Misplaced Pages

Chiropractic: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:09, 30 March 2006 view sourceJ~enwiki (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,427 edits Archiving January and February.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:54, 9 December 2024 view source McSly (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers32,228 edits Undid revision 1262116146 by Padmeone (talk) That chiropractor site looks like spamTag: Undo 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Form of pseudoscientific alternative medicine}}
{{controversial}}
{{pp-vandalism|small=yes}}
{{cleanup taskforce closed|Chiropractic medicine}}
{{Use American English|date=July 2019}}
{{ infobox alternative medicine
| name = Chiropractic
| image = File:Kiropraktisk ledd-korreksjon av rygg.jpg
| image_size =
| alt = Chiropractor performing adjustment
| caption = A chiropractor performing a vertebral adjustment
| claims = ], ], ]
| risks = ] (]), ], ]
| topics = ], ]
| orig-date = 1895 in ], U.S.
| origprop = ]
| laterprop = ]
| MeshID = D002684
}}
{{Pseudomedicine sidebar}}
<!-- Conceptual basis and Scope of practice -->
'''Chiropractic''' ({{IPAc-en|ˌ|k|aɪ|r|oʊ|ˈ|p|r|æ|k|t|ɪ|k}}) is a form of ]<ref name=Chapman-Smith>{{cite book|title=Principles and Practice of Chiropractic|vauthors=Chapman-Smith DA, ((Cleveland CS III))|publisher=McGraw-Hill|year=2005|isbn=978-0-07-137534-4|veditors=Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B|edition=3rd|pages=111–34|chapter=International status, standards, and education of the chiropractic profession|display-editors=etal}}</ref> concerned with the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of ] of the musculoskeletal system, especially of the ].<ref name=Nelson/> It is based on several ] ideas.<ref>For an explanation regarding the description of chiropractic as a pseudoscience, see:


* {{Cite book |last1=Singh |first1=Simon |author-link=Simon Singh |title=Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial |title-link=Trick or Treatment? |last2=Ernst |first2=Edzard |author-link2=Edzard Ernst |date=2008 |publisher=Bantam Press |isbn=978-0-593-06129-9 |location=London |chapter=The Truth About Chiropractic Therapy |oclc=190777228}}
* {{cite book |title=Science & Education |vauthors=Good R, Slezak P |publisher=Springer |year=2011 |pages=401–409 |chapter=Introductory Comments on Pseudoscience in Society and School |doi=10.1007/s11191-010-9331-2 |quote=The uncritical habits of mind that allow pseudosciences like subluxation chiropractic, astrology, intelligent design, and countless 'new age' medical cures to flourish are an important indication that science education needs to be changed.}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Hansson |first=Sven Ove |author-link=Sven Ove Hansson |date=2017-06-01 |title=Science denial as a form of pseudoscience |journal=Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A |volume=63 |pages=39–47 |bibcode=2017SHPSA..63...39H |doi=10.1016/j.shpsa.2017.05.002 |issn=0039-3681 |pmid=28629651}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Ernst |first=Edzard |author-link=Edzard Ernst |date=2009-04-01 |title=Complementary/alternative medicine: engulfed by postmodernism, anti-science and regressive thinking |journal=The British Journal of General Practice |volume=59 |issue=561 |pages=298–301 |doi=10.3399/bjgp09X420482 |issn=0960-1643 |pmc=2662117 |pmid=19341568}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Hall |first1=Harriet |author-link=Harriet Hall |date=May 2020 |title=Applied kinesiology and other chiropractic delusions |journal=] |volume=44 |issue=3 |pages=21–23}}
* {{Cite web |last=Novella |first=Steven |author-link=Steven Novella |date=March 22, 2017 |title=Cracking Down on Chiropractic Pseudoscience |url=https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/cracking-down-on-chiropractic-pseudoscience/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191219214428/https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/cracking-down-on-chiropractic-pseudoscience/ |archive-date=December 19, 2019 |access-date=2019-12-19 |website=sciencebasedmedicine.org |publisher=New England Skeptical Society |language=en-US}}
* Williams, William F. (2000). '']''. Facts on File Inc. p. 51. {{ISBN|1-57958-207-9}}</ref>


Many '''chiropractors''' (often known informally as '''chiros'''), especially those in the field's early history, have proposed that mechanical disorders of the ]s, especially of the ], affect general health,<ref name=Nelson>{{cite journal|vauthors=Nelson CF, Lawrence DJ, Triano JJ, Bronfort G, Perle SM, Metz RD, Hegetschweiler K, LaBrot T|title=Chiropractic as spine care: a model for the profession|journal=Chiropractic & Osteopathy|volume= 13|issue=1|page=9|year=2005|doi=10.1186/1746-1340-13-9|pmc=1185558|pmid=16000175 |doi-access=free }}</ref> and that regular ] (]) improves general health. The main ] involves ], especially manipulation of the spine, other joints, and ]s, but may also include exercises and health and lifestyle counseling.<ref name=content-of-practice>{{cite book|chapter-url=http://chiroweb.com/archives/ahcpr/chapter3.htm|chapter=Content of practice|vauthors=Mootz RD, Shekelle PG |year=1997|title=Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research|pages=67–91|veditors=Cherkin DC, Mootz RD |location= Rockville, MD|publisher=Agency for Health Care Policy and Research|oclc=39856366}} AHCPR Pub No. 98-N002.</ref> A chiropractor may have a ] degree and be referred to as "doctor" but is not a ] or a ].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-dc-as-pcp-drug-wars-resume/|title=The DC as PCP? Drug Wars Resume – Science-Based Medicine|date=2019-12-18|website=sciencebasedmedicine.org|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191218003248/https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-dc-as-pcp-drug-wars-resume/|archive-date=2019-12-18|access-date=2020-03-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/legislative-alchemy-2018-chiropractors-rebranding-as-primary-care-physicians-continues/|title=Legislative Alchemy 2018: Chiropractors rebranding as primary care physicians continues|last=Bellamy|first=Jann|date=December 20, 2018|website=sciencebasedmedicine.org|language=en-US|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191219062602/https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/legislative-alchemy-2018-chiropractors-rebranding-as-primary-care-physicians-continues/|archive-date=December 19, 2019|access-date=2019-12-18}}</ref> While many chiropractors view themselves as ] providers,<ref name="Ernst-eval" /><ref name="CooperMcKee2003" /> chiropractic clinical training does not meet the requirements for that designation.<ref name="Nelson" />
{| class="infobox" width="270px"
|-
!align="center"|]<br/>]
----
|-
|
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
*
*
|}<!--Template:Archivebox-->


<!-- Efficacy -->
==''American Scientist'' study==
]s of controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have found no evidence that ] is ], with the possible exception of treatment for ].<ref name=Ernst-eval>{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Chiropractic: a critical evaluation | journal = Journal of Pain and Symptom Management| volume = 35 | issue = 5 | pages = 544–62 | date = May 2008 | pmid = 18280103 | doi = 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.07.004 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2011 critical evaluation of 45 systematic reviews concluded that the data included in the study "fail to demonstrate convincingly that spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for any condition."<ref name=Posadzki-Ernst>{{cite journal |vauthors=Posadzki P, Ernst E | title = Spinal manipulation: an update of a systematic review of systematic reviews | journal = The New Zealand Medical Journal| volume = 124 | issue = 1340|pages=55–71|year=2011|pmid=21952385}}</ref> Spinal manipulation may be ] for sub-acute or chronic low back pain, but the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.<ref name=Lin2011/> No compelling evidence exists to indicate that maintenance chiropractic care adequately prevents symptoms or diseases.<ref name="ErnstMaintenance2009"/>
I removed the following sentence: ''"The only study on chiropractic published in a ]ed scientific journal ( not a journal dedicated to chiropractic) was in "American Scientist" "".'' Per ''American Scientist's'' , "''American Scientist'' is a general-interest, '''nonrefereed''' science magazine". It also states: "If your article is accepted, an editor will be assigned to work with you on revisions—which may be extensive—captions and the plan of illustration. You will be asked to check illustrations and editorial revisions to ensure that accuracy is maintained. Our goal is to help you write and illustrate your article in such a way as to attract and hold the interest of the reader." Hence, the study is not peer reviewed. ] 23:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


<!-- Safety -->
== Magnet therapy ==
There is not sufficient data to establish the safety of chiropractic manipulations.<ref name="Gouveia" /> It is frequently associated with mild to moderate ], with serious or fatal complications in rare cases.<ref name="Ernst-adverse">{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Adverse effects of spinal manipulation: a systematic review | journal = Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine| volume = 100 | issue = 7 | pages = 330–38 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17606755 | pmc = 1905885 | doi = 10.1177/014107680710000716 | url = http://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/full/100/7/330 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100516074554/http://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/full/100/7/330 | archive-date = 2010-05-16 }}
*{{cite web |author=Christian Nordqvist |date=2007-07-02 |title=Spinal Manipulation Should Not Be Routinely Used, New Study Warns |website=Med News Today |url=http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/75754.php}}</ref> There is controversy regarding the degree of risk of ], which can lead to ] and death, from ].<ref name="Haynes" /> Several deaths have been associated with this technique<ref name="Ernst-adverse" /> and it has been suggested that the relationship is ],<ref name="Ernst-2010" /><ref name="Ernst-death" /> a claim which is disputed by many chiropractors.<ref name="Ernst-death">{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Deaths after chiropractic: a review of published cases | journal = International Journal of Clinical Practice| volume = 64 | issue = 8 | pages = 1162–65 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20642715 | doi = 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02352.x | s2cid = 45225661 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<!-- Epidemiology -->
The article on chiropractic notes that DD Palmer was a magnetic therapist. This according to all evidence is a valid assertion. However, the article has a link to magnetic therapy. Unfortunately while these sound the same they are vastly different. Palmer appears to have been a student of Paul Caster. Mr. Caster taught magnetic therapy in the later part of the 20th century in the Midwest. This type of magnetic therapy had nothing to do with magnets and appeared to be related to Franz Mesmer's animal magnetism. The practitioner attempted to force their own animal magnetism into the patient and thus affect a cure.
Chiropractic is well established in the United States, Canada, and Australia.<ref name="global-strategy" /> It overlaps with other manual-therapy professions such as ] and ].<ref name="Norris" /> Most who seek chiropractic care do so for ].<ref name="Hurwitz">{{cite journal |vauthors=Hurwitz EL, Chiang LM | title = A comparative analysis of chiropractic and general practitioner patients in North America: findings from the joint Canada/United States Survey of Health, 2002-03 | journal = BMC Health Services Research| volume = 6 | page = 49 | year = 2006 | pmc = 1458338 | doi = 10.1186/1472-6963-6-49 | pmid = 16600038 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Back and neck pain are considered the specialties of chiropractic, but many chiropractors treat ailments other than musculoskeletal issues.<ref name="Ernst-eval" /> Chiropractic has two main groups: "straights", now the minority, emphasize ], "]", and consider vertebral subluxations to be the cause of all disease; and "mixers", the majority, are more open to mainstream views and conventional medical techniques, such as exercise, ], and ].<ref name="Kaptchuk-Eisenberg" />


<!-- History -->
Thus the link would be more appropriate to go to Mesmer
] founded chiropractic in the 1890s,<ref name="Martin" /> claiming that he had received it from "the other world".<ref name="Religion" /> Palmer maintained that the tenets of chiropractic were passed along to him by a doctor who had died 50 years previously.<ref>] (June 30, 2017). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200719094829/https://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-chiropractic-quackery-20170630-story.html|date=July 19, 2020}} --- "Daniel David Palmer, the 'father' of chiropractic who performed the first chiropractic adjustment in 1895, was an avid spiritualist. He maintained that the notion and basic principles of chiropractic treatment were passed along to him during a seance by a long-dead doctor. 'The knowledge and philosophy given me by Dr. Jim Atkinson, an intelligent spiritual being ... appealed to my reason,' Palmer wrote in his memoir ''The Chiropractor,'' which was published in 1914 after his death in Los Angeles. Atkinson had died 50 years prior to Palmer's epiphany." ''Los Angeles Times.'' Retrieved: September 25, 2019.</ref> His son ] helped to expand chiropractic in the early 20th century.<ref name="Martin">{{cite journal | author = Martin SC | title = Chiropractic and the social context of medical technology, 1895-1925 | journal = Technology and Culture| volume = 34 | issue = 4 | pages = 808–34 | date = October 1993 | pmid = 11623404 | doi = 10.2307/3106416 | jstor = 3106416 | s2cid = 23423922 }}</ref> Throughout its history, ].<ref name="DeVocht">{{cite journal | author = DeVocht JW | s2cid = 35775630 | title = History and overview of theories and methods of chiropractic: a counterpoint | journal = Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research| volume = 444 | pages = 243–49 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16523145 | doi = 10.1097/01.blo.0000203460.89887.8d }}</ref><ref name="Homola">{{cite journal | author = Homola S | title = Chiropractic: history and overview of theories and methods | journal = Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research| volume = 444 | pages = 236–42 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16446588 | doi = 10.1097/01.blo.0000200258.95865.87 | url = https://zenodo.org/record/889994 }}</ref> Its foundation is at odds with ], and is underpinned by ] ideas such as ] and Innate Intelligence.<ref name="History-Primer2" /> Despite the overwhelming evidence that ] is an effective ] intervention, there are significant disagreements among chiropractors over the subject,<ref name="Busse">{{cite journal |vauthors=Busse JW, Morgan L, Campbell JB | title = Chiropractic antivaccination arguments | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 28 | issue = 5 | pages = 367–73 | year = 2005 | pmid = 15965414 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.04.011 | url = http://jmptonline.org/article/S0161-4754(05)00111-9/fulltext }}</ref> which has led to negative impacts on both public vaccination and mainstream acceptance of chiropractic.<ref name="Campbell">{{cite journal |vauthors=Campbell JB, Busse JW, Injeyan HS | title = Chiropractors and vaccination: a historical perspective | journal = Pediatrics| volume = 105 | issue = 4 | page = e43 | year = 2000 | pmid = 10742364 | doi = 10.1542/peds.105.4.e43 | url = http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/105/4/e43 | doi-access = free }}</ref> The ] called chiropractic an "unscientific cult" in 1966<ref name="Chiro-PH" /> and boycotted it until losing an ].<ref name="CooperMcKee2003">{{cite journal |vauthors=Cooper RA, McKee HJ | title = Chiropractic in the United States: trends and issues | journal = Milbank Quarterly| volume = 81 | issue = 1 | pages = 107–38, table of contents | year = 2003 | pmid = 12669653 | pmc = 2690192 | doi = 10.1111/1468-0009.00040 }}</ref> Chiropractic has had a strong political base and sustained demand for services. In the last decades of the twentieth century, it gained more legitimacy and greater acceptance among conventional physicians and ]s in the United States.<ref name="CooperMcKee2003" /> During the ], chiropractic professional associations advised chiropractors to adhere to ], ], and local health department guidance.<ref>WFC Public Health Committee and WFC Research Committee (March 17, 2020). World Federation of Chiropractic.</ref><ref>Robert C. Jones, et al. American Chiropractic Association</ref> Despite these recommendations, a small but vocal and influential number of chiropractors spread ].<ref>MICHELLE R. SMITH, SCOTT BAUER and MIKE CATALINI (October 8, 2021). Associated Press.</ref>
http://en.wikipedia.org/Mesmer
Or animal magnetism
http://en.wikipedia.org/Animal_magnetism


== Conceptual basis ==
Here is a link to an article on Caster


=== Philosophy ===
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11619056&dopt=Abstract
Chiropractic is generally categorized as ] (CAM),<ref name=Chapman-Smith/> which focuses on manipulation of the ], especially the ].<ref name=Nelson /> Its founder, D.{{nbsp}}D. Palmer, called it "a science of healing without drugs".<ref name=Ernst-eval/>


Chiropractic's origins lie in the ] of ],<ref name=Ernst-eval /> and as it evolved it incorporated ], ] and ].<ref name=Keating05 /> Its early philosophy was based on ] from ], which helped distinguish chiropractic from medicine, provided it with legal and political defenses against claims of practicing medicine without a license, and allowed chiropractors to establish themselves as an autonomous profession.<ref name=Keating05 /> This "straight" philosophy, taught to generations of chiropractors, rejects the ] of the ],<ref name=Keating05 /> and relies on deductions from vitalistic first principles rather than on the ] of science.<ref name=Chiro-Beliefs /> However, most practitioners tend to incorporate scientific research into chiropractic,<ref name="Keating05" /> and most practitioners are "mixers" who attempt to combine the materialistic ] of science with the ] of their predecessors and with the ].<ref name=Chiro-Beliefs /> A 2008 commentary proposed that chiropractic actively divorce itself from the straight philosophy as part of a campaign to eliminate ] dogma and engage in ] and evidence-based research.<ref name=Murphy-pod>{{cite journal | vauthors = Murphy DR, Schneider MJ, Seaman DR, Perle SM, Nelson CF | title = How can chiropractic become a respected mainstream profession? The example of podiatry | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy | volume = 16 | page = 10 | date = Aug 2008 | pmid = 18759966 | pmc = 2538524 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-16-10 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
Caster called himself a magnetic and that is probably why chiropractic ends similarly.


{| class="wikitable floatright" style="margin-left: 0.4em;"
] 03:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
|+ Two chiropractic belief system constructs
! The testable principle
! The untestable metaphor
|-
| style="text-align:center;" | ]




Restoration of structural integrity
==Unjustified deletions==
] has twice made unexplained deletions of material that has earlier been a part of the article. The edit summary stated:


* (also falsified, read talk page on double-blind studies and chiropractic)


Improvement of health status
This User hadn't written anything on the Talk page that seemed to apply, nor could I find it anywhere else. I would like to have a link to the mentioned content.
| style="text-align:center;" | Universal intelligence


The word "falsified" was used in two edit summaries, but I wonder if the User is using the word properly. Here is a whole article on ], a concept originated by ]. If the User would explain in what sense the word was being used, then it might make more sense. Without any context it's hard to know for sure if it was being used correctly, or if the User doesn't understand the concept.


Innate intelligence
I invite ] to explain what is meant by these edit summaries, and also to justify such sudden removals of the work of other editors, without any discussion or proper explanation here on the Talk page. -- ] 21:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


==Peer-review==
Peer-reviewed journal articles should be referenced. Not all journals were created equal. The article states:
"There is some objective clinical data and peer-reviewed research that demonstrates the efficacy of certain therapeutic techniques used by chiropractors."


]
I think it is important to note that evidence for the effectiveness of the practice is not the same as evidence for the underlying theory or philosophy.
|-
| '''''Materialistic:'''''
| '''''Vitalistic:'''''
|-
| {{Bulleted list|Operational definitions possible|Lends itself to scientific inquiry}}
| {{Bulleted list|Origin of holism in chiropractic|Cannot be proven or disproven}}
|-
| style="text-align:center;" colspan="2"| ''Taken from Mootz & Phillips 1997''<ref name=Chiro-Beliefs />
|}


Although a wide diversity of ideas exist among chiropractors,<ref name=Keating05 /> they share the belief that the spine and health are related in a fundamental way, and that this relationship is mediated through the ].<ref>{{cite book|vauthors=Gay RE, Nelson CF |chapter= Chiropractic philosophy|chapter-url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=altrehab.section.336|veditors=Wainapel SF, Fast A |title= Alternative Medicine and Rehabilitation: a Guide for Practitioners|year=2003|isbn=978-1-888799-66-8|location= New York|publisher= ]}}</ref> Some chiropractors claim spinal manipulation can have an effect on a variety of ailments such as ] and ].<ref name=nhs-choices>{{cite web |url=http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/chiropractic/Pages/Introduction.aspx |title=Chiropractic |publisher=] |date=20 August 2014 |access-date=19 September 2016}}</ref>
== Responding to RfC by ]-] ==


Chiropractic philosophy includes the following perspectives:<ref name=Chiro-Beliefs>{{cite book|chapter-url=http://chiroweb.com/archives/ahcpr/chapter2.htm|chapter= Chiropractic belief systems|vauthors=Mootz RD, Phillips RB |year=1997|title= Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research|pages=9–16|veditors=Cherkin DC, Mootz RD |location= Rockville, MD|publisher= ]|oclc=39856366}} AHCPR Pub No. 98-N002.</ref>
Hi.


] assumes that health is affected by everything in an individual's environment; some sources also include a spiritual or ] dimension.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Freeman J | title = Towards a definition of holism | journal = The British Journal of General Practice | volume = 55 | issue = 511 | pages = 154–55 | date = February 2005 | pmid = 15720949 | pmc = 1463203 }}</ref> In contrast, reductionism in chiropractic reduces causes and cures of health problems to a single factor, ].<ref name=Murphy-pod /> ] emphasizes the body's inherent self-healing abilities. Chiropractic's early notion of innate intelligence can be thought of as a metaphor for homeostasis.<ref name=Keating05>{{cite book|author= Keating JC Jr|chapter= Philosophy in chiropractic|pages=77–98|title= Principles and Practice of Chiropractic|edition=3rd|veditors=Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B |publisher=]|year=2005|isbn=978-0-07-137534-4|display-editors=etal}}</ref>
First of all, I'd consider myself neutral in this question as I have no previous experience in this, have not written about this topic or read about it.


A large number of chiropractors fear that if they do not separate themselves from the traditional ] concept of innate intelligence, chiropractic will continue to be seen as a fringe profession.<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg>{{cite journal |vauthors=Kaptchuk TJ, Eisenberg DM |title=Chiropractic: origins, controversies, and contributions |journal=Archives of Internal Medicine|volume=158 |issue=20 |pages=2215–24 |date=November 1998 |pmid=9818801 |doi=10.1001/archinte.158.20.2215 |doi-access=free }}</ref> A variant of chiropractic called naprapathy originated in Chicago in the early twentieth century.<ref name="Gardner1957">{{cite book|author=Martin Gardner|author-link=Martin Gardner|title=Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TwP3SGAUsnkC&pg=PA227|date=1 June 1957|publisher=Courier Corporation|isbn=978-0-486-20394-2|pages=227–}}</ref><ref name=napra-qa/> It holds that manual manipulation of soft tissue can reduce "interference" in the body and thus improve health.<ref name=napra-qa>{{cite web |url=http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/dictionary/mdglos.html |publisher=Quackwatch |title=Dictionary of Metaphysical Healthcare&nbsp;– Glossary |year=1997 |author=Raso J |access-date=12 February 2016}}</ref>
My impression of the "Critique"-part is: no offense, but I find it comparatively poor, although not negligible. Specifics:


=== Straights and mixers ===
* "''The Chiropractic community maintains that serious complications due to manipulation of the cervical spine are extremely rare, being 1 in 3 or 4 million manipulations or fewer. This figure, which is based on over 40 years of chiropractic research and millions of cervical adjustments, is echoed by extensive review of spinal manipulation performed by the RAND corporation. However in one other study, Dvorak cites figures of 1 in 400,000. .''"
{| class="wikitable floatright" style="margin-left:0.4em;"
** This is not much of a critique of the topic. It should be integrated into another section in the article. 1 / 400,000 sounds harmless to me.
|+ Range of belief perspectives in chiropractic
* Many parts read like trivia. It would be better to reference from the ''NCAHF Position Paper on Chiropractic'' than to just mention it. To quote from every conducted study might well expand and become incomprehensible.
! Perspective attribute

! colspan="2" | Potential belief endpoints
Ok that's my input. Take it or leave it. ]-] 17:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
|-
:1/400 000 sounds rare, but if 400 000 are done per year then that is one serious adverse outcome per year - do we have an idea of what the total number per year, or per year per million population or whatever, ''is''? ] 15:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
| Scope of practice:

| align=right | narrow ("straight") ←||→ broad ("mixer")
:: I'll clarify my opinions:
|-
:: I don't think the critique sounds like anything. Is there nothing more serious to complain about?
| Diagnostic approach:
::# The Norwegian study ( I read the web page references ) showed "Thirty two of 46 infants in the treatment group (69.9%), and 24 of 40 in the control group (60.0%), showed some degree of improvement." -- so chiropractice is only slightly better?
| align=right | intuitive ←||→ analytical
::# 1/400,000 gets serious complications from chripractice. -- Aren't maltreatement in traditional health care far more common than that?
|-
::# I did find the NCAHF paper interesting but it was so long, and this article does not mention anything therein.
| Philosophic orientation:
:: ]-] 19:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
| align=right | vitalistic ←||→ materialistic

|-
== intro ==
| Scientific orientation:

| align=right | descriptive ←||→ experimental
You may not like to admit there is pol and sci controversy, but the fact remains that such controversy exists. WP guidelines say that in that case we should point it out to the reader. What we are doing here is creating an encyclopedia, not arguing one way or the other whether we like chiro or not. Pls discuss before making more intro changes. ] 01:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
|-

| Process orientation:
:I think the controversy is apparent in the article but is not one of the major tennants of the page nor chiropractic. Therefore it doens't belong in the first sentence. It's bad enough that the article jumps back-and-forth and in-and-out of opposing POVs. Stating it in the first sentence (one which is now a very basic definition of what chiropractic is) seems argumentative and the result of soapboxing. ] 17:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
| align=right | implicit ←||→ explicit

|-
Not so. I am helping to create an encyclopedia. That the issue has had such high level attention in the courts and elsewhere is obvious evidence of controversy which I reader should know about up front. If you are accusing me of soapboxing I hope you can apologise. I look forward to your cooperation in removing all POV.] 00:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
| Practice attitude:

| align=right | doctor/model-centered ←||→ patient/situation-centered
:I am sorry for accusing so quicky, but my accusations are proving more true with your recent edits...
|-

| Professional integration:
:You added the following to the portion before the intro: ''Chiropractic was founded by Daniel David Palmer who claimed he received the chiropractic principles from a dead physician Dr. Jim Atkinson during a seance.''
| align=right | separate and distinct ←||→ integrated into mainstream

|-
:That doesn't belong in the general intro to the page but rather in the history section (where it is repeated). Thus I removed it for this intro. What was your purpose in adding this sentence there if not to cast chiropractic into a bad light in the opening of this article. You are asking to help make the page NPOV when you are demonstrating just the opposite. Clearly, you are adding the seance bit to make chiropractic seem ludicrous. I'm not trying to sweep the seanace bit under the rug, but is it really such a big tenet of chiropractic that it needs to be in the opening sentences? Hardly. As it is now, the opening is a clear definition of what chiropractic is. No POV at all. I think it is complete. Leave it be. ] 02:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
| colspan="3" style="text-align: center;" | ''Taken from Mootz & Phillips 1997''<ref name=Chiro-Beliefs />

|}

Thanks for your cooperation. The logic you use is not impregnable (ie if it's POV it's POV wherever it occurs in the article). If it does make Chiro look ludicrous then we must face that fact. However, for the moment I am prepared to compromise. Let us put "politically and scientifically controversial" up top. Thanks for agreeing (and polishing) my attempts to have one scientific section. I will work on it some more to try to find a mutually agreeable formulation. ] 04:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

:I still don't think pol and sci controversary needs to be mentioned in the opener. Sorry. It is not part of the main tenet, broad overview, nor even the definition. The rest of the article does a fine job of showing the contraversy. But contraversy does not define chiropractic. I must strike it again. Sorry. Be taht as it may, I would like to work together. ] 04:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I think we're both in danger of violating 3R here so I'll refrain from editing it for today and leave it to your good judgement to make that decision for yourself. The "main tenet" is an encylopedic article about chiro - not the main tenet of chiro. This is an important distinction and one I urge you to consider. We both agree that the controversy is fundamental. Therefore what words would you suggest to convey this fundamental point? You may like to review the discussion elsewhere on this page before formulating your response. My preference, given the discussion elsewhere on the page is "politically and scientifically controversial" which I think you will agree is NPOV. Yes good to work with you too and I look forward to more cooperation. ] 05:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

:: I don't think I am breaching the 3R rule so I shall revert it. It is a significant part of the whole article to indicate that chiropractic is controversial. Thus, to take it out of the introduction fails to indicate to the reader that there are many POVs about it. I'm not sure if it is politically controversial so I shall simply say 'scientific'. ] 08:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Spinal subluxations are controversial. Writing in the opening sentence that the belief is that they exist and cause disease and that those diseases can be treated by adjusting them is NPOV. The current state asserts that spinal subluxations exist. I recall a randomised trial of xray interpretation in which chiropractors were unable to distingusih those spinal films which had been been used to diagnose subluxations to adjust from the controls that had not. Someone will provide the reference I don't doubt...

''Manipulation'' fixes back pain in many people and is good enough empiric treatment, but the system of belief that underpins a claim to be a complete system of medicine is based on a poorly supported assumption which is hard to demonstrate.
] 13:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

:There is enough scientific evidence to say that subluxation exist (see Maigne). However, that is regardless to this point. For this is an article about Chiropractic... not subluxation. Yes, it is clear now that Chiropractic does cause so contraversy. Lots of things do. Israel, penecilin, Paris Hilton... however, the contraversy doesn't define this things (sorry to reduce Paris to a thing). The current chiro article already points to the contraversy to a degree that is sufficient to let the reader know that the contraversy exists. Please leave it out of the topic sentence. ] 17:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I put the following message on ] page: There is little doubt that part of chiropractic's 'fame' is that some believe it works and others don't. Therefore, an important aspect of defining chiropractic is that it is controversial. Hence it is part of its definition within the introductory paragraph. What is your problem with that? It is a 'fact' that it is controversial. As you are a chiropractor you do not believe that it is controversial. As a scientist I believe that it is controversial. We encapsulate the two sides of the debate. By your continual removal of 'controversial' you are claiming that the modality is generally accepted when it isn't. This is not a neutral POV. I look forward to further discussions. ] 00:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

== NPOV ==

May I draw editors' attention to the following NPOV guideline: "neutral point of view NPOV means, among other things, that a reader should walk away from an article with a clear sense of what the controversy is all about." Given there is no disagreement that chiro is controversial politically and scientifically, a good introduction would point this out. An introduction would ideally cover what, who, when, why in 100 words or less. What we are doing here is writing a helpful encyclopedia, not defending a position on chiro. ] 02:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

:So why create a position by calling it controversial in the first sentence? I think Israel is so more controversial and yet its first sentence doesn't mention contraversy. I feel you are trying hard to insert your own POV slanted against chiropractic by continuing to add "contraversy" here. Leave it out of the first sentence. This is not an article about contraversy. This is an article about chiropractic. ] 03:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

== History section ==

The references to greeks and ancient history contain no mention of vertebral subluxations. Before reverting please provide references. You have had many more than 3 reverts today and have not discussed your reasons on the talk page. May I suggest you read WP guidelines on dispute resolution. ] 05:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I will refrain from revert wars. Please consider the following and discuss each point separately so we can come to agreement.

"==History==
Chiropractic was founded by ] in ], ]. He said he received the chiropractic principles from a dead physician Dr. Jim Atkinson during a seance. Palmer’s son, ] initiated research, development and promotion of chiropractic.

DD Palmer's effort to find a single cause for all disease led him to say ''A subluxated vertebrae . . . is the cause of 95 percent of all diseases. . . . The other five percent is caused by displaced joints other than those of the vertebral column.'' (From: Palmer DD. The Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic. Portland, Oregon: Portland Printing House Company, 1910.) The term '''''chiropractic''''' originated when Palmer asked a patient - Rev. Samuel Weed - to come up with a name from the ] to describe his practice. Among other terms Weed suggested combining the words ''chiros'' and ''praktikos'' (meaning "done by hand") to describe the adjustment of a ] in the ].

===Differing accounts of origins of spinal manipulation===

Palmer and his patient Harvey Lillard give differing accounts of when and how Palmer began to experiment with spinal manipulation.

====Palmer’s account====

Palmer says that in 1995 he was investigating the ] of a deaf janitor, Harvey Lillard. Lillard informed Palmer that while working in a cramped area seventeen years prior, he felt a pop in his back and had been nearly deaf ever since. Palmer’s examination found a sore lump which indicated spinal misalignment and a possible cause of Lillard's deafness. Palmer corrected the misalignment and Lillard could then hear the wheels of the horse-drawn carts in the street below. <ref>Palmer DD. The Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic. Portland, Oregon: Portland Printing House Company, 1910</ref> Palmer said there was nothing accidental about this as it was accomplished with an object in view and the expected result was obtained.

====Lillard’s account====

Lillard said he had been swapping jokes in the hall outside Palmer's office. Palmer joined them and, amused at a joke, slapped Lillard on the back with a book he was carrying. A few days later Lillard told Palmer his hearing had improved. Palmer then began to experiment with manipulative procedures. <ref>James C. Whorton, ''Nature Cures: The History of Alternative Medicine in America''</ref>

Although Chiropractic gained more acceptance from the 1960s, it’s popularity is decreasing. The US National Center for Education Statistics reports enrollments for sixteen U.S. chiropractic programs fell 39.9% from 16,500 in 1996 to 9,921 in 2002. Chiropractic patients numbers dropped 25% from 1997 to 2002. <ref>Tindle HA. Trends in use of complementary and alternative medicine by US adults: 1997-2002. Altern Ther Health Med. 2005 Jan-Feb;11(1):42-9.)</ref>

] 07:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

== Science section ==

I have refrained from revert war. Please discuss this proposal item by item here so we can come to an agreement.

"==Science and chiropractic== - There is scientific agreement that an ] framework should be used to assess health outcomes and that systematic reviews with strict protocols are essential. Organisations such as the ] and ] publish such reviews.

For the following conditions the ] found insufficient evidence that chiropractic is beneficial:
*
*
* [http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab002119.html Painful menstrual periods

For the following conditions ] found insufficient evidence that chiropractic is beneficial:
*
*
*

] 07:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

::There is already far too much info in this science section and I believe this entire article already exceeds the recommended page size. I don't know how reliable Cochrane is considering they state quite plainly on their site: "We make no representations and give no warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the information." They don't seem credible in that resepect. I am not trying to squelch anti-chiro info from being posted. It just seems that the science section already has it in there...and then some. Adding more seems to me as though there is a clear anti-chiro agenda at work here rather than an agenda of creating an encyclopaedic article. The anti-chiro agenda is furthered by repeated attempts to add "controversy" to the opening sentence on this page, as if "controversy" surround chiropractic and is a defining element. It is not. I tried to appease the anti-chiros by including "controversy" in the latter Introduction section - where it is more apropos than the topic sentence. However, my attempts at a compromise didn't seem to work. But I'm trying. I am a chiropactic. McCready, just curious, what are you qualifications on this subject? ] 18:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

::Another problem with Cochrane is that these reports are about spinal manipulation... not chiropractic. Spinal manipulation is performed by all sorts practitioners other that chiropractors. The same goes for the VBA and strokes as a result of neck manipulation. How many of these 1-out-of-4-million strokes were caused by chiropractic adjustments and how many by another practioner who was less skillful than chiropractors? The report dating back to 1965 and covering millions of chiropractic adjustments found no accounts of strokes. But the reports that only cover general neck manipulation show the 1-out-of-4-million figure. I think that if the reference or research is not specifically about chiropractic spinal adjustments (manipulation) than it is irrelevant to this article.

::There is a clear agenda at work here trying to turn this article into a biased piece against chiropractic. It needs to stop. What is the motivation? Is there that much chiropractic hate out there that people feel it neccessary to spend their time bashing it on WP? I am postulating that these people feel threatened for one reason or antoher. Maybe they fear losing patients. Maybe the fear having to face that the knowledge that they accepted as fact for so long is incorrect. Maybe it is laziness. I don't know, but I am continually astounded by detractors and the way they spend their time and energy spreading hate rather than love; doubt instead of curiosity; and promoting illness instead of health. ] 19:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you willingness to talk about the science section. Do I take it you are happy to have an EMB statement. I rechecked the cochrane references and I am afraid you are mistaken, each one discusses chiro. I agree the section needs to be shorter but in the meantime we need to agree on how to shorten it. Removing well referenced scientific material on the basis that the website it is posted on has a disclaimer is not IMHO the way to go. I look forward to your further discussion here before I begin to edit the section again. ] 00:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

:::Cochrane is very credible and reliable. Osteopathy and Chiropractic articles would benefit from a ] showing where they split off from each other and the subgroups formed. The things that cause me disquiet about this are the origin with a single chap who decided that all disease came from one cause, and then that he could cure it by making movements that in bones that are variously claimed to be out of place (but in no way that can be demonstrated in blind trials of xray images) or that are not actually physical displacements but something more mystical. At this point we hear there is already too much science in the article, and that all of conventional medicine is untrue and causing harm not benefit. Credibility was mentioned... ] 00:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

== History manipulation ==

I have removed the following sentence from the history section. "Writings from China and Greece written in 2700 B.C. and 1500 B.C. mention spinal manipulation and the maneuvering of the lower extremities to ease lower back pain." The source quoted does not mention China and does not assign these dates. In fact the source says "Chiropractic is 105 years old."

