If taking a patient’s vital signs makes you a better, more competent chiropractor, then doing full body diagnostic tests will make you an even better one. Following that logic, the closer we come to practicing medicine, the better chiropractor we are. which means that the best chiropractors in the world are not chiropactors at all but M.D.s!
On professional names
If certain people in our profession have no problem with the term “chiropractic physician, “ claiming that “physician” has a broader definition than just reference to a medical doctor, would they have a problem with the term “chiropactic medicine?” The latter term is no more an oxymoron than the former. we already have osteopathic medicine and wholistic medicine. Perhaps we have here one of the first steps toward clearly separating the different factions within the profession. We can get rid of the highly inflammatory term “mixer.” While the term “chiropractic medicine” at first may rankle some straights, we must recognize that ht mixers will not give up the term “chiropractic,” they don’t want to be labeled “mixer,” and we have a public that is terribly confused. I think if the straight movement would accept it, the mixers would probably have no problem. The only trouble might be selling it to the medical doctors!
If you are treating disease you are doing the same thing medical doctors are doing. Therefore you need clinical research to prove tat your treatment is more effective and safer than theirs. Unfortunately, clinical research with disease conditions merely perpetuates the misconception that chiropactic is another treatment for disease.
Isn’t it strange that the aspect of our profession which is so into research and scientific proof of chiropactic and so against straight chiropactic has never produced a shred of proof that non-diagnostic, straight chiropractic is a danger to the health care delivery system, which is their argument for opposing it?v10n3