It is interesting that the critics of chiropractic often charge that our philosophy is too simplistic. Yet the outside-in philosophy, epecially medicine is where the simplistic approach exists and actually originated. We do not say “this germ causes this disease” and “that germ causes that disease.” We do not blame hay fever on ragweed pollen. We say, sure the germ is a factor but resistance is also a factor and there are many subfactors to resistance. Likewise the pollen is an irritant but the body’s inability to produce a multitude of chemicals that would neutralize the irritant is also a factor.
Vertebral subluxation is not the cause of any disease but it and the subsequent effect it has on the body is very likely a cause of every disease. We in NTOSC just do not conjecture how great a factor or what the other causes are.
I guess the critics say the philosophy is simplistic due to us starting with a major premise that is different from their “science” or philosophy. They have a major premise and philosophy as well, but dont realize what it is and how it manages what they do.
It’s ironic Scott. I think the simplistic charge came about by traditional chiropractic claiming one single cause to all disease. But the medics are no different when they claim one single cause to each disease.
Hey Joe,
I don’t think you can have it both ways. If we can not tell whether the problem that exists is a disease or the limits of matter how can we say subluxations relate to disease at all? Disease is a medical condition not within the realm of chiropractic. Or have I been reading your blog wrong?
Besides our philosophy is simplistic, that’s part of the beauty of it.
Steve, a disease is a limitation of matter. However, sometimes the symptoms of a disease are the body adapting when it is not subluxated, so you bring up a good point. My post was referring to the chiropractic profession as a whole and when talking about VS as the cause of a/all disease it is a legitimate charge. Any OI approach like medicine and some aproaches to chiropractic are simplistic. Simplistic has a negative connotation, it is oversimplifying a complex problem. Disease is a complex problem and we do not address it. NTOSC is simple because it does not try to make a complex issue (disease) simple. It just doesn’t address it.
Hey Joe,
Neither does chiropractic try to make a simple problem such as subluxations cause dis-ease more complex than it is.
True, a simple problem but not a simplistic issue.
It is for me. Your body always works better with a clear nerve system. ENUF SAID
Hey Joe,
Didn’t Einstein say ..if you can’t explain a problem simply you don’t understand it well enough?
Your statement “a disease is a limitation of matter”, is that also true in reverse? Are all LOM diseases?
And, “sometimes the symptoms of a disease are the body adapting when it is not subluxated”, shouldn’t that read…sometimes symptoms are from disease sometimes symptoms are from adaptation, both states can occur with or without subluxation? Since we cannot know we check and adjust as indicated regardless.