I love chiropractors

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

DPTErudition

The One & Only
10+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
111
Reaction score
19
lol they definitely did. I love the expressions on the people's faces.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
What?! This cannot be real....
 
I can't tell you how many times I've watched this now.
 
Showed this to my PT peeps. They loved it.
 
Everyone should read this and pass along to their colleagues, faculty members, and friends.
 

Attachments

  • Chiropractic BS.pdf
    734.5 KB · Views: 118
Everyone should read this and pass along to their colleagues, faculty members, and friends.

I didn't get any further than this before I quit reading:

"Although some have equated Palmer’s vitalistic “innate intelligence” with the flow of nerve
impulses transmitted by spinal nerves, the bones of the spinal column cannot be displaced sufficiently—
without breakage—to impinge on nerves.6 Even if there is some form of nerve impingement,
the chiropractic claim that this can block “nerve flow” and affect organ function is
based on a simplistic and false view of the nervous system."

I have an idea. How about if we judge medicine by the tenets it held decades ago? That would be fair and accurate, right?

And Stephen Barrett? Please.
 
facetguy,

Perhaps it's my proximity to National University, but I still see quite a few patients who come to me having seen a chirocpractor that subscribes to the subluxation model. But, I know that you have said that these DCs are a dying breed. This is off topic, but I'm wondering how , if at all, the subluxation model was presented to you at your chiropractic school, and how do you handle patients who come to you convinced that somthing is "out" and needs to be "put back in."



I didn't get any further than this before I quit reading:

"Although some have equated Palmer’s vitalistic “innate intelligence” with the flow of nerve
impulses transmitted by spinal nerves, the bones of the spinal column cannot be displaced sufficiently—
without breakage—to impinge on nerves.6 Even if there is some form of nerve impingement,
the chiropractic claim that this can block “nerve flow” and affect organ function is
based on a simplistic and false view of the nervous system."

I have an idea. How about if we judge medicine by the tenets it held decades ago? That would be fair and accurate, right?

And Stephen Barrett? Please.
 
And I'm also wondering if you have a commercial that is as good as this one lying around somewhere?:)
 
facetguy,

Perhaps it's my proximity to National University, but I still see quite a few patients who come to me having seen a chirocpractor that subscribes to the subluxation model. But, I know that you have said that these DCs are a dying breed. This is off topic, but I'm wondering how , if at all, the subluxation model was presented to you at your chiropractic school, and how do you handle patients who come to you convinced that somthing is "out" and needs to be "put back in."

Damn, that video has 5 million views! I thought it was pretty creative, albeit intentionally a bit goofy.

My school wasn't old-model sublux heavy...and that was 20 years ago. I think much of the BOOPer stuff is based on a combo of some older chiros out there who haven't taken the time to update on the science (and therefore is a dying breed), along with the fact that it's simply easier (and quicker) to use that model when talking to patients. Does that make it right? No, but at least the patient comes away with some conceptualization of what their chiro is doing. I think all practitioners simplify things to some degree when explaining a treatment or disease or drug or whatever to patients.

When a patient says to me that something is "out" and "needs to be put back in", honestly I use my judgement as to the level of comprehension I think that patient is capable of. I frequently will respond something like "well, that's not really how it works, but as long as we're getting you better..." or whatever.

If you think about it, I'm sure you guys can think of some short-cuts and dumb-downs you use to explain things to your patients.
 
Damn, that video has 5 million views! I thought it was pretty creative, albeit intentionally a bit goofy.

My school wasn't old-model sublux heavy...and that was 20 years ago. I think much of the BOOPer stuff is based on a combo of some older chiros out there who haven't taken the time to update on the science (and therefore is a dying breed), along with the fact that it's simply easier (and quicker) to use that model when talking to patients. Does that make it right? No, but at least the patient comes away with some conceptualization of what their chiro is doing. I think all practitioners simplify things to some degree when explaining a treatment or disease or drug or whatever to patients.

When a patient says to me that something is "out" and "needs to be put back in", honestly I use my judgement as to the level of comprehension I think that patient is capable of. I frequently will respond something like "well, that's not really how it works, but as long as we're getting you better..." or whatever.

If you think about it, I'm sure you guys can think of some short-cuts and dumb-downs you use to explain things to your patients.
Yeah, but see, that conceptualization is wrong... Its one thing to "dumb down". It's another to imply or dare I say, lie, about what you are doing. Is that difficult to understand?
 
Am I the only one to notice that he was a Scientologist? That seems like the perfect religion for a chiropractor...
 
Top