Your symptoms: If you feel the need to share your symptoms with the chiropractor, that’s okay. However you should realize that chiropractors do not need to know that information. It is not helpful to his/her procedure or service. Chiropractic is different from medical or therapeutic procedures. Therapies all have as their objective the alleviation of the symptoms of a medical condition. The chiropractic objective is the correction of a vertebral subluxation. That is strictly a chiropractic problem. it cannot be corrected by the intention of medical procedures.
Often symptoms are reduced or totally alleviated by the correction of the subluxation. That was not because the chiropractor was accomplishing a therapeutic objective. It was because when a subluxation is corrected the body works better and a more effectively functioning body can heal itself, often in circumstances when it otherwise could not. But the chiropractic objective begins and ends with the vertebral subluxation correction.
There is another reason why sharing your symptoms is a cause for concern on our part. One of the most important aspects of a chiropractic practice is educating the practice member in understanding what our unique objective is, that it has nothing to do with the presence or absence of symptoms. It has to do with keeping the nerve system and every part of the body coordinated by that nerve system working at its best. When a person asks us about their symptoms or shares with us their complaints we really have no idea whether they fully grasped our objective or are looking for a quick and drugless therapeutic fix.
A radical way of letting people know symptoms are not what guide us, is to carefully write down the client’s illness history and at the end tear up the anamnesis and throw it in the basket… “now let’s see what we can do for you, the chiropractic way”, as Reggie told us ounce,
A pretty dramatic way of getting the point across, but by not also explaining why we do not care about your history and symptoms, it does not get the philosophical point across. I’m told that Reggie would later retrieve the paper, tape it together and put it in the PM’s file for malpractice protection purposes in case they never grasped the true objective of chiropractic which he explained better than anyone else .
JJ, having been a student of Reggie’s in spinology and having heard Reggie say that many times in chiropractic (I don’t believe for a moment he actually did that!), what I’ve done in the past is take down all their information and then ask them if there is anything else they need to tell me. No? Good. Turning the paper over and pushing it to the side I say, “now I fully understand why you are here, let me now explain why I am here and what this office is all about and how I feel I can help you”. That way I’ve fully acknowledged them and their reason for being here, and will then gently bring them into a full orientation explaining the philosophy behind this office and what we actually do and don’t do.
Tom, your method has fulfilled/properly explained Reggie’s intent without offending/turning off the prospective PM and in that way is a superior approach than his. Thank you for sharing that.
I think the true chiropractically philsosophical postion relative to symptoms is not detachment, but non attachment. Symptoms are not to be avoided, but they are to be addressed. There are no taboo subjects in chiropractic, only the proper relationship to the philosophy.
It is important that we ALL understand that, according to the AUTHORITY of the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science, a symptom is an effectf in motion, which is a manifestation of information (pri14) adapted by innate intelligence (pri23) which is expressed by e/matter (pri13). If the information is not interfered with, the symptom is one of adaptation and is normal (pri27). If it is interfered with (pri29), then the symptom is one that is created by DIS-EASE (pri30) which is due to VS (pri31), which then requires a vertebral adjustment. It is this bit of knowledge that must be included in your original orientation and repeated over and over and over again in as many creative ways as doable at EVERY subsequent visit!
Matt, I think what you are explaining in your comment is the TSC philosophy, not OSC. You say,“Symptoms are not to be avoided, but they are to be addressed.” That is usually followed by “we correct the cause” or “we get symptomatic people truly well”. That seems to be addressing symptoms and including symptoms or their cause as part of the chiropractic objective which is really and has been, part of the TSC objective since the 70’s, hence the article distinguishing between TSC and OSC in my book, The Rise and Fall of Pennsylvania College of Straight Chiropractic…”titled, Enjoin the Bastards.” Written by a late, well-known traditional straight chiropractor and clearly unfavorable to OSC, Nevertheless it elucidated the differences between the two schools of thought.
“Taboo subjects in chiropractic” are the medical/therapeutic objective like getting sick people well, surgical procedures and vaccination. We are, in my opinion, using the 33 principles as the basis for our objective and taboo subjects, should be avoided and not addressed. They have no “true chiropractically philosophical” relationship to the practice of chiropractic and if used will enable medical doctors to legally judge traditional chiropractors in court and it will confuse the public.
Joe, the only place that I can see symptoms being discussed are in a continuing education program where they will be discussed in the proper context, after a foundation has been established. Unfortunately because of the practical history of chiropractic being immersed in symptoms, many of those coming into our offices especially initially, do so seeking symptomatic relief. I love Reggie’s analogy that if someone has fallen into quick sand, you don’t jump in beside the person to try and help them. You stand on firm ground and throw them a rope. Some will grasp the rope, others not. We face a similar situation when we do our orientation, which ultimately sets the foundation for future interactions.