TheDoctorIsIn says on this talk page that manipulation is not the same as chiro. His logic is flawed if he then wants to claim manipulation as essential to the history of chiro. I don't think we can change the definition as will.

I would also like to remove the reference to Hippocrates. If you check the context (part 44 on the referenced translation) you will see Hippocrates was discussing succussion. What do you think, DoctorIsIn. ] 01:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

:No logic flaws. Spinal and bone manipulation were predecessors to chiropractor and thus part of its history. ] 05:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The logical flaw is to claim, as you incorectly did, that the Cochrane material referred to spinal manipulation and not to chiropractic and that therefore it wasn't relevant. ie your claim was that if it didn't mention chiro then it wasn't relevant. Now however you claim that any reference to spinal manipulation is part of the history of chiro. You can't have it both ways. Chiro was invented by Palmer who, unless you have evidence to the contrary did not base his arguments on succussion mentioned by Hippocrates. You have not addressed the issue of succussion. H was refering to it, not to chiro. I will amened the article accordingly until you provide evidence to the contrary. Thirdly, the souce referenced did not support the claim. Again you have failed to address this crucial point. If the reference cannot support the claim, it is unverifiable and therefore according to WP policy, does not belong. ] 08:45, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

:I will lay this out quite clearly for you. Ancient bone and spine manipulations were the predecessors to chiropractic adjustments. Therefore, it is part of the history of chiropractic. However, chiropractic adjustments evolved beyond these techniques and now are something different entirely. "A" led to "B" but "B" is no longer "A". A study of "A" is thus not a scientific study of "B" but rather a historical study of "B". I will now revert. ] 17:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


By your logic witch doctor bloodletting of the head should be included in an article on nureosurgery. Can you demonstrate where Palmer saw his lineage including Hippocrates. Until you do there is no justification for including it in the article. You have failed to address each item in my above post. ] 04:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

==Controversy in the articles topic sentence==

Chiropractic's fame is not founded in contraversy. Chiropractic's fame is founded in its continued success. That something so noninvasive and simple could be the answer to so many health problems that humankind have sought to cure with everything from drugs to leeches to ingesting chemicals is how chiropractic derived its fame. That the solution to much disease was founded in optimizing the body's nervous system so the body could heal itself is how chiropractic became famous. The contraversy is merely a side-effect of people clutching onto their old way of thinking about health and the body. ] 05:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

'''Controversial or hatred?'''

:Very well said Doc. There isn't so much controversy, as there IS a lot of chiropractic-hating extremists. If an ex-psychiatrist, a few MDs and a PT are filled with enough chiropractic hatred to carve out a career actively taking part in things like preventing chiropractic schools from opening, creating multiple websites attacking chiropractic and recruiting others to add statements to Misplaced Pages so it appears that chiropractic is controversial, this doesn't make chiropractic controversial.

:Millions of people utilize chiropractic care, MDs go to chiropractors and send their families as well as refer to chiropractic doctors, US Congress, states, countries, insurance, laws, licensing bodies, Olympic teams, athletes, committees, etc., etc., recognize chiropractic. So if it is OK with all of them and, of course, 75,000 DC's, doesn't this make chiropractic mainstream? Why isn't it OK with Maus and the others? If they have a vendetta or something, that still doesn't make chiropractic controversial, just because they say it is.
] 11:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


''Straight'' chiropractors adhere to the philosophical principles set forth by D.{{nbsp}}D. and B.{{nbsp}}J. Palmer, and retain metaphysical definitions and vitalistic qualities.<ref name=History-Primer /> Straight chiropractors believe that vertebral subluxation leads to interference with an "innate intelligence" exerted via the human nervous system and is a primary underlying risk factor for many diseases.<ref name=History-Primer /> Straights view the medical diagnosis of patient complaints, which they consider to be the "secondary effects" of subluxations, to be unnecessary for chiropractic treatment.<ref name=History-Primer /> Thus, straight chiropractors are concerned primarily with the detection and correction of vertebral subluxation via adjustment and do not "mix" other types of therapies into their practice style.<ref name=History-Primer /> Their philosophy and explanations are metaphysical in nature and they prefer to use traditional chiropractic lexicon terminology such as "perform spinal analysis", "detect subluxation", "correct with adjustment".<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg /> They prefer to remain separate and distinct from mainstream health care.<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg /> Although considered the minority group, "they have been able to transform their status as purists and heirs of the lineage into influence dramatically out of proportion to their numbers."<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg />
thanks for your thoughts. I agree with you the first sentence would usually be a simple defn. I'd like to put the controversy in the second sentenc of the top ] 18:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


''Mixer'' chiropractors "mix" diagnostic and treatment approaches from chiropractic, medical or osteopathic viewpoints and make up the majority of chiropractors.<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg /> Unlike straight chiropractors, mixers believe subluxation is one of many causes of disease, and hence they tend to be open to mainstream medicine.<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg/> Many of them incorporate mainstream medical diagnostics and employ conventional treatments including techniques of ] such as exercise, ], ], ]s, ], ], and ].<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg /> Some mixers also use techniques from alternative medicine, including ], ], ], ], and ].<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg />
:The article is filled with the legal contraversy (Wilk) and the differing scienitific opinions. The introduction already mentions the controversary in the medical community. Adding it anywhere else would be overkill and would tip the scales of this article even more towards and anti-chiro POV than it already is. ] 01:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


Although mixers are the majority group, many of them retain belief in vertebral subluxation as shown in a 2003 survey of 1,100 North American chiropractors, which found that 88 percent wanted to retain the term "vertebral subluxation complex", and that when asked to estimate the percent of disorders of internal organs that subluxation significantly contributes to, the mean response was 62 percent.<ref name=McDonald /> A 2008 survey of 6,000 American chiropractors demonstrated that most chiropractors seem to believe that a subluxation-based clinical approach may be of limited utility for addressing ]s, and greatly favored non-subluxation-based clinical approaches for such conditions.<ref name=Smith-Carber /> The same survey showed that most chiropractors generally believed that the majority of their clinical approach for addressing musculoskeletal/biomechanical disorders such as back pain was based on subluxation.<ref name=Smith-Carber>{{cite journal|journal=Journal of Chiropractic Humanities|year=2008|volume=15|pages=19–26|title=Survey of US Chiropractor Attitudes and Behaviors about Subluxation|vauthors=Smith M, Carber LA|url=http://archive.journalchirohumanities.com/Vol%2015/JChiroprHumanit2008v15-19-26.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120425234244/http://archive.journalchirohumanities.com/Vol%2015/JChiroprHumanit2008v15-19-26.pdf|archive-date=2012-04-25|doi=10.1016/s1556-3499(13)60166-7}}</ref> Chiropractors often offer conventional therapies such as physical therapy and lifestyle counseling, and it may for the lay person be difficult to distinguish the unscientific from the scientific.<ref name=Benedetti2002>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zHxockt9CWQC|title=Spin Doctors: The Chiropractic Industry Under Examination|last1=Benedetti|first1=Paul|last2=MacPhail|first2=Wayne|date=2002-01-01|publisher=Dundurn|isbn=978-1-55002-406-7|language=en|page=18}}</ref>
thanks guys, it would help to remain unemotional and objective here. We have all agreed it is controversial, the only question is whether it should go at the top. Argument saying no relies on the idea that it is not part of the defintion. Argument against this is that WP is not a dictionary. We are writing an article ABOUT chiro, not merely providing a dictionary definition. Once again, I will refrain from reverting until we sort this out. Looking foward to your answer. ] 15:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


=== Vertebral subluxation ===
:This is certainly not a dictionary. You are right. But the first sentence of an encyclopaedic article can provide a broad definition of the topic before the rest of the article dissects the topic. And in a broad definition of the word, chiropractic shouldn't be characterized as "controversial". Adding that word provides unneccessary POV. Do a search for chiropractic in a dictionary - . There is no mention of this controversy. Why? Because a good dictionary doesn't provide POV... just a definition. Beyind the topic sentence of this article is another matter. But the first sentence should not have the word "controversial" in it just as it should say "amazing". ] 16:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
{{Main|Vertebral subluxation}}
{{distinguish|text=], the medical condition}}


In science-based medicine, the term "subluxation" refers to an incomplete or partial ] of a ], from the Latin ''luxare'' for 'dislocate'.<ref name="Merriam-Webster">{{cite web | title=Subluxation | website=Merriam-Webster | url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subluxation | access-date=January 4, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.etymonline.com/word/luxation#:~:text=luxation%20(n.),a%20word%20of%20uncertain%20origin |title=luxation (n.) |work=Online Etymology Dictionary |access-date=July 28, 2021 |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190501165646/https://www.etymonline.com/word/luxation |archive-date=2019-05-01 }}</ref> While medical doctors use the term exclusively to refer to physical dislocations, Chiropractic founder D. D. Palmer imbued the word ''subluxation'' with a metaphysical and philosophical meaning drawn from pseudoscientific traditions such as ].<ref name=Keating1995 />
==Introductory sentence==
The introductory sentence states: ''"Chiropractic, or chiropractic care, is '''a system of health care''' that is based on the belief that many health problems can be prevented and treated using spinal adjustments in order to correct vertebral subluxations which are believed to be the cause of much disease."'' "A system of health care" in this context obviously means something different than what appears in the ] article. I would like to know if this sentence should be changed, or if a disambiguation page needs to be set up. Thoughts? -] 23:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


Palmer claimed that ''vertebral subluxations'' interfered with the body's function and its inborn ability to heal itself.<ref name=History-PPC>{{cite book|vauthors= Keating JC Jr|chapter= A brief history of the chiropractic profession|pages=23–64|title= Principles and Practice of Chiropractic|edition=3rd|veditors = Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B |publisher=McGraw-Hill|year=2005|isbn=978-0-07-137534-4|display-editors=etal|author-link= Joseph C. Keating, Jr}}</ref> D. D. Palmer repudiated his earlier theory that vertebral subluxations caused pinched nerves in the intervertebral spaces in favor of subluxations causing altered nerve vibration, either too tense or too slack, affecting the tone (health) of the end organ.<ref name=Keating1995 /> He qualified this by noting that knowledge of innate intelligence was not essential to the competent practice of chiropractic.<ref name=Keating1995>{{cite web|url=http://chiro.org/Plus/History/Persons/PalmerDD/PalmerDD's_Forgotten_Theories1995.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070710071140/http://www.chiro.org/Plus/History/Persons/PalmerDD/PalmerDD's_Forgotten_Theories1995.pdf |archive-date=2007-07-10 |url-status=live|title= D. D. Palmer's forgotten theories of chiropractic|last=Keating |first=J. C. Jr|publisher= ]|year=1995|access-date=2008-05-14}}</ref> This concept was later expanded upon by his son, B. J. Palmer, and was instrumental in providing the legal basis of differentiating chiropractic from conventional medicine. In 1910, D. D. Palmer theorized that the nervous system controlled health:
:Is there a general term that means the same as a service provided by doctors to promote health? Also, the Healthcare System article treats "Healthcare" as one word. On Chiro, we treat it as two words. Is this grammatically incorrect or does this provide the disambiguity that you are seeking? ] 01:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


{{Blockquote|]s divide nerve-fibers, which form the nerves, into two classes, ] and ]. Impressions are made on the peripheral afferent fiber-endings; these create sensations that are transmitted to the center of the nervous system. Efferent nerve-fibers carry impulses out from the center to their endings. Most of these go to muscles and are therefore called motor impulses; some are secretory and enter glands; a portion are inhibitory, their function being to restrain secretion. Thus, nerves carry impulses outward and sensations inward. The activity of these nerves, or rather their fibers, may become excited or allayed by impingement, the result being a modification of functionality&nbsp;– too much or not enough action&nbsp;– which is disease.<ref name=ChiropractorsAdjuster1910 />}}
== Science section ==


] to examine the bone structure of a patient.]]
There would have to be very strong reasons why non RCTs should go in the science section. The study reported said "Chiropractic office costs were higher for both acute and chronic patients (P < .01). When referrals were included, there were no significant differences in either group between provider types (P > .20)." The .2 figure is crucial here. ] 04:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Vertebral subluxation, a core concept of traditional chiropractic, remains unsubstantiated and largely untested, and a debate about whether to keep it in the chiropractic paradigm has been ongoing for decades.<ref name=Keating-subluxation /> In general, critics of traditional subluxation-based chiropractic (including chiropractors) are skeptical of its clinical value, ] beliefs and metaphysical approach. While straight chiropractic still retains the traditional vitalistic construct espoused by the founders, evidence-based chiropractic suggests that a mechanistic view will allow chiropractic care to become integrated into the wider health care community.<ref name=Keating-subluxation>{{cite journal |vauthors=Keating JC, Charlton KH, Grod JP, Perle SM, Sikorski D, Winterstein JF | title = Subluxation: dogma or science? | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy| volume = 13 | page = 17 | date = August 2005 | pmid = 16092955 | pmc = 1208927 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-13-17 | doi-access = free }}</ref> This is still a continuing source of debate within the chiropractic profession as well, with some schools of chiropractic still teaching the traditional/straight subluxation-based chiropractic, while others have moved towards an ] chiropractic that rejects metaphysical foundings and limits itself to primarily neuromusculoskeletal conditions.<ref>{{cite journal|journal=Journal of Chiropractic Education|year=2000|volume=14|issue=2|pages=71–77|title=A survey of the use of evidence-based health care in chiropractic college clinics|vauthors=Rose KA, Adams A|doi=10.7899/1042-5055-14.2.71 |url=http://www.journalchiroed.com/2000/JCEFall2000Rose.PDF|archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20081002073736/http://www.journalchiroed.com/2000/JCEFall2000Rose.PDF|archive-date=2008-10-02}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|journal=Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy|year=2006|volume=14|issue=2|pages=E14–18|title=Can chiropractors and evidence-based manual therapists work together? an opinion from a veteran chiropractor|author=Homola S|url=http://jmmtonline.com/documents/HomolaV14N2E.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070710071140/http://jmmtonline.com/documents/HomolaV14N2E.pdf |archive-date=2007-07-10 |url-status=live|doi=10.1179/jmt.2006.14.2.14E|citeseerx=10.1.1.366.2817|s2cid=71826135}}</ref>


In 2005, the ] was defined by the ] as "a lesion or dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact.<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> It is essentially a functional entity, which may influence biomechanical and neural integrity."<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> This differs from the medical definition of subluxation as a significant structural displacement, which can be seen with static imaging techniques such as ].<ref name=WHO-guidelines>{{cite book |author= World Health Organization|year=2005|title= WHO guidelines on basic training and safety in chiropractic|publisher=World Health Organization |url=https://www.who.int/medicines/areas/traditional/Chiro-Guidelines.pdf|isbn= 978-92-4-159371-7|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313162309/https://www.who.int/medicines/areas/traditional/Chiro-Guidelines.pdf |access-date=2008-02-29|archive-date=2022-03-13 }}</ref> The use of X-ray imaging in the case of vertebral subluxation exposes patients to harmful ] for no evidentially supported reason.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Jenkins|first1=H. J.|title=Awareness of radiographic guidelines for low back pain: a survey of Australian chiropractors.|journal=Chiropractic & Manual Therapies|date=5 October 2016|volume=24|page=39|doi=10.1186/s12998-016-0118-7|pmc=5051064|pmid=27713818 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name=Ammendolia /> The 2008 book '']'' states "X-rays can reveal neither the subluxations nor the innate intelligence associated with chiropractic philosophy, because they do not exist."<ref name=Trick-or-Treatment>{{cite book|pages=145–90|chapter=The truth about chiropractic therapy|title=Trick or Treatment: The Undeniable Facts about Alternative Medicine |last1=Singh |first1=S. |last2=Ernst |first2=E. |year=2008|publisher=W. W. Norton|isbn=978-0-393-06661-6}}</ref> ] David Chapman-Smith, Secretary-General of the ], has stated that "Medical critics have asked how there can be a subluxation if it cannot be seen on X-ray. The answer is that the chiropractic subluxation is essentially a functional entity, not structural, and is therefore no more visible on static X-ray than a ] or headache or any other functional problem."<ref>{{cite book|page=160|chapter=Principles and Goals of Chiropractic Care|title=The Chiropractic Profession: Its Education, Practice, Research and Future Directions|author=David Chapman-Smith|year=2000|publisher=NCMIC Group|isbn=978-1-892734-02-0}}</ref> The ], the statutory regulatory body for chiropractors in the United Kingdom, states that the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex "is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gcc-uk.org/files/link_file/Guidance_on_claims_made_for_the_chiropractic_VSC_18August10.pdf |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/5xywlByZ0?url=http://www.gcc-uk.org/files/link_file/Guidance_on_claims_made_for_the_chiropractic_VSC_18August10.pdf |archive-date=2011-04-16 |title=Guidance on claims made for the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex |publisher=General Chiropractic Council |access-date=2010-09-30 }}</ref>
A 2002 investigation supports that spinal manipulation may benefit patients afflicted with asthma. This was not a RCT study, no references are given in the study to check the assertions made, it is not a scientific study in any sense of the word. Where are the confidence intevals? Where are the footnotes? How can we check its verifiablity? In any case the cohrane work of 2006 supercedes. ] 04:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


As of 2014, the US ] states "The specific focus of chiropractic practice is known as the chiropractic subluxation or joint dysfunction. A subluxation is a health concern that manifests in the skeletal joints, and, through complex anatomical and physiological relationships, affects the nervous system and may lead to reduced function, disability or illness."<ref name="NBCE_about_chiro">{{Citation |last=NBCE |date=2014 |title=About Chiropractic |publisher=] |url=http://www.nbce.org/about/about_chiropractic/ |access-date=February 1, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150619234625/http://www.nbce.org/about/about_chiropractic/ |archive-date=June 19, 2015 }}</ref><ref name=History-Primer2 />
I have gone to the trouble of reviewing each link:
*glaucoma - single case study proves nothing - the link says MAY
*Bell’s palsy - single case study proves nothing - the link says it's possible
*Allergy and Crohn's Disease - not double or even single blinded, not RCT - the link says "the possibility may be considered"
*infantile colic - "suggest a possible association" - not good enough, not proven, 2 case studies
*duodenal ulcer - control group not the same as trial group - you've got to be joking; in any case the "pilot" concluded "under discussion as a possible mechanism for the treatment effect." this is dangerous stuff. How can people rely on this to treat ulcer???
*PARKINSON'S DISEASE - case study again, but at least the author has the decency to say "No firm conclusion can be obtained from the results of one case."


===Pseudoscience versus spinal manipulation therapy===
These links are not science and don't belong in the science section unless to say that they are unscientific. May and possible are words that anyone can use. It MAY be POSSIBLE that the moon is made of green cheese. Without double blind RCT we are pretty much wasting our time trying to argue these studies are scientific. ] 05:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
{{main|Spinal adjustment|Spinal manipulation}}


While some chiropractors limit their practice to short-term treatment of musculoskeletal conditions, many falsely claim to be able treat a myriad of other conditions.<ref name="skepinq"/><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vagrYOk47VEC&pg=PA198 |title=Spin Doctors: The Chiropractic Industry Under Examination |last1=Benedetti |first1=Paul |last2=MacPhail |first2=Wayne |publisher=Dundurn Group |location=Toronto |date=2002 |isbn=1-55002-406-X |page=198}}</ref> Some dissuade patients from seeking medical care, others have pretended to be qualified to act as a family doctor.<ref name="skepinq">{{cite web |url=https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/chiropractors-pro-and-con/ |title=Chiropractors: Pro and Con |website=Skeptical Inquirer |last=Hall |first=Harriet |date=June 1, 2017 |access-date=July 28, 2021 |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200823235423/https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/chiropractors-pro-and-con/ |archive-date=2020-08-23 }}</ref>
:Mccready, I must say that you've done a '''good job''' of cleaning up this mess. I've been over this ground before without success, since the one who placed all those links has little understanding of what consitutes good scientific research. Discussion was a waste of time. If you will look in the archives at to so-called research, you'll see his remarks immediately before, where he considers it good research. He and his supporters have repeatedly claimed this junk was proof for many weird chiropractic claims, but have failed to realize that those links only place chiropractic in a very bad light, since better research regarding manipulation (not adjustments) is available from non-chiropractic sources, but certainly not for such wild claims. If that is the best that chiropractic can come up with, what a pity. Such claims and attempts to "document" (sarcasm!) them should be buried out of sight, and many enlightened chiropractors will thank you for your efforts. Those links were an embarrassment! -- ] 20:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


], an alternative medicine watchdog, cautions against seeing chiropractors who:<ref name="skepinq"/><ref>{{cite web |url=https://quackwatch.org/chiropractic/ |title=Chirobase |website=Quackwatch |date=7 May 2019 |access-date=July 28, 2021 |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610204236/https://quackwatch.org/chiropractic/ |archive-date=2020-06-10 }}</ref>
== Question for Mcready ==
* Treat young children
:Hello Mccready. I read your CV. Very interesting background. Was wondering why you harbor what appears to be tremendous animosity towards the chiropractic profession. What's behind this? Have you had personal experience with chiropractic? I would be interested in knowing what's behind it all. Thanks ] 04:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
* Discourage immunization
* Pretend to be a family doctor
* Take full spine X-rays
* Promote unproven dietary supplements
* Are antagonistic to scientific medicine
* Claim to treat non-musculoskeletal problems


Writing for the '']'', one physician cautioned against seeing even chiropractors who solely claim to treat musculoskeletal conditions: {{blockquote|I think ] (SMT) is a reasonable option for patients to try ... But I could not in good conscience refer a patient to a chiropractor... When chiropractic is effective, what is effective is not 'chiropractic': it is SMT. SMT is also offered by physical therapists, DOs, and others. These are science-based providers ... If I thought a patient might benefit from manipulation, I would rather refer him or her to a science-based provider.<ref name="skepinq"/>}}
I have no particular animosity at all to chiropractic. You need to show me a meta-analysis reporting well controlled double blind RCTs. This is the standard usually required in science. Looking forward to futher discussion. ] 05:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


== Scope of practice ==
:Thanks Mccready. Have you had any personal experiences with chiropractic? ] 17:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
]


Chiropractors emphasize the conservative management of the ] without the use of medicines or surgery,<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> with special emphasis on the spine.<ref name=Nelson/> Back and neck pain are the specialties of chiropractic but many chiropractors treat ailments other than musculoskeletal issues.<ref name=Ernst-eval /> There is a range of opinions among chiropractors: some believed that treatment should be confined to the spine, or back and neck pain; others disagreed.<ref name=V-H /> For example, while one 2009 survey of American chiropractors had found that 73% classified themselves as "back pain/musculoskeletal specialists", the label "back and neck pain specialists" was regarded by 47% of them as a ''least'' desirable description in a 2005 international survey.<ref name=V-H>{{cite journal | author = Villanueva-Russell Y | title = Caught in the crosshairs: identity and cultural authority within chiropractic | journal = Social Science & Medicine| volume = 72 | issue = 11 | pages = 1826–37 | date = June 2011 | doi = 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.038 | pmid = 21531061}}</ref> Chiropractic combines aspects from mainstream and alternative medicine, and there is no agreement about how to define the profession: although chiropractors have many attributes of ] providers, chiropractic has more attributes of a medical specialty like ] or ].<ref name=Meeker-Haldeman>{{cite journal |vauthors=Meeker WC, Haldeman S | title = Chiropractic: a profession at the crossroads of mainstream and alternative medicine | journal = Annals of Internal Medicine| volume = 136 | issue = 3 | pages = 216–27 | year = 2002 | pmid = 11827498 | doi = 10.7326/0003-4819-136-3-200202050-00010 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.694.4126 | s2cid = 16782086 }}</ref> It has been proposed that chiropractors specialize in nonsurgical spine care, instead of attempting to also treat other problems,<ref name=Murphy-pod /><ref name=Meeker-Haldeman /> but the more expansive view of chiropractic is still widespread.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Gleberzon BJ, Cooperstein R, Perle SM | title = Can chiropractic survive its chimerical nature? | journal = The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association| volume = 49 | issue = 2 | pages = 69–73 | year = 2005 | pmid = 17549192 | pmc = 1840015 }}</ref>
:: I wonder if you are thinking about attacking the man and not the argument here Steth? The fact that those sceptical of chiropractic are interested in the scientific evidence doesn't mean that they have had some dark experience with chiropractic in the past. I personally was sceptical of the claims made well before a close friend's spine was broken by a long practising and highly qualified chiropractor. But I know that a simple case study of a smashed spine proves nothing. Only double-blind random controlled trials prove things. And given the claims made by chiropractic, this is hardly much to ask. ] 02:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


Mainstream health care and governmental organizations such as the World Health Organization consider chiropractic to be complementary and alternative medicine (CAM);<ref name=Chapman-Smith /> and a 2008 study reported that 31% of surveyed chiropractors categorized chiropractic as CAM, 27% as integrated medicine, and 12% as mainstream medicine.<ref name=Redwood-CAM>{{cite journal |vauthors=Redwood D, Hawk C, Cambron J, Vinjamury SP, Bedard J | title = Do chiropractors identify with complementary and alternative medicine? results of a survey | journal = The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine| volume = 14 | issue = 4 | pages = 361–68 | year = 2008 | doi = 10.1089/acm.2007.0766 | pmid = 18435599}}</ref> Many chiropractors believe they are primary care providers,<ref name=Ernst-eval/><ref name=CooperMcKee2003 /> including US<ref name=Bellamy2010>{{cite journal|last1=Bellamy|first1=Jann J|title=Legislative alchemy: the US state chiropractic practice acts|journal=Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies|volume=15|issue=3|year=2010|pages=214–22|doi=10.1111/j.2042-7166.2010.01032.x}}</ref> and UK chiropractors,<ref name=Jones-Harris2010>{{cite journal|title=Are chiropractors in the uk primary healthcare or primary contact practitioners?: a mixed methods study|author=Jones-Harris, Amanda R|journal=Chiropractic & Osteopathy|date=October 2010|volume=18|issue=28|page=28|doi=10.1186/1746-1340-18-28| pmc=3161390|pmid=20979615 |doi-access=free }}</ref> but the length, breadth, and depth of chiropractic clinical training do not support the requirements to be considered primary care providers,<ref name=Nelson /> so their role on primary care is limited and disputed.<ref name=Nelson/><ref name=CooperMcKee2003/>
:Something to ponder Miasmus. Being skeptical and asking for RCT's is one thing, but actively engaging in full-time chiropractic-hating extremism is certainly something else.


Chiropractic overlaps with several other forms of manual therapy, including massage therapy, ], physical therapy, and ].<ref name=Norris /><ref>{{cite journal | author = Theberge N | title = The integration of chiropractors into healthcare teams: a case study from sport medicine | journal = Sociology of Health & Illness| volume = 30 | issue = 1 | pages = 19–34 | date = January 2008 | pmid = 18254831 | doi = 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01026.x | doi-access = free }}</ref> Chiropractic is autonomous from and competitive with mainstream medicine,<ref name=Pettman /> and osteopathy outside the US remains primarily a manual medical system;<ref>{{cite journal|journal= Complementary Health Practice Review|year=2006|volume=11|issue=2|pages=77–94|doi=10.1177/1533210106292467|title= The drive for legitimization by osteopathy and chiropractic in Australia: between heterodoxy and orthodoxy|author= Baer HA|doi-access=free}}</ref> physical therapists work alongside and cooperate with mainstream medicine, and ] has merged with the medical profession.<ref name=Pettman>{{cite journal | author = Pettman E | title = A history of manipulative therapy | journal = Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy| volume = 15 | issue = 3 | pages = 165–74 | year = 2007 | pmid = 19066664 | pmc = 2565620 | doi = 10.1179/106698107790819873 }}</ref> Practitioners may distinguish these competing approaches through claims that, compared to other therapists, chiropractors heavily emphasize spinal manipulation, tend to use firmer manipulative techniques, and promote maintenance care; that osteopaths use a wider variety of treatment procedures; and that physical therapists emphasize machinery and exercise.<ref name=Norris>{{cite journal|author= Norris P|year=2001|title= How 'we' are different from 'them': occupational boundary maintenance in the treatment of musculo-skeletal problems|journal= Sociology of Health and Illness|volume=23|issue=1|pages=24–43|doi=10.1111/1467-9566.00239|doi-access=free}}</ref>
:As for smashing someone's spine, I think you are prone to hyperbole. Likely it didn't happen, especially from a "long practising and highly qualified chiropractor." So why you added that is questionable.


Chiropractic diagnosis may involve a range of methods including skeletal imaging, observational and tactile assessments, and orthopedic and neurological evaluation.<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> A chiropractor may also refer a patient to an appropriate specialist, or co-manage with another health care provider.<ref name=Meeker-Haldeman /> Common patient management involves ] (SM) and other manual therapies to the joints and soft tissues, rehabilitative exercises, health promotion, electrical modalities, complementary procedures, and lifestyle advice.<ref name=content-of-practice/>
:Mcready's silence answers the question. He is here on a mission to ensure that this article paints chiropractic in as bad a light as possible. This is radically different than asking for RCT's.


]
:He was probably recruited by someone who is also on a mission to do everything possible to damage chiropractic. ] 03:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


Chiropractors are not normally licensed to write ]s or perform major surgery in the United States<ref name=Parkman /> (although ] has become the first US state to allow "advanced practice" trained chiropractors to prescribe certain medications<ref>. State of New Mexico. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100317015229/http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/parts/title16/16.004.0015.htm |date=2010-03-17 }}. Retrieved 2010-05-03.</ref><ref> (PDF). State of New Mexico. Retrieved 2010-05-03.</ref>). In the US, their scope of practice varies by state, based on inconsistent views of chiropractic care: some states, such as ], broadly allow treatment of "human ailments"; some, such as ], use vague concepts such as "transition of nerve energy" to define scope of practice; others, such as ], specify a severely narrowed scope.<ref name=Morrison>{{cite journal | author = Morrison P | title = Adjusting the role of chiropractors in the United States: why narrowing chiropractor scope of practice statutes will protect patients | journal = Health Matrix | volume = 19 | issue = 2 | pages = 493–537 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19715143 }}</ref> US states also differ over whether chiropractors may conduct laboratory tests or diagnostic procedures, dispense dietary supplements, or use other therapies such as homeopathy and acupuncture; in ] they can become certified to perform minor surgery and to deliver children via natural childbirth.<ref name=Parkman>{{cite journal | vauthors = Parkman CA | title = Issues in credentialing CAM providers | journal = The Case Manager| volume = 15 | issue = 4 | pages = 24–27 | year = 2004 | doi = 10.1016/j.casemgr.2004.05.004 | pmid = 15247891}}</ref> A 2003 survey of North American chiropractors found that a slight majority favored allowing them to write prescriptions for ]s.<ref name=McDonald>{{cite book|vauthors=McDonald WP, Durkin KF, Pfefer M |year=2003|title=How Chiropractors Think and Practice: The Survey of North American Chiropractors|location=Ada, Ohio|publisher=Institute for Social Research, Ohio Northern University|isbn=978-0-9728055-5-1 |display-authors=etal}}{{page needed|date=May 2013}}</ref> A 2010 survey found that 72% of Swiss chiropractors considered their ability to prescribe nonprescription medication as an advantage for chiropractic treatment.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Wangler M, Zaugg B, Faigaux E | title = Medication Prescription: A Pilot Survey of Bernese Doctors of Chiropractic Practicing in Switzerland | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 33 | issue = 3 | pages = 231–237 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20350678 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.01.013 }}</ref>
:: You see, this is the value of case studies - NONE AT ALL. You claim that my friend's spine was not smashed and he didn't die six weeks later. I cannot prove it to you and you choose not to believe it. I could provide evidence to you in the form of press material from 1993 but I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who has such a pro-chiropractic stance. I am not pro or anti-chiropractic. I simply ask for the same evidence that every other medical claimant must provide to claim that their professed miracle cure works - randomized controlled double-blind trials. Why is that so difficult? ] 03:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


A related field, ], applies manual therapies to animals and is recognized in many US states,<ref name=AVMAScope>{{cite web|title=Scope of Practice: Complementary and alternative veterinary medicine (CAVM) and other practice act exemptions|url=https://www.avma.org/Advocacy/StateAndLocal/Pages/sr-cavm-exemptions.aspx|website=]|access-date=April 1, 2016|date=May 2019|archive-date=April 4, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160404015034/https://www.avma.org/Advocacy/StateAndLocal/Pages/sr-cavm-exemptions.aspx}}</ref> but is not recognized by the ] as being chiropractic.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://amerchiro.org/level2_css.cfm?T1ID=10&T2ID=117#107 |access-date=2008-07-05 |title='Veterinary' chiropractic |year=1994 |author=ACA House of Delegates |publisher=] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080517055938/http://www.amerchiro.org/level2_css.cfm?T1ID=10&T2ID=117#107 |archive-date=May 17, 2008 }}</ref> It remains controversial within certain segments of the veterinary and chiropractic professions.<ref>{{cite magazine |magazine=] |volume=19 |issue=13 |url=https://www.dynamicchiropractic.com/mpacms/dc/article.php?id=18081 |first=Daniel|last=Kamen |title= Politics and technique|date=June 18, 2001}}</ref>
== Vandalism ==


No single profession "owns" spinal manipulation and there is little consensus as to which profession should administer SM, raising concerns by chiropractors that other medical physicians could "steal" SM procedures from chiropractors.<ref name=Villanueva-Russell /> A focus on evidence-based SM research has also raised concerns that the resulting practice guidelines could limit the scope of chiropractic practice to treating backs and necks.<ref name=Villanueva-Russell>{{cite journal|author=Villanueva-Russell Y|title=Evidence-based medicine and its implications for the profession of chiropractic|journal=Social Science & Medicine|volume=60|issue=3|pages=545–61|year=2005|doi=10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.05.017|pmid=15550303}}</ref> Two US states (Washington and Arkansas) prohibit physical therapists from performing SM,<ref>{{cite news |last=Anderson |first=Chantal |title=Physical therapists, chiropractors square off over bill |url=http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/politicsnorthwest/2009/01/22/the_campus_is_heating_up.html |date=2009-01-22 |work=The Seattle Times |access-date=2010-09-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100922091855/http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/politicsnorthwest/2009/01/22/the_campus_is_heating_up.html |archive-date=2010-09-22 }}</ref> some states allow them to do it only if they have completed advanced training in SM, and some states allow only chiropractors to perform SM, or only chiropractors and physicians. Bills to further prohibit non-chiropractors from performing SM are regularly introduced into state legislatures and are opposed by physical therapist organizations.<ref>{{cite journal |journal=DePaul Journal of Health Care Law |year=2004 |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=237–61 |title= State practice acts of licensed health professions: scope of practice |url=https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1155&context=jhcl |vauthors=Hilliard JW, Johnson ME }}</ref>
i am reporting ] for vandalism to the chiropractic article: "Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change to content made in a deliberate attempt to reduce the quality of the encyclopedia." This user has failed to discuss his reasons for reverting, engaged in personal attacks, and seems convinced he has the right to question other editors about their private lives. When they fail to respond he draws conclusions without evidence then indulges in further personal attack and accusations of conspiracy. ] 07:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


== Treatments ==
:I haven't looked, in depth, at ]'s edits, so I can't comment on any charge that he is vandalising the article. However, I should be clear that there are serious issues with the version of the article seen on the left . I can't find any dictionary which refers to the subject of this article as a religion, and the phrase ] has the distinct smell of non-]. Certainly, if it can be properly sourced, a section of this article, or perhaps a separate article, could investigate the concents of this subject as a religion, but I cannot find a ] that would support such a direction in this article at this point. ] 08:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
{{Main|Chiropractic treatment techniques|Spinal adjustment}}
]


