Penn & Teller Do it again!

[Timber Loftis]

No, MagiK, I just know enough science to realize that the act of exercising and aligning your spine is obviously beneficial. I'm not claiming it cured my kidney problems, just that it made me feel better. For the same reason a massage would. You admitted a massage would make one feel better - why not a realignment?

Oh, and you don't need an M.D. to be a chiropractor. It's much more akin to massage therapy than medicine. But, it's patent common-sense obviousness that it can keep you healthy and feeling well.

I'd love to see the show, BTW, but I only get basic cable so oh well.

Hopefully they will have the series picked up for show on regualr cable channels after its first seasons run is done.

And I agree that you can have beneficial results to the area affected, but most chiropractors claim benefits far beyond anything they can back up..which puts them into the realm of "Bullshit!". I practice massage therapy myself and know you can have beneficial emmotional results and temporarily lessen someones pain just from some human contact, I would never however claim that my massages would cure the common cold. (Wish there wasnt such a stigma on massage but the porno industries gots to make their living tooo )

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by MagiK: Bet you would have just as much "relief" after a massage too.

Well, being that my gf is a massage therapist she could feel how out of alignment my back was before my last visit then after. A good massage can do wonders, but if the discs in your back are out of alignment and impinging on the nerves you will have pain.

Besides I am more then happy to pop down the $25-45 for an adjustment when it means I can walk out of the office free of back pain. I've done it about 4 times over the last ten years and it's worked wonders everytime.

[Sir Taliesin]

I've been using a chiroprator on and off for the last several years. He has done wonders for my back, whenever I manage to knock it out of whack. While I'm sure that SOME of them are snake oil salesman, most aren't! Don't generalize and lump them all together! That's like saying all military intelligence analysts are idiots, cause there is no intelligence in the military!

[Attalus]

In fact, no M.D. that I know of is a chiropractor. Their "degree" is D.C. I have actually seen what peoples' spines look like on the inside, and believe,me, they are way too tightly put together with ligaments, et al, for anyone to be doing much with "adjusting" them. No chiropractor has been able to show a in a controlled series that chiropractic does anything whatsoever.

[/)eathKiller]

Man... I should get ShowTime...

[Bardan the Slayer]

Originally posted by MagiK: Quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Chiropractic isn't junk. The spine settles in odd ways, especially given our modern-day sedintary lifestyle, and re-aligning it is one of the healthiest things you can do. The chiropractor also found a significant problem in my lower back caused by an accident I had as a kid. The fused vertebrae just below the lumbar and above the coccygeal (I forget the name) is so outta-whack that I have to do exercises to prevent possible crippleness later in life. I haven't seen the chiropractor in about 5 years, or the doctor in about 10. But, my back has been being affected by sitting 10 hrs/day and I'm seriously seeking a chiropractor in the next few months. As for the other crap, I'm sure it's funny. But, proving someone reacts to a placebo does not disprove the effectiveness of a treatment. You can do the same trick with fake Tylenol. And, there is no doubt that Penn & Teller are good magicians, but also very large assholes.

TL Im sure you are quite glad you went to the chiropractor, and my posts here won't change your mind, what I do not convey well and what you have to see the show for is that they did not just use placebo's they used scientific investigative techniques to discount the science and pseudo science. If it works for ya, go for it...all I know is that I prefer to not count on my mind tricking me into believing someone twisting my neck can cure exema, hemmorhoids, arthritis and a whole host of other things that many legitimate chriopractors claim it can. [/QUOTE]Undoubtedly it won't cure your haemmorhoids, but it may cure your bad neck, just as a chiropractor manipulating your spine may certainly be able to cure your back problems. Manipulating bones and joints to cure bone and joint problems is fact. Manipulating bones and joins to cure your Eczema is fiction

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Attalus: In fact, no M.D. that I know of is a chiropractor. Their "degree" is D.C. I have actually seen what peoples' spines look like on the inside, and believe,me, they are way too tightly put together with ligaments, et al, for anyone to be doing much with "adjusting" them. No chiropractor has been able to show a in a controlled series that chiropractic does anything whatsoever.

Yup I guess you are right:

Studies on Chiropractic

A summary of published studies and official inquiries documenting the efficacy and appropriateness of chiropractic health care.

The National Board of Chiropractic Examiners published reports based on a four-year study of chiropractic. These reports focused on three surveys including full-time, licensed U.S., Canadian and registered Australian and New Zealand chiropractic practitioners. The surveys and their resulting reports are titled Job Analysis of Chiropractic.

Following publication of the Job Analysis of Chiropractic, the NBCE began to receive requests for permission to reproduce certain portions of the reports. In response to those requests, the NBCE has condensed relevant portions for distribution:


GOVERNMENT AND RESEARCH STUDIES ON CHIROPRACTIC

In recent years, numerous independent researchers and various government agencies have conducted studies which focus on the efficacy, appropriateness and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic treatment. Several of these important studies are listed below.

