The uniqueness of the straight chiropractic objective impacts upon chiropractic technique. Since the objective of correcting vertebral subluxations
is to allow the forces of innate intelligence of the body to be more fully expressed, any technique that purports to accomplish that objective should be acceptable to the practice of objective straight chiropractic. However inherent within the above objective are a number of criteria that should be met. It will become clear that some of these criteria can only be met by the individual practicing the technique. The criteria are:
1. The technique should acknowledge that inherent within the idea of “correcting vertebral subluxations” is the knowledge that it is the innate
intelligence of the body that truly corrects the subluxation. Technique is a procedure or procedures that enable the objective straight chiropractor
to locate, analyze and introduce an adjustive thrust of such a quality that the innate intelligence of the recipient’s body can adapt that force and correct a vertebral subluxation.
2. The idea of normal with regard to the human spine can only be established by the innate intelligence of the individual. Conforming individuals to a standard or pre-determined norm is the objective of medicine and is not consistent with a non-therapeutic, objective approach to the practice of chiropractic.
3. Objective Straight Chiropractic is based upon logic and deduction. Consequently, it cannot be confused by or with absurdities. Approaches to the
location of vertebral subluxation and their correction must meet standards of common sense.
4. It is understood that while certain techniques as taught by their developers may not have an objective consistent with objective straight chiropractic, it is possible that an objective straight chiropractor could adapt that technique to accomplish the unique OSC objective. Chiropractors should be very careful in adapting techniques that do not have our unique objective and to realize that it may be impossible to adapt some techniques.
5. Since technique is a very personal thing, objective straight chiropractors should respect the approach of other chiropractors and refrain from passing judgement as to the validity or value of other techniques. This includes techniques that claim to have an objective consistent with objective straight chiropractic and those that clearly have another objective.
6. Objective straight chiropractic offers a wide enough latitude to embrace many different approaches to locating, analyzing and correcting vertebral subluxations. However, respectful discussion is urged so that objective straight chiropractors may find the most effective technique(s) for accomplishing their unique objective.
Another excellent article.
Point #1, chiropractic/chiropractor , and maybe take/adapt
Joseph,
I agree with Steve regarding point #1. –
– It appears that if the purpose of the technique is to LACVS, then it will locate itself WHERE the VS is, ie at the vertebral juxtaposition and no where else. If the technique locates itself at distant sites from the vetebral juxtaposition, then its purpose is therapeutic which is contrary to the chiropractic objective. The DISTINCT aspect of chiropractic is that its portal of entry is the spinal column while its SEPARATE aspect is its non-therapeutic approach.
Claude, Thank you. I made the change. Your post was not automatically approved because the computer you used had the server as comcadt. net. Based upon your comment would you say that a leg check is not a legitimate analytical technique because the technique uses a site distant “from the vertebral juxtaposition”? You cannot get much further from the Atlas than the feet!
Joseph,
I was not posting about pre-checks and post-checks which are part of the analysis and what a leg check is about. I was posting about the location of VS and the adjustic thrust, necessary to introduce our EUF. I guess as I re-read my post, I could have made myself more clear. Thank you for asking to clarify.
Joseph,
I was not posting about pre-checks and post-checks which are part of the analysis, WHICH IS what a leg check is about. I was posting about the location of VS and the adjustic thrust, necessary to introduce our EUF. I guess as I re-read my post, I could have made myself more clear. Thank you for asking to clarify.
Claude,
Ilium – PSIS >> thrust P-A,I-S,Sacrum AI >> thrust PS / sacrotuberous lig
etc, etc.
Q1: NOT OSC objective (not LACVS)??
Am I a Mixer?
🙁
David,
The definition of subluxation is: A vertebra that has lost its juxtaposition with the veterbra above, the one below or both; to an extent less that a luxation; occluding an opening which impinges upon a nerve and interferes with the flow of mental impulse from brain cell to tissue cell and vice versa. To LACVS is HOW we fulfill the chiropractic objective is it not?