Spinal manipulation, which chiropractors call "spinal adjustment" or "chiropractic adjustment", is the most common treatment used in chiropractic care.<ref name=NBCE_techniques /> Spinal manipulation is a passive manual maneuver during which a three-joint complex is taken past the normal range of movement, but not so far as to dislocate or damage the joint.<ref name=ACA-SMP /> Its defining factor is a dynamic thrust, which is a sudden force that causes an audible release and attempts to increase a joint's range of motion.<ref name=ACA-SMP /> High-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation (HVLA-SM) thrusts have physiological effects that signal neural discharge from paraspinal muscle tissues, depending on duration and amplitude of the thrust are factors of the degree in paraspinal muscle spindles activation.<ref name=Pickar2007 /> Clinical skill in employing HVLA-SM thrusts depends on the ability of the practitioner to handle the duration and magnitude of the load.<ref name=Pickar2007>{{cite journal |vauthors=Pickar JG, Sung PS, Kang YM, Ge W | title = Response of lumbar paraspinal muscles spindles is greater to spinal manipulative loading compared with slower loading under length control | journal = The Spine Journal| volume = 7 | issue = 5 | pages = 583–95 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17905321 | pmc = 2075482 | doi = 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.10.006 }}</ref> More generally, ] (SMT) describes techniques where the hands are used to manipulate, massage, mobilize, adjust, stimulate, apply traction to, or otherwise influence the spine and related tissues.<ref name=ACA-SMP>{{cite web|url=http://acatoday.org/pdf/spinal_manipulation_policy.pdf|title=Spinal manipulation policy statement|vauthors=Winkler K, Hegetschweiler-Goertz C, Jackson PS|access-date=2008-05-24|year=2003|publisher=American Chiropractic Association|display-authors=etal|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720114044/http://www.acatoday.org/pdf/spinal_manipulation_policy.pdf|archive-date=2011-07-20}}</ref>
Palmer himself calls it a religion. Isn't this sufficient? The definition of ] fits Palmer. If this doesn't meet your concerns I'd be pleased to discuss further. May I urge you to look at this in depth. We could welcome more independent editors on this page. ]


There are several schools of chiropractic adjustive techniques, although most chiropractors mix techniques from several schools. The following adjustive procedures were received by more than 10% of patients of licensed US chiropractors in a 2003 survey:<ref name=NBCE_techniques /> ] (full-spine manipulation, employing various techniques), extremity adjusting, ] (which uses a spring-loaded tool to deliver precise adjustments to the spine), Thompson Technique (which relies on a drop table and detailed procedural protocols), ] (which emphasizes evaluating the spine along with specific adjustment that avoids rotational vectors), Cox/flexion-distraction (a gentle, low-force adjusting procedure which mixes chiropractic with osteopathic principles and utilizes specialized adjusting tables with movable parts), adjustive instrument, Sacro-Occipital Technique (which models the spine as a torsion bar), ], ] (which emphasises "muscle testing" as a diagnostic tool), and cranial.<ref>{{cite book|title=Technique Systems in Chiropractic|vauthors=Cooperstein R, Gleberzon BJ |publisher=Churchill Livingstone|year=2004|isbn=978-0-443-07413-4|ref=TSC }}{{page needed|date=May 2013}}</ref> Chiropractic biophysics technique uses inverse functions of rotations during spinal manipulation.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Harrison DD, Janik TJ, Harrison GR, Troyanovich S, Harrison DE, Harrison SO |title=Chiropractic biophysics technique: a linear algebra approach to posture in chiropractic |journal=Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics|volume=19 |issue=8 |pages=525–35 |year=1996 |pmid=8902664}}</ref> ] (KST) may use their hands, or they may use an electric device known as an "ArthroStim" for assessment and spinal manipulations.<ref name=Aetna/> Insurers in the US and UK that cover other chiropractic techniques exclude KST from coverage because they consider it to be "experimental and investigational".<ref name=Aetna>{{cite web|title=Provider Manual for Chiropractic Services|url=https://www.nd.gov/dhs/services/medicalserv/medicaid/docs/chiropractic-manual.pdf|website=North Dakota Department of Human Services|publisher=State of North Dakota|access-date=2016-04-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160408173429/http://www.nd.gov/dhs/services/medicalserv/medicaid/docs/chiropractic-manual.pdf|archive-date=2016-04-08}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web| title = Complementary and Alternative Therapies Evidence Based Decision Making Framework| author = NHS Leeds West CCG Assurance Committee| work = leedswestccg.nhs.uk| date = 2014-01-02| access-date = 2015-06-30| url = http://www.leedswestccg.nhs.uk/content/uploads/2014/07/Complementary-and-alternative-therapies.pdf| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160304065519/http://www.leedswestccg.nhs.uk/content/uploads/2014/07/Complementary-and-alternative-therapies.pdf| archive-date = 2016-03-04}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=Chiropractic Services - Policy|url=http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/100_199/0107.html|website=Aetna|access-date=29 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160324082643/http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/100_199/0107.html|archive-date=24 March 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Chiropractic Policy|url=https://osuhealthplan.com/sites/all/themes/osuhealthplan/pdf/policies/Chiropractic%20Policy.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170105054235/https://osuhealthplan.com/sites/all/themes/osuhealthplan/pdf/policies/Chiropractic%20Policy.pdf|archive-date=5 January 2017|publisher=Oklahoma State University Health Plan|access-date=14 April 2016|date=1 April 2016}}</ref> Medicine-assisted manipulation, such as ], involves sedation or local anesthetic and is done by a team that includes an ]; a 2008 ] did not find enough evidence to make recommendations about its use for chronic low back pain.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Dagenais S, Mayer J, Wooley JR, Haldeman S | title = Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with medicine-assisted manipulation | journal = The Spine Journal| volume = 8 | issue = 1 | pages = 142–49 | year = 2008 | doi = 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.09.010 | pmid = 18164462}}</ref>
==Chiropractic's dismal future outlook==
Rand Baird analyses 20 predictions that have come true, all pointing downward:


], ] and ] chiropractic spinal manipulation]]
-- by Rand Baird, DC, MPH, FICA, FICC


Many other procedures are used by chiropractors for treating the spine, other joints and tissues, and general health issues. The following procedures were received by more than one-third of patients of licensed US chiropractors in a 2003 survey: Diversified technique (full-spine manipulation; mentioned in previous paragraph), ]/exercise promotion, corrective or therapeutic exercise, ]/] advice, ] strategies, ], changing risky/unhealthy behaviors, ] recommendations, ]/] recommendations, ], extremity adjusting (also mentioned in previous paragraph), trigger point therapy, and ]/early ] advice.<ref name=NBCE_techniques>{{cite book|title= Job Analysis of Chiropractic|chapter= Professional functions and treatment procedures|year=2005|pages=121–38|vauthors=Christensen MG, Kollasch MW |location= Greeley, CO|publisher= ]|chapter-url=http://nbce.org/pdfs/job-analysis/chapter_10.pdf|access-date=2008-08-25|isbn=978-1-884457-05-0 |url= http://nbce.org/pdfs/job-analysis/chapter_10.pdf|archive-url= https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20080910235612/http://nbce.org/pdfs/job-analysis/chapter_10.pdf|archive-date=2008-09-10}}</ref>
-- ] 20:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


A 2010 study describing Belgian chiropractors and their patients found chiropractors in Belgium mostly focus on neuromusculoskeletal complaints in adult patients, with emphasis on the spine.<ref name=Ailliet2010 /> The diversified technique is the most often applied technique at 93%, followed by the Activator mechanical-assisted technique at 41%.<ref name=Ailliet2010>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ailliet L, Rubinstein SM, de Vet HC | title = Characteristics of chiropractors and their patients in Belgium | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 33 | issue = 8 | pages = 618–25 | date = October 2010 | pmid = 21036284 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.08.011 }}</ref> A 2009 study assessing chiropractic students giving or receiving spinal manipulations while attending a United States chiropractic college found Diversified, Gonstead, and upper cervical manipulations are frequently used methods.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ndetan HT, Rupert RL, Bae S, Singh KP | title = Prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries sustained by students while attending a chiropractic college | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 32 | issue = 2 | pages = 140–48 | date = February 2009 | pmid = 19243726 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.12.012 }}</ref>


=== Practice guidelines ===
'''Outlook dismal for NPOV too'''
:And you feel the need to gleefully point out the above why? It won't help to create accord, build bridges and improve communication and agreement between editors/contributors. It won't help stop the revert wars.


Reviews of research studies within the chiropractic community have been used to generate practice guidelines outlining standards that specify which chiropractic treatments are legitimate (i.e. supported by evidence) and conceivably reimbursable under ] health payment systems.<ref name=Villanueva-Russell /> Evidence-based guidelines are supported by one end of an ideological continuum among chiropractors; the other end employs ] reasoning and makes unsubstantiated claims.<ref name=Nelson /><ref name=History-Primer2>{{cite web|title=Chiropractic history: a primer |author=Joseph C. Keating Jr. |author2=Cleveland CS III |author3=Menke M |url=http://www.historyofchiropractic.org/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |year=2005 |access-date=2008-06-16 |publisher=Association for the History of Chiropractic |archive-date=19 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130619204140/http://www.historyofchiropractic.org/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |quote=A significant and continuing barrier to scientific progress within chiropractic are the anti-scientific and pseudo-scientific ideas (Keating 1997b) which have sustained the profession throughout a century of intense struggle with political medicine. Chiropractors' tendency to assert the meaningfulness of various theories and methods as a counterpoint to allopathic charges of quackery has created a defensiveness which can make critical examination of chiropractic concepts difficult (Keating and Mootz 1989). One example of this conundrum is the continuing controversy about the presumptive target of DCs' adjustive interventions: subluxation (Gatterman 1995; Leach 1994). |author-link=Joseph C. Keating, Jr }}</ref><ref name=Keating-subluxation /><ref>{{cite journal |author=Joseph C. Keating Jr. |journal=Skeptical Inquirer |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=37–43 |title=Chiropractic: science and antiscience and pseudoscience side by side |year=1997|author-link=Joseph C. Keating, Jr }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author= Phillips RB|chapter= The evolution of vitalism and materialism and its impact on philosophy|pages=65–76|title= Principles and Practice of Chiropractic|edition=3rd|veditors=Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B |publisher=]|year=2005|isbn=978-0-07-137534-4|display-editors=etal}}</ref> Chiropractic remains at a crossroads, and that in order to progress it would need to embrace science; the promotion by some for it to be a cure-all was both "misguided and irrational".<ref name=Reggars2011>{{cite journal | author = Reggars JW | title = Chiropractic at the crossroads or are we just going around in circles? | journal = Chiropractic & Manual Therapies| volume = 19 | page = 11 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21599991 | pmc = 3119029 | doi = 10.1186/2045-709X-19-11 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2007 survey of ] chiropractors found that they do not consistently apply research in practice, which may have resulted from a lack of research education and skills.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Suter E, Vanderheyden LC, Trojan LS, Verhoef MJ, Armitage GD | title = How important is research-based practice to chiropractors and massage therapists? | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 30 | issue = 2 | pages = 109–15 | date = February 2007 | pmid = 17320731 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.12.013 }}</ref> Specific guidelines concerning the treatment of nonspecific (i.e., unknown cause) low back pain are inconsistent between countries.<ref name=Murphy>{{cite journal |vauthors=Murphy AY, van Teijlingen ER, Gobbi MO | title = Inconsistent grading of evidence across countries: a review of low back pain guidelines | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 29 | issue = 7 | pages = 576–81, 581.e1–2 | date = September 2006 | pmid = 16949948 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.07.005 }}</ref>
:So why post it at all? Is it to demonstrate further your biased agenda here? To me, this example only serves as more proof why NPOV is difficult (more likely, impossible) for you when it comes to chiropractic (and other non-traditional medical approaches.)


=== Effectiveness ===
:Posts like the one above indicate that you are still using Misplaced Pages as your free blog, behaviour which is clearly not Wikipedian. I think this is also a case of 'sour grapes'-type behaviour more fitting for a five-year-old child. That's why Mccready's heavy-handed tactics has gotten him branded as a 'Bad Boy'.
Numerous controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have been conducted, with varied results.<ref name=Ernst-eval/> There is no conclusive evidence that chiropractic manipulative treatment is effective for the treatment of any medical condition, except perhaps for certain kinds of back pain.<ref name=Ernst-eval /><ref name=Posadzki-Ernst/>


Generally, the research carried out into the effectiveness of chiropractic has been of poor quality.<ref name=Ernst-Canter>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ernst E, Canter PH | title = A systematic review of systematic reviews of spinal manipulation | journal = Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine| volume = 99 | issue = 4 | pages = 192–96 | date = April 2006 | pmid = 16574972 | pmc = 1420782 | doi = 10.1177/014107680609900418}}
:Kindly stop the chiropractic attacks and we will all get along just fine. ] 00:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
*{{cite news |date=March 22, 2006 |title=Back treatment 'has few benefits' |work=BBC News |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4824594.stm}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Johnston BC, da Costa BR, Devereaux PJ, Akl EA, Busse JW | title = The use of expertise-based randomized controlled trials to assess spinal manipulation and acupuncture for low back pain: a systematic review | journal = Spine| volume = 33 | issue = 8 | pages = 914–18 | date = April 2008 | pmid = 18404113 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816b4be4| s2cid = 28092478 }}</ref> Research published by chiropractors is distinctly biased: reviews of SM for back pain tended to find positive conclusions when authored by chiropractors, while reviews by mainstream authors did not.<ref name=Ernst-eval/>


There is a wide range of ways to measure treatment outcomes.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Khorsan R, Coulter ID, Hawk C, Choate CG | title = Measures in chiropractic research: choosing patient-based outcome assessments | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 31 | issue = 5 | pages = 355–75 | date = June 2008 | pmid = 18558278 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.04.007 }}</ref> Chiropractic care benefits from the ],<ref>{{cite journal | author = Kaptchuk TJ | title = The placebo effect in alternative medicine: can the performance of a healing ritual have clinical significance? | journal = Annals of Internal Medicine| volume = 136 | issue = 11 | pages = 817–25 | date = June 2002 | pmid = 12044130 | doi = 10.7326/0003-4819-136-11-200206040-00011 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.694.4848 | s2cid = 207535762 }}</ref> but it is difficult to construct a trustworthy placebo for clinical trials of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT).<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, McAuley JH | title = Selecting an appropriate placebo for a trial of spinal manipulative therapy | journal = Australian Journal of Physiotherapy| volume = 52 | issue = 2 | pages = 135–38 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16764551 | doi = 10.1016/S0004-9514(06)70049-6 | doi-access = free }}</ref> The efficacy of maintenance care in chiropractic is unknown.<ref name=Leboeuf-Yde-C/>
== Revert War – Attempt at Resolution ==


Available evidence covers the following conditions:
Dear Editors of this page.
* ''']'''. A 2013 ] found very low to moderate evidence that SMT was no more effective than inert interventions, sham SMT or as an adjunct therapy for acute low back pain.<ref name=Cochrane-2013>{{cite journal |vauthors=Rubinstein SM, Terwee CB, Assendelft WJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW | title = Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low back pain: an update of the cochrane review | journal = Spine| volume = 38 | issue = 3 | pages = E158–77 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23169072 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827dd89d | type = Systematic Review | hdl = 2066/109576 | s2cid = 28795577 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> The same review found that SMT appears to be no better than other recommended therapies.<ref name=Cochrane-2013/> A 2012 overview of systematic reviews found that collectively, SM failed to show it is an effective intervention for pain.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Posadzki P | title = Is spinal manipulation effective for pain? An overview of systematic reviews | journal = Pain Medicine| volume = 13 | issue = 6 | pages = 754–61 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22621391 | doi = 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01397.x | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2011 Cochrane review found strong evidence that suggests there is no clinically meaningful difference between SMT and other treatments for reducing pain and improving function for chronic low back pain.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Rubinstein SM, van Middelkoop M, Assendelft WJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW | title = Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low-back pain: an update of a Cochrane review | journal = Spine| volume = 36 | issue = 13 | pages = E825–46 | date = June 2011 | pmid = 21593658 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182197fe1 | type = Systematic review | hdl = 1887/117578 | s2cid = 5061433 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> A 2010 Cochrane review found no difference between the effects of combined chiropractic treatments and other treatments for chronic or mixed duration low back pain.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Walker BF, French SD, Grant W, Green S | title = Combined chiropractic interventions for low-back pain | journal = Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews| issue = 4 | page = CD005427 | year = 2010 | volume = 2010 | pmid = 20393942 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD005427.pub2 | pmc = 6984631 | editor1-last = Walker | editor1-first = Bruce F }}</ref> A 2010 systematic review found that most studies suggest SMT achieves equivalent or superior improvement in pain and function when compared with other commonly used interventions for short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up.<ref name=Dagenais-2010>{{cite journal |vauthors=Dagenais S, Gay RE, Tricco AC, Freeman MD, Mayer JM | title = NASS Contemporary Concepts in Spine Care: spinal manipulation therapy for acute low back pain | journal = The Spine Journal| volume = 10 | issue = 10 | pages = 918–40 | date = October 2010 | pmid = 20869008 | doi = 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.07.389 }}</ref>
Please do not bulk revert without discussing the following items. I will not edit again on this page for 24 hours, so you will have plenty of time to put some consideration to your work. ] says the indiscriminate bulk reversion is vandalism. In my revert, I have taken pains to examine each edit by looking carefully at the history page. I have also compromised by taking the claims for religion out of the introduction section (I have left in the statement about nerve compression, but I’m not sure it applies to NACM adherents.
* ''']'''. A 2013 systematic review and meta-analysis found a statistically significant improvement in overall recovery from sciatica following SM, when compared to usual care, and suggested that SM may be considered.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Lewis RA, Williams NH, Sutton AJ, Burton K, Din NU, Matar HE, Hendry M, Phillips CJ, Nafees S, Fitzsimmons D, Rickard I, Wilkinson C | title = Comparative clinical effectiveness of management strategies for sciatica: systematic review and network meta-analyses | journal = The Spine Journal| volume =15 | issue = 6|pages=1461–77| year = 2013 | doi = 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.08.049| pmid = 24412033| url = http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/19023/3/Manuscript_-_sciatica_MTC_paper_%252820130628%2529.pdf }}</ref> There is moderate quality evidence to support the use of SM for the treatment of acute ]<ref name=Leininger2011>{{cite journal |vauthors=Leininger B, Bronfort G, Evans R, Reiter T | title = Spinal manipulation or mobilization for radiculopathy: a systematic review | journal = Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America| volume = 22 | issue = 1 | pages = 105–25 | date = February 2011 | pmid = 21292148 | doi = 10.1016/j.pmr.2010.11.002 }}</ref> and acute lumbar ] with associated radiculopathy.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hahne AJ, Ford JJ, McMeeken JM | title = Conservative management of lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy: a systematic review | journal = Spine| volume = 35 | issue = 11 | pages = E488–504 | date = May 2010 | pmid = 20421859 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cc3f56 | s2cid = 19121111 | url = https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/Conservative_management_of_lumbar_disc_herniation_with_associated_radiculopathy/21857094 }}</ref> There is low or very low evidence supporting SM for chronic lumbar spine-related extremity symptoms and cervical spine-related extremity symptoms of any duration and no evidence exists for the treatment of thoracic radiculopathy.<ref name=Leininger2011 />
* '''] and other ]'''. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of manual therapies for ].<ref name=Vernon>{{cite journal |vauthors=Vernon H, Humphreys BK | title = Manual therapy for neck pain: an overview of randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews | journal = Europa Medicophysica| volume = 43 | issue = 1 | pages = 91–118 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17369783 | url = http://www.minervamedica.it/en/getfreepdf.php?cod=R33Y2007N01A0091 | format = PDF }}</ref> A 2013 systematic review found that the data suggests that there are minimal short- and long-term treatment differences when comparing manipulation or mobilization of the cervical spine to physical therapy or exercise for neck pain improvement.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Schroeder J, Kaplan L, Fischer DJ, Skelly AC | title = The Outcomes of Manipulation or Mobilization Therapy Compared with Physical Therapy or Exercise for Neck Pain: A Systematic Review | journal = Evidence-Based Spine-Care Journal| volume = 4 | issue = 1 | pages = 30–41 | year = 2013 | pmid = 24436697 | pmc = 3699243 | doi = 10.1055/s-0033-1341605 }}</ref> A 2013 systematic review found that although there is insufficient evidence that thoracic SM is more effective than other treatments, it is a suitable intervention to treat some patients with non-specific neck pain.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Huisman PA, Speksnijder CM, de Wijer A | title = The effect of thoracic spine manipulation on pain and disability in patients with non-specific neck pain: a systematic review | journal = Disability and Rehabilitation| volume = 35| issue = 20| pages = 1677–85 | date = January 2013 | pmid = 23339721 | doi = 10.3109/09638288.2012.750689 | s2cid = 12159586 }}</ref> A 2011 systematic review found that thoracic SM may offer short-term improvement for the treatment of acute or subacute mechanical neck pain; although the body of literature is still weak.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Cross KM, Kuenze C, Grindstaff TL, Hertel J | title = Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain: a systematic review | journal = Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy| volume = 41 | issue = 9 | pages = 633–42 | date = September 2011 | pmid = 21885904 | doi = 10.2519/jospt.2011.3670 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2010 Cochrane review found low quality evidence that suggests cervical manipulation may offer better short-term pain relief than a control for neck pain, and moderate evidence that cervical manipulation and mobilization produced similar effects on pain, function and patient satisfaction.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Gross A, Miller J, D'Sylva J, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Brønfort G, Hoving JL | title = Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: a Cochrane Review | journal = Manual Therapy| volume = 15 | issue = 4 | pages = 315–33 | date = August 2010 | pmid = 20510644 | doi = 10.1016/j.math.2010.04.002 }}</ref> A 2010 systematic review found low level evidence that suggests chiropractic care improves cervical range of motion and pain in the management of whiplash.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Shaw L, Descarreaux M, Bryans R, Duranleau M, Marcoux H, Potter B, Ruegg R, Watkin R, White E | title = A systematic review of chiropractic management of adults with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: recommendations for advancing evidence-based practice and research | journal = Work| volume = 35 | issue = 3 | pages = 369–94 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20364057 | doi = 10.3233/WOR-2010-0996 }}</ref>
* '''Headache'''. There is conflicting evidence surrounding the use of chiropractic SMT for the treatment and prevention of ]s.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Chaibi A, Tuchin PJ, Russell MB | title = Manual therapies for migraine: a systematic review | journal = ]| volume = 12 | issue = 2 | pages = 127–33 | date = April 2011 | pmid = 21298314 | pmc = 3072494 | doi = 10.1007/s10194-011-0296-6 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Posadzki P, Ernst E | title = Spinal manipulations for the treatment of migraine: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials | journal = Cephalalgia| volume = 31 | issue = 8 | pages = 964–70 | date = June 2011 | pmid = 21511952 | doi = 10.1177/0333102411405226 | s2cid = 31205541 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2006 review found no rigorous evidence supporting SM or other manual therapies for ].<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Fernández-de-Las-Peñas C, Alonso-Blanco C, Cuadrado ML, Miangolarra JC, Barriga FJ, Pareja JA | title = Are manual therapies effective in reducing pain from tension-type headache?: a systematic review | journal = The Clinical Journal of Pain| volume = 22 | issue = 3 | pages = 278–85 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16514329 | doi = 10.1097/01.ajp.0000173017.64741.86 | s2cid = 23367185 }}</ref> A 2005 review found that the evidence was weak for effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation for tension headache, and that it was probably more effective for tension headache than for ].<ref>{{cite journal | author = Biondi DM | title = Physical treatments for headache: a structured review | journal = Headache| volume = 45 | issue = 6 | pages = 738–46 | date = June 2005 | pmid = 15953306 | doi = 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2005.05141.x | s2cid = 42640492 }}</ref>
* '''Extremity conditions'''. A 2011 systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that the addition of manual mobilizations to an exercise program for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis resulted in better pain relief than a supervised exercise program alone and suggested that manual therapists consider adding manual mobilization to optimize supervised active exercise programs.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Jansen MJ, Viechtbauer W, Lenssen AF, Hendriks EJ, de Bie RA | title = Strength training alone, exercise therapy alone, and exercise therapy with passive manual mobilisation each reduce pain and disability in people with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review | journal = Journal of Physiotherapy| volume = 57 | issue = 1 | pages = 11–20 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21402325 | doi = 10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70002-9 | doi-access = free }}</ref> There is silver level evidence that manual therapy is more effective than exercise for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis, however this evidence could be considered to be inconclusive.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=French HP, Brennan A, White B, Cusack T | title = Manual therapy for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee - a systematic review | journal = Manual Therapy| volume = 16 | issue = 2 | pages = 109–17 | date = April 2011 | pmid = 21146444 | doi = 10.1016/j.math.2010.10.011 }}</ref> There is a small amount of research into the efficacy of chiropractic treatment for ]s,<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=McHardy A, Hoskins W, Pollard H, Onley R, Windsham R | title = Chiropractic treatment of upper extremity conditions: a systematic review | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 31 | issue = 2 | pages = 146–59 | date = February 2008 | pmid = 18328941 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.12.004 }}</ref> limited to low level evidence supporting chiropractic management of ]<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Pribicevic M, Pollard H, Bonello R, de Luca K | title = A systematic review of manipulative therapy for the treatment of shoulder pain | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 33 | issue = 9 | pages = 679–89 | year = 2010 | pmid = 21109059 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.08.019 }}</ref> and limited or fair evidence supporting chiropractic management of leg conditions.<ref name=BrantinghamBonnefin2012>{{cite journal|last1=Brantingham|first1=James W.|last2=Bonnefin|first2=Debra|last3=Perle|first3=Stephen M.|last4=Cassa|first4=Tammy Kay|last5=Globe|first5=Gary|last6=Pribicevic|first6=Mario|last7=Hicks|first7=Marian|last8=Korporaal|first8=Charmaine|title=Manipulative Therapy for Lower Extremity Conditions: Update of a Literature Review|journal=Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics|volume=35|issue=2|year=2012|pages=127–66|doi=10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.01.001|pmid=22325966}}</ref>
* '''Other'''. A 2012 systematic review found insufficient low bias evidence to support the use of spinal manipulation as a therapy for the treatment of hypertension.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Mangum K, Partna L, Vavrek D | title = Spinal manipulation for the treatment of hypertension: a systematic qualitative literature review | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 35 | issue = 3 | pages = 235–43 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22341795 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.01.005 }}</ref> A 2011 systematic review found moderate evidence to support the use of manual therapy for cervicogenic dizziness.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Lystad RP, Bell G, Bonnevie-Svendsen M, Carter CV | title = Manual therapy with and without vestibular rehabilitation for cervicogenic dizziness: a systematic review | journal = Chiropractic & Manual Therapies| volume = 19 | issue = 1 | page = 21 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21923933 | pmc = 3182131 | doi = 10.1186/2045-709X-19-21 | doi-access = free }}</ref> There is very weak evidence for chiropractic care for adult ] (curved or rotated spine)<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Everett CR, Patel RK | title = A systematic literature review of nonsurgical treatment in adult scoliosis | journal = Spine| volume = 32 | issue = 19 Suppl | pages = S130–34 | date = September 2007 | pmid = 17728680 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318134ea88 | s2cid = 9339782 | doi-access = free }}</ref> and no scientific data for ] adolescent scoliosis.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Romano M, Negrini S | title = Manual therapy as a conservative treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review | journal = Scoliosis| volume = 3 | page = 2 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18211702 | pmc = 2262872 | doi = 10.1186/1748-7161-3-2 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2007 systematic review found that few studies of chiropractic care for nonmusculoskeletal conditions are available, and they are typically not of high quality; it also found that the entire clinical encounter of chiropractic care (as opposed to just SM) provides benefit to patients with cervicogenic dizziness, and that the evidence from reviews is negative, or too weak to draw conclusions, for a wide variety of other nonmusculoskeletal conditions, including ]/], ], ], and ] conditions.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hawk C, Khorsan R, Lisi AJ, Ferrance RJ, Evans MW | title = Chiropractic care for nonmusculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review with implications for whole systems research | journal = The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine| volume = 13 | issue = 5 | pages = 491–512 | date = June 2007 | pmid = 17604553 | doi = 10.1089/acm.2007.7088 }}</ref> Other reviews have found no evidence of significant benefit for ],<ref>{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Spinal manipulation for asthma: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials | journal = Respiratory Medicine| volume = 103 | issue = 12 | pages = 1791–95 | date = December 2009 | pmid = 19646855 | doi = 10.1016/j.rmed.2009.06.017 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hondras MA, Linde K, Jones AP | title = Manual therapy for asthma | journal=Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews| issue = 2 | page = CD001002 | year = 2005 | pmid = 15846609 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD001002.pub2}}</ref> ],<ref name=Gotlib>{{cite journal |vauthors=Gotlib A, Rupert R | title = Chiropractic manipulation in pediatric health conditions--an updated systematic review | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy| volume = 16 | page = 11 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18789139 | pmc = 2553791 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-16-11 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>Baby colic:
* {{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Chiropractic spinal manipulation for infant colic: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials | journal = International Journal of Clinical Practice| volume = 63 | issue = 9 | pages = 1351–53 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19691620 | doi = 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02133.x | s2cid = 36131261 | doi-access = free }}
* {{cite book|vauthors=Husereau D, Clifford T, Aker P, Leduc D, Mensinkai S|title=Spinal Manipulation for Infantile Colic|isbn=978-1-894978-11-8|url=http://cadth.ca/media/pdf/177_spinal_manipulation_tr_e.pdf|access-date=2008-10-06|location=Ottawa|publisher=Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment|year=2003|series=Technology report no. 42|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081217004845/http://cadth.ca/media/pdf/177_spinal_manipulation_tr_e.pdf|archive-date=2008-12-17}}</ref> ],<ref name=HuangShu2011>{{cite journal |last1=Huang |first1=Tao |last2=Shu |first2=Xu |last3=Huang |first3=Yu Shan |last4=Cheuk |first4=Daniel KL |last5=Huang |first5=Tao |title=Complementary and miscellaneous interventions for nocturnal enuresis in children | journal=Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews|year=2011 |issue=12 |page=CD005230 |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD005230.pub2 |pmid=22161390}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=O'Connor D, Marshall S, Massy-Westropp N, Pitt V | title = Non-surgical treatment (other than steroid injection) for carpal tunnel syndrome | journal = Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews| issue = 1 | page = CD003219 | year = 2003 | volume = 2003 | pmid = 12535461 | pmc = 6486195 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD003219}}</ref> ],<ref>Fibromyalgia:
* {{cite journal |vauthors=Sarac AJ, Gur A | title = Complementary and alternative medical therapies in fibromyalgia | journal = Current Pharmaceutical Design| volume = 12 | issue = 1 | pages = 47–57 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16454724 | doi = 10.2174/138161206775193262 }}
* {{cite journal |vauthors=Schneider M, Vernon H, Ko G, Lawson G, Perera J | title = Chiropractic management of fibromyalgia syndrome: a systematic review of the literature | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 32 | issue = 1 | pages = 25–40 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19121462 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.012 | doi-access = free }}
* {{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Chiropractic treatment for fibromyalgia: a systematic review | journal = Clinical Rheumatology| volume = 28 | issue = 10 | pages = 1175–78 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19544042 | doi = 10.1007/s10067-009-1217-9 | s2cid = 25339207 }}
</ref> ],<ref>{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Chiropractic treatment for gastrointestinal problems: A systematic review of clinical trials | journal = Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology| volume = 25 | issue = 1 | pages = 39–49 | year = 2011 | pmc = 3027333 | pmid = 21258667| doi = 10.1155/2011/910469 | doi-access = free }}</ref> kinetic imbalance due to ] strain (KISS) in infants,<ref name=Gotlib /><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Brand PL, Engelbert RH, Helders PJ, Offringa M | title = | language = nl | journal = Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde| volume = 149 | issue = 13 | pages = 703–07 | year = 2005 | pmid = 15819137 }}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Proctor ML, Hing W, Johnson TC, Murphy PA, Brown J | title = Spinal manipulation for primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea | journal=The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews| volume = 3 | issue = 3 | page = CD002119 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16855988 | pmc = 6718213 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD002119.pub3}}</ref> ],<ref name=goto>{{Cite journal |last1=Goto |first1=Viviane |last2=Frange |first2=Cristina |last3=Andersen |first3=Monica L. |last4=Júnior |first4=José M. S. |last5=Tufik |first5=Sergio |last6=Hachul |first6=Helena |date=May 2014 |title=Chiropractic intervention in the treatment of postmenopausal climacteric symptoms and insomnia: A review |journal=Maturitas|volume=78 |issue=1 |pages=3–7 |doi=10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.02.004 |pmid=24656717}}</ref> ] symptoms,<ref name=goto/> or ].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Liddle|first1=Sarah D.|last2=Pennick|first2=Victoria|date=2015-09-30|title=Interventions for preventing and treating low-back and pelvic pain during pregnancy|journal=Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews|volume=2015|issue=9|pages=CD001139|doi=10.1002/14651858.CD001139.pub4|pmid=26422811|pmc=7053516}}</ref> As there is no evidence of effectiveness or safety for cervical manipulation for baby colic, it is not endorsed.<ref name=CamilleriPark2017>{{cite journal |vauthors=Camilleri M, Park SY, Scarpato E, Staiano A | title=Exploring hypotheses and rationale for causes of infantile colic | journal=Neurogastroenterology & Motility| year= 2017 | volume= 29 | issue= 2 | pages= e12943| doi=10.1111/nmo.12943 | pmc=5276723 | pmid=27647578 | type=Review }}</ref>


=== Safety ===
If you revert in bulk you will be undoing my work and that of many editors. The issues you need to consider before reverting are:
]


The ] found chiropractic care in general is safe when employed skillfully and appropriately.<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> There is not sufficient data to establish the safety of chiropractic manipulations.<ref name=Gouveia /> Manipulation is regarded as relatively safe but complications can arise, and it has known adverse effects, risks and contraindications.<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> Absolute ]s to spinal manipulative therapy are conditions that should not be manipulated; these contraindications include ] and conditions known to result in unstable joints.<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> Relative contraindications are conditions where increased risk is acceptable in some situations and where low-force and soft-tissue techniques are treatments of choice; these contraindications include ].<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> Although most contraindications apply only to manipulation of the affected region, some neurological signs indicate referral to ]; these include sudden and severe headache or ] unlike that previously experienced.<ref name=CCA-CFCREAB-CPG>{{cite journal | vauthors = Anderson-Peacock E, Blouin JS, Bryans R, Danis N, Furlan A, Marcoux H, Potter B, Ruegg R, Stein JG, White E | title = Chiropractic clinical practice guideline: evidence-based treatment of adult neck pain not due to whiplash | journal = The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association| volume = 49 | issue = 3 | pages = 158–209 | year = 2005 | pmid = 17549134 | pmc = 1839918 }}<br />• {{cite journal | vauthors = Anderson-Peacock E, Bryans R, Descarreaux M, Marcoux H, Potter B, Ruegg R, Shaw L, Watkin R, White E | title = A Clinical Practice Guideline Update from The CCA•CFCREAB-CPG | journal = The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association| volume = 52 | issue = 1 | pages = 7–8 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18327295 | pmc = 2258235 | url = http://jcca-online.org/ecms.ashx/PDF/2008/2008-1/ClinicalPracticeGuidelineUpdatefromTheCCACFCREABCPG.pdf | archive-url = https://www.webcitation.org/5sVyyGVET?url=http://jcca-online.org/ecms.ashx/PDF/2008/2008-1/ClinicalPracticeGuidelineUpdatefromTheCCACFCREABCPG.pdf | archive-date = 2010-09-05 }}</ref> Indirect risks of chiropractic involve delayed or missed diagnoses through consulting a chiropractor.<ref name=Ernst-eval />
:''No, if you don't want your edits reverted in bulk, don't mix good edits with borderline vandalism ones.'' —'']'' 11:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


