Thoughts on Chiropractors?

[seanjohn]

This is my first time venturing to this specific forum, but I would just like to ask the future M.D's a question.

What are your thoughts on chiropractors and the chiropractic profession as a whole? Do you accept them? Do you think they're quacks? Do you think chiropractic education is equivalent to medical education?

I'm in my fourth year of university getting a bachelor of science degree, and I'm definately interested in pursuing a career in medicine, however, the reason I made this thread is because I once considered a career in chiropractic. I'd just like to read your thoughts and opinions about chiropractors, since you're the future physicians of our nation.

Thanks for reading.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Bevo]

they're ok for back stuff I guess.

I think they can be very dangerous. A lot of inconsistencies in the schools and philosophies taught. Some think spinal manipulation can heal everything.

A doctor I used to shadow told me a story about a little girl who was taken to see a chiropractor because he told her parents he could cure her asthma. She ended up in the ER.

I'd never see one personally or let a family member be seen by one.

 

[Taus]

For back problems that are entirely musculoskeletal in nature...chiros can do some good...but beyond that....their education is not the same as DO/MD.....that is not a bad thing...they are good for what they're good for...nothing more nothing less....everyone has a place in healthcare as long as they don't try to overstep their scope of practice.

If you are into the manual medicine aspect of healthcare and want the education of a Physician, you may want to consider one of the Osteopathic Medical Schools.

 

[cromagnon]

...run.

 

[yyd]

-

 

[611]

You are asking Wal-mart if you should go to K-mart. Find out for yourself. Not by asking the medical profession or anyone else. You have to be the one who is happy with your career choice. Shadow doctors, visit TOP D.C. schools. Then decide what is right for you.

 

[lawguil]

You are asking Wal-mart if you should go to K-mart. Find out for yourself. Not by asking the medical profession or anyone else. You have to be the one who is happy with your career choice. Shadow doctors, visit TOP D.C. schools. Then decide what is right for you.

Sorry, you are not asking Wal-mart anything about Kmart, but you are comparing Kmart to Tiffany’s.

Chiropractic education:
1. Low admission standards
2. Inconsistent education from school to school
3. Non-evidenced based education or practice
4. Lacks basic patient/public safety mechanisms in practice
5. Riddled with unproven claims.
6. As a whole, not accepted in main stream healthcare

Some believe that chiropractor manipulation can effectively treat back pain, but it is largely unproven. It is likely that you could get the same results from a sugar pill but the sugar pill would have far less risk!

Medical School:
1. MCAT's for admission
2. Rigorous admissions standards
3. Evidenced based practice and education
4. Elaborate patient safety mechanism
5. Education is standardized and continuously adapting to the current healthcare environment/technology.
5. 4 years of medical school
6. 3+ years of residency training
7. Two methods to become a physician (Osteopathy and Allopathy)
8. Remember that physicians are very open to untraditional forms of medicine once there is scientific literature to support it.

 

[611]

My we have HUGE egos here.

 

[PublicHealth]

My we have HUGE egos here.

Misunderstanding abound. Chiropractic has been marginalized by mainstream allopathic medicine for more than 100 years. It is therefore no surprise that medical folks on this internet board continue to denigrate the profession in order to inflate their own egos.

Doctoral programs in chiropractic do have standardized requirements:

http://www.cce-usa.org/2006 January STANDARDS.pdf

Research in chiropractic is growing. It was not until about five years ago that chiropractors and researchers of chiropractic were able to receive federal research funding:

http://www.chiro.org/research/

http://nccam.nih.gov/news/19972000/030398.htm


Complementary and alternative medicine is gaining popularity in the US. Americans spend $27 BILLION dollars OUT-OF-POCKET for CAM services each year. The majority claim that allopathic medicine has failed them. A recent article in the New York Times is illustrative: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/03/health/03patient.html?ex=1141966800&en=743aeb0474331609&ei=5070

Register for NYT if you can't access the page.

"The most telling evidence of Americans' dissatisfaction with traditional health care is the more than $27 billion they spend annually on alternative and complementary medicine, according to government estimates. In ways large and small, millions of people are taking active steps to venture outside the mainstream, whether by taking the herbal remedy echinacea for a cold or by placing their last hopes for cancer cure in alternative treatment, as did Coretta Scott King, who died this week at an alternative hospice clinic in Mexico.

