If chiropractic corrects the cause of disease or if subluxation is the cause of all disease, how do we account for the fact that people who are not under chiropractic care get well from medical conditions? I am not talking about temporary, symptomatic relief either, but the actual complete resolution of a condition that never returns. For example, some people with a kidney infection receive an antibiotic, live another 30 or 40 years or more and never again have a kidney infection. Many sailors who developed scurvy on a long voyage ate fresh fruits when they were back in port and never got scurvy again. Conversely, people sometimes do not get well under chiropractic care. This has been the Achilles heel of the “one cause-one cure” crowd. It can and has been explained by limitations of matter. But the fact that people are “cured” by other methods also has to be explained.
Obviously, the objective straight chiropractic approach that says chiropractic is not a cure but merely a way to raise the level of health in the individual accounts for why some people do not get well, (their health level could not be raised sufficiently) and why others get well under different types of care (the care may, usually inadvertently, raise the level of health). v14n1
.