Spinal manipulation is associated with frequent, mild and temporary ],<ref name=Ernst-adverse /><ref name=CCA-CFCREAB-CPG /> including new or worsening pain or stiffness in the affected region.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Thiel HW, Bolton JE, Docherty S, Portlock JC | title = Safety of chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine: a prospective national survey | journal = Spine| volume = 32 | issue = 21 | pages = 2375–78 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17906581 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181557bb1 | s2cid = 42353750 }}</ref> They have been estimated to occur in 33% to 61% of patients, and frequently occur within an hour of treatment and disappear within 24 to 48 hours;<ref name=Gouveia>{{cite journal |vauthors=Gouveia LO, Castanho P, Ferreira JJ | title = Safety of chiropractic interventions: a systematic review | journal = Spine| volume = 34 | issue = 11 | pages = E405–13 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19444054 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a16d63 | s2cid = 21279308 | url= http://www.chiropratiquelasource.com/recherches/safety.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160919152855/http://www.chiropratiquelasource.com/recherches/safety.pdf |archive-date=2016-09-19 |url-status=live}}</ref> adverse reactions appear to be more common following manipulation than mobilization.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hurwitz EL, Morgenstern H, Vassilaki M, Chiang LM | title = Frequency and clinical predictors of adverse reactions to chiropractic care in the UCLA neck pain study | journal = Spine | volume = 30 | issue = 13 | pages = 1477–84 | date = July 2005 | pmid = 15990659 | doi = 10.1097/01.brs.0000167821.39373.c1 | s2cid = 45678522 }}</ref> The most frequently stated adverse effects are mild headache, soreness, and briefly elevated pain fatigue.<ref name=NHSChoicesChiropracticSafety>{{cite web |url=http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/chiropractic/Pages/Safetyandregulation.aspx |title=Safety and regulation of chiropractic |publisher=] |date=20 August 2014 |access-date=22 September 2016}}</ref> Chiropractic is correlated with a very high ] of minor adverse effects.<ref name=Ernst-eval /> Rarely,<ref name=WHO-guidelines /> spinal manipulation, particularly on the upper spine, can also result in complications that can lead to permanent disability or death; these can occur in adults<ref name=Ernst-adverse/> and children.<ref name=Vohra>{{cite journal |vauthors=Vohra S, Johnston BC, Cramer K, Humphreys K | title = Adverse events associated with pediatric spinal manipulation: a systematic review | journal = Pediatrics | volume = 119 | issue = 1 | pages = e275–83 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17178922 | doi = 10.1542/peds.2006-1392 | s2cid = 43683198 | url = http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/119/1/e275 }}</ref> Estimates vary widely for the incidence of these complications,<ref name=Gouveia /> and the actual incidence is unknown, due to high levels of underreporting and to the difficulty of linking manipulation to adverse effects such as stroke, which is a particular concern.<ref name=Ernst-adverse /> Adverse effects are poorly reported in recent studies investigating chiropractic manipulations.<ref name=Ernst-2012>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ernst E, Posadzki P | title = Reporting of adverse effects in randomised clinical trials of chiropractic manipulations: a systematic review | journal = The New Zealand Medical Journal| volume = 125 | issue = 1353 | pages = 87–140 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22522273 }}</ref> A 2016 systematic review concludes that the level of reporting is unsuitable and unacceptable.<ref name=GorrellEngel2016>{{cite journal| vauthors=Gorrell LM, Engel RM, Brown B, Lystad RP| title=The reporting of adverse events following spinal manipulation in randomized clinical trials-a systematic review | journal=The Spine Journal| year= 2016 | volume= 16 | issue= 9 | pages= 1143–51 | pmid=27241208 | doi=10.1016/j.spinee.2016.05.018 | type= Systematic Review }}</ref> Reports of serious adverse events have occurred, resulting from spinal manipulation therapy of the lumbopelvic region.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hebert JJ, Stomski NJ, French SD, Rubinstein SM | title = Serious Adverse Events and Spinal Manipulative Therapy of the Low Back Region: A Systematic Review of Cases | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 38 | issue = 9 | pages = 677–91 | year = 2013 | pmid = 23787298 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.05.009 | url = http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/15912/ }}</ref> Estimates for serious adverse events vary from 5 strokes per 100,000 manipulations to 1.46 serious adverse events per 10 million manipulations and 2.68 deaths per 10 million manipulations, though it was determined that there was inadequate data to be conclusive.<ref name=Gouveia /> Several case reports show temporal associations between interventions and potentially serious complications.<ref name=Hurwitz-2008 /> The published medical literature contains reports of 26 deaths since 1934 following chiropractic manipulations and many more seem to remain unpublished.<ref name=Ernst-death />
*1. Is chiro a religion - Palmer said so, why is that not enough? Palmer believed that what he called Innate was an intelligent entity directing the body and was a manifestation of God (Donahue 1986, 1987).
:''Calling chiro a a religion in the first sentence, without any qualifications is confusing and misleading the reader. A paragraph stating "Palmer believed that what he called Innate was an intelligent entity directing the body and was a manifestation of God (Donahue 1986, 1987)" would be probably be fine.'' —'']'' 11:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
*2. Is Palmer a crank - check ] and explain if you disagree
: ''From ''your'' point of view (maybe even mine) Palmer is a crank. Again calling someone, without any qualifications or reliable sources to back it up, a crack is in gross violation of ] and ].'' —'']'' 11:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
*3. Is the section on Australian training OK
*4. Whether the comments about chiros having rooms in malls belongs in an encyclopedia
*5. Whether chiropractors should be called doctors in the article. I understand this term is only allowed in the United States, so we have to be careful to distinguish
*6. The copy edit I have done to the US Bureau of Labor Outlook section. If you want to revert to the old version please say why my version is not clearer to the reader (the information content is the same)
*7. Whether the warning by 62 neurosurgeons should be deleted – if so, why – it is not good enough to allege conspiracies of chiro haters.
*8. In the legal history section whether at that stage of history chiros could call themselves doctors (I could be wrong and I hope you check before any bulk reverting)


] (VAS) is ] with chiropractic services in persons under 45 years of age, but it is similarly associated with general practitioner services, suggesting that these associations are likely explained by preexisting conditions.<ref name=Hurwitz-2008>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hurwitz EL, Carragee EJ, van der Velde G, Carroll LJ, Nordin M, Guzman J, Peloso PM, Holm LW, Côté P, Hogg-Johnson S, Cassidy JD, Haldeman S | title = Treatment of neck pain: noninvasive interventions: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders | journal = Spine| volume = 33 | issue = 4 Suppl | pages = S123–52 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18204386 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181644b1d | s2cid = 27261997 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Paciaroni M, Bogousslavsky J | title = Cerebrovascular complications of neck manipulation | journal = European Neurology| volume = 61 | issue = 2 | pages = 112–18 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19065058 | doi = 10.1159/000180314 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Weak to moderately strong evidence supports causation (as opposed to statistical association) between ] (CMT) and VAS.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Miley ML, Wellik KE, Wingerchuk DM, Demaerschalk BM | title = Does cervical manipulative therapy cause vertebral artery dissection and stroke? | journal = ] | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = 66–73 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18195663 | doi = 10.1097/NRL.0b013e318164e53d | s2cid = 18062970 }}</ref> There is insufficient evidence to support a strong association or no association between cervical manipulation and stroke.<ref name=Haynes>{{cite journal |vauthors=Haynes MJ, Vincent K, Fischhoff C, Bremner AP, Lanlo O, Hankey GJ | title = Assessing the risk of stroke from neck manipulation: a systematic review | journal = International Journal of Clinical Practice| volume = 66 | issue = 10 | pages = 940–47 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22994328 | pmc = 3506737 | doi = 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.03004.x }}</ref> While the biomechanical evidence is not sufficient to support the statement that CMT causes cervical artery dissection (CD), clinical reports suggest that mechanical forces have a part in a substantial number of CDs and the majority of population controlled studies found an association between CMT and VAS in young people.<ref name=Biller2014 /> It is strongly recommended that practitioners consider the plausibility of CD as a symptom, and people can be informed of the association between CD and CMT before administering manipulation of the cervical spine.<ref name=Biller2014>{{cite journal|last1=Biller|first1=J.|last2=Sacco|first2=R. L.|last3=Albuquerque|first3=F. C.|last4=Demaerschalk|first4=B. M.|last5=Fayad|first5=P.|last6=Long|first6=P. H.|last7=Noorollah|first7=L. D.|last8=Panagos|first8=P. D.|last9=Schievink|first9=W. I.|last10=Schwartz|first10=N. E.|last11=Shuaib|first11=A.|last12=Thaler|first12=D. E.|last13=Tirschwell|first13=D. L.|title=Cervical Arterial Dissections and Association With Cervical Manipulative Therapy: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association|journal=Stroke|year=2014|doi=10.1161/STR.0000000000000016|pmid=25104849|volume=45|issue=10|pages=3155–74|doi-access=free}}</ref> There is controversy regarding the degree of risk of stroke from cervical manipulation.<ref name=Haynes /> Many chiropractors state that, the association between chiropractic therapy and vertebral arterial dissection is not proven.<ref name=Ernst-death /> However, it has been suggested that the ] between chiropractic cervical manipulation beyond the normal range of motion and vascular accidents is probable<ref name=Ernst-death /> or definite.<ref name=Ernst-2010>{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Vascular accidents after neck manipulation: cause or coincidence? | journal = International Journal of Clinical Practice| volume = 64 | issue = 6 | pages = 673–77 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20518945 | doi = 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02237.x | s2cid = 38571730 | doi-access = free }}</ref> There is very low evidence supporting a small association between internal ] and chiropractic neck manipulation.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Church|first1=Ephraim W|last2=Sieg|first2=Emily P|last3=Zalatimo|first3=Omar|last4=Hussain|first4=Namath S|last5=Glantz|first5=Michael|last6=Harbaugh|first6=Robert E|title=Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Chiropractic Care and Cervical Artery Dissection: No Evidence for Causation|journal=Cureus|year=2016|doi=10.7759/cureus.498|pmid=27014532|volume=8|issue=2|pmc=4794386|page=e498|doi-access=free }}</ref> The incidence of internal carotid artery dissection following cervical spine manipulation is unknown.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Chung CL, Côté P, Stern P, L'espérance G | title = The Association Between Cervical Spine Manipulation and Carotid Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review of the Literature | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 38 | issue = 9 | pages = 672–6 | year = 2014 | pmid = 24387889 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.09.005 }}</ref> The literature infrequently reports helpful data to better understand the association between cervical manipulative therapy, cervical artery dissection and stroke.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Wynd S, Westaway M, Vohra S, Kawchuk G | title = The quality of reports on cervical arterial dissection following cervical spinal manipulation | journal = PLOS ONE| volume = 8 | issue = 3 | page = e59170 | year = 2013 | pmid = 23527121 | pmc = 3604043 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pone.0059170 | bibcode = 2013PLoSO...859170W | doi-access = free }}</ref> The limited evidence is inconclusive that chiropractic spinal manipulation therapy is not a cause of ].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Tuchin|first1=P.|title=A systematic literature review of intracranial hypotension following chiropractic|journal=International Journal of Clinical Practice|volume=68|issue=3|year=2014|pages=396–402|doi=10.1111/ijcp.12247|pmid=24372942|s2cid=5315779|doi-access=free}}</ref> Cervical intradural ] is very rare following spinal manipulation therapy.<ref name=YangOh2016>{{cite journal|last1=Yang|first1=Hwan-Seo|last2=Oh|first2=Young-Min|last3=Eun|first3=Jong-Pil|title=Cervical Intradural Disc Herniation Causing Progressive Quadriparesis After Spinal Manipulation Therapy|journal=Medicine|volume=95|issue=6|year=2016|page=e2797|doi=10.1097/MD.0000000000002797|pmc=4753938|pmid=26871842}}</ref>
Further areas in the article which need improvement:
*1. Intro is biased against chiro – let’s just get the beliefs down and address the science later
*2. History – the “chiro primerall72.pdf “ though biased in favour of chiro seems the best history available on the internet – does anyone know of a better one and shouldn’t we link this?. At the moment the history section is biased because it doesn’t show the attempts by some chiros since the 1975 conference to adopt a scientific framework. It doesn’t discuss the Alberta pediatricians campaign or the Rand Baird analysis either.
*3. Provision of scientific proof of chiro - not isolated case studies by believers.
*4. Future of chiropractic – the diminution of the profession as outlined for example by
*5. should we expand on the history to note the hundreds of California chiropractors incarcerated for unlicensed practice prior to passage of the Chiropractic Act in 1922. (if someone has a link to this Act pls provide)
*6. links to the history of medicine would be useful
*7. The Lon Morgon quote needs a reference – whoever deleted it before may know.


Chiropractors sometimes employ diagnostic imaging techniques such as X-rays and ]s that rely on ].<ref name=Bussieres /> Although there is no clear evidence to justify the practice, some chiropractors still X-ray a patient several times a year.<ref name=Trick-or-Treatment/> Practice guidelines aim to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure,<ref name=Bussieres>{{cite journal |vauthors=Bussières AE, Taylor JA, Peterson C | title = Diagnostic imaging practice guidelines for musculoskeletal complaints in adults&nbsp;– an evidence-based approach&nbsp;– part 3: spinal disorders | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 31 | issue = 1 | pages = 33–88 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18308153 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.11.003 | url = http://jmptonline.org/article/S0161-4754(07)00314-4/fulltext }}</ref> which increases cancer risk in proportion to the amount of radiation received.<ref>{{cite book |author=Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: Board on Radiation Effects Research" ] |title=Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2 |publisher=The National Academies Press |location=Washington, DC |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-309-09156-5 |doi=10.17226/11340 }}</ref> Research suggests that radiology instruction given at chiropractic schools worldwide seem to be evidence-based.<ref name=Ammendolia /> Although, there seems to be a disparity between some schools and available evidence regarding the aspect of radiography for patients with acute low back pain without an indication of a serious disease, which may contribute to chiropractic overuse of radiography for low back pain.<ref name=Ammendolia>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ammendolia C, Taylor JA, Pennick V, Côté P, Hogg-Johnson S, Bombardier C | title = Adherence to radiography guidelines for low back pain: A survey of chiropractic schools worldwide | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 31 | issue = 6 | pages = 412–18 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18722195 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.06.010 }}</ref>
For your information, I’ve also found the William T. Jarvis article “Why Chiropractic Is Controversial (1990)” inaccurate in reporting Wilk, though worth a read.


=== Risk-benefit ===
Please remember we are all here to create the best possible article taking into account all views and representing them as fairly as possible. I aim to gain you agreement soon to remove the NPOV tag. Once again if my edits are incorrect please correct them, don’t revert wholesale and don’t respond with vitriol. I have avoided saying so until now but I fully support any chiropractic within an evidence based framework and I deplore any conventional medicine which operates outside such a framework. Happy editing. ] 05:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


A 2012 systematic review concluded that no accurate assessment of risk-benefit exists for cervical manipulation.<ref name="Haynes" /> A 2010 systematic review stated that there is no good evidence to assume that neck manipulation is an effective treatment for any medical condition and suggested a ] in healthcare for chiropractic intervention even if a causality with ] after neck manipulation were merely a remote possibility.<ref name=Ernst-death/> The same review concluded that the risk of death from manipulations to the neck outweighs the benefits.<ref name=Ernst-death /> Chiropractors have criticized this conclusion, claiming that the author did not evaluate the potential benefits of spinal manipulation.<ref name=Ernst-response /> ] stated "This detail was not the subject of my review. I do, however, refer to such evaluations and should add that a report recently commissioned by the General Chiropractic Council did not support many of the outlandish claims made by many chiropractors across the world."<ref name=Ernst-response>{{cite journal | author = E Ernst | title = Response to critiques of deaths after chiropractic | journal = International Journal of Clinical Practice| volume = 65 | issue = 1 | page = 106 | year = 2011 | doi = 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02568.x | s2cid = 72845939 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 1999 review of 177 previously reported cases published between 1925 and 1997 in which injuries were attributed to manipulation of the cervical spine (MCS) concluded that "The literature does not demonstrate that the benefits of MCS outweigh the risks." The professions associated with each injury were assessed. Physical therapists (PT) were involved in less than 2% of all cases, with no deaths caused by PTs. Chiropractors were involved in a little more than 60% of all cases, including 32 deaths.<ref name="Di_Fabio_1/1/1999">{{cite web | last=Di Fabio | first=Richard P | date=January 1, 1999 | title=Manipulation of the Cervical Spine: Risks and Benefits | website=] | url=https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article/79/1/50/2857770 | access-date=November 1, 2021 | quote=Although the risk of injury associated with MCS appears to be small, this type of therapy has the potential to expose patients to vertebral artery damage that can be avoided with the use of mobilization (nonthrust passive movements). The literature does not demonstrate that the benefits of MCS outweigh the risks. Several recommendations for future studies and for the practice of MCS are discussed. }}</ref>
:I generally would have a difficult time defining any of the reverts made to this article's page as "indiscriminate bulk," as that is a fairly arbitrary and subjective description, at best. Also, I would hesitate to accept the opinion of one Wikipedian, or even two, as consensus. For all intents and purposes, none of the reverts I've seen to this page, by any editor, yet fall into the category of ]. I, personally, would hesitate to deem anyone's edits (or reverts) vandalism, as it seems to stem from a lack of ].


A 2009 review evaluating maintenance chiropractic care found that spinal manipulation is associated with considerable harm and no compelling evidence exists to indicate that it adequately prevents symptoms or diseases, thus the risk-benefit is not evidently favorable.<ref name="ErnstMaintenance2009">{{cite journal | author = Ernst E | title = Chiropractic maintenance treatment, a useful preventative approach? | journal = Preventive Medicine| volume = 49 | issue = 2–3 | pages = 99–100 | year = 2009 | pmid = 19465044 | doi = 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.05.004 }}</ref>
:'''Crank'''. All of that being said, I will continue to keep the article on my watchlist, and unless there is a consensus on this page otherwise, I will continue to revert any inclusion of the word ] in the article (within the limits of ]). From that very article: ''"Crank" (or kook, crackpot, or quack) is a pejorative term...'' Misplaced Pages is not a place for editors to determine who is a crank, kook, crackpot, or quack. That is up for our readers to determine that on their own.


=== Cost-effectiveness ===
:'''Religion'''. Further, to date, the only sources I have seen defining this article as a religion don't seem to pass muster as ]. The one (unreliable, ]) document linked from this article, which claims to be a letter from the gentleman who created (is that the right word?) this "system of care" is not accurate today, insofar as what this "system of care" is today. Every definition I can find defines it as just that, again, a "system of care" -- not a religion. Certainly it seems reasonable to note, in an appropriate section in the article, that historically, chiropractic may have had some (apparently economic) interest in being defined as a religion. That is, if it can be reliable sourced.


A 2012 systematic review suggested that the use of spine manipulation in clinical practice is a ] treatment when used alone or in combination with other treatment approaches.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Michaleff ZA, Lin CW, Maher CG, van Tulder MW | title = Spinal manipulation epidemiology: Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies | journal = Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology| volume = 22 | issue = 5 | pages = 655–62 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22429823 | doi = 10.1016/j.jelekin.2012.02.011 }}</ref> A 2011 systematic review found evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of using spinal manipulation for the treatment of sub-acute or chronic low back pain; the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.<ref name=Lin2011>{{cite journal |vauthors=Lin CW, Haas M, Maher CG, Machado LA, van Tulder MW | title = Cost-effectiveness of guideline-endorsed treatments for low back pain: a systematic review | journal = European Spine Journal| volume = 20 | issue = 7 | pages = 1024–38 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21229367 | pmc = 3176706 | doi = 10.1007/s00586-010-1676-3 }}</ref>
:I don't really have anything to say about your other points right now. I agree that the article has quite a ways to go, and, thus, as do the editors. I think this revert business is a bit on the ridiculous side, but, again, it isn't Misplaced Pages's place to define people or things in pejorative terms. I think we'll do well to stick to the facts, and in doing so, I think this article could well become a model article citizen here on Misplaced Pages in the process. ] 08:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


A 2006 systematic cost-effectiveness review found that the reported cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation in the United Kingdom compared favorably with other treatments for back pain, but that reports were based on data from clinical trials without placebo controls and that the specific cost-effectiveness of the treatment (as opposed to non-specific effects) remains uncertain.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Canter PH, Coon JT, Ernst E | title = Cost-Effectiveness of Complementary Therapies in the United Kingdom&nbsp;– A Systematic Review† | journal = Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine| volume = 3 | issue = 4 | pages = 425–32 | year = 2006 | pmid = 17173105 | pmc = 1697737 | doi = 10.1093/ecam/nel044 | url =http://ecam.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/3/4/425 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080511154423/http://ecam.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/3/4/425 | archive-date = 2008-05-11 }}</ref> A 2005 American systematic review of economic evaluations of conservative treatments for low back pain found that significant quality problems in available studies meant that definite conclusions could not be drawn about the most cost-effective intervention.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=van der Roer N, Goossens ME, Evers SM, van Tulder MW | title = What is the most cost-effective treatment for patients with low back pain? a systematic review | journal = Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology| volume = 19 | issue = 4 | pages = 671–84 | year = 2005 | pmid = 15949783 | doi = 10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.007 }}</ref> The cost-effectiveness of maintenance chiropractic care is unknown.<ref name=Leboeuf-Yde-C>{{cite journal |vauthors=Leboeuf-Yde C, Hestbaek L | title = Maintenance care in chiropractic&nbsp;– what do we know? | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy| volume = 16 | page = 3 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18466623 | pmc = 2396648 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-16-3 | doi-access = free }}</ref>{{Primary source inline|date=July 2021}}
'''Skeptical about Mccready's contrition'''


Analysis of a clinical and cost utilization data from the years 2003 to 2005 by an integrative medicine independent physician association (IPA) which looked the chiropractic services utilization found that the clinical and cost utilization of chiropractic services based on 70,274 member-months over a 7-year period decreased patient costs associate with the following use of services by 60% for in-hospital admissions, 59% for hospital days, 62% for outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% for pharmaceutical costs when compared with conventional medicine (visit to a medical doctor primary care provider) IPA performance for the same health maintenance organization product in the same geography and time frame.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Sarnat RL, Winterstein J, Cambron JA | title = Clinical Utilization and Cost Outcomes From an Integrative Medicine Independent Physician Association: An Additional 3-Year Update | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 30 | issue = 4 | pages = 263–69 | date = May 2007 | pmid = 17509435 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.004 | s2cid = 613004 | url = http://www.jmptonline.org/article/S0161-4754(07)00076-0/abstract }}</ref>
Well, based on Mccready’s return bulk revert vandalism and another whack in the head by the Admin, it would appear that Mcready hasn’t really changed much since his 24 hours in the ‘naughty chair”.


== Education, licensing, and regulation ==
After reviewing the bulk reverts he made and his plea for understanding, he has certainly convinced me – he really is intent on turning Misplaced Pages into his soapbox to ensure that the topic of Chiropractic is portrayed in as negative a light as possible.
{{Main|Chiropractic education|List of chiropractic schools}}
Requirements vary between countries. In the U.S. chiropractors obtain a non-medical accredited diploma in the field of chiropractic.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/?charindex=F|title=Glossary|publisher=National Center for Education Statistics, ]|access-date=2009-06-05|archive-date=2009-06-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090604050407/http://www.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/?charindex=F}}</ref> Chiropractic education in the U.S. has been criticized for failing to meet generally accepted standards of ].<ref>{{cite journal|vauthors=Marcus DM, McCullough L|title=An evaluation of the evidence in 'evidence-based' integrative medicine programs|journal=Academic Medicine|volume=84|issue=9|pages=1229–34|year=2009|doi=10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b185f4|pmid=19707062|doi-access=free}}</ref> The curriculum content of North American chiropractic and medical colleges with regard to basic and clinical sciences has little similarity, both in the kinds of subjects offered and in the time assigned to each subject.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Coulter I, Adams A, Coggan P, Wilkes M, Gonyea M | title = A comparative study of chiropractic and medical education | journal = Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine| volume = 4 | issue = 5 | pages = 64–75 | date = September 1998 | pmid = 9737032 }}</ref> Accredited chiropractic programs in the U.S. require that applicants have 90 semester hours of undergraduate education with a ] of at least 3.0 on a 4.0 scale. Many programs require at least three years of undergraduate education, and more are requiring a bachelor's degree.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chirocolleges.org/prospective_students.html|title=Prospective students|publisher=Association of Chiropractic Colleges|access-date=2009-07-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090814171533/http://www.chirocolleges.org/prospective_students.html|archive-date=2009-08-14}}</ref> Canada requires a minimum three years of undergraduate education for applicants, and at least 4200 instructional hours (or the equivalent) of full-time chiropractic education for matriculation through an accredited chiropractic program.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chirofed.ca/english/pdf/Standards-for-Accreditation-of-Doctor-of-Chiropractic-Programmes.pdf|title=Standards for Accreditation of Doctor of Chiropractic Programmes|date=2011-11-26|publisher=Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory and Educational Accrediting Boards|access-date=2014-08-02|archive-date=2015-09-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923202912/http://www.chirofed.ca/english/pdf/Standards-for-Accreditation-of-Doctor-of-Chiropractic-Programmes.pdf}}</ref> Graduates of the ] (CMCC) are formally recognized to have at least 7–8 years of university level education.<ref name=CMCCMediaRelations>{{cite web |url= https://www.cmcc.ca/news/CMCC%20Backgrounder%202015.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190226193153/https://www.cmcc.ca/news/CMCC%20Backgrounder%202015.pdf |archive-date=2019-02-26 |url-status=live|title= CMCC Backgrounder 2015 |publisher= ] |access-date= 26 February 2019 }}</ref><ref name=GovOntario>{{cite web |url=http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/postsec/degreegr.html |title=Degree Authority in Ontario |publisher=Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities |access-date=2010-12-14}}</ref> The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines suggest three major full-time educational paths culminating in either a ] degree. Besides the full-time paths, they also suggest a conversion program for people with other health care education and limited training programs for regions where no legislation governs chiropractic.<ref name=WHO-guidelines />


Upon graduation, there may be a requirement to pass national, state, or provincial board examinations before being ] to practice in a particular jurisdiction.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://life.edu/node/94 |title=State chiropractic licensure |access-date=2009-06-05 |year=2008 |publisher=] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090801072938/http://www.life.edu/node/94 |archive-date=2009-08-01 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://chirofed.ca/english/becoming.html |title=Becoming a chiropractor |publisher=Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory and Educational Accrediting Boards |access-date=2009-06-05 |archive-date=2009-06-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090615181538/http://www.chirofed.ca/english/becoming.html }}</ref> Depending on the location, ] may be required to renew these licenses.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Grod JP | title = Continuing health education in Canada | journal = The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association| volume = 50 | issue = 1 | pages = 14–17 | year = 2006 | pmid = 17549163 | pmc = 1839972 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Stuber KJ, Grod JP, Smith DL, Powers P | title = An online survey of chiropractors' opinions of Continuing Education | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy| volume = 13 | issue = 1 | page = 22 | year = 2005 | pmid = 16242035 | pmc = 1282582 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-13-22 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Specialty training is available through part-time postgraduate education programs such as chiropractic ] and sports chiropractic, and through full-time residency programs such as ] or orthopedics.<ref>{{cite book |chapter-url=http://chiroweb.com/archives/ahcpr/chapter3.htm |chapter=Chiropractic training |vauthors=Coulter ID, Adams AH, Sandefur R |year=1997 |title=Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research |pages=17–28 |veditors=Cherkin DC, Mootz RD |url=http://curziechiropractic.com/forms/ahcpr/uschiros.pdf |access-date=2008-05-11 |location=Rockville, MD |publisher=Agency for Health Care Policy and Research |oclc=39856366 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080625173624/http://curziechiropractic.com/forms/ahcpr/uschiros.pdf |archive-date=2008-06-25 }} AHCPR Pub No. 98-N002.</ref>
His edits are largely unacceptable and should be removed to restore this to a neutral informative article, not a personal blog/soapbox for his anti-chiropractic agenda and a link repository so donations can increase for his like-minded friends.


In the U.S., chiropractic schools are accredited through the ] (CCE) while the General Chiropractic Council (GCC) is the statutory governmental body responsible for the regulation of chiropractic in the UK.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE) |url=http://cce-usa.org/ |publisher= The Council on Chiropractic Education |access-date=2008-07-05 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gcc-uk.org/ |title=The General Chiropractic Council |access-date=2020-05-02 }}</ref> The U.S. CCE requires a mixing curriculum, which means a straight-educated chiropractor may not be eligible for licensing in states requiring CCE accreditation.<ref name=Morrison /> CCEs in the U.S., Canada, Australia and Europe have joined to form CCE-International (CCE-I) as a model of accreditation standards with the goal of having credentials portable internationally.<ref name=CCEI>{{cite web| url = http://www.cceintl.org/About_Us.html| title = About Us| access-date = 2010-09-30| publisher = ]| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101118013746/http://www.cceintl.org/About_Us.html| archive-date = 2010-11-18}}</ref> Today, there are 18 accredited Doctor of Chiropractic programs in the U.S.,<ref>{{cite web|title=Accredited Doctor of Chiropractic programs|url=http://cce-usa.org/adcp.php|publisher=The Council on Chiropractic Education|access-date=2008-02-22|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080214031937/http://www.cce-usa.org/adcp.php|archive-date = 2008-02-14}}</ref> 2 in Canada,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://chirofed.ca/english/accreditation.html|title=Accreditation of educational programmes|publisher=Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory and Educational Accrediting Boards|access-date=2009-06-05|archive-date=2009-05-18|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090518022905/http://www.chirofed.ca/english/accreditation.html}}</ref> 6 in Australasia,<ref name=CCEA>{{cite web| url = http://www.ccea.com.au/Accreditation/Program%20Accreditation%20Status.htm| title = Program Accreditation Status| access-date = 2010-09-30| publisher = Council on Chiropractic Education Australasia| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110217092348/http://ccea.com.au/Accreditation/Program%20Accreditation%20Status.htm| archive-date = 2011-02-17}}</ref> and 5 in Europe.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cce-europe.com/accredited-institutions.html|title=Institutions holding Accredited Status with the ECCE|publisher=]|date=2010-11-01|access-date=2014-08-02|archive-date=2014-07-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140722063913/http://www.cce-europe.com/accredited-institutions.html}}</ref> All but one of the chiropractic colleges in the U.S. are privately funded, but in several other countries they are in government-sponsored universities and colleges.<ref name=DeVocht /> Of the two chiropractic colleges in Canada, one is publicly funded (]) and one is privately funded (]). In 2005, CMCC was granted the privilege of offering a professional health care degree under the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, which sets the program within the hierarchy of education in Canada as comparable to that of other primary contact health care professions such as medicine, dentistry and optometry.<ref name=CMCCMediaRelations /><ref name=GovOntario />
Hopefully the more than fair and neutral Admin will begin to do this.
Thank you very much ] 23:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


Regulatory colleges and chiropractic boards in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, and Australia are responsible for protecting the public, standards of practice, disciplinary issues, quality assurance and maintenance of competency.<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.chiropracticcanada.ca/en-us/FactsFAQs.aspx| title = Canadian Chiropractic Association FAQs| access-date = 2010-10-02| publisher = Canadian Chiropractic Association |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090817225255/http://www.chiropracticcanada.ca/en-us/FactsFAQs.aspx |archive-date=2009-08-17}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url = http://pacex.fclb.org/Information/FAQ/tabid/364/Default.aspx| title = Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards FAQ| access-date = 2010-10-02| publisher = ]}}</ref> There are an estimated 49,000 chiropractors in the U.S. (2008),<ref name=BLS>{{cite web|url=http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos071.htm|title=Chiropractors|publisher= ]|access-date=2008-07-05|year=2007}}</ref> 6,500 in Canada (2010),<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.chiropracticcanada.ca/en-us/AboutUs/ChiropracticInCanada.aspx| title = Canadian Chiropractic Association: Chiropractic in Canada| access-date = 2010-10-02| publisher = Canadian Chiropractic Association| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100527103605/http://www.chiropracticcanada.ca/en-us/AboutUs/ChiropracticInCanada.aspx| archive-date = 2010-05-27}}</ref> 2,500 in Australia (2000),<ref name=Campbell /> and 1,500 in the UK (2000).<ref>{{cite book|title= The Chiropractic Profession: Its Education, Practice, Research and Future Directions|author= Chapman-Smith D|year=2000|chapter= Current status of the profession|isbn=978-1-892734-02-0|publisher=NCMIC|location= West Des Moines, IA}}</ref>
==Introduction==
<blockquote>'''Chiropractic''' is a ] and controversial system of health care founded by the ] ]. It is based on the belief that many health problems can be prevented and treated using ]s in order to correct ]s which are believed to be the cause of much disease.</blockquote>


Chiropractors often argue that this education is as good as or better than medical physicians', but most chiropractic training is confined to classrooms with much time spent learning theory, adjustment, and marketing.<ref name="Morrison"/> The fourth year of chiropractic education persistently showed the highest stress levels.<ref name=Hester2013 /> Every student, irrespective of year, experienced different ranges of stress when studying.<ref name=Hester2013>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hester H, Cunliffe C, Hunnisett A | title = Stress in chiropractic education: a student survey of a five-year course | journal = Journal of Chiropractic Education| volume = 27 | issue = 2 | pages = 147–51 | year = 2013 | pmid = 23957319 | pmc = 3791907 | doi = 10.7899/JCE-13-4 }}</ref> The chiropractic leaders and colleges have had internal struggles.<ref name=Johnson2010 /> Rather than cooperation, there has been infighting between different factions.<ref name=Johnson2010 /> A number of actions were posturing due to the confidential nature of the chiropractic colleges in an attempt to enroll students.<ref name=Johnson2010>{{cite journal | author = Johnson C | title = Reflecting on 115 years: the chiropractic profession's philosophical path | journal = Journal of Chiropractic Humanities| volume = 17 | issue = 1 | pages = 1–5 |date=December 2010 | pmid = 22693471 | pmc = 3342796 | doi = 10.1016/j.echu.2010.11.001 }}</ref>{{clarify|reason=What actions? Confidential nature?|date=June 2017}}
If it were a religion there would be churches. ] is a religion. It is ]. If it is a religion then it has a prophet or teacher, not a "crank". ] 16:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


In 2024, ] reported on the high debt burden of students who pursued degrees in alternative medicine. Ten different chiropractic programs were ranked among the 47 US graduate programs with highest debt to earnings ratios.<ref name="opb-part2">{{cite news |last1=Camhi |first1=Tiffany |title=Oregon alternative medicine students face a long road to loan forgiveness |url=https://www.opb.org/article/2024/08/30/oregon-alternative-medicine-loan-forgiveness/ |access-date=28 October 2024 |work=OPB |date=30 August 2024 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="scorecard-data">{{cite web |author1=U.S. Department of Education |title=Most Recent Data by Field of Study |url=https://ed-public-download.app.cloud.gov/downloads/Most-Recent-Cohorts-Field-of-Study_06102024.zip |website=U.S. Department of Education College Scorecard |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240909175033/https://ed-public-download.app.cloud.gov/downloads/Most-Recent-Cohorts-Field-of-Study_06102024.zip |archive-date=9 September 2024}}</ref> Analyses by Quackwatch and the ] found high rates of default on Health Education Assistance Loan (HEAL) student loans used for chiropractic programs.<ref name="sunlight">{{cite web |last1=Rosiak |first1=Luke |title=Chiropractics lobbied for special student loans, defaulted in droves : Sunlight Foundation |url=https://sunlightfoundation.com/2010/01/12/chiropractics-lobbied-special-student-loans-defaulted-droves/ |website=Sunlight Foundation |access-date=29 October 2024 |date=12 January 2010}}</ref><ref name="mirtz">{{cite web |last1=Mirtz, DC |first1=Timothy |title=The Student Loan Mess: Why Chiropractic Is in Trouble|url=https://quackwatch.org/chiropractic/edu/loan/ |website=Quackwatch |access-date=29 October 2024 |date=23 April 2003}}</ref><ref name="default-rates">{{cite web |title=Chiropractic Student Loan Default Rates (1999 to 2012)|url=https://quackwatch.org/chiropractic/edu/default/ |website=Quackwatch |access-date=29 October 2024 |date=12 March 2018}}</ref> Among health professionals who were listed as in default on HEAL loans in 2012, 53% were chiropractors.<ref name="default-rates"/>
==Misuse of a citation==
I have eliminated the very misleading section:


=== Ethics ===
:"Many doctors warn against the dangers of chiropractic. Sixty-two clinical neurologists issued a warning about the dangers of neck manipulation. The signers include private neurologists as well as chiefs of neurology departments of major teaching hospitals. Calling their concerns significant,..."
{{Main|Chiropractic professional ethics}}


The chiropractic oath is a modern variation of the classical ] historically taken by physicians and other healthcare professionals swearing to practice their professions ethically.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Simpson JK, Losco B, Young KJ | title = Development of the murdoch chiropractic graduate pledge | journal = Journal of Chiropractic Education| volume = 24 | issue = 2 | pages = 175–86 | year = 2010 | pmid = 21048880 | pmc = 2967342 | doi=10.7899/1042-5055-24.2.175}}</ref> The American Chiropractic Association (ACA) has an ethical code "based upon the acknowledgement that the social contract dictates the profession's responsibilities to the patient, the public, and the profession; and upholds the fundamental principle that the paramount purpose of the chiropractic doctor's professional services shall be to benefit the patient."<ref>{{Cite web|author=Staff|title=Code of Ethics|publisher=]|url=http://www.acatoday.org/content_css.cfm?CID=719|access-date=2014-02-11|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140222140728/http://www.acatoday.org/content_css.cfm?CID=719|archive-date=2014-02-22}}</ref> The ] (ICA) also has a set of professional canons.<ref>{{Cite web|author=Staff|title=ICA code of Ethics|publisher=]|url=http://www.chiropractic.org/ica/ethics.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140405120410/http://www.chiropractic.org/ica/ethics.htm|archive-date=2014-04-05}}</ref>
The head neurologist of SPONTADS, John Norris in Canada whose report this 'warning' was based on confessed under oath that he had nothing to base his findings on and couldn't remember how he arrived at them. In other words he made the whole thing up. He has since left his position and this unfortunate episode is now a permanent black mark on his record. This was in 2002 and the neurologists were threatened with legal action for this 'warning.'
They have since distanced themselves from this false decree when they found that they were long on hate and short on facts.