They do not appear to care that there is little, if any, evidence that many of the therapies work. Nor do they seem to mind that alternative therapy practitioners have a fraction of the training mainstream doctors do or that vitamin and herb makers are as profit-driven as drug makers.

This straying from conventional medicine is often rooted in a sense of disappointment, even betrayal, many patients and experts say. When patients see conventional medicine's inadequacies up close — a misdiagnosis, an intolerable drug, failed surgery, even a dismissive doctor — many find the experience profoundly disillusioning, or at least eye-opening.

Haggles with insurance providers, conflicting findings from medical studies and news reports of drug makers' covering up product side effects all feed their disaffection, to the point where many people begin to question not only the health care system but also the science behind it. Soon, intuition and the personal experience of friends and family may seem as trustworthy as advice from a doctor in diagnosing an illness or judging a treatment."

 

[seanjohn]

I wish this thread wasn't moved to the NP/PA/PT section and stayed in the current allopathic students section, there's already another similar thread here. I specifically wanted answers from current allopathic students and now that's in this forum, I won't get many responses from them. Oh well.

 

[611]

I wish this thread wasn't moved to the NP/PA/PT section and stayed in the current allopathic students section, there's already another similar thread here. I specifically wanted answers from current allopathic students and now that's in this forum, I won't get many responses from them. Oh well.

If you care what they say, Chiriopractic is NOT for you.

 

[lawguil]

Misunderstanding abound. Chiropractic has been marginalized by mainstream allopathic medicine for more than 100 years. It is therefore no surprise that medical folks on this internet board continue to denigrate the profession in order to inflate their own egos.

Doctoral programs in chiropractic do have standardized requirements:

http://www.cce-usa.org/2006 January STANDARDS.pdf

Research in chiropractic is growing. It was not until about five years ago that chiropractors and researchers of chiropractic were able to receive federal research funding:

http://www.chiro.org/research/

http://nccam.nih.gov/news/19972000/030398.htm


Complementary and alternative medicine is gaining popularity in the US. Americans spend $27 BILLION dollars OUT-OF-POCKET for CAM services each year. The majority claim that allopathic medicine has failed them. A recent article in the New York Times is illustrative: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/03/health/03patient.html?ex=1141966800&en=743aeb0474331609&ei=5070

Register for NYT if you can't access the page.

"The most telling evidence of Americans' dissatisfaction with traditional health care is the more than $27 billion they spend annually on alternative and complementary medicine, according to government estimates. In ways large and small, millions of people are taking active steps to venture outside the mainstream, whether by taking the herbal remedy echinacea for a cold or by placing their last hopes for cancer cure in alternative treatment, as did Coretta Scott King, who died this week at an alternative hospice clinic in Mexico.

They do not appear to care that there is little, if any, evidence that many of the therapies work. Nor do they seem to mind that alternative therapy practitioners have a fraction of the training mainstream doctors do or that vitamin and herb makers are as profit-driven as drug makers.

This straying from conventional medicine is often rooted in a sense of disappointment, even betrayal, many patients and experts say. When patients see conventional medicine's inadequacies up close — a misdiagnosis, an intolerable drug, failed surgery, even a dismissive doctor — many find the experience profoundly disillusioning, or at least eye-opening.

Haggles with insurance providers, conflicting findings from medical studies and news reports of drug makers' covering up product side effects all feed their disaffection, to the point where many people begin to question not only the health care system but also the science behind it. Soon, intuition and the personal experience of friends and family may seem as trustworthy as advice from a doctor in diagnosing an illness or judging a treatment."

Come on now! Did you think that providing a printed document from a chiropractic organization showing that standards exist would put this to rest? It is well known that chiropractors have different philosophies. Perhaps the language is standardized with respect to one manipulation technique to another, but chiropractors have different beliefs of what the manipulation can treat. Further, perhaps they have a baseline education that must be met to award the chiropractic degree - they don't have a standard in place to ensure the content of a course is taught. Further, if your standard allows you to manipulate science, pathology and physiology to accommodate basic chiropractic principles, then the standardization that exists is useless.

Research in chiropractic is growing. It was not until about five years ago that chiropractors and researchers of chiropractic were able to receive federal research funding:

http://www.chiro.org/research/

http://nccam.nih.gov/news/19972000/030398.htm

As I mentioned above - physicians are very open minded when alternative therapy is supported with scientific literature. When the chiropractic community can produce literature that shows its benefits and safety, then it will be accepted and likely encouraged in "mainstream" healthcare - if it is more effective than current treatments.

