From an Objective Straight Chiropractic standpoint, there are three aspects of
what has historically been called mixing chiropractic that need to be
addressed. 1. The Objective Aspect. Mixing chiropractic can be defined as
combining any part of the chiropractic procedure (correcting vertebral
subluxation), with any objective other than enabling the innate intelligence of
the body to be more fully expressed over the nerve system. The two most
common forms of mixing are religious (using theological terms and concepts
or having a religious objective) and medical, the latter being by far the most
common. In this form, the chiropractor may use the correction of vertebral
subluxation for the express purpose of affecting a disease or its cause. This
has been referred to as conservative mixing. The chiropractor may also not
address the spine in any way but perform clearly medical procedures under
the professional designation of chiropractic. This has been referred to as
liberal mixing. It should be noted that the term Traditional Straight Chiropractic
has been coined to describe those chiropractors who refer to themselves as
straight chiropractors but whose approach to the practice of chiropractic
clearly relates to disease in one way or another. (See Position Paper #2) 2.
The Legal Aspect. In its short history, the Objective Straight Chiropractic
community has held to a live-and-let-live philosophy recognizing that any
approach to the practice of chiropractic should be recognized as long as it
does not violate the laws of the land. A chiropractor should be free to practice
as broadly as he chooses or as narrowly as he chooses within the bounds of
the law. This recognition of the right of the mixer does not impact upon the
philosophy despite the fact that its practice is in conflict with the Objective
Straight Chiropractic philosophy. The recognition of the right to a mixer
approach is in keeping with the broader ADIO philosophy to which the
Objective Straight Chiropractor subscribes acknowledging individual rights
and freedom. The ultimate desire of the Objective Straight Chiropractor would
be to have a clear legal and descriptive separation between straight and
mixing chiropractic with the Traditional Straight Chiropractor choosing to which
approach he would subscribe. 3. The Philosophical Aspect. Mixing
chiropractic has a different objective than straight chiropractic. It may be just
as legal as straight chiropractic, but it has opposite philosophical intentions.
The intention of medicine (and hence, mixing chiropractic) is to change the
physiology/function of the body from what the doctor has determined is
abnormal to what he determines is normal. His ultimate goal is to create a
change in the matter. The intention of straight chiropractic is to enable the
innate intelligence of the body to restore the innate forces within the body to
normal. He does this by introducing a universal force which the innate
intelligence will utilize (thereby making it an innate force) to correct a vertebral
subluxation. The medical objective is to change the matter. It is the end unto
itself. The Objective Straight Chiropractor may use changes in the matter as
an indication that the innate intelligence is trying to correct a vertebral
subluxation or failing to correct a vertebral subluxation or that the innate
intelligence has succeeded in making a correction. However, the matter
changes that the Objective Straight Chiropractor utilizes are ordinarily not
associated with disease or medical conditions or their alleviation. That is why
symptoms are not an indicator to objective straight chiropractors nor are
medical diagnostic or orthopedic tests. The Objective Straight Chiropractor
may utilize skin temperature patterns or changes, so-called working muscles,
short legs, and/or other non-medical evaluations. These material changes are
only used for evaluation purposes and in no way are part of the correction
process. The Objective Straight Chiropractor only introduces forces knowing
that a subluxation is indicative of a lack of innate forces. He does not endeavor
to determine what the condition of the matter should be. The medical approach
assumes what the state of the matter should be and endeavors to have the
body reach that predetermined state by whatever physical means he
determines to be most effective.