A 2008 commentary proposed that the chiropractic profession actively regulate itself to combat abuse, fraud, and ], which are more prevalent in chiropractic than in other health care professions, violating the ] between patients and physicians.<ref name=Murphy-pod /> According to a 2015 Gallup poll of U.S. adults, the perception of chiropractors is generally favorable; two-thirds of American adults agree that chiropractors have their patient's best interest in mind and more than half also agree that most chiropractors are trustworthy. Less than 10% of US adults disagreed with the statement that chiropractors were trustworthy.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Majority in U.S. Say Chiropractic Works for Neck, Back Pain|url = http://www.gallup.com/poll/184910/majority-say-chiropractic-works-neck-back-pain.aspx|access-date = 2015-09-13|website = Gallup Inc.|date = 8 September 2015}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|title = Public Perceptions of Doctors of Chiropractic: Results of a National Survey and Examination of Variation According to Respondents' Likelihood to Use Chiropractic, Experience With Chiropractic, and Chiropractic Supply in Local Health Care Markets|journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics|date = 2015-01-01|doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2015.08.001|pmid = 26362263|first1 = William B|last1 = Weeks|first2 = Christine M|last2 = Goertz|first3 = William C|last3 = Meeker|first4 = Dennis M|last4 = Marchiori|volume=38|issue = 8|pages=533–44|doi-access = free}}</ref>
Also the 'website' listed as a reference is yet another site owned by an ex-psychiatrist who has a long history of chiropractic antagonism and should be suspect and viewed as unreliable. Why hasn't he changed his site to reflect the true accuracy?
] launched a campaign to draw attention to the ] against science writer ].<ref>{{cite news|title=A pivotal moment for free speech in Britain |newspaper=] |date=April 15, 2010 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2010/apr/15/simon-singh-libel-reform}}</ref> In 2009, a number of organizations and public figures signed a statement entitled "The law has no place in scientific disputes".<ref>{{cite web |title=The BHA re-publishes Simon Singh's article on chiropractic therapy |publisher=] |date=July 29, 2009 |url=https://humanism.org.uk/2009/07/29/news-331/}}</ref>]]
Chiropractors, especially in America, have a reputation for unnecessarily treating patients.<ref name=Trick-or-Treatment /> In many circumstances the focus seems to be put on economics instead of health care.<ref name=Trick-or-Treatment /> Sustained chiropractic care is promoted as a preventive tool, but unnecessary manipulation could possibly present a risk to patients.<ref name=Ernst-eval /> Some chiropractors are concerned by the routine unjustified claims chiropractors have made.<ref name=Ernst-eval /> A 2010 analysis of chiropractic websites found the majority of chiropractors and their associations made claims of effectiveness not supported by scientific evidence, while 28% of chiropractor websites advocate lower back pain care, which has some sound evidence.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ernst E, Gilbey A | title = Chiropractic claims in the English-speaking world | journal = The New Zealand Medical Journal| volume = 123 | issue = 1312 | pages = 36–44 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20389316 }}</ref>


The US ] (OIG) estimated that for calendar year 2013, 82% of payments to chiropractors under ], a total of $359 million, did not comply with Medicare requirements.<ref name=ACSH2017/> There have been at least 15 OIG reports about chiropractic billing irregularities since 1986.<ref name=ACSH2017>{{cite web|url=http://acsh.org/news/2017/01/02/medicare-overpayments-chiropractors-are-widespread-10670|title=Medicare Overpayments to Chiropractors Are Widespread|author=Stephen Barrett|publisher=American Council on Science and Health|date=2017-01-02}}</ref>
Admins should note: Other misleading statements about stroke should also be viewed with skepticism and eliminated from this article as should be any other uses of biased websites owned by individuals who flagrantly solicit donations when you visit. Misplaced Pages should not be used to increase the donation flow to private individuals.


In 2009, a ] to the ] (BCA) against ] inspired the filing of formal complaints of false advertising against more than 500 individual chiropractors within one 24-hour period,<ref name=withdraw>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/06/chiropractic_group_advises_mem_1.html |title=The Great Beyond: Chiropractic group advises members to 'withdraw from the battleground' |publisher=Nature.com |author=Lucas Laursen |access-date=20 June 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/06/chiropractic_complainers_ident.html |title=The Great Beyond: Complaints converge on chiropractors |publisher=Nature.com |author=Lucas Laursen |access-date=20 June 2009}}</ref> prompting the McTimoney Chiropractic Association to write to its members advising them to remove leaflets that make claims about whiplash and colic from their practice, to be wary of new patients and telephone inquiries, and telling their members: "If you have a website, take it down NOW" and "Finally, we strongly suggest you do NOT discuss this with others, especially patients."<ref name=withdraw /> An editorial in ''Nature'' suggested that the BCA may have been trying to suppress debate and that this use of English libel law was a burden on the right to freedom of expression, which is protected by the ].<ref>{{cite journal | title = Unjust burdens of proof | journal = Nature| volume = 459 | issue = 7248 | page = 751 | date = June 2009 | pmid = 19516290 | doi = 10.1038/459751a | bibcode = 2009Natur.459Q.751. | doi-access = free }}</ref> The libel case ended with the BCA withdrawing its suit in 2010.<ref name="news">{{cite news|title=Case dropped against Simon Singh|author=Pallab Ghosh|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8621880.stm|work=BBC News|date=2010-04-15}}</ref><ref name="Mark Henderson">{{cite news|newspaper=Times Online|url=http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7098157.ece|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611200255/http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7098157.ece|url-status=dead|archive-date=June 11, 2011|title=Science writer Simon Singh wins bitter libel battle|author=Mark Henderson|location=London|date=2010-04-16}}</ref>
''''''


== Reception ==
I have noted this before in the Talk section but Mccready seems to have overlooked this. I am sure it was just an oversight on his part and would expect him to be more careful in the future about including this. Thanks ] 05:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


Chiropractic is established in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, and is present to a lesser extent in many other countries.<ref name=global-strategy>{{cite web |url=http://chiropracticdiplomatic.com/strategies/global_strategy.pdf |title=Global professional strategy for chiropractic |vauthors=Tetrault M |publisher=Chiropractic Diplomatic Corps |year=2004 |access-date=2008-04-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080625173624/http://chiropracticdiplomatic.com/strategies/global_strategy.pdf |archive-date=2008-06-25 }}</ref> It is viewed as a marginal and non-clinically–proven attempt at ], which has not integrated into mainstream medicine.<ref name=V-H />
:: I find that this citation from an organization called "Chiropractic is Safe" could be just as suspect and unreliable as your claim that chirobase is. I will revert your removal of the anti-chiropractic material. It seems that you are intent to remove anything remotely indicating that chiro is unsafe from this article. I think you have an almighty large barrow to push yourself. If you wish to balance out the your claimed bias in the article then put it in the text without removing large slabs of the controversy. ] 06:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


=== Australia ===
Well, no. But I AM intent on removing things that are being misused such as a statement that is really false and POV and should not be included. Dr. Norris recanted his findings which the 'warning' was based on. This was widely reported. Do you have any citations to the contrary I would be happy to reveiw them? If you post them here, I will leave the warning in. Otherwise, I believe the paragraph in question should be removed.
Thanks. ] 13:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


In ], there are approximately 2488 chiropractors, or one chiropractor for every 7980 people.<ref name="Leach 364–378">{{Cite journal|last=Leach|first=Matthew J.|date=2013-08-01|title=Profile of the complementary and alternative medicine workforce across Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States and United Kingdom|journal=Complementary Therapies in Medicine|volume=21|issue=4|pages=364–378|doi=10.1016/j.ctim.2013.04.004|pmid=23876568|issn=0965-2299}}</ref> Most private health insurance funds in Australia cover chiropractic care, and the federal government funds chiropractic care when the patient is referred by a medical practitioner.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Xue CC, Zhang AL, Lin V, Myers R, Polus B, Story DF | title = Acupuncture, chiropractic and osteopathy use in Australia: a national population survey | journal = BMC Public Health| volume = 8 | page = 105 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18377663 | pmc = 2322980 | doi = 10.1186/1471-2458-8-105 | doi-access = free }}</ref> In 2014, the chiropractic profession had a registered workforce of 4,684 practitioners in Australia represented by two major organizations – the Chiropractors' Association of Australia (CAA) and the Chiropractic and Osteopathic College of Australasia (COCA).<ref name=AdamsLauche2017/> Annual expenditure on chiropractic care (alone or combined with osteopathy) in Australia is estimated to be between AUD$750–988 million with musculoskeletal complaints such as back and neck pain making up the bulk of consultations; and proportional expenditure is similar to that found in other countries.<ref name=AdamsLauche2017/> While Medicare (the Australian publicly funded universal health care system) coverage of chiropractic services is limited to only those directed by a medical referral to assist chronic disease management, most private health insurers in Australia do provide partial reimbursement for a wider range of chiropractic services in addition to limited third party payments for workers compensation and motor vehicle accidents.<ref name=AdamsLauche2017/>
::I can find no shortage of citations relating to the Norris study, such as http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1914 but nothing (other than from chiropractic newsletters) saying that Norris has recanted. You show me a citation showing that he has recanted his research from something other than a chiropractic newsletter or supporter of chiropractic. Perhaps the Canadian Journal of Medicine where the Norris research was first published, or perhaps a newspaper? If you can do that then I am happy to admit I am wrong and will happily delete the reference to the Norris research. ] 05:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


Of the 2,005 chiropractors who participated in a 2015 survey, 62.4% were male and the average age was 42.1 (SD = 12.1) years.<ref name=AdamsLauche2017/> Nearly all chiropractors (97.1%) had a bachelor's degree or higher, with the majority of chiropractor's highest professional qualification being a bachelor or double bachelor's degree (34.6%), followed by a master's degree (32.7%), Doctor of Chiropractic (28.9%) or PhD (0.9%).<ref name=AdamsLauche2017/> Only a small number of chiropractor's highest professional qualification was a diploma (2.1%) or advanced diploma (0.8%).<ref name=AdamsLauche2017>{{cite journal|last1=Adams|first1=Jon|last2=Lauche|first2=Romy|last3=Peng|first3=Wenbo|last4=Steel|first4=Amie|last5=Moore|first5=Craig|last6=Amorin-Woods|first6=Lyndon G.|last7=Sibbritt|first7=David|title=A workforce survey of Australian chiropractic: the profile and practice features of a nationally representative sample of 2,005 chiropractors|journal=BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine|volume=17|issue=1|page=14|year=2017|issn=1472-6882|doi=10.1186/s12906-016-1542-x|pmc=5217252|pmid=28056964 |doi-access=free }}{{CC-notice|cc=by4|url=https://bmccomplementalternmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12906-016-1542-x|author(s)=Jon Adams, Romy Lauche, Wenbo Peng, Amie Steel, Craig Moore, Lyndon G. Amorin-Woods, and David Sibbritt}}</ref>
I agree with Maustrauser in this and will, meantime, reinsert controversial in the top, having accepted the majority view re religion (though I must say that if you check the definition is fits). ]


=== Germany ===
:Adding "controversial" to the introduction of the article does not have even a plurality of the support of the editors on this page, let alone a consensus in support. Until that time comes, and I think it won't, adding it back will simply be reverted. The reality is, it's an adjective (the word, controversial, that is)... Once more, our job here is to state the facts, in the article. If the facts support the notion that the subject of this article is controversial, then so be it. But again, whether they do or don't, it isn't our job to whack Misplaced Pages readers over the head with any of our particular beliefs. ] 08:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
In Germany, chiropractic may be offered by medical doctors and alternative practitioners. Chiropractors qualified abroad must obtain a German non-medical practitioner license. Authorities have routinely required a comprehensive knowledge test for this, but in the recent past, some administrative courts have ruled that training abroad should be recognised.<ref>{{cite web |title=Freedom of Profession for Chiropractors in Germany |url=https://www.aclanz.de/en/october-17-2014-2 |website=ACLANZ |publisher=aclanz Rechtsanwälte |access-date=16 June 2023}}</ref>


=== Switzerland ===
::I agree with Justen Deal above, and with Maustrauser on Norris - I have searched and not found independent evidence that he has recanted, or that any other signatories have done so] 11:57, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
In Switzerland, only trained medical professionals are allowed to offer chiropractic. There are 300 chiropractors in Switzerland.<ref>{{cite web |title=ChiroSuisse - Organisation |url=https://www.chirosuisse.ch/de/chirosuisse/organisation |website=www.chirosuisse.ch |publisher=Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Chiropraktik|access-date=16 June 2023 |language=de}}</ref>


=== United Kingdom ===
:::Alright, I will try to find a neutral reference where Norris recants his findings as proof. Then, in the interest of fairness, websites that still have the Norris study posted should also be viewed as unreliable and should also not be allowed here and deleted. Is that OK Justen, Gleng and Maus?] 15:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


In the United Kingdom, there are over 2,000 chiropractors, representing one chiropractor per 29,206 people.<ref name="Leach 364–378"/> Chiropractic is available on the ] in some areas, such as ], where the treatment is only available for neck or back pain.<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-23669971 |title= Chiropractic treatment available on NHS in Cornwall |date= August 13, 2013 |access-date= August 18, 2013 |work= BBC News}}</ref>
:: I agree, I don't think that websites are a good source for anything much anyway, and should generally be treated as unreliable, as they are likely to be there to propogate a particular viewpoint rather than objectively display evidence. However, of course they might be helpful in tracking reliable sources] 16:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


A 2010 study by questionnaire presented to UK chiropractors indicated only 45% of chiropractors disclosed to patients the serious risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine and that 46% believed there was possibility patients would refuse treatment if the risks were correctly explained. However 80% acknowledged the ethical/moral responsibility to disclose risk to patients.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Langworthy JM, Forrest L | title = Withdrawal rates as a consequence of disclosure of risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy| volume = 18 | page = 27 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20977721 | pmc = 3161389 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-18-27 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
::I partly agree. I think websites that are set up to be pro-chiro or anti-chiro are unacceptable as they are pushing a POV. Neutral websites that exist for the exploration of science and human knowledge (eg Nature, Scientific American, Cochrane Collaboration, New Scientist) and that are peer reviewed from experts outside the area of professed expertise, should be considered acceptable. The reason I can't accept blanket 'banning' of websites is that much research is simply published electronically now and no longer on paper. ] 05:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


=== United States and Canada ===
:::Thank you Gleng. So is that OK with Maustrauser and Justen?
] 04:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


The percentage of the population that utilizes chiropractic care at any given time generally falls into a range from 6% to 12% in the U.S. and Canada,<ref name=Lawrence-Meeker>{{cite journal |vauthors=Lawrence DJ, Meeker WC | title = Chiropractic and CAM utilization: a descriptive review | journal = Chiropractic & Osteopathy| volume = 15 | page = 2 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17241465 | pmc = 1784103 | doi = 10.1186/1746-1340-15-2 | doi-access = free }}</ref> with a global high of 20% in Alberta in 2006.<ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://chiroweb.com/archives/25/06/02.html |title= Chiropractic in Alberta: a model of consumer utilization and satisfaction |magazine=Dynamic Chiropractic |volume=25 |issue=6 |vauthors= Crownfield PW |year=2007}}</ref> In 2008, chiropractors were reported to be the most common CAM providers for children and adolescents, these patients representing up to 14% of all visits to chiropractors.<ref name=Kemper />
Sensible people don't see chiropractic as controversial or dangerous, just ineffective and more expensive than a ] needs to be. Millions of people swear by it and for them it seems to work. ] 14:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


There were around 50,330 chiropractors practicing in North America in 2000.<ref name="Leach 364–378"/> In 2008, this has increased by almost 20% to around 60,000 chiropractors.<ref name="Ernst-eval" /> In 2002–03, the majority of those who sought chiropractic did so for relief from back and neck pain and other neuromusculoskeletal complaints;<ref name="Hurwitz" /> most do so specifically for low back pain.<ref name="Hurwitz" /><ref name="Lawrence-Meeker" /> The majority of U.S. chiropractors participate in some form of managed care.<ref name="CooperMcKee2003" /> Although the majority of U.S. chiropractors view themselves as specialists in neuromusculoskeletal conditions, many also consider chiropractic as a type of primary care.<ref name="CooperMcKee2003" /> In the majority of cases, the care that chiropractors and physicians provide divides the market, however for some, their care is complementary.<ref name="CooperMcKee2003" />


In the U.S., chiropractors perform over 90% of all manipulative treatments.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chirobase.org/05RB/AHCPR/12.html |title=Chiropractic in the United States:Training, Practice, and Research |first1=Daniel C. |last1=Cherkin |first2=Robert D. |last2=Mootz |access-date=2010-10-01 |year=2010 |publisher=Chirobase}}</ref> Satisfaction rates are typically higher for chiropractic care compared to medical care, with a 1998 U.S. survey reporting 83% of respondents satisfied or very satisfied with their care; quality of communication seems to be a consistent predictor of patient satisfaction with chiropractors.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Gaumer G | title = Factors associated with patient satisfaction with chiropractic care: survey and review of the literature | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 29 | issue = 6 | pages = 455–462 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16904491 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.06.013 }}</ref>
The blanket argument that websites are not a good source is absurd. Sorry Gareth. If you hold this view, what do you think of WP? How do you expect readers to view WP? Pleeease! As to Fred's argument, millions of people used to say the world was flat. I kinda like the idea that most humans aspire to be more than dumb suckers. And there is plenty of evidence for the dangers of chiro, not to mention the utter waste of human resources devoted to it. ] 06:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


Utilization of chiropractic care is sensitive to the costs incurred by the co-payment by the patient.<ref name=Chapman-Smith/> The use of chiropractic declined from 9.9% of U.S. adults in 1997 to 7.4% in 2002; this was the largest relative decrease among CAM professions, which overall had a stable use rate.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Tindle HA, Davis RB, Phillips RS, Eisenberg DM | title = Trends in use of complementary and alternative medicine by US adults: 1997–2002 | journal = Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine| volume = 11 | issue = 1 | pages = 42–49 | year = 2005 | pmid = 15712765 }}</ref> As of 2007 7% of the U.S. population is being reached by chiropractic.<ref>{{cite magazine |magazine=Dynamic Chiropractic |volume=25|issue=19|year=2007|last=Stanley |first=G.|title= The Sustainability of Chiropractic|url=http://www.dynamicchiropractic.com/mpacms/dc/article.php?id=52341 }}</ref> They were the third largest medical profession in the US in 2002, following physicians and dentists.<ref name=Bailey2002>{{cite book|author=Eric J. Bailey|title=African American Alternative Medicine: Using Alternative Medicine to Prevent and Control Chronic Diseases|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=g83lie1RiUMC&pg=PA26|year=2002|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|isbn=978-0-89789-747-1|pages=26ff}}</ref> Employment of U.S. chiropractors was expected to increase 14% between 2006 and 2016, faster than the average for all occupations.<ref name=BLS />
I think that ] is very sound advice. Websites vary massively, and judging their reliability is not always easy, though many are fine; certainly they are fine to cite as sources of opinion rather than fact. The general problem in citing them for fact is a) content on a website can change and so any citation is insecure and b) the status of the material cited is uncertain - exactly what is peer reviewed etc. So I would recommend references to peer-reviewed archived secondary sources, published in very reputable journals as the ideal source for potentially controversial statements about science. Where the evidence is strong and the consensus is there, there will be such sources, and if they can't be found it is a cause of concern. Obviously I think WP is great, but it is not itself authoratative (not yet at least), although at its best it cites authoritative sources.
If a website posts as facts things that are demonstrably false, knowing them to be false, then I would consider it discredited. Websites that expect to be taken seriously should respect truth, even when inconvenient.
] 11:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


In the U.S., most states require insurers to cover chiropractic care, and most ]s cover these services.<ref name=Kemper>{{cite journal |vauthors=Kemper KJ, Vohra S, Walls R| title = American Academy of Pediatrics. The use of complementary and alternative medicine in pediatrics | journal = Pediatrics| volume = 122 | issue = 6 | pages = 1374–1386 | date = December 2008 | pmid = 19047261 | doi = 10.1542/peds.2008-2173 | last5 = Provisional Section On Complementary | doi-access = free }}</ref>
'''Neurologist Norris'''


==History==
Hi Gang,
{{Main|History of chiropractic}}
Had a busy weekend. Anyone see the film, "V"? Very powerful, very interesting and different. I recommend it.
]
Chiropractic's origins lie in the ] practice of ], in which untrained practitioners engaged in joint manipulation or resetting fractured bones.<ref name=Ernst-eval />
Chiropractic was founded in 1895 by ] in ]. Palmer, a ], hypothesized that manual manipulation of the spine could cure disease.<ref name=Baer /> The first chiropractic patient of D. D. Palmer was ], a worker in the building where Palmer's office was located.<ref name=History-Primer /> He claimed that he had severely reduced hearing for 17 years, which started shortly following a "pop" in his spine.<ref name=History-Primer /> A few days following his adjustment, Lillard claimed his hearing was almost completely restored.<ref name=History-Primer /> Another of Palmer's patients, Samuel Weed, coined the term ''chiropractic'', from ] {{lang|grc|χειρο-}} {{lang|grc-Latn|]}} 'hand' (itself from {{lang|grc|]}} {{lang|grc-Latn|cheir}} 'hand') and {{lang|grc|]}} {{lang|grc-Latn|praktikos}} 'practical'.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/chiropractic |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130503112929/http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/chiropractic |archive-date=May 3, 2013 |title=chiropractic |year=2014 |work=] |publisher=]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/chiro- |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140812213145/http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/chiro- |archive-date=August 12, 2014 |title=chiro- |year=2014 |work=] |publisher=]}}</ref> Chiropractic is classified as a field of ].<ref name=Swanson2015>{{cite book |vauthors=Swanson ES |title=Science and Society: Understanding Scientific Methodology, Energy, Climate, and Sustainability |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tQmhCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA65 |year=2015 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-319-21987-5 |page=65 |chapter=Pseudoscience}}</ref>


Chiropractic competed with its predecessor osteopathy, another medical system based on magnetic healing; both systems were founded by charismatic midwesterners in opposition to the conventional medicine of the day, and both postulated that manipulation improved health.<ref name=Baer>{{cite journal |journal=Medical Anthropology Quarterly |year=1987 |volume=1 |issue=2 |pages=176–193 |title=Divergence and convergence in two systems of manual medicine: osteopathy and chiropractic in the United States |vauthors=Baer HA |doi=10.1525/maq.1987.1.2.02a00030 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Although initially keeping chiropractic a family secret, in 1898 Palmer began teaching it to a few students at his new ].<ref name=Martin /> One student, his son ], became committed to promoting chiropractic, took over the Palmer School in 1906, and rapidly expanded its enrollment.<ref name=Martin/>
Wow, Mccready really let his anti-chiro bias show with statements about "the dangers of chiro" (Where? Compared to what?) His chiro-hatred really comes shining through, and he obviously hasn't learned anything from 24 hours in the naughty corner.


Early chiropractors believed that all disease was caused by interruptions in the flow of innate intelligence, a ] nervous energy or life force that represented God's presence in man; chiropractic leaders often invoked religious imagery and moral traditions.<ref name=Martin /> D. D. Palmer said he "received chiropractic from the other world".<ref name="Religion">&nbsp;– Letter from D. D. Palmer to P. W. Johnson, D.C., May 4, 1911. In the letter, he often refers to himself with ] and also as "Old Dad".</ref> D. D. and B. J. both seriously considered declaring chiropractic a religion, which might have provided ], but decided against it partly to avoid confusion with ].<ref name=Martin /><ref name="Religion" /> Early chiropractors also tapped into the ] movement, emphasizing craft, hard work, competition, and advertisement, aligning themselves with the common man against intellectuals and ], among which they included the ] (AMA).<ref name=Martin />
Anyway, I agree with Maustrauser that sites that are used as references on WP shouldn't be pro or anti-anything. So after sifting through the morass of chiro-hate spin websites from angry shrinks, acne docs and a PT, I will reference the transcripts directly to answer the Norris issue so we can delete the so-called neurologists'warning' and put this thing to rest and move on. Websites that cite the neurologists 'warning' or the Norris study without noting that he publicly acknowledged that he had no basis to draw any conclusions, do not meet the WP standards and should be deleted.


], early developer of chiropractic]]
From Inquest Transcripts
Chiropractic has seen considerable ].<ref name=DeVocht /><ref name=Homola/> Although D. D. and B. J. were "straight" and disdained the use of instruments, some early chiropractors, whom B. J. scornfully called "mixers", advocated the use of instruments.<ref name=Martin /> In 1910, B. J. changed course and endorsed X-rays as necessary for diagnosis; this resulted in a significant exodus from the Palmer School of the more conservative faculty and students.<ref name=Martin /> The mixer camp grew until by 1924 B. J. estimated that only 3,000 of the United States' 25,000 chiropractors remained straight.<ref name=Martin /> That year, B. J.'s invention and promotion of the neurocalometer, a temperature-sensing device, was highly controversial among B. J.'s fellow straights. By the 1930s, chiropractic was the largest alternative healing profession in the U.S.<ref name=Martin />
:"(John) Norris states that the Stroke Consortium lacks the knowledge about chiropractic manipulation, chiropractic science. There is no evidence-based data, no concrete scientific conclusions, to show that what a chiropractor does stretches the artery in such a way to cause a dissection." Ted Danson, testimony of May 16, 2002 from transcript of Lana Lewis Inquest, pp. 72-75.


], first chiropractic patient]]
:Norris: (regarding SPONTADS), “So I think that it is an essentially hypothesisgenerating, interesting case series, but no more than that ... It is just that. So I think, well, I agree with Mr. Danson, it's irrelevant to this inquest.'" -- pp.27-28.
Chiropractors faced heavy opposition from organized medicine.<ref name=History-Primer /> D. D. Palmer was jailed in 1907 for practicing medicine without a license.<ref name="Jail"> — Chiro.org</ref>{{fcn|date=February 2023}} Thousands of chiropractors were prosecuted for ], and D. D. and many other chiropractors were jailed.<ref name=History-Primer /> To defend against medical statutes, B. J. argued that chiropractic was separate and distinct from medicine, asserting that chiropractors "analyzed" rather than "diagnosed", and "adjusted" subluxations rather than "treated" disease.<ref name=History-Primer /> B. J. cofounded the Universal Chiropractors' Association (UCA) to provide legal services to arrested chiropractors.<ref name=History-Primer /> Although the UCA won their first test case in Wisconsin in 1907, prosecutions instigated by state medical boards became increasingly common and in many cases were successful. In response, chiropractors conducted political campaigns to secure separate licensing statutes, eventually succeeding in all fifty states, from Kansas in 1913 through Louisiana in 1974.<ref name=History-Primer /> The longstanding feud between chiropractors and ]s continued for decades.


===Restraint of trade decision 1989===
:In response to the total patient size of SPONTADS study being 180, Norris replies: “It is a drop in the ointment. You can’t do a study based on figures like that. You need a large study to do it.” Transcript May 16, 2002, pp 156-157.
The AMA labeled chiropractic an "unscientific ]" in 1966,<ref name=Chiro-PH>{{cite journal |vauthors=Johnson C, Baird R, Dougherty PE, Globe G, Green BN, Haneline M, Hawk C, Injeyan HS, Killinger L, Kopansky-Giles D, Lisi AJ, Mior SA, Smith M | title = Chiropractic and public health: current state and future vision | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 31 | issue = 6 | pages = 397–410 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18722194 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.07.001 | doi-access = free }}</ref> and until 1980 advised its members that it was unethical for medical doctors to associate with "unscientific practitioners".<ref>{{cite journal | author = Cherkin D | title = AMA policy on chiropractic | journal = American Journal of Public Health| volume = 79 | issue = 11 | pages = 1569–70 | date = November 1989 | pmid = 2817179 | pmc = 1349822 | doi = 10.2105/AJPH.79.11.1569-a }}</ref> This culminated in a landmark 1987 decision, '']'', in which the court found that the AMA had engaged in unreasonable restraint of trade and conspiracy, and which ended the AMA's de facto boycott of chiropractic.<ref name=CooperMcKee2003/>


===Growing scholarly interest===
:Responding to the questions as to how many manipulations are done in Canada and how many of them lead to Stroke – Norris: “I think probably until we get a collaborative study going, we really can’t answer these questions, and they are really very critical, I think.” May 16, 2002, pp 113-114
Serious research to test chiropractic theories did not begin until the 1970s, and is continuing to be hampered by antiscientific and ] ideas that sustained the profession in its long battle with organized medicine.<ref name=History-Primer /> By the mid-1990s there was a growing scholarly interest in chiropractic, which helped efforts to improve service quality and establish clinical guidelines that recommended manual therapies for acute low back pain.<ref name=History-Primer>{{cite web|title=Chiropractic history: a primer |last1=Keating |first1=J. C. Jr |last2=Cleveland |first2=C. S. III |last3=Menke |first3=M. |url=http://ahc.memberclicks.net/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |year=2005 |access-date=2008-06-16 |publisher=Association for the History of Chiropractic |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140424011335/http://ahc.memberclicks.net/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |archive-date=2014-04-24 }}</ref>


In recent decades chiropractic gained legitimacy and greater acceptance by medical physicians and ]s, and enjoyed a strong political base and sustained demand for services.<ref name=CooperMcKee2003/> However, its future seemed uncertain: as the number of practitioners grew, evidence-based medicine insisted on treatments with demonstrated value, managed care restricted payment, and competition grew from ]s and other health professions.<ref name=CooperMcKee2003/> The profession responded by marketing natural products and devices more aggressively, and by reaching deeper into alternative medicine and primary care.<ref name=CooperMcKee2003/>
:Responding to the question as to why he knowingly made public statements for which there was no scientific substantiation, Norris: “I can’t explain that to the jury. I’m sorry.” May 16, 2002, pp. 113-114.


== Public health ==
] 04:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
{{further|Vaccine controversy#Alternative medicine|Water fluoridation controversy}}
Some chiropractors oppose ] and ], which are common ] practices.<ref name=Murphy-pod /> Within the chiropractic community there are significant disagreements about vaccination, one of the most cost-effective public health interventions available.<ref name=WardleFrawley2016>{{cite journal|last1=Wardle|first1=Jon|last2=Frawley|first2=Jane|last3=Steel|first3=Amie|last4=Sullivan|first4=Elizabeth|title=Complementary medicine and childhood immunisation: A critical review|journal=Vaccine|volume=34|issue=38|year=2016|pages=4484–4500|doi=10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.07.026|pmid=27475472}}</ref> Most chiropractic writings on vaccination focus on its negative aspects,<ref name=Busse /> claiming that it is hazardous, ineffective, and unnecessary.<ref name=Campbell /> Some chiropractors have embraced vaccination, but a significant portion of the profession rejects it, as original chiropractic philosophy traces diseases to causes in the spine and states that vaccines interfere with healing.<ref name=Campbell /> The extent to which anti-vaccination views perpetuate the current chiropractic profession is uncertain.<ref name=Busse /> The American Chiropractic Association and the International Chiropractors Association support individual exemptions to compulsory vaccination laws, and a 1995 survey of U.S. chiropractors found that about a third believed there was no scientific proof that immunization prevents disease.<ref name=Campbell/> The Canadian Chiropractic Association supports vaccination;<ref name=Busse/> a survey in Alberta in 2002 found that 25% of chiropractors advised patients for, and 27% against, vaccinating themselves or their children.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal |vauthors=Russell ML, Injeyan HS, Verhoef MJ, Eliasziw M | title = Beliefs and behaviours: understanding chiropractors and immunization | journal = Vaccine| volume = 23 | issue = 3 | pages = 372–379 | year = 2004 | pmid = 15530683 | doi = 10.1016/j.vaccine.2004.05.027 }}</ref>


Early opposition to water fluoridation included chiropractors, some of whom continue to oppose it as being incompatible with chiropractic philosophy and an infringement of personal freedom. Other chiropractors have actively promoted fluoridation, and several chiropractic organizations have endorsed scientific principles of public health.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Jones RB, Mormann DN, Durtsche TB | title = Fluoridation referendum in La Crosse, Wisconsin: contributing factors to success | journal = American Journal of Public Health| volume = 79 | issue = 10 | pages = 1405–1408 | year = 1989 | pmid = 2782512 | pmc = 1350185 | doi = 10.2105/AJPH.79.10.1405 }}</ref> In addition to traditional chiropractic opposition to water fluoridation and vaccination, chiropractors' attempts to establish a positive reputation for their public health role are also compromised by their reputation for recommending repetitive lifelong chiropractic treatment.<ref name=Murphy-pod />
I think that Steth has made a good case that the warning from Canadian neurosurgeons is not really a reliable source for strong evidence, though it would be nice to be able to see the transcripts to check the full context.] 08:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


== Controversy ==
Sure is a bias Steth and it's called science. You have yet to show me a single large RCT that supports your belief. Your snide comments about being banned apply to yourself when you were blocked by the same trigger happy admin. And no I do not agree the case has been made for deleting the canadian material. We need to see the whole transcript and even then that leaves 91 other signatories does it not. ] 09:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
{{main|Chiropractic controversy and criticism}}
Throughout its history chiropractic has been the subject of internal and external controversy and criticism.<ref name=Kaptchuk-Eisenberg /><ref name=Jaroff>{{cite magazine|last=Jaroff|first=Leon|title=Back Off, Chiropractors!|url=http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,213482,00.html|date=27 February 2002|magazine=]|access-date=7 June 2009}}</ref> According to ], the founder of chiropractic, ] is the sole cause of disease and manipulation is the cure for all diseases of the human race.<ref name=Ernst-eval/><ref name=ChiropractorsAdjuster1910>{{cite book|vauthors= Palmer DD|title= The Chiropractor's Adjuster: Text-book of the Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic for Students and Practitioners|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/45233534/s-Adjuster-1910|location=Portland, Oregon|publisher= Portland Printing House Co|year=1910|oclc=17205743|quote=A subluxated vertebra&nbsp;... is the cause of 95 percent of all diseases&nbsp;... The other five percent is caused by displaced joints other than those of the vertebral column.}}</ref> A 2003 profession-wide survey<ref name=McDonald /> found "most chiropractors (whether 'straights' or 'mixers') still hold views of innate intelligence and of the cause and cure of disease (not just back pain) consistent with those of the Palmers."<ref name=Brown2014>{{cite news|first=Candy|last=Gunther Brown |title=Chiropractic: Is it Nature, Medicine or Religion?|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/candy-gunther-brown-phd/chiropractic-is-it-nature_b_5559654.html|work=]|date=July 7, 2014}}</ref> A critical evaluation stated "Chiropractic is rooted in mystical concepts. This led to an internal conflict within the chiropractic profession, which continues today."<ref name=Ernst-eval /> Chiropractors, including D. D. Palmer, were jailed for ].<ref name=Ernst-eval /> For most of its existence, chiropractic has battled with ], sustained by antiscientific and pseudoscientific ideas such as subluxation.<ref name=History-Primer /> Collectively, systematic reviews have not demonstrated that spinal manipulation, the main treatment method employed by chiropractors, is ] for any medical condition, with the possible exception of treatment for ].<ref name=Ernst-eval /> Chiropractic remains controversial, though to a lesser extent than in past years.<ref name=DeVocht/>


==See also==
Let's keep cool here. As far as I can see, the SPONTADS study is ongoing ad hasn't reported properly yet, until it does the jury is out. Norris and others may have jumped the gun with early data, and it seems that they might not have taken account of referral bias which might have exaggerated the effect of chiropractic. A group of 62 (not 92) Canadian neurosurgeons signed up to the warning, but the case they make is based on a few isolated case reports, and doesn't amount to compelling evidence, and I haven't heard widespread concern from other quarters like the AMA. The citation to this statement was from a strongly opinionated website. If this is the evidence for lack of safety of chiropractic, then it's not strong in my view. If it is unsafe, let's see the authoratative secondary sources in peer-reviewed reputable journals.] 12:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
{{Portal|Medicine}}
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]


== References ==
:Well, I am sure Mcready that you can find the transcripts and read them for yourself. I have given you the references. Then after reading them, I guess you won't hate chiropractic anymore and will post neutral information, right? ] 02:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
{{Reflist}}


== Further reading ==
I'm reverting to Steth's version; it seems to me that the EBM side is covered in detail later, and the statement from Canadian neurologists is not sufficiently authoritative evidence to put up front, and it's reasonable to hold it back, at least pending discussion. There are separate sections on safety and scientific validity, and no need for overkill. ] 11:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
* {{cite book |editor=Barrett S |editor-link=Stephen Barrett |author=Long PH |title=Chiropractic Abuse: An Insider's Lament |publisher=American Council on Science & Health |year=2013 |isbn=978-0-9727094-9-1}}
* {{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience |volume=1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Gr4snwg7iaEC&pg=PA308 |publisher=ABC-CLIO |isbn=978-1-57607-653-8 |pages=308– |author=Homola S |title=Chiropractic: Conventional or Alternative Healing? |year=2002 |editor=Shermer M}}
* {{cite journal | author = Menke JM | title = Do Manual Therapies Help Low Back Pain?: A Comparative Effectiveness Meta-Analysis | journal = Spine| volume = 39| issue = 7| date = January 2014 | pmid = 24480940 | doi = 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000230 | type = Meta-analysis | pages=E463–72| s2cid = 25497624 }}


== Gleng and Steth reverts == == External links ==
{{sisterlinks|d=Q658096|c=Category:Chiropractic|n=no|b=no|v=no|voy=no|s=1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Chiropractic |m=no|mw=no|species=no}}
{{Prone to spam|date=June 2012}}
<!-- {{No more links}}


Please be cautious adding more external links.
Gleng said before that Steth should provided evidence, other than on a chiro page, that Norris has retracted. Steth has not done so. His claim to have done so points to a chiro page. I have redited having considered carefully the edits since my last edit - for example, Steth's removal of the note on NCAM. The systematic attempt to remove EBM is deplorable. Please discuss why EBM should be deleted. Please also discuss the deletion of Lon Morgon's summary - it is in the religion section and therefore apposite. ] 04:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


Misplaced Pages is not a collection of links and should not be used for advertising.
1) I would resist any attempt to remove EBM - but this is extensively covered later in the article and just doesn't need to be in the lead. In the lead it is simply a judgemental statement; later it is backed by fact.
2) On the safely issue, I have looked at inquest reports, and looked for outcomes of the Canadian work. It certainly seems likely that Norris said nothing at the inquest that was taken as evidence that chiropractic was unsafe - at least nothing mentioned in the summing up. It seems to me now that yes, clearly many neurosurgeons are concerned about possible health risks - but also many do not think that there are serious health risks, and work with chiroprracters; so where is the evidence - let's cite that; find a peer-reviewed analysis of health risks, not a press statement that may have been rash. As far as I can see, the statement was triggered by early data that showed a high risk in patients who had been treated by chiropracters - but this may have been misleading because early recruitment to the study was biased by preferential recruitment of such cases to the study cohort (referral bias). I'm not saying suppress the facts, I am saying let's get unarguable facts.
3) Lon Morgan and religion. I don't know enough here to comment. Is this really germane to chiropractic? Perhaps the historical origins are mystical and fraudulent (and I'm not saying that they are), but the same might be argued for much of modern medical practice, and the sins of the fathers etc. History is interesting and relevant, but needs to be handled carefully to avoid guilt by association. ] 08:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


Excessive or inappropriate links will be removed.


