Is Traditional Chiropractic attempting to justify their “drugless approach” by emphasizing the word drugless, thus condemning those who really have the same objective, getting sick people well, but suggesting they,TSC,are doing it by a less radical and harmful approach, that is, by using an alternative, “conservative way”…chiropractic?
“Getting sick people well.”
Anyone who claims to get sick people well and believes that he is doing that is deluding himself. You can not “get sick people well”. Only the sick person can get himself well.
You can either give first aid and/or suppress some of the symptoms of the patient, as the medical people do, which certainly does not get people well.
Or you can correct some nerve malfunction allowing the patient’s body to function with less interference and resulting in less neurological confusion as properly practiced chiropractic does.
But the patient must still get himself well.
If you were a world renowned concert pianist and you cut your finger, and you absolutely had to have that finger healed so that you could give long awaited piano concert tonight, who would you go to, to heal that finger? Answer…No One. You have to heal yourself.
So it is all academic.
We chiropractors fool ourselves when we think we are getting people well. But that does not mean that by practicing “Real Chiropractic” we are not doing something very valuable for the patient. And when observed by others it does appear that we are healing people/getting them well. Just don’t fall into the trap of thinking that, that is what you are doing.
Art
You wrote” (to no one in particular)“Getting sick people well…
Anyone who claims to get sick people well and believes that he is doing that is deluding himself. You can not “get sick people well”. “Only the sick person can get himself well.” That’s Christian Science, Art (which is not Christian and not Science)
You further write,”You can either give first aid and/or suppress some of the symptoms of the patient, as the medical people do, which certainly does not get people well.” Which is what mixer chiropractors do.
You go on to say, Or you can correct some nerve malfunction allowing the patient’s body to function with less interference and resulting in less neurological confusion as properly practiced chiropractic does.” That is “properly practiced chiropractic” in your mind/opinion. Objective chiropractic limits itself to only “neurological confusion” (I like that term) but only as it relates to the vertebral subluxation “nothing more, nothing less.
You continue “But the patient must still get himself well.” No, Principle #24, the innate intelligence of the body does that (a principle which you do not seem to think carrying any authority)
You continue “So it is all academic.” No, its called by BJ,the Law of Life But then I imagine you do not consider him or the 33 principles as anyone who would carry any authority.
You conclude: “We chiropractors fool ourselves when we think we are getting people well. But that does not mean that by practicing “Real Chiropractic” we are not doing something very valuable for the patient. And when observed by others it does appear that we are healing people/getting them well. Just don’t fall into the trap of thinking that, that is what you are doing.” It always amazes me how chiropractors and medical doctors can do “something very valuable for the patient in their own mind or the patients mind or both
Objective chiropractic limits itself to only “neurological confusion” (I like that term) but only as it relates to the vertebral subluxation “nothing more, nothing less.
You continue “But the patient must still get himself well.” No, Principle #24, the innate intelligence of the body does that (a principle which you do not seem to think carrying any authority)
You continue “So it is all academic.” No, its called by BJ,the Law of Life But then I imagine you do not consider him or the 33 principles as anyone who would carry any authority.
You conclude: “We chiropractors fool ourselves when we think we are getting people well. But that does not mean that by practicing “Real Chiropractic” we are not doing something very valuable for the patient. And when observed by others it does appear that we are healing people/getting them well. Just don’t fall into the trap of thinking that, that is what you are doing.” It always amazes me how chiropractors and medical doctors can do “something very valuable for the patient in their own mind
1.
Chiropractic should, in my mind, limit itself to only reducing as much as possible , neurological confusion, so that principle #24 can function at the best level. (We both think alike on this , just express ourselves differently.) (BTW I can not see a principle ever carrying authority. A principle is a principle, not an authority.)
And as to what B.J. called something (“Law of Life”, or “Peanut Butter”, really doesn’t affect me at all.
As to me not seeing anyone “carrying authority”, I guess you are right, since I’ve found all who claim authority to ultimately have feet of clay. Even the great and wonderful me.
“It always amazes me how chiropractors and medical doctors can do “something very valuable for the patient in their own mind.”
Well, if you do not see what you do for patients as something very valuable, how could you justify accepting a fee for that service and why would you take the time to do it?
I think that we pretty much agree on these things, just express it differently.
Art, a principle is a law:principle #1 the law of organization, P.#24, THE LAW OF life. A sign along the road that says “25 MPH” carries the authority of the government and in this country the Constitution and the people, regarding the speed limit. Trying to tell the police officer that the sign might just as well say “peanut butter” would not get you very far except a ticket or a ride to jail. NB Your lack of quotation marks and addressing your reply is quite confusing!
I get the impression that our disagreement differs where we see the chiropractic objective beginning and ending. Is it with the vertebral subluxation or with “neurological confusion “caused by something other than VS?
Art,
The law of gravity (principle) has AUTHORITY on our planet. Everything that goes up will eventually have to come down unless it leaves the stratosphere. Do you see now that principles do have authority?
The law of gravity deals with an attraction of masses which is governed by the size of those masses. That’s why men walking on the moon (smaller than the earth) demonstrated a different manifestation/”rate” of the same law(different rates of “attraction”