The difference between chiropractic and every therapeutic approach to the treatment of disease is that chiropractic does not presume to make recommendations specific to an individual's health needs except to "prescribe" a program for receiving adjustments. When chiropractors stray from this narrow approach for any reason no matter how it is done, a problem is created. Telling a patient to take vitamin C for his or her cold or do certain exercises to strengthen the back muscles is not such a horrible thing. It is, however, indicative of a philosophical weakness. A chiropractor who makes specific, prescriptive recommendations for an individual in any area of health is saying he knows with his educated, finite mind what is best, what is needed or how to run the human body. What makes chiropractic unique is that the chiropractor understands his place in the restoration of health in a patient. The chiropractor introduces a specific force. The innate intelligence of the body makes the adjustment and thus restores the expression of mental impulses and proper function. The innate intelligence does the healing. It establishes the body's needs and supplies those needs as long as it is free of interference and within limitations of matter. Whenever the chiropractor presumes to encroach upon the job of the intelligence of the body, he is mixing. It is not so much mixing medicine and chiropractic that is dangerous but mixing the role of the chiropractor and role of the innate intelligence. The former is often done out of ignorance, the latter is done out of arrogance. The latter invariably leads to the former. The moment the chiropractor loses that unique humility that is responsible for the success of chiropractic he is in trouble. It is not the act but the thinking behind the act. There appears to be new techniques developing in chiropractic that incorporate certain rehabilitative exercises along with the adjustments, presumably to help hold the adjustment or improve spinal structure. If chiropractic is to survive we cannot, no matter how great our scientific, educated knowledge, begin to prescribe for patients. Prescription is subjective, arbitrary and is basic to the practice of medicine. It is antithetical to the practice of chiropractic. What can the chiropractor do and still be consistent with his philosophy? Almost without exception the difference between what a chiropractor should do and should not do with regard to recommendations comes down to this: If the information imparted to the patient is something that could be said to a group of people, it is patient education in the area of health. If it is something specifically for that particular patient, it is prescriptive. For example, in the area of exercise, telling a patient that exercise is important to their overall health is patient education. If you are going to do that, then you must also explain that exercise is the normal natural amount of activity necessary to maintain the body in a state of health. You must teach them that the exercise needs of an individual differ from every other individual. They are based upon the person's frame, health, activity, work, diet and a dozen other factors. They also differ from day to day for the same individual. You must explain why no one can determine the exact exercise needs for any individual, that only the body can do it, and if a person needs or wants expert advice in order to make an educated decision, he or she should go to an expert in the field of exercise or therapeutic rehabilitation. You must explain that you are no more an authority in that field than you are in the field of medicine. If you are going to educate people regarding exercise, then the above is a minimum. Obviously, explaining the above, which is consistent with the chiropractic philosophy, precludes then prescribing three different spinal exercises in order to enable the individual to strengthen his or her spine and to better hold the adjustment. Here is the principle that is important. If we explain what exercise is, why it is an individual matter and why a person should not depend on someone else to determine their exercise needs, we create independent individuals who can learn to take control of their lives and meet their physical needs according to the dictates of the innate intelligence of their bodies. If we prescribe, on the other hand, we have created a dependent "innate cripple" who must come back to us every time for instruction, every time they need to make a decision about the running of their body. That's what the practice of medicine has been doing for the last 2000 years! It may be ego gratifying and financially rewarding but it does the patient no good in the long run and is contrary to the philosophy of chiropractic. Remember the philosophy of chiropractic is not just something we arbitrarily choose to practice by but it is what is in the best interest of the individual patient and humanity in general.
VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION DEGENERATION The straight chiropractic segment of the profession has embraced the above term more quickly than anything in recent history. In fact, it seems to have more readily accepted VSD and VSC (Vertebral Subluxation Complex) than the term "straight chiropractic" which in itself is more than a little frightening. In an effort to save time and space I will not go into an explanation of vertebral subluxation degeneration and its four phases. I would imagine that chiropractors who read this newsletter tend to be knowledgeable in the modern concepts of the profession. There are a number of issues concerning this concept that must be addressed. First, subluxation degeneration or spinal degeneration is a medical entity. Disease is outside the realm of chiropractic. It does not matter whether the disease is degeneration of the heart muscle, kidney tissue or bones of the spine, it is not part of the practice of chiropractic. It should not be in any way addressed by the chiropractor , except as it may present a contraindication to certain adjusting techniques. We do not diagnose, treat, discuss or relate to disease of any kind, at any time, anywhere in the human body. Just because that disease happens to involve the spinal column does not make it part of our domain. Cancer, tuberculosis , osteoporosis and numerous other diseases involve the spinal column. They are the domain of the medical profession, always have been. The second issue is related to the first. One of the more interesting things that has emerged from the chiropractic philosophy in more recent years is the concept that disease always has a multiplicity of causes. One of those causes may be at certain times the inability of the body to function in a coordinated manner. That state may be due to a vertebral subluxation. This justifies our addressing our attention to vertebral subluxation. But to say that any condition, whether it involves the spine or not, is caused by a vertebral subluxation is not only presumptuous but philosophically unsound, scientifically unprovable, and clinically undemonstrable. We can honestly say that people in all four phases of spinal degeneration need chiropractic care if they are subluxated. That can also be said for every other person on the face of the earth, even those who demonstrate a "normal spine." Many who have jumped on the "four phases" bandwagon have done so because it is scientific, because we can now present some thing tangible, that is, research done by an M.D. as op posed to this "abstract chiropractic philosophy." The fact is, the research primarily involves Dr. Hadley, an M.D., taking x-rays of various stages of degeneration of a woman's spine. No examination for subluxation was done. Now we may assume that she was subluxated for more than likely she was. However, there is no scientific proof. If these four phases are the result of vertebral subluxation and if the first subluxation occurs at birth or shortly thereafter, then we can logically conclude that those patients walking into our office who are 40 years of age and over and never have been adjusted are going to look at least like a Phase III or maybe even a Phase IV. The fact is that you could look at a thousand sixty-year old cervical spines and not see one that looks like Hadley's Phase IV. So, either the vertebral subluxation is not the epidemic scourge affecting babies, small children and everyone else or, the four phases of spinal degeneration only occur in a small percentage of people who are subluxated and also have certain other internal (hereditary) and/or external (environmental) factors which predispose them to that particular disease. Well, shoot, why stop at the four phases, let's include heart disease, cancer and all the rest. Throw up an x-ray of the stages of cancer and tell people it's related to years of subluxations. We have no more scientific proof that subluxation is related to cancer than we do to the four phases but who cares, we can scare the bejabbers out of that patient with what their cancer will look like if they don't get adjusted. I know we are taught to do some fancy footwork, to say this is only a representation but, let's be honest, it is another PR tool and frankly it's less than honest. We should not have to use a diseased spine, researched by an M.D. which is no more or no less related to a vertebral subluxation than any other disease in the body to attract and educate our patients. If we must use these questionable procedures as educational tools we need to back up and reevaluate where we are going. To paraphrase B.J. "chiropractic is honest or it is nothing."