See ] and ] for details.
Science belongs in the lead because it's in the article. That's wikipedia policy -see ]. "The lead should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it could stand on its own as a concise version of the article." Show me neurosurgeons who work with chiropracters - sounds like propaganda to me. Happy to move it to history section if you can show neurosurgeons don't still have such concerns. I can't see how you can rewrite history to exculpate fraud and guilt if it's already present. ] 11:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


If there are already suitable links, propose additions or replacements on
From the AMA, ]
the article's talk page, or submit your link to the relevant category at
"Manipulation has been shown to have a reasonably good degree of efficacy in ameliorating back pain, headache, and similar musculoskeletal complaints"
the Open Directory Project (dmoz.org) and link there using {{Dmoz}}.
and "In a national survey of referral patterns by board-certified family physicians and internists ... 47% said they would refer for chiropractic"
I haven't found a direct and serious health warning from the AMA. I'm open on this, I just don't see hard evidence of health risks. Where is the evidence? Studies, not opinions. OK on the lead. As for history - no I just don't go along with this at all. Mendel's data were fraudulent, this doesn't taint modern genetics.] 12:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


-->
== Today's Reverts (29 March 2006) ==
* ] -


{{Chiropractic|state=expanded}}
''(Originally posted by ] to ].)''
{{Pseudoscience}}


{{Authority control}}
{{3RR2}} ''']]]''' 00:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


]
:Thank you for the warning. I was aware. ] 00:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
]
:
]
:I should add... You stated in your edit summary for the revert: "rv. 3RR coming into play next time - mccready attempted dispute resolution/compromise on the talk page, but you choose to ignore it and continue edit warring.)" I understand you've just familiarised yourself with this article , but it's important to note that there is no compromising on ] and ]. An "edit war," in my mind, requires that I might take a position on the "edits" that are being disputed... I don't. I take issue with those edits being added without being reliably and verifiably sourced. Certainly ] has added his thoughts to the ] page, but nobody, to date, has found reason for adding content to the article that cannot be verified. These statements are important to the subject of the article, but Misplaced Pages requires the statements be verifiable and reliable. So far, you, nor ], nor anybody else (for that matter), have offered a source for the statements you're trying to add into the article. I have searched, and cannot find any to support the statements myself. That means the edits need to come out of the article until someone (preferably whoever added the statements) can source it. ] 00:26, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
]

Latest revision as of 18:54, 9 December 2024

Form of pseudoscientific alternative medicine

Chiropractic
Alternative medicine
Chiropractor performing adjustmentA chiropractor performing a vertebral adjustment
ClaimsVertebral subluxation, spinal adjustment, Innate Intelligence
RisksVertebral artery dissection (stroke), compression fracture, death
Related fieldsOsteopathy, vitalism
Original proponentsD. D. Palmer
Subsequent proponentsB. J. Palmer
MeSHD002684
Part of a series on
Alternative medicine
General information
Fringe medicine and science
Controversies
Classifications
Traditional medicine
Alternative diagnoses

Chiropractic (/ˌkaɪroʊˈpræktɪk/) is a form of alternative medicine concerned with the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system, especially of the spine. It is based on several pseudoscientific ideas.

Many chiropractors (often known informally as chiros), especially those in the field's early history, have proposed that mechanical disorders of the joints, especially of the spine, affect general health, and that regular manipulation of the spine (spinal adjustment) improves general health. The main chiropractic treatment technique involves manual therapy, especially manipulation of the spine, other joints, and soft tissues, but may also include exercises and health and lifestyle counseling. A chiropractor may have a Doctor of Chiropractic (D.C.) degree and be referred to as "doctor" but is not a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) or a Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.). While many chiropractors view themselves as primary care providers, chiropractic clinical training does not meet the requirements for that designation.

Systematic reviews of controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have found no evidence that chiropractic manipulation is effective, with the possible exception of treatment for back pain. A 2011 critical evaluation of 45 systematic reviews concluded that the data included in the study "fail to demonstrate convincingly that spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for any condition." Spinal manipulation may be cost-effective for sub-acute or chronic low back pain, but the results for acute low back pain were insufficient. No compelling evidence exists to indicate that maintenance chiropractic care adequately prevents symptoms or diseases.

There is not sufficient data to establish the safety of chiropractic manipulations. It is frequently associated with mild to moderate adverse effects, with serious or fatal complications in rare cases. There is controversy regarding the degree of risk of vertebral artery dissection, which can lead to stroke and death, from cervical manipulation. Several deaths have been associated with this technique and it has been suggested that the relationship is causative, a claim which is disputed by many chiropractors.

Chiropractic is well established in the United States, Canada, and Australia. It overlaps with other manual-therapy professions such as osteopathy and physical therapy. Most who seek chiropractic care do so for low back pain. Back and neck pain are considered the specialties of chiropractic, but many chiropractors treat ailments other than musculoskeletal issues. Chiropractic has two main groups: "straights", now the minority, emphasize vitalism, "Innate Intelligence", and consider vertebral subluxations to be the cause of all disease; and "mixers", the majority, are more open to mainstream views and conventional medical techniques, such as exercise, massage, and ice therapy.

D. D. Palmer founded chiropractic in the 1890s, claiming that he had received it from "the other world". Palmer maintained that the tenets of chiropractic were passed along to him by a doctor who had died 50 years previously. His son B. J. Palmer helped to expand chiropractic in the early 20th century. Throughout its history, chiropractic has been controversial. Its foundation is at odds with evidence-based medicine, and is underpinned by pseudoscientific ideas such as vertebral subluxation and Innate Intelligence. Despite the overwhelming evidence that vaccination is an effective public health intervention, there are significant disagreements among chiropractors over the subject, which has led to negative impacts on both public vaccination and mainstream acceptance of chiropractic. The American Medical Association called chiropractic an "unscientific cult" in 1966 and boycotted it until losing an antitrust case in 1987. Chiropractic has had a strong political base and sustained demand for services. In the last decades of the twentieth century, it gained more legitimacy and greater acceptance among conventional physicians and health plans in the United States. During the COVID-19 pandemic, chiropractic professional associations advised chiropractors to adhere to CDC, WHO, and local health department guidance. Despite these recommendations, a small but vocal and influential number of chiropractors spread vaccine misinformation.

Conceptual basis

Philosophy

Chiropractic is generally categorized as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), which focuses on manipulation of the musculoskeletal system, especially the spine. Its founder, D. D. Palmer, called it "a science of healing without drugs".

Chiropractic's origins lie in the folk medicine of bonesetting, and as it evolved it incorporated vitalism, spiritual inspiration and rationalism. Its early philosophy was based on deduction from irrefutable doctrine, which helped distinguish chiropractic from medicine, provided it with legal and political defenses against claims of practicing medicine without a license, and allowed chiropractors to establish themselves as an autonomous profession. This "straight" philosophy, taught to generations of chiropractors, rejects the inferential reasoning of the scientific method, and relies on deductions from vitalistic first principles rather than on the materialism of science. However, most practitioners tend to incorporate scientific research into chiropractic, and most practitioners are "mixers" who attempt to combine the materialistic reductionism of science with the metaphysics of their predecessors and with the holistic paradigm of wellness. A 2008 commentary proposed that chiropractic actively divorce itself from the straight philosophy as part of a campaign to eliminate untestable dogma and engage in critical thinking and evidence-based research.

Two chiropractic belief system constructs
The testable principle The untestable metaphor
Chiropractic adjustment

Restoration of structural integrity

Improvement of health status

Universal intelligence

Innate intelligence

Body physiology

Materialistic: Vitalistic:
  • Operational definitions possible
  • Lends itself to scientific inquiry
  • Origin of holism in chiropractic
  • Cannot be proven or disproven
Taken from Mootz & Phillips 1997

Although a wide diversity of ideas exist among chiropractors, they share the belief that the spine and health are related in a fundamental way, and that this relationship is mediated through the nervous system. Some chiropractors claim spinal manipulation can have an effect on a variety of ailments such as irritable bowel syndrome and asthma.

Chiropractic philosophy includes the following perspectives:

Holism assumes that health is affected by everything in an individual's environment; some sources also include a spiritual or existential dimension. In contrast, reductionism in chiropractic reduces causes and cures of health problems to a single factor, vertebral subluxation. Homeostasis emphasizes the body's inherent self-healing abilities. Chiropractic's early notion of innate intelligence can be thought of as a metaphor for homeostasis.

A large number of chiropractors fear that if they do not separate themselves from the traditional vitalistic concept of innate intelligence, chiropractic will continue to be seen as a fringe profession. A variant of chiropractic called naprapathy originated in Chicago in the early twentieth century. It holds that manual manipulation of soft tissue can reduce "interference" in the body and thus improve health.

Straights and mixers

Range of belief perspectives in chiropractic
Perspective attribute Potential belief endpoints
Scope of practice: narrow ("straight") ← → broad ("mixer")
Diagnostic approach: intuitive ← → analytical
Philosophic orientation: vitalistic ← → materialistic
Scientific orientation: descriptive ← → experimental
Process orientation: implicit ← → explicit
Practice attitude: doctor/model-centered ← → patient/situation-centered
Professional integration: separate and distinct ← → integrated into mainstream
Taken from Mootz & Phillips 1997

Straight chiropractors adhere to the philosophical principles set forth by D. D. and B. J. Palmer, and retain metaphysical definitions and vitalistic qualities. Straight chiropractors believe that vertebral subluxation leads to interference with an "innate intelligence" exerted via the human nervous system and is a primary underlying risk factor for many diseases. Straights view the medical diagnosis of patient complaints, which they consider to be the "secondary effects" of subluxations, to be unnecessary for chiropractic treatment. Thus, straight chiropractors are concerned primarily with the detection and correction of vertebral subluxation via adjustment and do not "mix" other types of therapies into their practice style. Their philosophy and explanations are metaphysical in nature and they prefer to use traditional chiropractic lexicon terminology such as "perform spinal analysis", "detect subluxation", "correct with adjustment". They prefer to remain separate and distinct from mainstream health care. Although considered the minority group, "they have been able to transform their status as purists and heirs of the lineage into influence dramatically out of proportion to their numbers."

Mixer chiropractors "mix" diagnostic and treatment approaches from chiropractic, medical or osteopathic viewpoints and make up the majority of chiropractors. Unlike straight chiropractors, mixers believe subluxation is one of many causes of disease, and hence they tend to be open to mainstream medicine. Many of them incorporate mainstream medical diagnostics and employ conventional treatments including techniques of physical therapy such as exercise, stretching, massage, ice packs, electrical muscle stimulation, therapeutic ultrasound, and moist heat. Some mixers also use techniques from alternative medicine, including nutritional supplements, acupuncture, homeopathy, herbal remedies, and biofeedback.

Although mixers are the majority group, many of them retain belief in vertebral subluxation as shown in a 2003 survey of 1,100 North American chiropractors, which found that 88 percent wanted to retain the term "vertebral subluxation complex", and that when asked to estimate the percent of disorders of internal organs that subluxation significantly contributes to, the mean response was 62 percent. A 2008 survey of 6,000 American chiropractors demonstrated that most chiropractors seem to believe that a subluxation-based clinical approach may be of limited utility for addressing visceral disorders, and greatly favored non-subluxation-based clinical approaches for such conditions. The same survey showed that most chiropractors generally believed that the majority of their clinical approach for addressing musculoskeletal/biomechanical disorders such as back pain was based on subluxation. Chiropractors often offer conventional therapies such as physical therapy and lifestyle counseling, and it may for the lay person be difficult to distinguish the unscientific from the scientific.

Vertebral subluxation

Main article: Vertebral subluxation Not to be confused with subluxation, the medical condition.

In science-based medicine, the term "subluxation" refers to an incomplete or partial dislocation of a joint, from the Latin luxare for 'dislocate'. While medical doctors use the term exclusively to refer to physical dislocations, Chiropractic founder D. D. Palmer imbued the word subluxation with a metaphysical and philosophical meaning drawn from pseudoscientific traditions such as Vitalism.

Palmer claimed that vertebral subluxations interfered with the body's function and its inborn ability to heal itself. D. D. Palmer repudiated his earlier theory that vertebral subluxations caused pinched nerves in the intervertebral spaces in favor of subluxations causing altered nerve vibration, either too tense or too slack, affecting the tone (health) of the end organ. He qualified this by noting that knowledge of innate intelligence was not essential to the competent practice of chiropractic. This concept was later expanded upon by his son, B. J. Palmer, and was instrumental in providing the legal basis of differentiating chiropractic from conventional medicine. In 1910, D. D. Palmer theorized that the nervous system controlled health:

Physiologists divide nerve-fibers, which form the nerves, into two classes, afferent and efferent. Impressions are made on the peripheral afferent fiber-endings; these create sensations that are transmitted to the center of the nervous system. Efferent nerve-fibers carry impulses out from the center to their endings. Most of these go to muscles and are therefore called motor impulses; some are secretory and enter glands; a portion are inhibitory, their function being to restrain secretion. Thus, nerves carry impulses outward and sensations inward. The activity of these nerves, or rather their fibers, may become excited or allayed by impingement, the result being a modification of functionality – too much or not enough action – which is disease.

Chiropractors use x-ray radiography to examine the bone structure of a patient.

Vertebral subluxation, a core concept of traditional chiropractic, remains unsubstantiated and largely untested, and a debate about whether to keep it in the chiropractic paradigm has been ongoing for decades. In general, critics of traditional subluxation-based chiropractic (including chiropractors) are skeptical of its clinical value, dogmatic beliefs and metaphysical approach. While straight chiropractic still retains the traditional vitalistic construct espoused by the founders, evidence-based chiropractic suggests that a mechanistic view will allow chiropractic care to become integrated into the wider health care community. This is still a continuing source of debate within the chiropractic profession as well, with some schools of chiropractic still teaching the traditional/straight subluxation-based chiropractic, while others have moved towards an evidence-based chiropractic that rejects metaphysical foundings and limits itself to primarily neuromusculoskeletal conditions.

In 2005, the chiropractic subluxation was defined by the World Health Organization as "a lesion or dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact. It is essentially a functional entity, which may influence biomechanical and neural integrity." This differs from the medical definition of subluxation as a significant structural displacement, which can be seen with static imaging techniques such as X-rays. The use of X-ray imaging in the case of vertebral subluxation exposes patients to harmful ionizing radiation for no evidentially supported reason. The 2008 book Trick or Treatment states "X-rays can reveal neither the subluxations nor the innate intelligence associated with chiropractic philosophy, because they do not exist." Attorney David Chapman-Smith, Secretary-General of the World Federation of Chiropractic, has stated that "Medical critics have asked how there can be a subluxation if it cannot be seen on X-ray. The answer is that the chiropractic subluxation is essentially a functional entity, not structural, and is therefore no more visible on static X-ray than a limp or headache or any other functional problem." The General Chiropractic Council, the statutory regulatory body for chiropractors in the United Kingdom, states that the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex "is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease."

As of 2014, the US National Board of Chiropractic Examiners states "The specific focus of chiropractic practice is known as the chiropractic subluxation or joint dysfunction. A subluxation is a health concern that manifests in the skeletal joints, and, through complex anatomical and physiological relationships, affects the nervous system and may lead to reduced function, disability or illness."

Pseudoscience versus spinal manipulation therapy

Main articles: Spinal adjustment and Spinal manipulation

While some chiropractors limit their practice to short-term treatment of musculoskeletal conditions, many falsely claim to be able treat a myriad of other conditions. Some dissuade patients from seeking medical care, others have pretended to be qualified to act as a family doctor.

Quackwatch, an alternative medicine watchdog, cautions against seeing chiropractors who:

  • Treat young children
  • Discourage immunization
  • Pretend to be a family doctor
  • Take full spine X-rays
  • Promote unproven dietary supplements
  • Are antagonistic to scientific medicine
  • Claim to treat non-musculoskeletal problems

Writing for the Skeptical Inquirer, one physician cautioned against seeing even chiropractors who solely claim to treat musculoskeletal conditions:

I think Spinal Manipulation Therapy (SMT) is a reasonable option for patients to try ... But I could not in good conscience refer a patient to a chiropractor... When chiropractic is effective, what is effective is not 'chiropractic': it is SMT. SMT is also offered by physical therapists, DOs, and others. These are science-based providers ... If I thought a patient might benefit from manipulation, I would rather refer him or her to a science-based provider.

Scope of practice

A treatment table at a chiropractic office

Chiropractors emphasize the conservative management of the neuromusculoskeletal system without the use of medicines or surgery, with special emphasis on the spine. Back and neck pain are the specialties of chiropractic but many chiropractors treat ailments other than musculoskeletal issues. There is a range of opinions among chiropractors: some believed that treatment should be confined to the spine, or back and neck pain; others disagreed. For example, while one 2009 survey of American chiropractors had found that 73% classified themselves as "back pain/musculoskeletal specialists", the label "back and neck pain specialists" was regarded by 47% of them as a least desirable description in a 2005 international survey. Chiropractic combines aspects from mainstream and alternative medicine, and there is no agreement about how to define the profession: although chiropractors have many attributes of primary care providers, chiropractic has more attributes of a medical specialty like dentistry or podiatry. It has been proposed that chiropractors specialize in nonsurgical spine care, instead of attempting to also treat other problems, but the more expansive view of chiropractic is still widespread.

Mainstream health care and governmental organizations such as the World Health Organization consider chiropractic to be complementary and alternative medicine (CAM); and a 2008 study reported that 31% of surveyed chiropractors categorized chiropractic as CAM, 27% as integrated medicine, and 12% as mainstream medicine. Many chiropractors believe they are primary care providers, including US and UK chiropractors, but the length, breadth, and depth of chiropractic clinical training do not support the requirements to be considered primary care providers, so their role on primary care is limited and disputed.

Chiropractic overlaps with several other forms of manual therapy, including massage therapy, osteopathy, physical therapy, and sports medicine. Chiropractic is autonomous from and competitive with mainstream medicine, and osteopathy outside the US remains primarily a manual medical system; physical therapists work alongside and cooperate with mainstream medicine, and osteopathic medicine in the U.S. has merged with the medical profession. Practitioners may distinguish these competing approaches through claims that, compared to other therapists, chiropractors heavily emphasize spinal manipulation, tend to use firmer manipulative techniques, and promote maintenance care; that osteopaths use a wider variety of treatment procedures; and that physical therapists emphasize machinery and exercise.

Chiropractic diagnosis may involve a range of methods including skeletal imaging, observational and tactile assessments, and orthopedic and neurological evaluation. A chiropractor may also refer a patient to an appropriate specialist, or co-manage with another health care provider. Common patient management involves spinal manipulation (SM) and other manual therapies to the joints and soft tissues, rehabilitative exercises, health promotion, electrical modalities, complementary procedures, and lifestyle advice.

A chiropractic adjustment of a horse

Chiropractors are not normally licensed to write medical prescriptions or perform major surgery in the United States (although New Mexico has become the first US state to allow "advanced practice" trained chiropractors to prescribe certain medications). In the US, their scope of practice varies by state, based on inconsistent views of chiropractic care: some states, such as Iowa, broadly allow treatment of "human ailments"; some, such as Delaware, use vague concepts such as "transition of nerve energy" to define scope of practice; others, such as New Jersey, specify a severely narrowed scope. US states also differ over whether chiropractors may conduct laboratory tests or diagnostic procedures, dispense dietary supplements, or use other therapies such as homeopathy and acupuncture; in Oregon they can become certified to perform minor surgery and to deliver children via natural childbirth. A 2003 survey of North American chiropractors found that a slight majority favored allowing them to write prescriptions for over-the-counter drugs. A 2010 survey found that 72% of Swiss chiropractors considered their ability to prescribe nonprescription medication as an advantage for chiropractic treatment.

A related field, veterinary chiropractic, applies manual therapies to animals and is recognized in many US states, but is not recognized by the American Chiropractic Association as being chiropractic. It remains controversial within certain segments of the veterinary and chiropractic professions.

No single profession "owns" spinal manipulation and there is little consensus as to which profession should administer SM, raising concerns by chiropractors that other medical physicians could "steal" SM procedures from chiropractors. A focus on evidence-based SM research has also raised concerns that the resulting practice guidelines could limit the scope of chiropractic practice to treating backs and necks. Two US states (Washington and Arkansas) prohibit physical therapists from performing SM, some states allow them to do it only if they have completed advanced training in SM, and some states allow only chiropractors to perform SM, or only chiropractors and physicians. Bills to further prohibit non-chiropractors from performing SM are regularly introduced into state legislatures and are opposed by physical therapist organizations.

Treatments

Main articles: Chiropractic treatment techniques and Spinal adjustment
A chiropractor performs an adjustment on a patient.

Spinal manipulation, which chiropractors call "spinal adjustment" or "chiropractic adjustment", is the most common treatment used in chiropractic care. Spinal manipulation is a passive manual maneuver during which a three-joint complex is taken past the normal range of movement, but not so far as to dislocate or damage the joint. Its defining factor is a dynamic thrust, which is a sudden force that causes an audible release and attempts to increase a joint's range of motion. High-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation (HVLA-SM) thrusts have physiological effects that signal neural discharge from paraspinal muscle tissues, depending on duration and amplitude of the thrust are factors of the degree in paraspinal muscle spindles activation. Clinical skill in employing HVLA-SM thrusts depends on the ability of the practitioner to handle the duration and magnitude of the load. More generally, spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) describes techniques where the hands are used to manipulate, massage, mobilize, adjust, stimulate, apply traction to, or otherwise influence the spine and related tissues.

There are several schools of chiropractic adjustive techniques, although most chiropractors mix techniques from several schools. The following adjustive procedures were received by more than 10% of patients of licensed US chiropractors in a 2003 survey: Diversified technique (full-spine manipulation, employing various techniques), extremity adjusting, Activator technique (which uses a spring-loaded tool to deliver precise adjustments to the spine), Thompson Technique (which relies on a drop table and detailed procedural protocols), Gonstead (which emphasizes evaluating the spine along with specific adjustment that avoids rotational vectors), Cox/flexion-distraction (a gentle, low-force adjusting procedure which mixes chiropractic with osteopathic principles and utilizes specialized adjusting tables with movable parts), adjustive instrument, Sacro-Occipital Technique (which models the spine as a torsion bar), Nimmo Receptor-Tonus Technique, applied kinesiology (which emphasises "muscle testing" as a diagnostic tool), and cranial. Chiropractic biophysics technique uses inverse functions of rotations during spinal manipulation. Koren Specific Technique (KST) may use their hands, or they may use an electric device known as an "ArthroStim" for assessment and spinal manipulations. Insurers in the US and UK that cover other chiropractic techniques exclude KST from coverage because they consider it to be "experimental and investigational". Medicine-assisted manipulation, such as manipulation under anesthesia, involves sedation or local anesthetic and is done by a team that includes an anesthesiologist; a 2008 systematic review did not find enough evidence to make recommendations about its use for chronic low back pain.

Lumbar, cervical and thoracic chiropractic spinal manipulation

Many other procedures are used by chiropractors for treating the spine, other joints and tissues, and general health issues. The following procedures were received by more than one-third of patients of licensed US chiropractors in a 2003 survey: Diversified technique (full-spine manipulation; mentioned in previous paragraph), physical fitness/exercise promotion, corrective or therapeutic exercise, ergonomic/postural advice, self-care strategies, activities of daily living, changing risky/unhealthy behaviors, nutritional/dietary recommendations, relaxation/stress reduction recommendations, ice pack/cryotherapy, extremity adjusting (also mentioned in previous paragraph), trigger point therapy, and disease prevention/early screening advice.

A 2010 study describing Belgian chiropractors and their patients found chiropractors in Belgium mostly focus on neuromusculoskeletal complaints in adult patients, with emphasis on the spine. The diversified technique is the most often applied technique at 93%, followed by the Activator mechanical-assisted technique at 41%. A 2009 study assessing chiropractic students giving or receiving spinal manipulations while attending a United States chiropractic college found Diversified, Gonstead, and upper cervical manipulations are frequently used methods.

Practice guidelines

Reviews of research studies within the chiropractic community have been used to generate practice guidelines outlining standards that specify which chiropractic treatments are legitimate (i.e. supported by evidence) and conceivably reimbursable under managed care health payment systems. Evidence-based guidelines are supported by one end of an ideological continuum among chiropractors; the other end employs antiscientific reasoning and makes unsubstantiated claims. Chiropractic remains at a crossroads, and that in order to progress it would need to embrace science; the promotion by some for it to be a cure-all was both "misguided and irrational". A 2007 survey of Alberta chiropractors found that they do not consistently apply research in practice, which may have resulted from a lack of research education and skills. Specific guidelines concerning the treatment of nonspecific (i.e., unknown cause) low back pain are inconsistent between countries.

Effectiveness

Numerous controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have been conducted, with varied results. There is no conclusive evidence that chiropractic manipulative treatment is effective for the treatment of any medical condition, except perhaps for certain kinds of back pain.

Generally, the research carried out into the effectiveness of chiropractic has been of poor quality. Research published by chiropractors is distinctly biased: reviews of SM for back pain tended to find positive conclusions when authored by chiropractors, while reviews by mainstream authors did not.

There is a wide range of ways to measure treatment outcomes. Chiropractic care benefits from the placebo response, but it is difficult to construct a trustworthy placebo for clinical trials of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT). The efficacy of maintenance care in chiropractic is unknown.

Available evidence covers the following conditions:

  • Low back pain. A 2013 Cochrane review found very low to moderate evidence that SMT was no more effective than inert interventions, sham SMT or as an adjunct therapy for acute low back pain. The same review found that SMT appears to be no better than other recommended therapies. A 2012 overview of systematic reviews found that collectively, SM failed to show it is an effective intervention for pain. A 2011 Cochrane review found strong evidence that suggests there is no clinically meaningful difference between SMT and other treatments for reducing pain and improving function for chronic low back pain. A 2010 Cochrane review found no difference between the effects of combined chiropractic treatments and other treatments for chronic or mixed duration low back pain. A 2010 systematic review found that most studies suggest SMT achieves equivalent or superior improvement in pain and function when compared with other commonly used interventions for short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up.
  • Radiculopathy. A 2013 systematic review and meta-analysis found a statistically significant improvement in overall recovery from sciatica following SM, when compared to usual care, and suggested that SM may be considered. There is moderate quality evidence to support the use of SM for the treatment of acute lumbar radiculopathy and acute lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy. There is low or very low evidence supporting SM for chronic lumbar spine-related extremity symptoms and cervical spine-related extremity symptoms of any duration and no evidence exists for the treatment of thoracic radiculopathy.
  • Whiplash and other neck pain. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of manual therapies for neck pain. A 2013 systematic review found that the data suggests that there are minimal short- and long-term treatment differences when comparing manipulation or mobilization of the cervical spine to physical therapy or exercise for neck pain improvement. A 2013 systematic review found that although there is insufficient evidence that thoracic SM is more effective than other treatments, it is a suitable intervention to treat some patients with non-specific neck pain. A 2011 systematic review found that thoracic SM may offer short-term improvement for the treatment of acute or subacute mechanical neck pain; although the body of literature is still weak. A 2010 Cochrane review found low quality evidence that suggests cervical manipulation may offer better short-term pain relief than a control for neck pain, and moderate evidence that cervical manipulation and mobilization produced similar effects on pain, function and patient satisfaction. A 2010 systematic review found low level evidence that suggests chiropractic care improves cervical range of motion and pain in the management of whiplash.
  • Headache. There is conflicting evidence surrounding the use of chiropractic SMT for the treatment and prevention of migraine headaches. A 2006 review found no rigorous evidence supporting SM or other manual therapies for tension headache. A 2005 review found that the evidence was weak for effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation for tension headache, and that it was probably more effective for tension headache than for migraine.
  • Extremity conditions. A 2011 systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that the addition of manual mobilizations to an exercise program for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis resulted in better pain relief than a supervised exercise program alone and suggested that manual therapists consider adding manual mobilization to optimize supervised active exercise programs. There is silver level evidence that manual therapy is more effective than exercise for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis, however this evidence could be considered to be inconclusive. There is a small amount of research into the efficacy of chiropractic treatment for upper limbs, limited to low level evidence supporting chiropractic management of shoulder pain and limited or fair evidence supporting chiropractic management of leg conditions.
  • Other. A 2012 systematic review found insufficient low bias evidence to support the use of spinal manipulation as a therapy for the treatment of hypertension. A 2011 systematic review found moderate evidence to support the use of manual therapy for cervicogenic dizziness. There is very weak evidence for chiropractic care for adult scoliosis (curved or rotated spine) and no scientific data for idiopathic adolescent scoliosis. A 2007 systematic review found that few studies of chiropractic care for nonmusculoskeletal conditions are available, and they are typically not of high quality; it also found that the entire clinical encounter of chiropractic care (as opposed to just SM) provides benefit to patients with cervicogenic dizziness, and that the evidence from reviews is negative, or too weak to draw conclusions, for a wide variety of other nonmusculoskeletal conditions, including ADHD/learning disabilities, dizziness, high blood pressure, and vision conditions. Other reviews have found no evidence of significant benefit for asthma, baby colic, bedwetting, carpal tunnel syndrome, fibromyalgia, gastrointestinal disorders, kinetic imbalance due to suboccipital strain (KISS) in infants, menstrual cramps, insomnia, postmenopausal symptoms, or pelvic and back pain during pregnancy. As there is no evidence of effectiveness or safety for cervical manipulation for baby colic, it is not endorsed.

Safety

Chiropractic adjustment on children

The World Health Organization found chiropractic care in general is safe when employed skillfully and appropriately. There is not sufficient data to establish the safety of chiropractic manipulations. Manipulation is regarded as relatively safe but complications can arise, and it has known adverse effects, risks and contraindications. Absolute contraindications to spinal manipulative therapy are conditions that should not be manipulated; these contraindications include rheumatoid arthritis and conditions known to result in unstable joints. Relative contraindications are conditions where increased risk is acceptable in some situations and where low-force and soft-tissue techniques are treatments of choice; these contraindications include osteoporosis. Although most contraindications apply only to manipulation of the affected region, some neurological signs indicate referral to emergency medical services; these include sudden and severe headache or neck pain unlike that previously experienced. Indirect risks of chiropractic involve delayed or missed diagnoses through consulting a chiropractor.

Spinal manipulation is associated with frequent, mild and temporary adverse effects, including new or worsening pain or stiffness in the affected region. They have been estimated to occur in 33% to 61% of patients, and frequently occur within an hour of treatment and disappear within 24 to 48 hours; adverse reactions appear to be more common following manipulation than mobilization. The most frequently stated adverse effects are mild headache, soreness, and briefly elevated pain fatigue. Chiropractic is correlated with a very high incidence of minor adverse effects. Rarely, spinal manipulation, particularly on the upper spine, can also result in complications that can lead to permanent disability or death; these can occur in adults and children. Estimates vary widely for the incidence of these complications, and the actual incidence is unknown, due to high levels of underreporting and to the difficulty of linking manipulation to adverse effects such as stroke, which is a particular concern. Adverse effects are poorly reported in recent studies investigating chiropractic manipulations. A 2016 systematic review concludes that the level of reporting is unsuitable and unacceptable. Reports of serious adverse events have occurred, resulting from spinal manipulation therapy of the lumbopelvic region. Estimates for serious adverse events vary from 5 strokes per 100,000 manipulations to 1.46 serious adverse events per 10 million manipulations and 2.68 deaths per 10 million manipulations, though it was determined that there was inadequate data to be conclusive. Several case reports show temporal associations between interventions and potentially serious complications. The published medical literature contains reports of 26 deaths since 1934 following chiropractic manipulations and many more seem to remain unpublished.

Vertebrobasilar artery stroke (VAS) is statistically associated with chiropractic services in persons under 45 years of age, but it is similarly associated with general practitioner services, suggesting that these associations are likely explained by preexisting conditions. Weak to moderately strong evidence supports causation (as opposed to statistical association) between cervical manipulative therapy (CMT) and VAS. There is insufficient evidence to support a strong association or no association between cervical manipulation and stroke. While the biomechanical evidence is not sufficient to support the statement that CMT causes cervical artery dissection (CD), clinical reports suggest that mechanical forces have a part in a substantial number of CDs and the majority of population controlled studies found an association between CMT and VAS in young people. It is strongly recommended that practitioners consider the plausibility of CD as a symptom, and people can be informed of the association between CD and CMT before administering manipulation of the cervical spine. There is controversy regarding the degree of risk of stroke from cervical manipulation. Many chiropractors state that, the association between chiropractic therapy and vertebral arterial dissection is not proven. However, it has been suggested that the causality between chiropractic cervical manipulation beyond the normal range of motion and vascular accidents is probable or definite. There is very low evidence supporting a small association between internal carotid artery dissection and chiropractic neck manipulation. The incidence of internal carotid artery dissection following cervical spine manipulation is unknown. The literature infrequently reports helpful data to better understand the association between cervical manipulative therapy, cervical artery dissection and stroke. The limited evidence is inconclusive that chiropractic spinal manipulation therapy is not a cause of intracranial hypotension. Cervical intradural disc herniation is very rare following spinal manipulation therapy.

