I have an issue with those who decry the lack of “scientific proof” of this principle that we straight chiropractors embrace. We hear everything from vitriolic condemnation to condescension because of our “problem.” Ironically, our “problem” is not a problem for us, nor for the government, nor for even a single insurance company and most important, not for the public. It is only a few, a very few powerful and influential chiropractors who want to change chiropractic, who have a problem with what we do and what we are failing to scientifically prove. We maintain that there is an inborn intelligence in the human organism which controls and coordinates function through the nerve system and that a misaligned vertebra may interfere with the nerves and affect the proper function of the body.
Here is the problem: these people have already rejected what we hold to, that the innate intelligence of the body works better in all people when there is no interference in the nerve system. That is a pretty simple and straightforward assertion. They just do not accept it and I have no idea why. Not only do they not accept it, I believe they will never accept it because they have already placed their faith in the religion of the outside-in approach of scientism. They have not proved our approach incorrect, they have simply accepted it as incorrect and are trying to find reasons why it is not valid. That is not only academically dishonest, it borders on criminal for a needy public. There is a significant difference between proving us wrong scientifically and rejecting our assertions outright without any proof except for unfounded reasons. Actually, they cannot even come up with unfounded reasons. The only reason that they can come up with is that no empirical studies have been done. When you think about it, the only argument that they put forward is that we have not done scientific studies that meet their criteria. They have no other argument.
There is a clear reasonableness to our philosophy. The body has an inborn organizing principle. The body has the capacity to heal itself. The nerve system is a tool the intelligence uses to coordinate all functions. We make no outlandish claims for cures of diseases (at least we do not in objective straight or non-therapeutic chiropractic).
There is ample scientific proof that the nerve system can be interfered with, proof from the medical community who have nothing to gain from our assertions. There are over 110 years of anecdotal events. All of this counts for nothing to them. It must have had some value at one time, enough to convince them to be a part of this profession. If they have had any clinical experience, they have seen the anecdotal changes talking place in the lives of people.
With all these arguments in our favor, the logic of our approach, the anatomical and physiological basis, the anecdotal events, governmental and third-party acceptance, and an apparently satisfied public, there is every reason to continue our practice. There are absolutely no arguments against the continuation of what we do. If people were being injured or killed by our procedures that would be an argument. However, incidents are so rare in chiropractic that any scientific study would be hard pressed to demonstrate a cause-effect relationship. If we were preventing people from getting necessary medical care, that would be an argument. But modern non-therapeutic chiropractic does not do that. There is, in fact, every reason to continue our practice until such time as we scientifically demonstrate the validity of what we do, if that can be done. There is no reason to stop or alter our practice. This idea outlined above is so wonderful that anyone who is a chiropractor, no, anyone who is interested in serving humanity, would surely want to attempt to prove it, not reject it on such a lame excuse that it has yet to be proved scientifically.
I would suggest that this issue has nothing to do with science, nothing to do with validating chiropractic, nothing to do with us taking our rightful place within the health-care community. It has to do with one group of people, who, for some reason have already rejected, out of hand, what we do and what we believe. Who personally despise us for our beliefs and, for whatever personal and individual reasons they might have, want to destroy us. This is not an issue of science. It is not an issue of raising the level of recognition of our profession. It is not an issue of proving what we do to the government or the public. It is primarily an issue of one group of people who have rejected our approach to chiropractic. Oh, there may be a few people who sincerely think we would be better off as a profession if we proved our theories, but those are very few and probably are not in positions of power and are really not part of this group.
Last evening I watched the President’s State of the Union Address. I saw the clear partisanship on the two sides of the aisle stronger than I have ever seen before. I realized for the first time what the issue is with the political environment in this country. You could see it on the faces and in the eyes of the men and women as the cameras panned the right side of the audience. These people absolutely hate the president. They despise him as a person for his core beliefs, his values and his personality, not merely his politics.
This morning I realized what the issue is in chiropractic. The side of the profession who is screaming about the need for scientific proof hates us and what we believe. The issue is not scientific proof. The issue is that we embrace a metaphysical mindset. It is not about science. It is about innate intelligence. It is about removing every vestige of this philosophical principle. Validating chiropractic is not the issue. Invalidating the Major Premise of chiropractic is. This battle in chiropractic is not over science. It is over values. It is over a belief system. It is merely an extension of the larger battle in society. It is the battle over theism and atheism, absolutes and post-modern thinking, strict constitutional interpretation and the Constitution as a “living document.”
For 200 years, God and His Standards were an integral part of our society. The so-called “separation clause” was put in the Constitution to protect religion from the government not the people from religious tyranny. In fact, almost everything in the Constitution is meant to protect the people from governmental tyranny. We had prayer in public schools, God in the Pledge of Allegiance, the Ten Commandments hanging in the courtrooms and “In God we trust” on our money. None of those things ever impinged on anyone’s freedom for 200 years. Well, we see how that is changing from one hateful woman who started by removing prayer in the public schools and has been continued by her God-hating progeny.
For over 100 years, the principles of chiropractic were based on a metaphysical premise. We got along just fine and I would suggest we grew and flourished as a result of it. It obviously was not because of our plethora of scientific proof! Today, the same outside-in, anthropo-centric people who are trying to remove every aspect of God from society are trying to remove the metaphysical underpinnings of chiropractic. They believe that all metaphysical concepts are ultimately grounded in a theistic world and life viewpoint and they are probably correct. Same war, just a different battlefield. They believe we must remove every concept of God from the fabric of society including government, morals, science, politics and culture. They see chiropractic philosophy as a hindrance. It is not that chiropractic must be scientific, it is that it must not be philosophical and making it into a science seems to be the best way to remove the philosophy because science only addresses the material. The issue is not about becoming more scientific to them. The issue is about becoming less, no, non-philosophical.v21n3
So for those of you who do not agree with their direction for chiropractic, who believe that chiropractic must maintain its “innate” philosophy,1 I make four suggestions:
1. For those interested in research, do not allow philosophical constructs to be removed from that work.
2. Resist the efforts of those who would destroy our philosophy, especially in the name of validation, scientific research or societal acceptance.
3. Increase the exposure of your practice members and the community to the philosophy of chiropractic, particularly concepts like innate intelligence.
4. Support those in the country who are fighting the larger battle of this culture war which is a battle of two world viewpoints, above-down inside-out and outside-in. That battle for the minds of society directly affects chiropractic.
1 By innate philosophy, I mean the inborn philosophy from the time chiropractic was “born” as well as the philosophy that is founded on an innate intelligence in living things.
V21n3