Tom,
Traditional chiropractors, also, have fallen in quick sand. That is WHY we need to throw them a rope too! The question is: WHAT is the rope and HOW are we to stand firm while we pull them out?
Claude, I believe “the rope” is giving the TSCors the same message that we give to our people, and as you would say, over and over and in as many ways as possible. Unfortunately, I believe it is the TSCors, that have the hardest time accepting this message as they want to continually bring in their TSC “baggage” with them, hoping somehow to transform it into NTOSC. The broad scope practitioners from what I’ve seen, actually make the transition easier as they clearly realize that all they’ve been doing is totally inconsistent with the NTOSC message.
Unfortunately most TSCors have gotten into the quicksand with the practice members and are tying the rope around their own neck and hoping they can be pulled from the “quicksand” by that means. Most are strangling before they can get out!
Thank you Claude for the ‘Big Picture” explanation. Your overview was EXCELLENT and made it all very clear. I have saved and will study it. It enhanced and clarified much for me. Much appreciated!
Greg, you are welcome.
Those are great Chiropractic explanations.
But…
Have you tested the effectiveness of what you were teaching them? Have you ever tried asking the patient to explain to you what you have just told them?
Chiropractic is so new and different that you will find as I did that they were more confused than ever if you just told them what you have written above, even if you told them 10 or 15 times on the next 10 or 15 visits.
Try it, you’ll dislike it.
To solve the patient education problem when I was in practice I wrote what I wanted the patient to understand in brief 1 page letters. These explained essentially what you have written above, but also explained how my practice worked and why and what they could expect, that the patient would take home with them, with the understanding that I would be asking THEM to explain what I had written on the next visit.
On the next visit…
Those who obviously had not read the letter and so could not explain it were adjusted without further attemt to educate them until they were satisfied and/or quit care, without further effort to teach them what I felt they should know.
They would come for care off and on over the next years.
.
Those who could not explain what I had written, but had read the lettter and tried to understand it were given another letter, explaining my Chiropractic procedures in different terms and sent home with the understanding that I would expect them to explain to me what I had written on the next visit.
If they showed adequate understanding of that letter, they would be given a more advanced letter, and so on.
And so on over a period of 20 letters, over 20 visits, by which time even the ones who had low level thinking ability had gotten it, well enough to explain to others what we were all about in my offices. Helped me build the practice quickly. Many of these patients became lifetime patients. My son is currently taking care (most are on a once a week program, with more frequent visits when needed) patients that started care with me 30 or 40 years ago.
Art,
What I posted above is for the chiropractors on this blog. We, ALL, need understanding of WHY we say WHAT we say. It is a fundamental problem that exists within our profession and requires attention. For example, Greg Dutson’s comment, on my post, implies that he will study what I posted and convert it, as you say, for the practice members in simple terms, over and over and over again in as MANY CREATIVE ways as doable for at least 200 visits. I have texted this method of educating practice members for over 40 years and I testify that it works!
Thank you for your comment, it is much appreciated.
… tested… not texted. Thank you again, Art.
Great article. So on the Mark.
Thank You Dr. Joe Strauss,
Ronen Mendi, Israel
Tom,
Most TSCs know HOW to give a good orientation that is geared torward getting sick people well “without drugs and surgery”. Obviously objective chiropractors do not practice from accepted dogmas. There is a unique “firm ground” as you say for ALL to stand on. WHAT is this “firm ground”?
Claude, the 33 principles.
Tom,
Yes, the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science! Therefore, since it has been only 4 years (after Reggie’s passing) that we have identified the chiropractic objective as a their final conclusion to be: LACVS for a full expression of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body, PERIOD, can you “see” WHY the “TSCs are having the hardest time accepting this message” as you so well say? TSCs don’t know the rational logic leading to the conclusion of the chiropractic objective because WE HAVE NOT demonstrated that truth to them yet! Since the TSCs do not have the the notion of the chiropractic objective, HOW can they accept it? TSCs are following DD and BJ’s objective which was to “get sick people well” with a new method called chiropractic. It’s an objective based on dogma, not on reason and the rational logic of the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science. –
– We have to “prove beyond the shadow of a doubt” the chiropractic objective to ALL chiropractors. Then, and ONLY then, will they have a choice to make. Otherwise, they will continue to practice from the dogma of “getting sick people well”. –
– WE have a response-ability to act accordingly and to choose to tell ALL chiropractors and chiropractic students about the rational logic of the chiropractic objective which is deduced as the conclusion of the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science. The future of chiropractic depends on this! It’s NOT enough to just tell the story to the public any longer. Time is of the essence! I say: “Carry on. ADIO”
Joseph,
What is the rope that TSCs are tying around their own necks, according to you?
Addressing disease, its cause and/or its symptoms