U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCY REPORTING
A 1994 study published by the U.S. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorses spinal manipulation for acute low back pain in adults in its Clinical Practice Guideline #14. An independent multidisciplinary panel of private-sector clinicians and other experts convened and developed specific statements on appropriate health care of acute low back problems in adults. In one statement cited, relief of discomfort (low back pain) can be accomplished most safely with spinal manipulation and/or nonprescription medication.


THE MANGA REPORT
A major study to assess the most appropriate use of available health care resources was reported in 1993. This was an outcomes-study funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and conducted in hopes of sharing information about ways to reduce the incidence of work-related injuries and to address cost-effective ways to rehabilitate disabled and injured workers. The study was conducted by three health economists led by University of Ottawa Professor Pran Manga, Ph.D. The report of the study is commonly called the Manga Report. The Manga Report overwhelmingly supported the efficacy, safety, scientific validity, and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic for low-back pain. Additionally, it found that higher patient satisfaction levels were associated with chiropractic care than with medical treatment alternatives. "Evidence from Canada and other countries suggests potential savings of hundreds of millions annually," the Manga Report states. "The literature clearly and consistently shows that the major savings from chiropractic management come from fewer and lower costs of auxiliary services, fewer hospitalizations, and a highly significant reduction in chronic problems, as well as in levels and duration of disability."


RAND STUDY ON LOW-BACK PAIN
A four-phase study conducted in the early 1990s by RAND, one of America's most prestigious centers for research in public policy, science and technology, explored many indications of low-back pain. In the RAND studies, an expert panel of researchers, including medical doctors and doctors of chiropractic, found that:

chiropractors deliver a substantial amount of health care to the U.S. population.

spinal manipulation is of benefit to some patients with acute low-back pain.

The RAND reports marked the first time that representatives of the medical community went on record stating that spinal manipulation is an appropriate treatment for certain low-back pain conditions.


THE NEW ZEALAND COMMISSION REPORT
A particularly significant study of chiropractic was conducted between 1978 - 1980 by the New Zealand Commission of Inquiry. In its 377-page report to the House of Representatives, the Commission called its study "probably the most comprehensive and detailed independent examination of chiropractic ever undertaken in any country." The Commission entered the inquiry with "the general impression...shared by many in the community: that chiropractic was an unscientific cult, not to be compared with orthodox medical or paramedical services." By the end of the inquiry, the commission reported itself "irresistibly and with complete unanimity drawn to the conclusion that modern chiropractic is a soundly-based and valuable branch of health care in a specialized area..." Conclusions of the Commission's report, based on investigations in New Zealand, the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia, stated:

Spinal manual therapy in the hands of a registered chiropractor is safe.

Spinal manual therapy can be effective in relieving musculo-skeletal symptoms such as back pain, and other symptoms known to respond to such therapy, such as migraine.

Chiropractors are the only health practitioners who are necessarily equipped by their education and training to carry out spinal manual therapy.

In the public interest and in the interests of patients, there must be no impediment to full professional cooperation between chiropractors and medical practitioners.


FLORIDA WORKERS' COMPENSATION STUDY
A 1998 study of 10,652 Florida workers' compensation cases was conducted by Steve Wolk, Ph.D., and reported by the Foundation for Chiropractic Education and Research. It was concluded that "a claimant with a back-related injury, when initially treated by a chiropractor versus a medical doctor, is less likely to become temporarily disabled, or if disabled, remains disabled for a shorter period of time; and claimants treated by medical doctors were hospitalized at a much higher rate than claimants treated by chiropractors."


WASHINGTON HMO STUDY
In 1989, a survey administered by Daniel C. Cherkin, Ph.D., and Frederick A. MacCornack, Ph.D., concluded that patients receiving care from health maintenance organizations (HMOs) within the state of Washington were three times as likely to report satisfaction with care from chiropractors as they were with care from other physicians. The patients were also more likely to believe that their chiropractor was concerned about them.


UTAH WORKERS' COMPENSATION STUDY
A workers' compensation study conducted in Utah by Kelly B. Jarvis, D.C., Reed B. Phillips, D.C., Ph.D., and Elliot K. Morris, JD, MBA, compared the cost of chiropractic care to the costs of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes. Results were reported in the 1991 Journal of Occupational Medicine. The study indicated that costs were significantly higher for medical claims than for chiropractic claims; in addition, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care instead of chiropractic care.


PATIENT DISABILITY COMPARISON
A 1992 article in the Journal of Family Practice reported a study by D.C. Cherkin, Ph.D., which compared patients of family physicians and of chiropractors. The article stated "the number of days of disability for patients seen by family physicians was significantly higher (mean 39.7) than for patients managed by chiropractors (mean 10.8)." A related editorial in the same issue referred to risks of complications from lumbar manipulation as being "very low."


OREGON WORKERS' COMPENSATION
A 1991 report on a workers' compensation study conducted in Oregon by Joanne Nyiendo, Ph.D., concluded that the median time loss days (per case) for comparable injuries was 9.0 for patients receiving treatment by a doctor of chiropractic and 11.5 for treatment by a medical doctor.


STANO COST COMPARISON STUDY
A study by Miron Stano, Ph.D., reported in June 1993 Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics involved 395,641 patients with neuromusculoskeletal conditions. Results over a two-year period showed that patients who received chiropractic care incurred significantly lower health care costs than did patients treated solely by medical or osteopathic physicians.


SASKATCHEWAN CLINICAL RESEARCH
Following a 1993 study, researchers J. David Cassidy, D.C., Hayno Thiel, D.C., M.S., and W. Kirkaldy Willis, M.D., of the Back Pain Clinic at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatchewan concluded that "the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disk herniation by side posture manipulation is both safe and effective."


WIGHT STUDY ON RECURRING HEADACHES
A 1978 study conducted by J.S. Wight, D.C., and reported in the ACA Journal of Chiropractic, indicated that 74.6% of patients with recurring headaches, including migraines, were either cured or experienced reduced headache symptomatology after receiving chiropractic manipulation.


1991 GALLUP POLL
A 1991 demographic poll conducted by the Gallup Organization revealed that 90% of chiropractic patients felt their treatment was effective; more than 80% were satisfied with that treatment; and nearly 75% felt most of their expectations had been met during their chiropractic visits.


1990 BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL REPORT
A study conducted by T.W. Meade, a medical doctor, and reported in the June 2, 1990, British Medical Journal concluded after two years of patient monitoring, "for patients with low-back pain in whom manipulation is not contraindicated, chiropractic almost certainly confers worthwhile, long-tem benefit in comparison with hospital outpatient management."


VIRGINIA COMPARATIVE STUDY
A 1992 study conducted by L.G. Schifrin, Ph.D., provided an economic assessment of mandated health insurance coverage for chiropractic treatment within the Commonwealth of Virginia. As reported by the College of William and Mary, and the Medical College of Virginia, the study indicated that chiropractic provides therapeutic benefits at economical costs. The report also recommended that chiropractic be a widely available form of health care.


1992 AMERICA HEALTH POLICY REPORT
A 1992 review of data from over 2,000,000 users of chiropractic care in the U.S., reported in the Journal of American Health Policy, stated that, "chiropractic users tend to have substantially lower total health care costs," and "chiropractic care reduces the use of both physician and hospital care."


1985 UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN STUDY
In 1985, the University of Saskatchewan conducted a study of 283 patients "who had not responded to previous conservative or operative treatment" and who were initially classified as totally disabled. The study revealed that "81%...became symptom free or achieved a state of mild intermittent pain with no work restrictions" after daily spinal manipulations were administered.


LANDMARK LEGAL DECISION SUPPORTS CHIROPRACTIC
Further validation of chiropractic care evolved from an antitrust suit which was filed by four members of the chiropractic profession against the American Medical Association (AMA) and a number of other health care organizations in the U.S. (Wilk et al v. AMA et al, 1990).

Following 11 years of litigation, a federal appellate court judge upheld a ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Susan Getzendanner that the AMA had engaged in a "lengthy, systematic, successful and unlawful boycott" designed to restrict cooperation between MDs and chiropractors in order to eliminate the profession of chiropractic as a competitor in the U.S. health care system.

Judge Getzendanner rejected the AMA's patient care defense, and cited scientific studies which implied that "chiropractic care was twice as effective as medical care in relieving many painful conditions of the neck and back as well as related musculo-skeletal problems."

Since the court's findings and conclusions were released, an increasing number of medical doctors, hospitals, and health care organizations in the U.S. have begun to include the services of chiropractors.

[Rokenn]

lol, while trying to find articles debunking chiropratic care I fouind this:

the 3000-year history of alternative medicine in 30 seconds:

1000 BCE: "Eat this root."

100 CE: "That root's heathen, don't eat it. Say this prayer."

1800 CE: "That prayer is superstition, don't say it. Drink this snake-oil."

1900 CE: "That snake-oil is phony, don't drink it. Take this pill."

2002 CE: "That pill is artificial, don't take it. Eat this root.

[WillowIX]

OK I quoted the wrong post, went back to edit and of course I checked the delete box. Can´t remember what I posted so I´ll have to start anew.

Chiropractic is now more than a century old, and it is licensed throughout the United States and Canada and recognized in more than 60 countries worldwide. Doctors of Chiropractic receive training that is focused on the treatment of NMS conditions through manual and physical procedures, such as manipulation, massage, exercise, and nutrition. Most patients present to chiropractors with low back pain, neck pain, whiplash, and headaches. Numerous studies and expert panel reviews have supported the use of chiropractic and manipulation for these complaints. Satisfaction with chiropractic care for low back pain typically is good. Chiropractic, in general, offers safe and cost-effective procedures for selected musculoskeletal problems.

This pretty much summarizes my idea of chiropractics (well not the nutritional part). Anything else from a chiropractor is IMO a scam.

MagiK, placebo ahould never be under-estimated. Reports have indicated that approximately 25-40% of diseases can be cured using placebo. The human body is capable of very advance healing. Too bad we don´t know how and why.