What’s the difference between treating a symptom and getting a sick person well? It seems to me that “chiropractic research” is merely getting rid of a symptom or symptoms, often only temporarily and calling it correcting the cause. That may be why most chiropractors are addressing only musculoskeletal problems
Signs are the subjective findings of the observer, while symptoms are the subjective findings of the PM neither of which are necessarily related to a VS.
Wouldn’t you say that as per your comment (above) “getting rid of a symptom or symptoms, often only temporarily and calling it correcting the cause.” That the removal of a sign suggests more something more causal? True not subluxation and true adjustment deals with fuller expression of innate intelligence, but so so many times the concept of getting sick people well is always put in the context of symptom removal. It’s not. It’s sign removal. Different, perhaps not a chiropractic subject, but we might as well be accurate when we speak
Signs and symptoms–reminds me of words we used back in school. đŸ™‚ Symptoms AND signs are BOTH nonspecific and only in combination “suggestive” of a possible diagnosis. MDs diagnoses are estimated to be wrong anywhere from 20% to 60%–I just don’t feel the need to add to the statistic.
Signs can point to OI inductions, empirically determined, yielding fallible statistics, but certainly no more than the ole AD 80/10/10 practice builder that sold a lot of adjustments for the wrong reasons (conditions getting better) by many a financially successful chiropractor.
Yet batting 300 shows greatness so Right stat for the Right sign is tolerable as long as it’s not metaphysical in nature. But then again. When you get down to it. What isn’t? (IF)M
Why would a “sign’ be MORE related to a cause than a symptom. Both are subjective findings, one on the part of the subject and one on the part of the object. Sign on a gravestone: “I told all the doctors I wasn’t feeling well”
Isnt a “sign”, based on a measurement, a number, more assessing than a subjective complaint?
Recently I have become involved with volunteering chiropractic adjustments for an addiction recovery program. Have cited Jay Holder, DC of Florida and his work showing an increased recovery rate from addictions. What would be the proper way of explaining this effect. It seems like it is too easy to become condition focused rather than simply enhancing neural flow. Any tips for keeping on the “straight and narrow?”
(By the way, I love your books and plan on ordering the whole set soon)
Bryan, I applaud you efforts. Addiction recovery programs may involve professional procedures that include but are not limited to psychological, medical, emotional, and spiritual help. Of course chiropractic does not address other ares than the correction of VS…But everyone needs chiropractic care and that needs to be explained to members of the program. Like any other condition, they are better off with a good nerve supply. I am not familiar with Holder’s work so I do not know whether he incorporates/mixes other professional procedures.
The torque release/Holder type chiropractors I have encountered have all been symptom based. As you point out Joe a good nerve supply is the best foundation for life…
I guess a good nerve supply is not symptom based? It all comes down to intent. Is your intent to express intelligence through matter or remove interference? A technique should not matter.
Thrusting into a subluxation to treat symptoms.
TSC…getting a sick person well
What’s the difference between treating a symptom and getting a sick person well? It seems to me that “chiropractic research” is merely getting rid of a symptom or symptoms, often only temporarily and calling it correcting the cause. That may be why most chiropractors are addressing only musculoskeletal problems
When symptoms are spoken of, are signs also being included in the same discussion?
Signs are the subjective findings of the observer, while symptoms are the subjective findings of the PM neither of which are necessarily related to a VS.
Wouldn’t you say that as per your comment (above) “getting rid of a symptom or symptoms, often only temporarily and calling it correcting the cause.” That the removal of a sign suggests more something more causal? True not subluxation and true adjustment deals with fuller expression of innate intelligence, but so so many times the concept of getting sick people well is always put in the context of symptom removal. It’s not. It’s sign removal. Different, perhaps not a chiropractic subject, but we might as well be accurate when we speak
Signs and symptoms–reminds me of words we used back in school. đŸ™‚ Symptoms AND signs are BOTH nonspecific and only in combination “suggestive” of a possible diagnosis. MDs diagnoses are estimated to be wrong anywhere from 20% to 60%–I just don’t feel the need to add to the statistic.
Signs can point to OI inductions, empirically determined, yielding fallible statistics, but certainly no more than the ole AD 80/10/10 practice builder that sold a lot of adjustments for the wrong reasons (conditions getting better) by many a financially successful chiropractor.
Yet batting 300 shows greatness so Right stat for the Right sign is tolerable as long as it’s not metaphysical in nature. But then again. When you get down to it. What isn’t? (IF)M
Why would a “sign’ be MORE related to a cause than a symptom. Both are subjective findings, one on the part of the subject and one on the part of the object. Sign on a gravestone: “I told all the doctors I wasn’t feeling well”
Isnt a “sign”, based on a measurement, a number, more assessing than a subjective complaint?
Recently I have become involved with volunteering chiropractic adjustments for an addiction recovery program. Have cited Jay Holder, DC of Florida and his work showing an increased recovery rate from addictions. What would be the proper way of explaining this effect. It seems like it is too easy to become condition focused rather than simply enhancing neural flow. Any tips for keeping on the “straight and narrow?”
(By the way, I love your books and plan on ordering the whole set soon)
Bryan, I applaud you efforts. Addiction recovery programs may involve professional procedures that include but are not limited to psychological, medical, emotional, and spiritual help. Of course chiropractic does not address other ares than the correction of VS…But everyone needs chiropractic care and that needs to be explained to members of the program. Like any other condition, they are better off with a good nerve supply. I am not familiar with Holder’s work so I do not know whether he incorporates/mixes other professional procedures.
The torque release/Holder type chiropractors I have encountered have all been symptom based. As you point out Joe a good nerve supply is the best foundation for life…
I guess a good nerve supply is not symptom based? It all comes down to intent. Is your intent to express intelligence through matter or remove interference? A technique should not matter.
I intend to cross the street. If I don’t, who cares