Research into getting sick people well is inductive reasoning. It only works/worked for chiropractic if and when we believed that VS was the cause of all disease. That is why BJ continually looked for THE WAY to correct vs and when he failed to find it was forced to conclude that LOM of the nerve system was the only LOM in the body. Apparently some chiropractors still do, judging from some of the comments on this blog. OSC, on the other hand, is based upon the 33 Principles and that P # 24 involves more than just vs and that the LOM involves more than just the matter of the nerve system. That was why chiropractors historically “mixed”. They believed that there were more limitations than .just VS. such as genetic/ congenital, trauma,etc. The difference between mixing chiropractic and OSC is that we only address VS and not any other limitation of matter. Research/TSC believes that all VS is the cause of all disease and that on he rare occasions it is due to LOM/VS/permanent nerve damage of the nerve system and that they can diagnose/discern that rare occasion and refer out. Research/inductive reasoning, empirical evidence like the “sun will come up tomorrow” is only of benefit to the person experiencing thatbenefit and only at that time.
Joseph,
YOU definitely need to collate some of these threads in a comprehensive easy to understand book for the OC’s progeny.
It’s a must!!! đŸ˜‰
What do all of these acronyms stand for?
They are all contained somewhere in the posts/blogs. Please let me know which specifically you do not know/understand. It might not hurt to review them. It would give you a good overview of OSC
VS (vertebral subluxation) –
– BJ (Bartlet Joshua Palmer D.C.) –
– LOM (limitations of energy/matter) –
– OSC (objective straight chiropractic) –
– P #24 (principle 24) –
– TSC (traditional straight chiropractic)