Validate is defined as, “to establish something as valid.” Does research validate our chiropractic philosophy or is the philosophy validated by the logic of its deductive reasoning and the authority of the 33 principles? If we need scientific research for ourselves or others in order to validate chiropractic, is it possible to do that and … Read more
In analyzing the spine it is suggested that recognizing that the innate intelligence of the body makes the adjustment promotes sloppy or inaccurate analysis and thinking you as the D.C. makes the adjustment promotes more accurate analysis. Do you agree?
Barak Obama does not love or even like the U.S. because of what it is or what it has been but because of what he expects to make it. On the contrary, he loathes what it is and has been. Similarly, some chiropractic leaders do not love or even like chiropractic because of what it … Read more
…Is caused by saying no to the truth of the chiropractic philosophy.
Isn’t it ironic that chiropractors are creating courses, training and requiring education in order to do exactly what they have been claiming they do not do for the past 100 plus years while trying to get recognition as a separate and distinct profession.
When I first went into practice in Pennsylvania in 1967, there were still a few chiropractors around who had been licensed as “drugless physicians” a broad category created in 1929 prior to the 1951 law creating a chiropractic profession. Everyone who went into chiropractic after that date could only practice chiropractic and they were limited … Read more
Many wise words are spoken in jest but they don’t compare to stupid words spoken in earnest.-Sam Levenson
Is modern day chiropractic merely a means by which a man or woman can make a good living by putting in the least amount of time and effort, living off the government (insurance), and being able to fill one’s time with the pleasures and diversions that usually are identified with a life of idleness?
When we are talking about the innate intelligence of the body I think we must be careful to use that term. Sometimes we even get so sloppy in our terminology we call it “innate”. The same goes for the innate intelligence of a cell, tissue or organ, amoeba. tree, etc.
What is the difference between taking the philosophy exactly as DD and BJ presented it or taking what they gave us and refining and expanding upon it? How do we insure that in doing the latter we are not changing their original intent?