Chiropractors sometimes employ diagnostic imaging techniques such as X-rays and CT scans that rely on ionizing radiation. Although there is no clear evidence to justify the practice, some chiropractors still X-ray a patient several times a year. Practice guidelines aim to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure, which increases cancer risk in proportion to the amount of radiation received. Research suggests that radiology instruction given at chiropractic schools worldwide seem to be evidence-based. Although, there seems to be a disparity between some schools and available evidence regarding the aspect of radiography for patients with acute low back pain without an indication of a serious disease, which may contribute to chiropractic overuse of radiography for low back pain.

Risk-benefit

A 2012 systematic review concluded that no accurate assessment of risk-benefit exists for cervical manipulation. A 2010 systematic review stated that there is no good evidence to assume that neck manipulation is an effective treatment for any medical condition and suggested a precautionary principle in healthcare for chiropractic intervention even if a causality with vertebral artery dissection after neck manipulation were merely a remote possibility. The same review concluded that the risk of death from manipulations to the neck outweighs the benefits. Chiropractors have criticized this conclusion, claiming that the author did not evaluate the potential benefits of spinal manipulation. Edzard Ernst stated "This detail was not the subject of my review. I do, however, refer to such evaluations and should add that a report recently commissioned by the General Chiropractic Council did not support many of the outlandish claims made by many chiropractors across the world." A 1999 review of 177 previously reported cases published between 1925 and 1997 in which injuries were attributed to manipulation of the cervical spine (MCS) concluded that "The literature does not demonstrate that the benefits of MCS outweigh the risks." The professions associated with each injury were assessed. Physical therapists (PT) were involved in less than 2% of all cases, with no deaths caused by PTs. Chiropractors were involved in a little more than 60% of all cases, including 32 deaths.

A 2009 review evaluating maintenance chiropractic care found that spinal manipulation is associated with considerable harm and no compelling evidence exists to indicate that it adequately prevents symptoms or diseases, thus the risk-benefit is not evidently favorable.

Cost-effectiveness

A 2012 systematic review suggested that the use of spine manipulation in clinical practice is a cost-effective treatment when used alone or in combination with other treatment approaches. A 2011 systematic review found evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of using spinal manipulation for the treatment of sub-acute or chronic low back pain; the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.

A 2006 systematic cost-effectiveness review found that the reported cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation in the United Kingdom compared favorably with other treatments for back pain, but that reports were based on data from clinical trials without placebo controls and that the specific cost-effectiveness of the treatment (as opposed to non-specific effects) remains uncertain. A 2005 American systematic review of economic evaluations of conservative treatments for low back pain found that significant quality problems in available studies meant that definite conclusions could not be drawn about the most cost-effective intervention. The cost-effectiveness of maintenance chiropractic care is unknown.

Analysis of a clinical and cost utilization data from the years 2003 to 2005 by an integrative medicine independent physician association (IPA) which looked the chiropractic services utilization found that the clinical and cost utilization of chiropractic services based on 70,274 member-months over a 7-year period decreased patient costs associate with the following use of services by 60% for in-hospital admissions, 59% for hospital days, 62% for outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% for pharmaceutical costs when compared with conventional medicine (visit to a medical doctor primary care provider) IPA performance for the same health maintenance organization product in the same geography and time frame.

Education, licensing, and regulation

Main articles: Chiropractic education and List of chiropractic schools

Requirements vary between countries. In the U.S. chiropractors obtain a non-medical accredited diploma in the field of chiropractic. Chiropractic education in the U.S. has been criticized for failing to meet generally accepted standards of evidence-based medicine. The curriculum content of North American chiropractic and medical colleges with regard to basic and clinical sciences has little similarity, both in the kinds of subjects offered and in the time assigned to each subject. Accredited chiropractic programs in the U.S. require that applicants have 90 semester hours of undergraduate education with a grade point average of at least 3.0 on a 4.0 scale. Many programs require at least three years of undergraduate education, and more are requiring a bachelor's degree. Canada requires a minimum three years of undergraduate education for applicants, and at least 4200 instructional hours (or the equivalent) of full-time chiropractic education for matriculation through an accredited chiropractic program. Graduates of the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) are formally recognized to have at least 7–8 years of university level education. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines suggest three major full-time educational paths culminating in either a DC, DCM, BSc, or MSc degree. Besides the full-time paths, they also suggest a conversion program for people with other health care education and limited training programs for regions where no legislation governs chiropractic.

Upon graduation, there may be a requirement to pass national, state, or provincial board examinations before being licensed to practice in a particular jurisdiction. Depending on the location, continuing education may be required to renew these licenses. Specialty training is available through part-time postgraduate education programs such as chiropractic orthopedics and sports chiropractic, and through full-time residency programs such as radiology or orthopedics.

In the U.S., chiropractic schools are accredited through the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE) while the General Chiropractic Council (GCC) is the statutory governmental body responsible for the regulation of chiropractic in the UK. The U.S. CCE requires a mixing curriculum, which means a straight-educated chiropractor may not be eligible for licensing in states requiring CCE accreditation. CCEs in the U.S., Canada, Australia and Europe have joined to form CCE-International (CCE-I) as a model of accreditation standards with the goal of having credentials portable internationally. Today, there are 18 accredited Doctor of Chiropractic programs in the U.S., 2 in Canada, 6 in Australasia, and 5 in Europe. All but one of the chiropractic colleges in the U.S. are privately funded, but in several other countries they are in government-sponsored universities and colleges. Of the two chiropractic colleges in Canada, one is publicly funded (UQTR) and one is privately funded (CMCC). In 2005, CMCC was granted the privilege of offering a professional health care degree under the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, which sets the program within the hierarchy of education in Canada as comparable to that of other primary contact health care professions such as medicine, dentistry and optometry.

Regulatory colleges and chiropractic boards in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, and Australia are responsible for protecting the public, standards of practice, disciplinary issues, quality assurance and maintenance of competency. There are an estimated 49,000 chiropractors in the U.S. (2008), 6,500 in Canada (2010), 2,500 in Australia (2000), and 1,500 in the UK (2000).

Chiropractors often argue that this education is as good as or better than medical physicians', but most chiropractic training is confined to classrooms with much time spent learning theory, adjustment, and marketing. The fourth year of chiropractic education persistently showed the highest stress levels. Every student, irrespective of year, experienced different ranges of stress when studying. The chiropractic leaders and colleges have had internal struggles. Rather than cooperation, there has been infighting between different factions. A number of actions were posturing due to the confidential nature of the chiropractic colleges in an attempt to enroll students.

In 2024, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported on the high debt burden of students who pursued degrees in alternative medicine. Ten different chiropractic programs were ranked among the 47 US graduate programs with highest debt to earnings ratios. Analyses by Quackwatch and the Sunlight Foundation found high rates of default on Health Education Assistance Loan (HEAL) student loans used for chiropractic programs. Among health professionals who were listed as in default on HEAL loans in 2012, 53% were chiropractors.

Ethics

Main article: Chiropractic professional ethics

The chiropractic oath is a modern variation of the classical Hippocratic Oath historically taken by physicians and other healthcare professionals swearing to practice their professions ethically. The American Chiropractic Association (ACA) has an ethical code "based upon the acknowledgement that the social contract dictates the profession's responsibilities to the patient, the public, and the profession; and upholds the fundamental principle that the paramount purpose of the chiropractic doctor's professional services shall be to benefit the patient." The International Chiropractor's Association (ICA) also has a set of professional canons.

A 2008 commentary proposed that the chiropractic profession actively regulate itself to combat abuse, fraud, and quackery, which are more prevalent in chiropractic than in other health care professions, violating the social contract between patients and physicians. According to a 2015 Gallup poll of U.S. adults, the perception of chiropractors is generally favorable; two-thirds of American adults agree that chiropractors have their patient's best interest in mind and more than half also agree that most chiropractors are trustworthy. Less than 10% of US adults disagreed with the statement that chiropractors were trustworthy.

The charity Sense about Science launched a campaign to draw attention to the BCA legal case against science writer Simon Singh. In 2009, a number of organizations and public figures signed a statement entitled "The law has no place in scientific disputes".

Chiropractors, especially in America, have a reputation for unnecessarily treating patients. In many circumstances the focus seems to be put on economics instead of health care. Sustained chiropractic care is promoted as a preventive tool, but unnecessary manipulation could possibly present a risk to patients. Some chiropractors are concerned by the routine unjustified claims chiropractors have made. A 2010 analysis of chiropractic websites found the majority of chiropractors and their associations made claims of effectiveness not supported by scientific evidence, while 28% of chiropractor websites advocate lower back pain care, which has some sound evidence.

The US Office of the Inspector General (OIG) estimated that for calendar year 2013, 82% of payments to chiropractors under Medicare Part B, a total of $359 million, did not comply with Medicare requirements. There have been at least 15 OIG reports about chiropractic billing irregularities since 1986.

In 2009, a backlash to the libel suit filed by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) against Simon Singh inspired the filing of formal complaints of false advertising against more than 500 individual chiropractors within one 24-hour period, prompting the McTimoney Chiropractic Association to write to its members advising them to remove leaflets that make claims about whiplash and colic from their practice, to be wary of new patients and telephone inquiries, and telling their members: "If you have a website, take it down NOW" and "Finally, we strongly suggest you do NOT discuss this with others, especially patients." An editorial in Nature suggested that the BCA may have been trying to suppress debate and that this use of English libel law was a burden on the right to freedom of expression, which is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. The libel case ended with the BCA withdrawing its suit in 2010.

Reception

Chiropractic is established in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, and is present to a lesser extent in many other countries. It is viewed as a marginal and non-clinically–proven attempt at complementary and alternative medicine, which has not integrated into mainstream medicine.

Australia

In Australia, there are approximately 2488 chiropractors, or one chiropractor for every 7980 people. Most private health insurance funds in Australia cover chiropractic care, and the federal government funds chiropractic care when the patient is referred by a medical practitioner. In 2014, the chiropractic profession had a registered workforce of 4,684 practitioners in Australia represented by two major organizations – the Chiropractors' Association of Australia (CAA) and the Chiropractic and Osteopathic College of Australasia (COCA). Annual expenditure on chiropractic care (alone or combined with osteopathy) in Australia is estimated to be between AUD$750–988 million with musculoskeletal complaints such as back and neck pain making up the bulk of consultations; and proportional expenditure is similar to that found in other countries. While Medicare (the Australian publicly funded universal health care system) coverage of chiropractic services is limited to only those directed by a medical referral to assist chronic disease management, most private health insurers in Australia do provide partial reimbursement for a wider range of chiropractic services in addition to limited third party payments for workers compensation and motor vehicle accidents.

Of the 2,005 chiropractors who participated in a 2015 survey, 62.4% were male and the average age was 42.1 (SD = 12.1) years. Nearly all chiropractors (97.1%) had a bachelor's degree or higher, with the majority of chiropractor's highest professional qualification being a bachelor or double bachelor's degree (34.6%), followed by a master's degree (32.7%), Doctor of Chiropractic (28.9%) or PhD (0.9%). Only a small number of chiropractor's highest professional qualification was a diploma (2.1%) or advanced diploma (0.8%).

Germany

In Germany, chiropractic may be offered by medical doctors and alternative practitioners. Chiropractors qualified abroad must obtain a German non-medical practitioner license. Authorities have routinely required a comprehensive knowledge test for this, but in the recent past, some administrative courts have ruled that training abroad should be recognised.

Switzerland

In Switzerland, only trained medical professionals are allowed to offer chiropractic. There are 300 chiropractors in Switzerland.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, there are over 2,000 chiropractors, representing one chiropractor per 29,206 people. Chiropractic is available on the National Health Service in some areas, such as Cornwall, where the treatment is only available for neck or back pain.

A 2010 study by questionnaire presented to UK chiropractors indicated only 45% of chiropractors disclosed to patients the serious risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine and that 46% believed there was possibility patients would refuse treatment if the risks were correctly explained. However 80% acknowledged the ethical/moral responsibility to disclose risk to patients.

United States and Canada

The percentage of the population that utilizes chiropractic care at any given time generally falls into a range from 6% to 12% in the U.S. and Canada, with a global high of 20% in Alberta in 2006. In 2008, chiropractors were reported to be the most common CAM providers for children and adolescents, these patients representing up to 14% of all visits to chiropractors.

There were around 50,330 chiropractors practicing in North America in 2000. In 2008, this has increased by almost 20% to around 60,000 chiropractors. In 2002–03, the majority of those who sought chiropractic did so for relief from back and neck pain and other neuromusculoskeletal complaints; most do so specifically for low back pain. The majority of U.S. chiropractors participate in some form of managed care. Although the majority of U.S. chiropractors view themselves as specialists in neuromusculoskeletal conditions, many also consider chiropractic as a type of primary care. In the majority of cases, the care that chiropractors and physicians provide divides the market, however for some, their care is complementary.

In the U.S., chiropractors perform over 90% of all manipulative treatments. Satisfaction rates are typically higher for chiropractic care compared to medical care, with a 1998 U.S. survey reporting 83% of respondents satisfied or very satisfied with their care; quality of communication seems to be a consistent predictor of patient satisfaction with chiropractors.

Utilization of chiropractic care is sensitive to the costs incurred by the co-payment by the patient. The use of chiropractic declined from 9.9% of U.S. adults in 1997 to 7.4% in 2002; this was the largest relative decrease among CAM professions, which overall had a stable use rate. As of 2007 7% of the U.S. population is being reached by chiropractic. They were the third largest medical profession in the US in 2002, following physicians and dentists. Employment of U.S. chiropractors was expected to increase 14% between 2006 and 2016, faster than the average for all occupations.

In the U.S., most states require insurers to cover chiropractic care, and most HMOs cover these services.

History

Main article: History of chiropractic
Daniel David (D. D.) Palmer, founder of chiropractic

Chiropractic's origins lie in the folk medicine practice of bonesetting, in which untrained practitioners engaged in joint manipulation or resetting fractured bones. Chiropractic was founded in 1895 by Daniel David (D. D.) Palmer in Davenport, Iowa. Palmer, a magnetic healer, hypothesized that manual manipulation of the spine could cure disease. The first chiropractic patient of D. D. Palmer was Harvey Lillard, a worker in the building where Palmer's office was located. He claimed that he had severely reduced hearing for 17 years, which started shortly following a "pop" in his spine. A few days following his adjustment, Lillard claimed his hearing was almost completely restored. Another of Palmer's patients, Samuel Weed, coined the term chiropractic, from Greek χειρο- chiro- 'hand' (itself from χείρ cheir 'hand') and πρακτικός praktikos 'practical'. Chiropractic is classified as a field of pseudomedicine.

Chiropractic competed with its predecessor osteopathy, another medical system based on magnetic healing; both systems were founded by charismatic midwesterners in opposition to the conventional medicine of the day, and both postulated that manipulation improved health. Although initially keeping chiropractic a family secret, in 1898 Palmer began teaching it to a few students at his new Palmer School of Chiropractic. One student, his son Bartlett Joshua (B. J.) Palmer, became committed to promoting chiropractic, took over the Palmer School in 1906, and rapidly expanded its enrollment.

Early chiropractors believed that all disease was caused by interruptions in the flow of innate intelligence, a vitalistic nervous energy or life force that represented God's presence in man; chiropractic leaders often invoked religious imagery and moral traditions. D. D. Palmer said he "received chiropractic from the other world". D. D. and B. J. both seriously considered declaring chiropractic a religion, which might have provided legal protection under the U.S. constitution, but decided against it partly to avoid confusion with Christian Science. Early chiropractors also tapped into the Populist movement, emphasizing craft, hard work, competition, and advertisement, aligning themselves with the common man against intellectuals and trusts, among which they included the American Medical Association (AMA).

B. J. Palmer, early developer of chiropractic

Chiropractic has seen considerable controversy and criticism. Although D. D. and B. J. were "straight" and disdained the use of instruments, some early chiropractors, whom B. J. scornfully called "mixers", advocated the use of instruments. In 1910, B. J. changed course and endorsed X-rays as necessary for diagnosis; this resulted in a significant exodus from the Palmer School of the more conservative faculty and students. The mixer camp grew until by 1924 B. J. estimated that only 3,000 of the United States' 25,000 chiropractors remained straight. That year, B. J.'s invention and promotion of the neurocalometer, a temperature-sensing device, was highly controversial among B. J.'s fellow straights. By the 1930s, chiropractic was the largest alternative healing profession in the U.S.

Harvey Lillard, first chiropractic patient

Chiropractors faced heavy opposition from organized medicine. D. D. Palmer was jailed in 1907 for practicing medicine without a license. Thousands of chiropractors were prosecuted for practicing medicine without a license, and D. D. and many other chiropractors were jailed. To defend against medical statutes, B. J. argued that chiropractic was separate and distinct from medicine, asserting that chiropractors "analyzed" rather than "diagnosed", and "adjusted" subluxations rather than "treated" disease. B. J. cofounded the Universal Chiropractors' Association (UCA) to provide legal services to arrested chiropractors. Although the UCA won their first test case in Wisconsin in 1907, prosecutions instigated by state medical boards became increasingly common and in many cases were successful. In response, chiropractors conducted political campaigns to secure separate licensing statutes, eventually succeeding in all fifty states, from Kansas in 1913 through Louisiana in 1974. The longstanding feud between chiropractors and medical doctors continued for decades.

Restraint of trade decision 1989

The AMA labeled chiropractic an "unscientific cult" in 1966, and until 1980 advised its members that it was unethical for medical doctors to associate with "unscientific practitioners". This culminated in a landmark 1987 decision, Wilk v. AMA, in which the court found that the AMA had engaged in unreasonable restraint of trade and conspiracy, and which ended the AMA's de facto boycott of chiropractic.

Growing scholarly interest

Serious research to test chiropractic theories did not begin until the 1970s, and is continuing to be hampered by antiscientific and pseudoscientific ideas that sustained the profession in its long battle with organized medicine. By the mid-1990s there was a growing scholarly interest in chiropractic, which helped efforts to improve service quality and establish clinical guidelines that recommended manual therapies for acute low back pain.

In recent decades chiropractic gained legitimacy and greater acceptance by medical physicians and health plans, and enjoyed a strong political base and sustained demand for services. However, its future seemed uncertain: as the number of practitioners grew, evidence-based medicine insisted on treatments with demonstrated value, managed care restricted payment, and competition grew from massage therapists and other health professions. The profession responded by marketing natural products and devices more aggressively, and by reaching deeper into alternative medicine and primary care.

Public health

Further information: Vaccine controversy § Alternative medicine, and Water fluoridation controversy

Some chiropractors oppose vaccination and water fluoridation, which are common public health practices. Within the chiropractic community there are significant disagreements about vaccination, one of the most cost-effective public health interventions available. Most chiropractic writings on vaccination focus on its negative aspects, claiming that it is hazardous, ineffective, and unnecessary. Some chiropractors have embraced vaccination, but a significant portion of the profession rejects it, as original chiropractic philosophy traces diseases to causes in the spine and states that vaccines interfere with healing. The extent to which anti-vaccination views perpetuate the current chiropractic profession is uncertain. The American Chiropractic Association and the International Chiropractors Association support individual exemptions to compulsory vaccination laws, and a 1995 survey of U.S. chiropractors found that about a third believed there was no scientific proof that immunization prevents disease. The Canadian Chiropractic Association supports vaccination; a survey in Alberta in 2002 found that 25% of chiropractors advised patients for, and 27% against, vaccinating themselves or their children.

Early opposition to water fluoridation included chiropractors, some of whom continue to oppose it as being incompatible with chiropractic philosophy and an infringement of personal freedom. Other chiropractors have actively promoted fluoridation, and several chiropractic organizations have endorsed scientific principles of public health. In addition to traditional chiropractic opposition to water fluoridation and vaccination, chiropractors' attempts to establish a positive reputation for their public health role are also compromised by their reputation for recommending repetitive lifelong chiropractic treatment.

Controversy

Main article: Chiropractic controversy and criticism

Throughout its history chiropractic has been the subject of internal and external controversy and criticism. According to Daniel D. Palmer, the founder of chiropractic, subluxation is the sole cause of disease and manipulation is the cure for all diseases of the human race. A 2003 profession-wide survey found "most chiropractors (whether 'straights' or 'mixers') still hold views of innate intelligence and of the cause and cure of disease (not just back pain) consistent with those of the Palmers." A critical evaluation stated "Chiropractic is rooted in mystical concepts. This led to an internal conflict within the chiropractic profession, which continues today." Chiropractors, including D. D. Palmer, were jailed for practicing medicine without a license. For most of its existence, chiropractic has battled with mainstream medicine, sustained by antiscientific and pseudoscientific ideas such as subluxation. Collectively, systematic reviews have not demonstrated that spinal manipulation, the main treatment method employed by chiropractors, is effective for any medical condition, with the possible exception of treatment for back pain. Chiropractic remains controversial, though to a lesser extent than in past years.