The HOW could be >> precheck >> subluxations (C0-L5) >> administer an EIF, as per technique, and analysis on ANY Structure (toe-fontenelle) >> recheck >> subluxations (C0-L5) >> Educated Indicators for Nerve Interference and Unimpeded Mental Impulses, by Subluxation >> Clear (As best as Educated can determine) Just doin my best >>- Adjustment Complete! Period!
yes/no
Subluxation removal has to be Objective. How you do it is per the science of Chiropractic.
yes/no
Yes I know
29.) Adjustic thrust: An adjustic thrust is a specific educated universal force introduced into a subluxated vertebra of a living person by a chiropractor with the intent that the innate intelligence of the body of that person will produce a vertebral adjustment.
Logan, Stillwagon, Dejarnette, Fuhr, Network, Gonstead, Diversified etc.
I think 29 needs a broader application of what’s been within the realm of Chiropractic Technique(s).
33 principles? bedrock!
OSC definitions? NOT bedrock!
Are you telling me you never have put a concussion of forces into an ilium?
28.) Vertebral adjustment: A vertebral adjustment is a universal force adapted by the innate intelligence of the body for the correction of a vertebral subluxation.
If I read this correctly >> II performs the adjustment using IF adapted from UF. The origin of the UF is not specified. (eg. UF into a spinous process, transverse process, lamina, etc.)
29.) Adjustic thrust: An adjustic thrust is a specific educated universal force introduced into a subluxated vertebra of a living person by a chiropractor with the intent that the innate intelligence of the body of that person will produce a vertebral adjustment.
Just to clarify >> UF anywhere on the body can be used by ii. The object is to use an educated approach that poses the least internal resistance and is the most specific and effective in creating this UF to IF adaptation.
But as we know, within Chiropractic there is not just the vertebral column, but also the pelvis (sacral segments are theoretically subject to nerve interference, at least using Activator Methods. Of course. References to the Sacrum as a subluxation prone structure, at least with L5, are abundant.
If a Chiropractor uses an analysis that suggest subluxation, perhaps a different physical way of creating interference to Mental Impulses (cord tension, dural tension, whatever the theory), why not include it in the definition of an adjustic thrust.
I use an analysis that pre and post checks the evidence of, and the successful removal of Subluxation and the effects of (Leg Length change or No Change). These effects are definitive and I believe fall in to the realm of OSC with 33 principle adherence and ADIO approach.
So… Can’t I adjust the pelvis, and the occiput and call that an adjustment, if my subluxation findings are congruent?
David,
Any technique that you use which purpose is to LACVS is fine from a non-therapeutic chiropractic point of view, as long as your intent is for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. I was attempting to clarify that it is a vertebral adjustment that innate intelligence produces and that it is non-therapeutic. Once again, I understand that sometimes I do not make myself really clear. I do appreciate you for asking to clarify. Thank you David. –
Ps: It is I WHO choose to accept position paper #7 as it is now written.
Good article.
i like how it stated that there was a wide enough latitude to embrace many different approaches that share the objective.
I’m somewhat unclear about what absurdities could be here. An example would be nice. Here is mine. I heard someone suggest that the muscles pull the vertebrae out of place and creates the vs. would that be an absurdity? Honest question.
Lastly, I would definitely entertain a discussion around the most effective technique(s) for accomplishing a unique objective of OSC/OC.
I contend that low force approach to technique or instrument assisted are best. For those who know I’m not instrument assisted but certainly not ‘iron hands’ Sam. Aomewhere in between i guess. Lol!
My reasons for low force are:
1. These techniques recognize that force in and of itself is not what accomplishes the adjustment. It is how the ii of the body adapts that force and creates the adjustment. This is quite the opposite of manipulation or a therapeutic approach to care.
2. Instrument assisted line of drives are more clearly delivered and seen on delivery.
I will save discussion on approaches to analysis for a later time.