Excerpt from The Strauss Commentaries on the Green Books-Book Six.
As B.J. discusses the research and data of the B.J. Palmer Research Clinic, I am always left with the same question. It is clear that B.J. wanted to do legitimate research. He went to great pains in his work to remove variables. He used the finest equipment available. He brought in medical doctors to insure that medical findings were ascertained and evaluated by the right people. He published thousands of pages of his findings in volume after volume and he was thoroughly satisfied that chiropractic indeed did get sick people well. Here is my question: Why does the scientific community not accept his findings? In fact, why does the chiropractic profession in general not accept that correcting vertebral subluxation will address the cause of diseases? Is there no true objectivity in the scientific community? Have these findings been brought to light in the world of science or is there some major flaw in B.J.’s research which he was unable to see that renders his work unacceptable? Are we missing something? There are schools of medicine that are founded on the work of people like Pasteur, research done over a century ago. It is still respected today. Yet to my knowledge there is not one school, not even the one that bears the Palmer name, that teaches the chiropractic principle based on the research and proof that B.J. purported? Do we just ignore this aspect of our history? We seem to. If so, why is it ignored? Are we afraid that publishing this research and presenting it to the world would elicit nothing more than a chuckle and a pat on the head as if we were a small child who had just performed a successful experiment with a chemistry set we got for Christmas.
I believe as a profession we need to evaluate B.J.’s research and determine that it is valid and submit it to the scientific community, or we need to find where the research is flawed. We have research departments at all the chiropractic colleges, getting grant money to study things that B.J. may have already proven. Some of their research should be in evaluating the B.J. Palmer Research Clinic findings for the purpose of either using it or relegating it to the trash heap of chiropractic history. As it stands now, that work is in a state of limbo. As such we are being unfair to B.J., to the profession, and to the goals of science and research. v17n4