Not too long ago a national chiropractic publication ran the results of a survey in Michigan and Georgia concerning "practice rights." It appears the survey was done legitimately and scientifically although they never revealed who paid for it. I imagine the results were nearly what they expected or they probably would not have published the results. I am not one of the "false Chiropractic Gods who start rationalizing that the surveys were not conducted honestly." I believe they were and that they present a fairly accurate account of the thinking of the chiropractic profession in Georgia, Michigan, and probably the rest of the country. The survey showed that the vast majority of chiropractors approve of ultrasound and electrical muscle stimulation, nutrition, and diagnosis as part of the practice of chiropractic. What has that proved? The only thing I can see is that the results show again that the majority is not always right. Throughout history time and time again the majority has shown itself to be wrong, foolish, ignorant, prejudice, and lacking in truly intelligent thought or action. In 1492 the majority of people thought the world was flat. Hitler and his Nationalist allies had a majority in the Reichstag election of March 5, 1933. The majority of the people in the world embrace Marxism and socialism. Does that mean the United States is wrong? If the United States of America had waited for the majority of the people to agree to independence we would still be English Colonies. The majority of people in this country at the turn of the century thought chiropractic quackery (if they thought about it at all). That did not stop our chiropractic forefathers from pushing for the right of the minority (themselves). The majority of people in this country have never gone to a chiropractor, yet we chiropractors have fought for inclusion in insurance and Medicare and Medicaid so that the small minority could have the benefits. Benefits, I might add which are paid for by the majority.
The whole point is, do we really need to know what the majority thinks? Now, calm yourself. Remember that a majority-rule type of government is a democracy and the United States is a Republic. In the beginning of our country a minority was given the privilege of voting. Since then we have extended that privilege to others, e.g. women and 18 21 year olds. That privilege was extended by acts of a legislature that was elected by the minority. That is the way a republic works. Those who demonstrate responsibility vote, electing officials whom they feel are responsible enough to make good laws. As the old television program used to say, "It's not the best system but all the others are so much worse." Even today the majority of Americans do not elect the president. The Electoral College does. Conceivably the majority of the people in this nation could vote for one man (or woman) and due to the distribution of electoral votes another could be elected. In fact the majority of Americans do not even vote! Between those unregistered, those ineligible, and those who are registered but for one reason or another don't get out to the polls a relatively small minority elects the leadership in this country. The United States was not founded on the rule of the majority but the rights of the individual. Lynch mobs represent the rule of the majority. Trial by jury represents the rights of the individual, and the verdict must be unanimous, not a majority. The last pure democracy, government by majority, existed around the 5th century B.C., in Greece. It was a tremendous age for science, the arts and philosophy, but it didn't last very long. Primarily because the majority were more interested in the above than they were a strong military. The wishes of the majority should be the last reason to precipitate action. The majority of chiropractors in this country do not belong to any national or state organizations. Should we conclude from that statistic that there is no reason for the organization's existence? How much weight can two state organizations (Michigan and Georgia) place upon the opinion of chiropractors. A majority poll cannot tell you what is good or bad, right or wrong, best or worst. The only thing a majority survey demonstrates is what the majority thinks at that particular moment. The majority laid palms at Jesus' feet on Sunday and yelled "Crucify Him!" on Thursday. The worst thing you can do with a survey is try to analyze the thinking of the majority because frankly the majority is not often thinking. If we are to argue issues in chiropractic let's do it on a philosophical, scientific, intellectual, or legal basis. But, please spare us the absurdity of majority surveys.
CHIROPRACTIC ROOTS
It is indeed a sad indictment upon our profession that there is so little apparent interest in chiropractic history. I imagine the apathetic attitude is no worse than the lack of interest in American history by most Americans. However, you would think that anyone truly interested in chiropractic, its philosophy and its future would be interested in its history. Yet less than 2% of our profession belong to an organization called the Association for the History of Chiropractic. Chiropractic history courses are virtually non-existent in chiropractic colleges. I would venture to say that other than names like D.D. Palmer, B.J. Palmer, and Harvey Lillard, historical figures in chiropractic are pretty much unknown. Many chiropractors have no interest in this profession other than how much money they can get from it. But, there is a good percentage who are truly interested in chiropractic and its future. Those are the ones who read this newsletter and should be interested in chiropractic history, yet there is a strong indication that there is an obvious lack of interest. The saying that those who do not study the events of history are doomed to repeat its mistakes is more than a trite statement. Many of the problems of contemporary chiropractic were the same problems that confronted our forefathers. We would do well to look at the mistakes that they made and at their solutions in order to keep from making the same errors. While the Blacks, the American Indians, and other ethnic groups are increasingly emphasizing their history, chiropractors appear to be trying to bury theirs. We are literally burying our history. Every year more of the great pioneers pass on and their stories, their battles, the feelings that they had in building this profession are lost for all time. That is truly sad. What these great men and women did 40, 50, 60, 70 years ago is largely responsible for our right to practice today and most of us do not even know them or know of that which they have done. Studying the lives of men like Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, Lee, and Lincoln can give us an appreciation of what this country now is, and what it should be. Similarly, studying the lives of the great historical figures in chiropractic can give us an appreciation of what chiropractic now is and what it should be. I think some chiropractors are afraid to study chiropractic history for fear that it will somehow disrupt their present thinking. Deep down they are concerned that what they are doing does not line up with the principles and concepts that those who developed our profession held. That's okay! There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with the developers of our profession but just maybe they can convince you that their ideas and their concept of chiropractic is sounder, better, and more rewarding. At least it shouldn't hurt to "hear them out." You may find that the old-timers were not ignorant "fishpeddlers" but were intelligent, articulate, scientific thinkers. Every chiropractor should begin to take an interest in chiropractic history. It has to affect your thinking to some degree. If nothing else, it will make you think and there is far too little of that being done today within our profession.
