think a patient coming to a physio know what you do? Why you think you got that picture of practitioner explaining to patient what the treatment entails and what you will be doing. Patients don’t care, all they want is to get back to pain-free status and usually they get told by a friend to go see whomever and they do. No patient actually comes in to argue about philosophy, most just come in saying “do something about this pain”

3. I never said I agreed with the philosophy, you keep repeating this fact. Again, I actually said I do not follow it, and nor do universities in Australia that teach chiro.

Only you can transform it, and you've failed so far.
Transform what? The philosophy? Shit I am happy to have it dropped from every stupid website out there, so idiots like you weren’t go arguing shit you know nothing about.