See also

References

  1. ^ Chapman-Smith DA, Cleveland CS III (2005). "International status, standards, and education of the chiropractic profession". In Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B, et al. (eds.). Principles and Practice of Chiropractic (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. pp. 111–34. ISBN 978-0-07-137534-4.
  2. ^ Nelson CF, Lawrence DJ, Triano JJ, Bronfort G, Perle SM, Metz RD, Hegetschweiler K, LaBrot T (2005). "Chiropractic as spine care: a model for the profession". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 13 (1): 9. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-13-9. PMC 1185558. PMID 16000175.
  3. For an explanation regarding the description of chiropractic as a pseudoscience, see:
  4. ^ Mootz RD, Shekelle PG (1997). "Content of practice". In Cherkin DC, Mootz RD (eds.). Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. pp. 67–91. OCLC 39856366. AHCPR Pub No. 98-N002.
  5. "The DC as PCP? Drug Wars Resume – Science-Based Medicine". sciencebasedmedicine.org. 2019-12-18. Archived from the original on 2019-12-18. Retrieved 2020-03-27.
  6. Bellamy, Jann (December 20, 2018). "Legislative Alchemy 2018: Chiropractors rebranding as primary care physicians continues". sciencebasedmedicine.org. Archived from the original on December 19, 2019. Retrieved 2019-12-18.
  7. ^ Ernst E (May 2008). "Chiropractic: a critical evaluation". Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 35 (5): 544–62. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.07.004. PMID 18280103.
  8. ^ Cooper RA, McKee HJ (2003). "Chiropractic in the United States: trends and issues". Milbank Quarterly. 81 (1): 107–38, table of contents. doi:10.1111/1468-0009.00040. PMC 2690192. PMID 12669653.
  9. ^ Posadzki P, Ernst E (2011). "Spinal manipulation: an update of a systematic review of systematic reviews". The New Zealand Medical Journal. 124 (1340): 55–71. PMID 21952385.
  10. ^ Lin CW, Haas M, Maher CG, Machado LA, van Tulder MW (2011). "Cost-effectiveness of guideline-endorsed treatments for low back pain: a systematic review". European Spine Journal. 20 (7): 1024–38. doi:10.1007/s00586-010-1676-3. PMC 3176706. PMID 21229367.
  11. ^ Ernst E (2009). "Chiropractic maintenance treatment, a useful preventative approach?". Preventive Medicine. 49 (2–3): 99–100. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.05.004. PMID 19465044.
  12. ^ Gouveia LO, Castanho P, Ferreira JJ (2009). "Safety of chiropractic interventions: a systematic review" (PDF). Spine. 34 (11): E405–13. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a16d63. PMID 19444054. S2CID 21279308. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-09-19.
  13. ^ Ernst E (2007). "Adverse effects of spinal manipulation: a systematic review". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 100 (7): 330–38. doi:10.1177/014107680710000716. PMC 1905885. PMID 17606755. Archived from the original on 2010-05-16.
  14. ^ Haynes MJ, Vincent K, Fischhoff C, Bremner AP, Lanlo O, Hankey GJ (2012). "Assessing the risk of stroke from neck manipulation: a systematic review". International Journal of Clinical Practice. 66 (10): 940–47. doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.03004.x. PMC 3506737. PMID 22994328.
  15. ^ Ernst E (2010). "Vascular accidents after neck manipulation: cause or coincidence?". International Journal of Clinical Practice. 64 (6): 673–77. doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02237.x. PMID 20518945. S2CID 38571730.
  16. ^ Ernst E (2010). "Deaths after chiropractic: a review of published cases". International Journal of Clinical Practice. 64 (8): 1162–65. doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02352.x. PMID 20642715. S2CID 45225661.
  17. ^ Tetrault M (2004). "Global professional strategy for chiropractic" (PDF). Chiropractic Diplomatic Corps. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-06-25. Retrieved 2008-04-18.
  18. ^ Norris P (2001). "How 'we' are different from 'them': occupational boundary maintenance in the treatment of musculo-skeletal problems". Sociology of Health and Illness. 23 (1): 24–43. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.00239.
  19. ^ Hurwitz EL, Chiang LM (2006). "A comparative analysis of chiropractic and general practitioner patients in North America: findings from the joint Canada/United States Survey of Health, 2002-03". BMC Health Services Research. 6: 49. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-6-49. PMC 1458338. PMID 16600038.
  20. ^ Kaptchuk TJ, Eisenberg DM (November 1998). "Chiropractic: origins, controversies, and contributions". Archives of Internal Medicine. 158 (20): 2215–24. doi:10.1001/archinte.158.20.2215. PMID 9818801.
  21. ^ Martin SC (October 1993). "Chiropractic and the social context of medical technology, 1895-1925". Technology and Culture. 34 (4): 808–34. doi:10.2307/3106416. JSTOR 3106416. PMID 11623404. S2CID 23423922.
  22. ^ "D. D. Palmer's Religion of Chiropractic" – Letter from D. D. Palmer to P. W. Johnson, D.C., May 4, 1911. In the letter, he often refers to himself with royal third person terminology and also as "Old Dad".
  23. Lazarus, David (June 30, 2017). Column: Chiropractic treatment, a $15-billion industry, has its roots in a ghost story. Archived July 19, 2020, at the Wayback Machine --- "Daniel David Palmer, the 'father' of chiropractic who performed the first chiropractic adjustment in 1895, was an avid spiritualist. He maintained that the notion and basic principles of chiropractic treatment were passed along to him during a seance by a long-dead doctor. 'The knowledge and philosophy given me by Dr. Jim Atkinson, an intelligent spiritual being ... appealed to my reason,' Palmer wrote in his memoir The Chiropractor, which was published in 1914 after his death in Los Angeles. Atkinson had died 50 years prior to Palmer's epiphany." Los Angeles Times. Retrieved: September 25, 2019.
  24. ^ DeVocht JW (2006). "History and overview of theories and methods of chiropractic: a counterpoint". Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 444: 243–49. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000203460.89887.8d. PMID 16523145. S2CID 35775630.
  25. ^ Homola S (2006). "Chiropractic: history and overview of theories and methods". Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 444: 236–42. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000200258.95865.87. PMID 16446588.
  26. ^ Joseph C. Keating Jr.; Cleveland CS III; Menke M (2005). "Chiropractic history: a primer" (PDF). Association for the History of Chiropractic. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 June 2013. Retrieved 2008-06-16. A significant and continuing barrier to scientific progress within chiropractic are the anti-scientific and pseudo-scientific ideas (Keating 1997b) which have sustained the profession throughout a century of intense struggle with political medicine. Chiropractors' tendency to assert the meaningfulness of various theories and methods as a counterpoint to allopathic charges of quackery has created a defensiveness which can make critical examination of chiropractic concepts difficult (Keating and Mootz 1989). One example of this conundrum is the continuing controversy about the presumptive target of DCs' adjustive interventions: subluxation (Gatterman 1995; Leach 1994).
  27. ^ Busse JW, Morgan L, Campbell JB (2005). "Chiropractic antivaccination arguments". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 28 (5): 367–73. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.04.011. PMID 15965414.
  28. ^ Campbell JB, Busse JW, Injeyan HS (2000). "Chiropractors and vaccination: a historical perspective". Pediatrics. 105 (4): e43. doi:10.1542/peds.105.4.e43. PMID 10742364.
  29. ^ Johnson C, Baird R, Dougherty PE, Globe G, Green BN, Haneline M, Hawk C, Injeyan HS, Killinger L, Kopansky-Giles D, Lisi AJ, Mior SA, Smith M (2008). "Chiropractic and public health: current state and future vision". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 31 (6): 397–410. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.07.001. PMID 18722194.
  30. WFC Public Health Committee and WFC Research Committee (March 17, 2020). COVID-19 Advice for Chiropractors World Federation of Chiropractic.
  31. Robert C. Jones, et al. Not Business as Usual: A Safe, Responsible Response to COVID-19 American Chiropractic Association
  32. MICHELLE R. SMITH, SCOTT BAUER and MIKE CATALINI (October 8, 2021). Anti-vaccine chiropractors rising force of misinformation. Associated Press.
  33. ^ Keating JC Jr (2005). "Philosophy in chiropractic". In Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B, et al. (eds.). Principles and Practice of Chiropractic (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. pp. 77–98. ISBN 978-0-07-137534-4.
  34. ^ Mootz RD, Phillips RB (1997). "Chiropractic belief systems". In Cherkin DC, Mootz RD (eds.). Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. pp. 9–16. OCLC 39856366. AHCPR Pub No. 98-N002.
  35. ^ Murphy DR, Schneider MJ, Seaman DR, Perle SM, Nelson CF (Aug 2008). "How can chiropractic become a respected mainstream profession? The example of podiatry". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 16: 10. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-16-10. PMC 2538524. PMID 18759966.
  36. Gay RE, Nelson CF (2003). "Chiropractic philosophy". In Wainapel SF, Fast A (eds.). Alternative Medicine and Rehabilitation: a Guide for Practitioners. New York: Demos Medical Publishing. ISBN 978-1-888799-66-8.
  37. "Chiropractic". NHS Choices. 20 August 2014. Retrieved 19 September 2016.
  38. Freeman J (February 2005). "Towards a definition of holism". The British Journal of General Practice. 55 (511): 154–55. PMC 1463203. PMID 15720949.
  39. Martin Gardner (1 June 1957). Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science. Courier Corporation. pp. 227–. ISBN 978-0-486-20394-2.
  40. ^ Raso J (1997). "Dictionary of Metaphysical Healthcare – Glossary". Quackwatch. Retrieved 12 February 2016.
  41. ^ Keating, J. C. Jr; Cleveland, C. S. III; Menke, M. (2005). "Chiropractic history: a primer" (PDF). Association for the History of Chiropractic. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-04-24. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
  42. ^ McDonald WP, Durkin KF, Pfefer M, et al. (2003). How Chiropractors Think and Practice: The Survey of North American Chiropractors. Ada, Ohio: Institute for Social Research, Ohio Northern University. ISBN 978-0-9728055-5-1.
  43. ^ Smith M, Carber LA (2008). "Survey of US Chiropractor Attitudes and Behaviors about Subluxation" (PDF). Journal of Chiropractic Humanities. 15: 19–26. doi:10.1016/s1556-3499(13)60166-7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-04-25.
  44. Benedetti, Paul; MacPhail, Wayne (2002-01-01). Spin Doctors: The Chiropractic Industry Under Examination. Dundurn. p. 18. ISBN 978-1-55002-406-7.
  45. "Subluxation". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved January 4, 2018.
  46. "luxation (n.)". Online Etymology Dictionary. Archived from the original on 2019-05-01. Retrieved July 28, 2021.
  47. ^ Keating, J. C. Jr (1995). "D. D. Palmer's forgotten theories of chiropractic" (PDF). Association for the History of Chiropractic. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2007-07-10. Retrieved 2008-05-14.
  48. Keating JC Jr (2005). "A brief history of the chiropractic profession". In Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B, et al. (eds.). Principles and Practice of Chiropractic (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. pp. 23–64. ISBN 978-0-07-137534-4.
  49. ^ Palmer DD (1910). The Chiropractor's Adjuster: Text-book of the Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic for Students and Practitioners. Portland, Oregon: Portland Printing House Co. OCLC 17205743. A subluxated vertebra ... is the cause of 95 percent of all diseases ... The other five percent is caused by displaced joints other than those of the vertebral column.
  50. ^ Keating JC, Charlton KH, Grod JP, Perle SM, Sikorski D, Winterstein JF (August 2005). "Subluxation: dogma or science?". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 13: 17. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-13-17. PMC 1208927. PMID 16092955.
  51. Rose KA, Adams A (2000). "A survey of the use of evidence-based health care in chiropractic college clinics" (PDF). Journal of Chiropractic Education. 14 (2): 71–77. doi:10.7899/1042-5055-14.2.71. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-10-02.
  52. Homola S (2006). "Can chiropractors and evidence-based manual therapists work together? an opinion from a veteran chiropractor" (PDF). Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy. 14 (2): E14–18. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.366.2817. doi:10.1179/jmt.2006.14.2.14E. S2CID 71826135. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2007-07-10.
  53. ^ World Health Organization (2005). WHO guidelines on basic training and safety in chiropractic (PDF). World Health Organization. ISBN 978-92-4-159371-7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2022-03-13. Retrieved 2008-02-29.
  54. Jenkins, H. J. (5 October 2016). "Awareness of radiographic guidelines for low back pain: a survey of Australian chiropractors". Chiropractic & Manual Therapies. 24: 39. doi:10.1186/s12998-016-0118-7. PMC 5051064. PMID 27713818.
  55. ^ Ammendolia C, Taylor JA, Pennick V, Côté P, Hogg-Johnson S, Bombardier C (2008). "Adherence to radiography guidelines for low back pain: A survey of chiropractic schools worldwide". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 31 (6): 412–18. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.06.010. PMID 18722195.
  56. ^ Singh, S.; Ernst, E. (2008). "The truth about chiropractic therapy". Trick or Treatment: The Undeniable Facts about Alternative Medicine. W. W. Norton. pp. 145–90. ISBN 978-0-393-06661-6.
  57. David Chapman-Smith (2000). "Principles and Goals of Chiropractic Care". The Chiropractic Profession: Its Education, Practice, Research and Future Directions. NCMIC Group. p. 160. ISBN 978-1-892734-02-0.
  58. "Guidance on claims made for the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex" (PDF). General Chiropractic Council. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-04-16. Retrieved 2010-09-30.
  59. NBCE (2014), About Chiropractic, National Board of Chiropractic Examiners, archived from the original on June 19, 2015, retrieved February 1, 2015
  60. ^ Hall, Harriet (June 1, 2017). "Chiropractors: Pro and Con". Skeptical Inquirer. Archived from the original on 2020-08-23. Retrieved July 28, 2021.
  61. Benedetti, Paul; MacPhail, Wayne (2002). Spin Doctors: The Chiropractic Industry Under Examination. Toronto: Dundurn Group. p. 198. ISBN 1-55002-406-X.
  62. "Chirobase". Quackwatch. 7 May 2019. Archived from the original on 2020-06-10. Retrieved July 28, 2021.
  63. ^ Villanueva-Russell Y (June 2011). "Caught in the crosshairs: identity and cultural authority within chiropractic". Social Science & Medicine. 72 (11): 1826–37. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.038. PMID 21531061.
  64. ^ Meeker WC, Haldeman S (2002). "Chiropractic: a profession at the crossroads of mainstream and alternative medicine". Annals of Internal Medicine. 136 (3): 216–27. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.694.4126. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-136-3-200202050-00010. PMID 11827498. S2CID 16782086.
  65. Gleberzon BJ, Cooperstein R, Perle SM (2005). "Can chiropractic survive its chimerical nature?". The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. 49 (2): 69–73. PMC 1840015. PMID 17549192.
  66. Redwood D, Hawk C, Cambron J, Vinjamury SP, Bedard J (2008). "Do chiropractors identify with complementary and alternative medicine? results of a survey". The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 14 (4): 361–68. doi:10.1089/acm.2007.0766. PMID 18435599.
  67. Bellamy, Jann J (2010). "Legislative alchemy: the US state chiropractic practice acts". Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies. 15 (3): 214–22. doi:10.1111/j.2042-7166.2010.01032.x.
  68. Jones-Harris, Amanda R (October 2010). "Are chiropractors in the uk primary healthcare or primary contact practitioners?: a mixed methods study". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 18 (28): 28. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-18-28. PMC 3161390. PMID 20979615.
  69. Theberge N (January 2008). "The integration of chiropractors into healthcare teams: a case study from sport medicine". Sociology of Health & Illness. 30 (1): 19–34. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01026.x. PMID 18254831.
  70. ^ Pettman E (2007). "A history of manipulative therapy". Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy. 15 (3): 165–74. doi:10.1179/106698107790819873. PMC 2565620. PMID 19066664.
  71. Baer HA (2006). "The drive for legitimization by osteopathy and chiropractic in Australia: between heterodoxy and orthodoxy". Complementary Health Practice Review. 11 (2): 77–94. doi:10.1177/1533210106292467.
  72. ^ Parkman CA (2004). "Issues in credentialing CAM providers". The Case Manager. 15 (4): 24–27. doi:10.1016/j.casemgr.2004.05.004. PMID 15247891.
  73. "Occupational And Professional Licensing, Chiropractic Practitioners, Chiropractic Advanced Practice Certification Registry". State of New Mexico. Archived 2010-03-17 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 2010-05-03.
  74. "Occupational And Professional Licensing, Chiropractic Practitioners, Chiropractic Advanced Practice Certification Registry" (PDF). State of New Mexico. Retrieved 2010-05-03.
  75. ^ Morrison P (2009). "Adjusting the role of chiropractors in the United States: why narrowing chiropractor scope of practice statutes will protect patients". Health Matrix. 19 (2): 493–537. PMID 19715143.
  76. Wangler M, Zaugg B, Faigaux E (2010). "Medication Prescription: A Pilot Survey of Bernese Doctors of Chiropractic Practicing in Switzerland". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 33 (3): 231–237. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.01.013. PMID 20350678.
  77. "Scope of Practice: Complementary and alternative veterinary medicine (CAVM) and other practice act exemptions". American Veterinary Medical Association. May 2019. Archived from the original on April 4, 2016. Retrieved April 1, 2016.
  78. ACA House of Delegates (1994). "'Veterinary' chiropractic". American Chiropractic Association. Archived from the original on May 17, 2008. Retrieved 2008-07-05.
  79. Kamen, Daniel (June 18, 2001). "Politics and technique". Dynamic Chiropractic. Vol. 19, no. 13.
  80. ^ Villanueva-Russell Y (2005). "Evidence-based medicine and its implications for the profession of chiropractic". Social Science & Medicine. 60 (3): 545–61. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.05.017. PMID 15550303.
  81. Anderson, Chantal (2009-01-22). "Physical therapists, chiropractors square off over bill". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 2010-09-22. Retrieved 2010-09-23.
  82. Hilliard JW, Johnson ME (2004). "State practice acts of licensed health professions: scope of practice". DePaul Journal of Health Care Law. 8 (1): 237–61.
  83. ^ Christensen MG, Kollasch MW (2005). "Professional functions and treatment procedures" (PDF). Job Analysis of Chiropractic (PDF). Greeley, CO: National Board of Chiropractic Examiners. pp. 121–38. ISBN 978-1-884457-05-0. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-09-10. Retrieved 2008-08-25.
  84. ^ Winkler K, Hegetschweiler-Goertz C, Jackson PS, et al. (2003). "Spinal manipulation policy statement" (PDF). American Chiropractic Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-20. Retrieved 2008-05-24.
  85. ^ Pickar JG, Sung PS, Kang YM, Ge W (2007). "Response of lumbar paraspinal muscles spindles is greater to spinal manipulative loading compared with slower loading under length control". The Spine Journal. 7 (5): 583–95. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2006.10.006. PMC 2075482. PMID 17905321.
  86. Cooperstein R, Gleberzon BJ (2004). Technique Systems in Chiropractic. Churchill Livingstone. ISBN 978-0-443-07413-4.
  87. Harrison DD, Janik TJ, Harrison GR, Troyanovich S, Harrison DE, Harrison SO (1996). "Chiropractic biophysics technique: a linear algebra approach to posture in chiropractic". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 19 (8): 525–35. PMID 8902664.
  88. ^ "Provider Manual for Chiropractic Services" (PDF). North Dakota Department of Human Services. State of North Dakota. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-04-08. Retrieved 2016-04-14.
  89. NHS Leeds West CCG Assurance Committee (2014-01-02). "Complementary and Alternative Therapies Evidence Based Decision Making Framework" (PDF). leedswestccg.nhs.uk. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2015-06-30.
  90. "Chiropractic Services - Policy", Aetna, archived from the original on 24 March 2016, retrieved 29 March 2016
  91. "Chiropractic Policy" (PDF). Oklahoma State University Health Plan. 1 April 2016. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 January 2017. Retrieved 14 April 2016.
  92. Dagenais S, Mayer J, Wooley JR, Haldeman S (2008). "Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with medicine-assisted manipulation". The Spine Journal. 8 (1): 142–49. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2007.09.010. PMID 18164462.
  93. ^ Ailliet L, Rubinstein SM, de Vet HC (October 2010). "Characteristics of chiropractors and their patients in Belgium". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 33 (8): 618–25. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.08.011. PMID 21036284.
  94. Ndetan HT, Rupert RL, Bae S, Singh KP (February 2009). "Prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries sustained by students while attending a chiropractic college". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 32 (2): 140–48. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.12.012. PMID 19243726.
  95. Joseph C. Keating Jr. (1997). "Chiropractic: science and antiscience and pseudoscience side by side". Skeptical Inquirer. 21 (4): 37–43.
  96. Phillips RB (2005). "The evolution of vitalism and materialism and its impact on philosophy". In Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B, et al. (eds.). Principles and Practice of Chiropractic (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. pp. 65–76. ISBN 978-0-07-137534-4.
  97. Reggars JW (2011). "Chiropractic at the crossroads or are we just going around in circles?". Chiropractic & Manual Therapies. 19: 11. doi:10.1186/2045-709X-19-11. PMC 3119029. PMID 21599991.
  98. Suter E, Vanderheyden LC, Trojan LS, Verhoef MJ, Armitage GD (February 2007). "How important is research-based practice to chiropractors and massage therapists?". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 30 (2): 109–15. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.12.013. PMID 17320731.
  99. Murphy AY, van Teijlingen ER, Gobbi MO (September 2006). "Inconsistent grading of evidence across countries: a review of low back pain guidelines". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 29 (7): 576–81, 581.e1–2. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.07.005. PMID 16949948.
  100. Ernst E, Canter PH (April 2006). "A systematic review of systematic reviews of spinal manipulation". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 99 (4): 192–96. doi:10.1177/014107680609900418. PMC 1420782. PMID 16574972.
  101. Johnston BC, da Costa BR, Devereaux PJ, Akl EA, Busse JW (April 2008). "The use of expertise-based randomized controlled trials to assess spinal manipulation and acupuncture for low back pain: a systematic review". Spine. 33 (8): 914–18. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816b4be4. PMID 18404113. S2CID 28092478.
  102. Khorsan R, Coulter ID, Hawk C, Choate CG (June 2008). "Measures in chiropractic research: choosing patient-based outcome assessments". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 31 (5): 355–75. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.04.007. PMID 18558278.
  103. Kaptchuk TJ (June 2002). "The placebo effect in alternative medicine: can the performance of a healing ritual have clinical significance?". Annals of Internal Medicine. 136 (11): 817–25. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.694.4848. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-136-11-200206040-00011. PMID 12044130. S2CID 207535762.
  104. Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, McAuley JH (2006). "Selecting an appropriate placebo for a trial of spinal manipulative therapy". Australian Journal of Physiotherapy. 52 (2): 135–38. doi:10.1016/S0004-9514(06)70049-6. PMID 16764551.
  105. ^ Leboeuf-Yde C, Hestbaek L (2008). "Maintenance care in chiropractic – what do we know?". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 16: 3. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-16-3. PMC 2396648. PMID 18466623.
  106. ^ Rubinstein SM, Terwee CB, Assendelft WJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW (February 2013). "Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low back pain: an update of the cochrane review". Spine (Systematic Review). 38 (3): E158–77. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827dd89d. hdl:2066/109576. PMID 23169072. S2CID 28795577.
  107. Posadzki P (2012). "Is spinal manipulation effective for pain? An overview of systematic reviews". Pain Medicine. 13 (6): 754–61. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01397.x. PMID 22621391.
  108. Rubinstein SM, van Middelkoop M, Assendelft WJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW (June 2011). "Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low-back pain: an update of a Cochrane review". Spine (Systematic review). 36 (13): E825–46. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182197fe1. hdl:1887/117578. PMID 21593658. S2CID 5061433.
  109. Walker BF, French SD, Grant W, Green S (2010). Walker BF (ed.). "Combined chiropractic interventions for low-back pain". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2010 (4): CD005427. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005427.pub2. PMC 6984631. PMID 20393942.
  110. Dagenais S, Gay RE, Tricco AC, Freeman MD, Mayer JM (October 2010). "NASS Contemporary Concepts in Spine Care: spinal manipulation therapy for acute low back pain". The Spine Journal. 10 (10): 918–40. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2010.07.389. PMID 20869008.
  111. Lewis RA, Williams NH, Sutton AJ, Burton K, Din NU, Matar HE, Hendry M, Phillips CJ, Nafees S, Fitzsimmons D, Rickard I, Wilkinson C (2013). "Comparative clinical effectiveness of management strategies for sciatica: systematic review and network meta-analyses" (PDF). The Spine Journal. 15 (6): 1461–77. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.08.049. PMID 24412033.
  112. ^ Leininger B, Bronfort G, Evans R, Reiter T (February 2011). "Spinal manipulation or mobilization for radiculopathy: a systematic review". Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America. 22 (1): 105–25. doi:10.1016/j.pmr.2010.11.002. PMID 21292148.
  113. Hahne AJ, Ford JJ, McMeeken JM (May 2010). "Conservative management of lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy: a systematic review". Spine. 35 (11): E488–504. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cc3f56. PMID 20421859. S2CID 19121111.
  114. Vernon H, Humphreys BK (2007). "Manual therapy for neck pain: an overview of randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews" (PDF). Europa Medicophysica. 43 (1): 91–118. PMID 17369783.
  115. Schroeder J, Kaplan L, Fischer DJ, Skelly AC (2013). "The Outcomes of Manipulation or Mobilization Therapy Compared with Physical Therapy or Exercise for Neck Pain: A Systematic Review". Evidence-Based Spine-Care Journal. 4 (1): 30–41. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1341605. PMC 3699243. PMID 24436697.
  116. Huisman PA, Speksnijder CM, de Wijer A (January 2013). "The effect of thoracic spine manipulation on pain and disability in patients with non-specific neck pain: a systematic review". Disability and Rehabilitation. 35 (20): 1677–85. doi:10.3109/09638288.2012.750689. PMID 23339721. S2CID 12159586.
  117. Cross KM, Kuenze C, Grindstaff TL, Hertel J (September 2011). "Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain: a systematic review". Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 41 (9): 633–42. doi:10.2519/jospt.2011.3670. PMID 21885904.
  118. Gross A, Miller J, D'Sylva J, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Brønfort G, Hoving JL (August 2010). "Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: a Cochrane Review". Manual Therapy. 15 (4): 315–33. doi:10.1016/j.math.2010.04.002. PMID 20510644.
  119. Shaw L, Descarreaux M, Bryans R, Duranleau M, Marcoux H, Potter B, Ruegg R, Watkin R, White E (2010). "A systematic review of chiropractic management of adults with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: recommendations for advancing evidence-based practice and research". Work. 35 (3): 369–94. doi:10.3233/WOR-2010-0996. PMID 20364057.
  120. Chaibi A, Tuchin PJ, Russell MB (April 2011). "Manual therapies for migraine: a systematic review". The Journal of Headache and Pain. 12 (2): 127–33. doi:10.1007/s10194-011-0296-6. PMC 3072494. PMID 21298314.
  121. Posadzki P, Ernst E (June 2011). "Spinal manipulations for the treatment of migraine: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials". Cephalalgia. 31 (8): 964–70. doi:10.1177/0333102411405226. PMID 21511952. S2CID 31205541.
  122. Fernández-de-Las-Peñas C, Alonso-Blanco C, Cuadrado ML, Miangolarra JC, Barriga FJ, Pareja JA (2006). "Are manual therapies effective in reducing pain from tension-type headache?: a systematic review". The Clinical Journal of Pain. 22 (3): 278–85. doi:10.1097/01.ajp.0000173017.64741.86. PMID 16514329. S2CID 23367185.
  123. Biondi DM (June 2005). "Physical treatments for headache: a structured review". Headache. 45 (6): 738–46. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4610.2005.05141.x. PMID 15953306. S2CID 42640492.
  124. Jansen MJ, Viechtbauer W, Lenssen AF, Hendriks EJ, de Bie RA (2011). "Strength training alone, exercise therapy alone, and exercise therapy with passive manual mobilisation each reduce pain and disability in people with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review". Journal of Physiotherapy. 57 (1): 11–20. doi:10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70002-9. PMID 21402325.
  125. French HP, Brennan A, White B, Cusack T (April 2011). "Manual therapy for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee - a systematic review". Manual Therapy. 16 (2): 109–17. doi:10.1016/j.math.2010.10.011. PMID 21146444.
  126. McHardy A, Hoskins W, Pollard H, Onley R, Windsham R (February 2008). "Chiropractic treatment of upper extremity conditions: a systematic review". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 31 (2): 146–59. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.12.004. PMID 18328941.
  127. Pribicevic M, Pollard H, Bonello R, de Luca K (2010). "A systematic review of manipulative therapy for the treatment of shoulder pain". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 33 (9): 679–89. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.08.019. PMID 21109059.
  128. Brantingham, James W.; Bonnefin, Debra; Perle, Stephen M.; Cassa, Tammy Kay; Globe, Gary; Pribicevic, Mario; Hicks, Marian; Korporaal, Charmaine (2012). "Manipulative Therapy for Lower Extremity Conditions: Update of a Literature Review". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 35 (2): 127–66. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.01.001. PMID 22325966.
  129. Mangum K, Partna L, Vavrek D (2012). "Spinal manipulation for the treatment of hypertension: a systematic qualitative literature review". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 35 (3): 235–43. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.01.005. PMID 22341795.
  130. Lystad RP, Bell G, Bonnevie-Svendsen M, Carter CV (2011). "Manual therapy with and without vestibular rehabilitation for cervicogenic dizziness: a systematic review". Chiropractic & Manual Therapies. 19 (1): 21. doi:10.1186/2045-709X-19-21. PMC 3182131. PMID 21923933.
  131. Everett CR, Patel RK (September 2007). "A systematic literature review of nonsurgical treatment in adult scoliosis". Spine. 32 (19 Suppl): S130–34. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e318134ea88. PMID 17728680. S2CID 9339782.
  132. Romano M, Negrini S (2008). "Manual therapy as a conservative treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review". Scoliosis. 3: 2. doi:10.1186/1748-7161-3-2. PMC 2262872. PMID 18211702.
  133. Hawk C, Khorsan R, Lisi AJ, Ferrance RJ, Evans MW (June 2007). "Chiropractic care for nonmusculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review with implications for whole systems research". The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 13 (5): 491–512. doi:10.1089/acm.2007.7088. PMID 17604553.
  134. Ernst E (December 2009). "Spinal manipulation for asthma: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials". Respiratory Medicine. 103 (12): 1791–95. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2009.06.017. PMID 19646855.
  135. Hondras MA, Linde K, Jones AP (2005). "Manual therapy for asthma". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2): CD001002. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001002.pub2. PMID 15846609.
  136. ^ Gotlib A, Rupert R (2008). "Chiropractic manipulation in pediatric health conditions--an updated systematic review". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 16: 11. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-16-11. PMC 2553791. PMID 18789139.
  137. Baby colic:
  138. Huang, Tao; Shu, Xu; Huang, Yu Shan; Cheuk, Daniel KL; Huang, Tao (2011). "Complementary and miscellaneous interventions for nocturnal enuresis in children". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (12): CD005230. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005230.pub2. PMID 22161390.
  139. O'Connor D, Marshall S, Massy-Westropp N, Pitt V (2003). "Non-surgical treatment (other than steroid injection) for carpal tunnel syndrome". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2003 (1): CD003219. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003219. PMC 6486195. PMID 12535461.
  140. Fibromyalgia:
  141. Ernst E (2011). "Chiropractic treatment for gastrointestinal problems: A systematic review of clinical trials". Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology. 25 (1): 39–49. doi:10.1155/2011/910469. PMC 3027333. PMID 21258667.
  142. Brand PL, Engelbert RH, Helders PJ, Offringa M (2005). "". Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde (in Dutch). 149 (13): 703–07. PMID 15819137.
  143. Proctor ML, Hing W, Johnson TC, Murphy PA, Brown J (2006). "Spinal manipulation for primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 3 (3): CD002119. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002119.pub3. PMC 6718213. PMID 16855988.
  144. ^ Goto, Viviane; Frange, Cristina; Andersen, Monica L.; Júnior, José M. S.; Tufik, Sergio; Hachul, Helena (May 2014). "Chiropractic intervention in the treatment of postmenopausal climacteric symptoms and insomnia: A review". Maturitas. 78 (1): 3–7. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.02.004. PMID 24656717.
  145. Liddle, Sarah D.; Pennick, Victoria (2015-09-30). "Interventions for preventing and treating low-back and pelvic pain during pregnancy". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015 (9): CD001139. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001139.pub4. PMC 7053516. PMID 26422811.
  146. Camilleri M, Park SY, Scarpato E, Staiano A (2017). "Exploring hypotheses and rationale for causes of infantile colic". Neurogastroenterology & Motility (Review). 29 (2): e12943. doi:10.1111/nmo.12943. PMC 5276723. PMID 27647578.
  147. ^ Anderson-Peacock E, Blouin JS, Bryans R, Danis N, Furlan A, Marcoux H, Potter B, Ruegg R, Stein JG, White E (2005). "Chiropractic clinical practice guideline: evidence-based treatment of adult neck pain not due to whiplash". The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. 49 (3): 158–209. PMC 1839918. PMID 17549134.
    Anderson-Peacock E, Bryans R, Descarreaux M, Marcoux H, Potter B, Ruegg R, Shaw L, Watkin R, White E (2008). "A Clinical Practice Guideline Update from The CCA•CFCREAB-CPG" (PDF). The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. 52 (1): 7–8. PMC 2258235. PMID 18327295. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-09-05.
  148. Thiel HW, Bolton JE, Docherty S, Portlock JC (2007). "Safety of chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine: a prospective national survey". Spine. 32 (21): 2375–78. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181557bb1. PMID 17906581. S2CID 42353750.
  149. Hurwitz EL, Morgenstern H, Vassilaki M, Chiang LM (July 2005). "Frequency and clinical predictors of adverse reactions to chiropractic care in the UCLA neck pain study". Spine. 30 (13): 1477–84. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000167821.39373.c1. PMID 15990659. S2CID 45678522.
  150. "Safety and regulation of chiropractic". NHS Choices. 20 August 2014. Retrieved 22 September 2016.
  151. Vohra S, Johnston BC, Cramer K, Humphreys K (2007). "Adverse events associated with pediatric spinal manipulation: a systematic review". Pediatrics. 119 (1): e275–83. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1392. PMID 17178922. S2CID 43683198.
  152. Ernst E, Posadzki P (2012). "Reporting of adverse effects in randomised clinical trials of chiropractic manipulations: a systematic review". The New Zealand Medical Journal. 125 (1353): 87–140. PMID 22522273.
  153. Gorrell LM, Engel RM, Brown B, Lystad RP (2016). "The reporting of adverse events following spinal manipulation in randomized clinical trials-a systematic review". The Spine Journal (Systematic Review). 16 (9): 1143–51. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2016.05.018. PMID 27241208.
  154. Hebert JJ, Stomski NJ, French SD, Rubinstein SM (2013). "Serious Adverse Events and Spinal Manipulative Therapy of the Low Back Region: A Systematic Review of Cases". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 38 (9): 677–91. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.05.009. PMID 23787298.
  155. ^ Hurwitz EL, Carragee EJ, van der Velde G, Carroll LJ, Nordin M, Guzman J, Peloso PM, Holm LW, Côté P, Hogg-Johnson S, Cassidy JD, Haldeman S (2008). "Treatment of neck pain: noninvasive interventions: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders". Spine. 33 (4 Suppl): S123–52. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181644b1d. PMID 18204386. S2CID 27261997.
  156. Paciaroni M, Bogousslavsky J (2009). "Cerebrovascular complications of neck manipulation". European Neurology. 61 (2): 112–18. doi:10.1159/000180314. PMID 19065058.
  157. Miley ML, Wellik KE, Wingerchuk DM, Demaerschalk BM (2008). "Does cervical manipulative therapy cause vertebral artery dissection and stroke?". Neurologist. 14 (1): 66–73. doi:10.1097/NRL.0b013e318164e53d. PMID 18195663. S2CID 18062970.
  158. ^ Biller, J.; Sacco, R. L.; Albuquerque, F. C.; Demaerschalk, B. M.; Fayad, P.; Long, P. H.; Noorollah, L. D.; Panagos, P. D.; Schievink, W. I.; Schwartz, N. E.; Shuaib, A.; Thaler, D. E.; Tirschwell, D. L. (2014). "Cervical Arterial Dissections and Association With Cervical Manipulative Therapy: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association". Stroke. 45 (10): 3155–74. doi:10.1161/STR.0000000000000016. PMID 25104849.
  159. Church, Ephraim W; Sieg, Emily P; Zalatimo, Omar; Hussain, Namath S; Glantz, Michael; Harbaugh, Robert E (2016). "Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Chiropractic Care and Cervical Artery Dissection: No Evidence for Causation". Cureus. 8 (2): e498. doi:10.7759/cureus.498. PMC 4794386. PMID 27014532.
  160. Chung CL, Côté P, Stern P, L'espérance G (2014). "The Association Between Cervical Spine Manipulation and Carotid Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review of the Literature". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 38 (9): 672–6. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.09.005. PMID 24387889.
  161. Wynd S, Westaway M, Vohra S, Kawchuk G (2013). "The quality of reports on cervical arterial dissection following cervical spinal manipulation". PLOS ONE. 8 (3): e59170. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...859170W. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059170. PMC 3604043. PMID 23527121.
  162. Tuchin, P. (2014). "A systematic literature review of intracranial hypotension following chiropractic". International Journal of Clinical Practice. 68 (3): 396–402. doi:10.1111/ijcp.12247. PMID 24372942. S2CID 5315779.
  163. Yang, Hwan-Seo; Oh, Young-Min; Eun, Jong-Pil (2016). "Cervical Intradural Disc Herniation Causing Progressive Quadriparesis After Spinal Manipulation Therapy". Medicine. 95 (6): e2797. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000002797. PMC 4753938. PMID 26871842.
  164. ^ Bussières AE, Taylor JA, Peterson C (2008). "Diagnostic imaging practice guidelines for musculoskeletal complaints in adults – an evidence-based approach – part 3: spinal disorders". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 31 (1): 33–88. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.11.003. PMID 18308153.
  165. Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: Board on Radiation Effects Research" US National Research Council (2006). Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/11340. ISBN 978-0-309-09156-5.
  166. ^ E Ernst (2011). "Response to critiques of deaths after chiropractic". International Journal of Clinical Practice. 65 (1): 106. doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02568.x. S2CID 72845939.
  167. Di Fabio, Richard P (January 1, 1999). "Manipulation of the Cervical Spine: Risks and Benefits". Physical Therapy. Retrieved November 1, 2021. Although the risk of injury associated with MCS appears to be small, this type of therapy has the potential to expose patients to vertebral artery damage that can be avoided with the use of mobilization (nonthrust passive movements). The literature does not demonstrate that the benefits of MCS outweigh the risks. Several recommendations for future studies and for the practice of MCS are discussed.
  168. Michaleff ZA, Lin CW, Maher CG, van Tulder MW (2012). "Spinal manipulation epidemiology: Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies". Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology. 22 (5): 655–62. doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2012.02.011. PMID 22429823.
  169. Canter PH, Coon JT, Ernst E (2006). "Cost-Effectiveness of Complementary Therapies in the United Kingdom – A Systematic Review†". Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 3 (4): 425–32. doi:10.1093/ecam/nel044. PMC 1697737. PMID 17173105. Archived from the original on 2008-05-11.
  170. van der Roer N, Goossens ME, Evers SM, van Tulder MW (2005). "What is the most cost-effective treatment for patients with low back pain? a systematic review". Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology. 19 (4): 671–84. doi:10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.007. PMID 15949783.
  171. Sarnat RL, Winterstein J, Cambron JA (May 2007). "Clinical Utilization and Cost Outcomes From an Integrative Medicine Independent Physician Association: An Additional 3-Year Update". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 30 (4): 263–69. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.004. PMID 17509435. S2CID 613004.
  172. "Glossary". National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Education. Archived from the original on 2009-06-04. Retrieved 2009-06-05.
  173. Marcus DM, McCullough L (2009). "An evaluation of the evidence in 'evidence-based' integrative medicine programs". Academic Medicine. 84 (9): 1229–34. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b185f4. PMID 19707062.
  174. Coulter I, Adams A, Coggan P, Wilkes M, Gonyea M (September 1998). "A comparative study of chiropractic and medical education". Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine. 4 (5): 64–75. PMID 9737032.
  175. "Prospective students". Association of Chiropractic Colleges. Archived from the original on 2009-08-14. Retrieved 2009-07-23.
  176. "Standards for Accreditation of Doctor of Chiropractic Programmes" (PDF). Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory and Educational Accrediting Boards. 2011-11-26. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-09-23. Retrieved 2014-08-02.
  177. ^ "CMCC Backgrounder 2015" (PDF). Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-02-26. Retrieved 26 February 2019.
  178. ^ "Degree Authority in Ontario". Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities. Retrieved 2010-12-14.
  179. "State chiropractic licensure". Life University. 2008. Archived from the original on 2009-08-01. Retrieved 2009-06-05.
  180. "Becoming a chiropractor". Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory and Educational Accrediting Boards. Archived from the original on 2009-06-15. Retrieved 2009-06-05.
  181. Grod JP (2006). "Continuing health education in Canada". The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. 50 (1): 14–17. PMC 1839972. PMID 17549163.
  182. Stuber KJ, Grod JP, Smith DL, Powers P (2005). "An online survey of chiropractors' opinions of Continuing Education". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 13 (1): 22. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-13-22. PMC 1282582. PMID 16242035.
  183. Coulter ID, Adams AH, Sandefur R (1997). "Chiropractic training" (PDF). In Cherkin DC, Mootz RD (eds.). Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research (PDF). Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. pp. 17–28. OCLC 39856366. Archived from the original on 2008-06-25. Retrieved 2008-05-11. AHCPR Pub No. 98-N002.
  184. "The Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE)". The Council on Chiropractic Education. Retrieved 2008-07-05.
  185. "The General Chiropractic Council". Retrieved 2020-05-02.
  186. "About Us". Councils on Chiropractic Education International. Archived from the original on 2010-11-18. Retrieved 2010-09-30.
  187. "Accredited Doctor of Chiropractic programs". The Council on Chiropractic Education. Archived from the original on 2008-02-14. Retrieved 2008-02-22.
  188. "Accreditation of educational programmes". Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory and Educational Accrediting Boards. Archived from the original on 2009-05-18. Retrieved 2009-06-05.
  189. "Program Accreditation Status". Council on Chiropractic Education Australasia. Archived from the original on 2011-02-17. Retrieved 2010-09-30.
  190. "Institutions holding Accredited Status with the ECCE". European Council On Chiropractic Education. 2010-11-01. Archived from the original on 2014-07-22. Retrieved 2014-08-02.
  191. "Canadian Chiropractic Association FAQs". Canadian Chiropractic Association. Archived from the original on 2009-08-17. Retrieved 2010-10-02.
  192. "Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards FAQ". Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards. Retrieved 2010-10-02.
  193. ^ "Chiropractors". U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2007. Retrieved 2008-07-05.
  194. "Canadian Chiropractic Association: Chiropractic in Canada". Canadian Chiropractic Association. Archived from the original on 2010-05-27. Retrieved 2010-10-02.
  195. Chapman-Smith D (2000). "Current status of the profession". The Chiropractic Profession: Its Education, Practice, Research and Future Directions. West Des Moines, IA: NCMIC. ISBN 978-1-892734-02-0.
  196. ^ Hester H, Cunliffe C, Hunnisett A (2013). "Stress in chiropractic education: a student survey of a five-year course". Journal of Chiropractic Education. 27 (2): 147–51. doi:10.7899/JCE-13-4. PMC 3791907. PMID 23957319.
  197. ^ Johnson C (December 2010). "Reflecting on 115 years: the chiropractic profession's philosophical path". Journal of Chiropractic Humanities. 17 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1016/j.echu.2010.11.001. PMC 3342796. PMID 22693471.
  198. Camhi, Tiffany (30 August 2024). "Oregon alternative medicine students face a long road to loan forgiveness". OPB. Retrieved 28 October 2024.
  199. U.S. Department of Education. "Most Recent Data by Field of Study". U.S. Department of Education College Scorecard. Archived from the original on 9 September 2024.
  200. Rosiak, Luke (12 January 2010). "Chiropractics lobbied for special student loans, defaulted in droves : Sunlight Foundation". Sunlight Foundation. Retrieved 29 October 2024.
  201. Mirtz, DC, Timothy (23 April 2003). "The Student Loan Mess: Why Chiropractic Is in Trouble". Quackwatch. Retrieved 29 October 2024.
  202. ^ "Chiropractic Student Loan Default Rates (1999 to 2012)". Quackwatch. 12 March 2018. Retrieved 29 October 2024.
  203. Simpson JK, Losco B, Young KJ (2010). "Development of the murdoch chiropractic graduate pledge". Journal of Chiropractic Education. 24 (2): 175–86. doi:10.7899/1042-5055-24.2.175. PMC 2967342. PMID 21048880.
  204. Staff. "Code of Ethics". American Chiropractic Association. Archived from the original on 2014-02-22. Retrieved 2014-02-11.
  205. Staff. "ICA code of Ethics". International Chiropractor's Association. Archived from the original on 2014-04-05.
  206. "Majority in U.S. Say Chiropractic Works for Neck, Back Pain". Gallup Inc. 8 September 2015. Retrieved 2015-09-13.
  207. Weeks, William B; Goertz, Christine M; Meeker, William C; Marchiori, Dennis M (2015-01-01). "Public Perceptions of Doctors of Chiropractic: Results of a National Survey and Examination of Variation According to Respondents' Likelihood to Use Chiropractic, Experience With Chiropractic, and Chiropractic Supply in Local Health Care Markets". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 38 (8): 533–44. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2015.08.001. PMID 26362263.
  208. "A pivotal moment for free speech in Britain". The Guardian. April 15, 2010.
  209. "The BHA re-publishes Simon Singh's article on chiropractic therapy". British Humanist Association. July 29, 2009.
  210. Ernst E, Gilbey A (2010). "Chiropractic claims in the English-speaking world". The New Zealand Medical Journal. 123 (1312): 36–44. PMID 20389316.
  211. ^ Stephen Barrett (2017-01-02). "Medicare Overpayments to Chiropractors Are Widespread". American Council on Science and Health.
  212. ^ Lucas Laursen. "The Great Beyond: Chiropractic group advises members to 'withdraw from the battleground'". Nature.com. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
  213. Lucas Laursen. "The Great Beyond: Complaints converge on chiropractors". Nature.com. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
  214. "Unjust burdens of proof". Nature. 459 (7248): 751. June 2009. Bibcode:2009Natur.459Q.751.. doi:10.1038/459751a. PMID 19516290.
  215. Pallab Ghosh (2010-04-15). "Case dropped against Simon Singh". BBC News.
  216. Mark Henderson (2010-04-16). "Science writer Simon Singh wins bitter libel battle". Times Online. London. Archived from the original on June 11, 2011.
  217. ^ Leach, Matthew J. (2013-08-01). "Profile of the complementary and alternative medicine workforce across Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States and United Kingdom". Complementary Therapies in Medicine. 21 (4): 364–378. doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2013.04.004. ISSN 0965-2299. PMID 23876568.
  218. Xue CC, Zhang AL, Lin V, Myers R, Polus B, Story DF (2008). "Acupuncture, chiropractic and osteopathy use in Australia: a national population survey". BMC Public Health. 8: 105. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-105. PMC 2322980. PMID 18377663.
  219. ^ Adams, Jon; Lauche, Romy; Peng, Wenbo; Steel, Amie; Moore, Craig; Amorin-Woods, Lyndon G.; Sibbritt, David (2017). "A workforce survey of Australian chiropractic: the profile and practice features of a nationally representative sample of 2,005 chiropractors". BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 17 (1): 14. doi:10.1186/s12906-016-1542-x. ISSN 1472-6882. PMC 5217252. PMID 28056964. This article incorporates text by Jon Adams, Romy Lauche, Wenbo Peng, Amie Steel, Craig Moore, Lyndon G. Amorin-Woods, and David Sibbritt available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
  220. "Freedom of Profession for Chiropractors in Germany". ACLANZ. aclanz Rechtsanwälte. Retrieved 16 June 2023.
  221. "ChiroSuisse - Organisation". www.chirosuisse.ch (in German). Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Chiropraktik. Retrieved 16 June 2023.
  222. "Chiropractic treatment available on NHS in Cornwall". BBC News. August 13, 2013. Retrieved August 18, 2013.
  223. Langworthy JM, Forrest L (2010). "Withdrawal rates as a consequence of disclosure of risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 18: 27. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-18-27. PMC 3161389. PMID 20977721.
  224. ^ Lawrence DJ, Meeker WC (2007). "Chiropractic and CAM utilization: a descriptive review". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 15: 2. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-15-2. PMC 1784103. PMID 17241465.
  225. Crownfield PW (2007). "Chiropractic in Alberta: a model of consumer utilization and satisfaction". Dynamic Chiropractic. Vol. 25, no. 6.
  226. ^ Kemper KJ, Vohra S, Walls R (December 2008). "American Academy of Pediatrics. The use of complementary and alternative medicine in pediatrics". Pediatrics. 122 (6): 1374–1386. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-2173. PMID 19047261.
  227. Cherkin, Daniel C.; Mootz, Robert D. (2010). "Chiropractic in the United States:Training, Practice, and Research". Chirobase. Retrieved 2010-10-01.
  228. Gaumer G (2006). "Factors associated with patient satisfaction with chiropractic care: survey and review of the literature". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 29 (6): 455–462. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.06.013. PMID 16904491.
  229. Tindle HA, Davis RB, Phillips RS, Eisenberg DM (2005). "Trends in use of complementary and alternative medicine by US adults: 1997–2002". Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine. 11 (1): 42–49. PMID 15712765.
  230. Stanley, G. (2007). "The Sustainability of Chiropractic". Dynamic Chiropractic. Vol. 25, no. 19.
  231. Eric J. Bailey (2002). African American Alternative Medicine: Using Alternative Medicine to Prevent and Control Chronic Diseases. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 26ff. ISBN 978-0-89789-747-1.
  232. ^ Baer HA (1987). "Divergence and convergence in two systems of manual medicine: osteopathy and chiropractic in the United States". Medical Anthropology Quarterly. 1 (2): 176–193. doi:10.1525/maq.1987.1.2.02a00030.
  233. "chiropractic". Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2014. Archived from the original on May 3, 2013.
  234. "chiro-". Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2014. Archived from the original on August 12, 2014.
  235. Swanson ES (2015). "Pseudoscience". Science and Society: Understanding Scientific Methodology, Energy, Climate, and Sustainability. Springer. p. 65. ISBN 978-3-319-21987-5.
  236. — Chiro.org
  237. Cherkin D (November 1989). "AMA policy on chiropractic". American Journal of Public Health. 79 (11): 1569–70. doi:10.2105/AJPH.79.11.1569-a. PMC 1349822. PMID 2817179.
  238. Wardle, Jon; Frawley, Jane; Steel, Amie; Sullivan, Elizabeth (2016). "Complementary medicine and childhood immunisation: A critical review". Vaccine. 34 (38): 4484–4500. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.07.026. PMID 27475472.
  239. Russell ML, Injeyan HS, Verhoef MJ, Eliasziw M (2004). "Beliefs and behaviours: understanding chiropractors and immunization". Vaccine. 23 (3): 372–379. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2004.05.027. PMID 15530683.
  240. Jones RB, Mormann DN, Durtsche TB (1989). "Fluoridation referendum in La Crosse, Wisconsin: contributing factors to success". American Journal of Public Health. 79 (10): 1405–1408. doi:10.2105/AJPH.79.10.1405. PMC 1350185. PMID 2782512.
  241. Jaroff, Leon (27 February 2002). "Back Off, Chiropractors!". Time. Retrieved 7 June 2009.
  242. Gunther Brown, Candy (July 7, 2014). "Chiropractic: Is it Nature, Medicine or Religion?". HuffPost.

Further reading

External links

Chiropractic
Chiropractic
Techniques
Education
Accrediting bodies
International organizations
People
Pseudoscience
List of topics characterized as pseudoscience
Terminology
Topics
characterized as
pseudoscience
Medicine
Social science
Physics
Other
Promoters of
pseudoscience
Related topics
Resources
Categories: