Here’s a question for those of you who love and want more research. If you can produce anecdotal, case study, or any kind of empirical research that chiropractic creates improvement in a person with xyz disease (you pick the disease), what exactly have you proven and how does that impact upon the practice of chiropractic? This is not a trick question or one intended to start a controversy, just looking for a reasonable answer as to why so many case studies by chiropractors on people with medical conditions, are being done, published and disseminated.
Can I get back to you on that? I should warn you….it might take a lifetime to get the answer for you.
But the short answer is…..those doing the research seem to feel the need to want more acceptance by groups that seem to depend on what research findings show. Typically, and regardless of the end result desired by the research, the study just about guarantees the researcher to find that end result.
There is a big difference between proof and probability, and thus no one can prove anything; they can only show the probability that something will happen. Case studies of diseases that have been helped shows the public (who only know what the commercials tell them) that chiropractic is not only about neck and back pain. It opens the door for discussion that we do not cure anything, the body does.
And probabilities, like the weather channel, is at best a very low percentage guess. Just last june, in Australia, scientists around the world convene to look in the ONLY supermicroscope in the world. They isolated a molecule of a T-cell and “looked” into it. They saw for the first time a “switch” they did not know existed. It puts in question the entire immune system response that has been postulated for years. How can anyone “correct” what could be malfunctioning with that “switch” when no one had a clue it even existed? No, the body does NOT heal itself. A corpse is a body and it does not heal itself. And no, Chiropractic does heal anything either. It’s the all knowing innate intelligence of the body that heals when fully expressed within the limitation of the matter of the body. In conclusion, therefore, we can deduct that case studies confuse the public about what chiropractic really is.
I meant to say, and no, chiropractic does NOT heal anything either.
How about more research and proof that Chiropractic improves the function of the nerve system (is anyone doing this). Once this is demonstrated it would open the door to the metaphysical aspect of Innate Intelligence, as it is transmitted through that same improved system.
Gee Steve, what a novel idea. Is that too much of a challenge to our researchers or are they just interested in proving how well we fit into the medical model? Sadly, even the schools seem to have no interest in researching what you are suggesting. And then they cannot understand why we are not interested in supporting their research.
Great question….I’ve thought about this often but how would this be done? What variables would we look at?
I’m just glad Harvey’s hearing returned. If not, we’d all be doing something else today.
I personally like to see research because, to me, it represents an affirmation of what the body is capable of when vertebral subluxation is removed. It would be better to see more research framed from the chiropractic objective rather than the symptom relief objective. I agree with Bob V. that there is a certain subset of researchers who “seem to feel the need to want more acceptance by groups that seem to depend on what research findings show.” Another reason why there are so many symptom relief studies may be the dearth of publishing opportunities for research framed from a chiropractic objective. Over the years it seems that individuals have tried to address this by establishing chiropractic research journals, but none have stood the test of time. Research publication and research itself also suffer from the “Reality TV” dilemma… As a society we would rather be entertained than educated. Chiropractic “miracle” case studies are more interesting to most people than a study that reports a practice member was doing well before chiropractic care and is still doing well with chiropractic care. A “well-patient” study has to rely on dry reporting of objective measures or statistical health outcomes surveys. Do quantitative, chiropractic, subjective outcomes assessments even exist? Our “Reality TV” dilemma isn’t limited to chiropractic science it is just as prevalent in chiropractic philosophy. The majority of the “principled” segment of the profession seems like they would rather get pumped up on spizz than critically think about philosophical principles
One future goal for research could be to establish a “differential diagnosis” of the vertebral subluxation. If we want to advance our science we must define and test the various options we have in analysis and how they relate to our clinical goal of reducing subluxation. There have been a number of studies on tools such as thermography, palpation, leg length inequality, etc but, as Dr. McCoy concludes in a recent article in the Annals of Vertebral Subluxation Research regarding thermography, we need still need to work on a number of areas including the reliability of interpretation, the clinical utility of analysis, and the relationship between thermal readings and outcomes.
Why did B.J. Palmer write, if it took him twenty lifetimes to do it, he would prove chiropractic?