Does the emphasis on getting sick people well and the resultant expenditure of effort (such as research, people changing their techniques all the time and mixing come from the guilt of failure?
More important than giving people a chiropractic adjustment is giving them an ADIO world and life viewpoint (WALV). It is like the “giving a person a fish and teaching them to fish” principle. Perhaps the lack of success/acceptance or prominence of chiropractic is not because we haven’t given them adjustments but because we haven’t even put an (ADIO) worm on the hook. The chiropractic philosophy is part of an ADIO WALV. It is the worm and the objective is the hook.
I don’t think it is the guilt of failure, but rather the “dent” in the EGO, from years in Chiropractic school that drives home the idea that you CAN get sick people well.
Excellent point Glenn! The CCE has convinced students (and chiropractors)that we are as much “equal” to the m.d. in getting sick people well. I remember a student in a chiropractic school where I was speaking, bragging that she, as a student, found a cancer on x-ray that the physician had missed. My response: “so what?” A 7up commercial a few years ago, always #3 in the soft drink battles, began to advertise them-self as “the uncola-no caffeine, never had it, never will.” They positioned themselves in a different place. Perhaps we need to market chiropractic as the “# 1 non-therapeutic healing art in the world. That’s sure better than the old ICA’s “largest drugless healing art” Most of chiropractic is still drugless… for now, but not non-therapeutic!
The trouble of chiropractic education is that chiropractic is excellent at relieving symptoms. It works so fast, that the pts who came because of never ending symptoms, forget after a short while, why they came in the first place.
Even the chiropractor get loomed by the speed of adio recovery.
To such a degree, that when it is not happening as expected, the chiropractor looks for logical explanation, thus erroneously admits the fault.
Good point Ronan! TSC is pretty good at Getting certain Sick People Well which is mistakenly translated/understood (by the PM and the general public as relieving their symptoms). Our explanation of chiropractic must include:
1. The PM (and the public’s) understanding the objective of medicine (GSPW)in contrast to the objective of chiropractic(enabling the body to work better.
2. The body works better without VS.
3. Correcting VS is the only chiropractic objective.
4.The body (actually the innate intelligence of the body does the healing).
5.The ability of the living body is limited by limitations of the material with which it as to work.
The order and the means (lay lecture, orientation, internet, etc.,etc.,etc.) these are explained and by which these are
understood
determines the success and more (to me anyway)important whether the chiropractor is explaining TSC, OSC or not explaining chiropractic at all. By failing to explain these point has chiropractic to considered a means of only benefiting certain “sick” people, ie.
those with musculoskeletal problems, which is apparently acceptable to the medical (and most of our) profession and will allow us to join the medical community.