WHERE HAVE ALL THE VOLUME PRACTICES GONE?
Ten to fifteen years ago chiropractors established professional success in part by the number of patients they took care of in a day or week. Seminars were given to teach young chiropractors how they could attract multitudes of patients to their offices. It was not unusual for a successful D.C. to adjust over 1,000 patients per week and see 50 new patients in the course of that period. Granted, "the numbers game" sometimes got out of hand and figures were often inflated in introducing speakers and advertising seminars. But, the fact remains that measuring success by the number of patients is determining success by service. Today it appears that success is measured by an altogether different criteria. A materialistic yardstick is now the indicator of success within our profession. Seminars emphasize how much money they can help you make rather than how many patients they can help you attract and adjust. Young chiropractors do not seem to strive to see a hundred patients a day but rather try to figure a means by which they can charge 100 dollars a patient. The measure of success today is not whether you are seeing a thousand patients a week but whether you are making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Greed has engulfed our profession as more and more chiropractors are practicing less and less chiropractic on fewer and fewer patients to get insurance and government dollars. Recently a chiropractor spoke in a chiropractic college class in Patient Management and Office Procedure. The chiropractor had at one time one of the largest volume practices in his entire state. But, more recently he had changed to charging a high fee and maintaining almost a total insurance practice. This chiropractor, who was still a very young man, boasted to the students that now he was making three times the money he once did and was only expending one-third the energy. What he was saying was that he is now seeing one-third the patients. What a shame! What about all those people who need chiropractic care? And, what does he do with all his extra time? Perhaps he tries to find ways to spend all the extra money. I think every individual has the right to wealth if he or she so deserves, but not at the expense of chiropractic for humanity. If this chiropractor continued to work as hard as he once did he should make six times as much money (if my mathematics is correct.) It appears that in this case, and I do not believe this one chiropractor is an isolated case, that the amount of money you make is inversely proportional to the amount of chiropractic service you give. That principle is born out by the fact that in this area the chiropractor making the most money practices no chiropractic at all. Ten years ago one of the most respected chiropractors I have ever had the privilege of knowing said something frighteningly prophetic. It was during a discussion of the straight-mixing controversy that he stated that the issue of mixing chiropractic would not destroy our profession. "If anything destroys chiropractic it will be materialism." In less than ten years that statement is on the verge of coming true. Greed has permeated most professions. Professional sports has become big business. Law and medicine, with few exceptions, are mostly about the task of making money. We somehow think that the clergy and chiropractic are two professions who should be above the greed lust. But, it appears we are not. It does not appear that the desire for the dollar will abate before it gets worse. For the materialistic chiropractor will attract materialistic students to our colleges and the syndrome will be perpetuated. The success of our profession is based upon two things. One, we have a principle that enables the human organism to express a little more of its innate potential. Chiropractic does not have the ability to make drastic changes in bodily function as do drugs and surgery. But, the body has oft times almost miraculous ability to heal itself and that is the reason for our success. The second reason is that chiropractors have always been people-oriented. The pioneers in our profession fought for, and went to jail for a principle that they thought was important. Humanity deserved to experience the benefits of that principle. Most of them could have had easier lives and made more lucrative livings doing something else. But, "chiropractic for humanity" was too important. Very few became rich but they took care of many people and gave us the heritage we now have. We are ignoring that heritage and "going for the big bucks." This attitude and problem transcends straight--mixing lines. The attitude pervades all of our colleges. It may be an unspoken attitude on the straight college campus but it is nevertheless there, judging from the way the graduates practice when they go into the field. The materialistic attitude could be overlooked if the doctors used the money to educate the public to chiropractic, for grants for chiropractic research, or plowed it back into the colleges. But, judging from the pleas that almost daily come in the mail, very little of the money made in chiropractic is being returned to chiropractic. Greed and materialism will strangle our profession faster than anything. In the verbal jargon of the straight-mixing battle, we have stopped using a word that was very popular 10 years ago. Anyone who has graduated from chiropractic college in the last five years may not have even heard the term but it best describes the type of chiropractor we need and the type our colleges had better begin to produce. What we need are Principled Chiropractors.