Haggles with insurance providers, conflicting findings from medical studies and news reports of drug makers' covering up product side effects all feed their disaffection, to the point where many people begin to question not only the health care system but also the science behind it.

As you can see, anybody who breaks the rules within the mechanism of science will be exposed - not just chiropractors. It's called accountability! When you break the rules and the safety mechanism that exists, you pay. Why should chiropractors be exempt from being accountable?

You manipulate a scientist’s view of accountability to mean this:

Chiropractic has been marginalized by mainstream allopathic medicine for more than 100 years. It is therefore no surprise that medical folks on this internet board continue to denigrate the profession in order to inflate their own egos.

The above sounds like more of a personal attack towards physicians and scientists, who are expected to be accountable, are accountable and when they break the rules are held accountable. They didn't spend one hundred years saying, "trust me with unquestioning faith, I will fix your problem." Instead they questioned everything, including science itself, to advance the profession and care of patients.

Soon, intuition and the personal experience of friends and family may seem as trustworthy as advice from a doctor in diagnosing an illness or judging a treatment.

Why do you say this? It sounds a bit radical to me!

 

[611]

Who knows if Chiropratic even wants to be part of mainstream medicine. Maybe medicine should become part of mainstream Chiropractic
They are different. A student needs to decide for themselves which is the right path for them.

 

[lawguil]

If you care what they say, Chiriopractic is NOT for you.

Basically, what 611 is saying is: if you are willing to ask a trained scientist who would be inclined to analyze the data objectively and provide you with a professional opinion as opposed to a personal opinion, then you may not be a good fit in the chiropractic community.

 

[611]

Now let's not twist words. We are giving advice to students to help them.

 

[ProZackMI]

This is my first time venturing to this specific forum, but I would just like to ask the future M.D's a question.

What are your thoughts on chiropractors and the chiropractic profession as a whole? Do you accept them? Do you think they're quacks? Do you think chiropractic education is equivalent to medical education?

I'm in my fourth year of university getting a bachelor of science degree, and I'm definately interested in pursuing a career in medicine, however, the reason I made this thread is because I once considered a career in chiropractic. I'd just like to read your thoughts and opinions about chiropractors, since you're the future physicians of our nation.

Thanks for reading.

Go into medicine, pharmacy, vet med, podiatry, psychology, dentistry, or another professional field. Don't go into chiropractic. If you want an easier path to a good career, become an NP or PA. Don't waste your time and energy and money to become a puffed back cracker with no true education or skills. You'll end up poor, dissatisfied, and unrespected by the real medical community.

Get an MD, PharmD, DO, DDS, DVM, DPM, PsyD/PhD, or even an OD...don't waste your time on chiroquackery.

 

[seanjohn]

Go into medicine, pharmacy, vet med, podiatry, psychology, dentistry, or another professional field. Don't go into chiropractic. If you want an easier path to a good career, become an NP or PA. Don't waste your time and energy and money to become a puffed back cracker with no true education or skills. You'll end up poor, dissatisfied, and unrespected by the real medical community.

Get an MD, PharmD, DO, DDS, DVM, DPM, PsyD/PhD, or even an OD...don't waste your time on chiroquackery.

Thank you, I think that sums up the thoughts of most MD's towards chiroquackters.

I live in Canada, and we don't have DO's, I don't even think osteopaths are legally recognized here, or legally allowed to practice in Canada. I've never seen one.

We also don't have NP's or PA's in Canada. You're either a medical doctor, or nothing.

 

[PublicHealth]

I live in Canada, and we don't have DO's, I don't even think osteopaths are legally recognized here, or legally allowed to practice in Canada. I've never seen one.

http://www.osteopathiecollege.com/college_association.htm
http://www.osteopathiecollege.com/home.htm
http://www.cao-hhs.org/

Quackery?

We also don't have NP's or PA's in Canada. You're either a medical doctor, or nothing.

http://www.caopa.net/english/

http://www.cna-nurses.ca/CNA/practice/advanced/initiative/default_e.aspx
http://www.npcanada.ca/modules/news/

I'm not sure of the credibility of any of these organiziations. I'm an American, dammit!

 

[seanjohn]

http://www.osteopathiecollege.com/college_association.htm
http://www.osteopathiecollege.com/home.htm
http://www.cao-hhs.org/

Quackery?




http://www.caopa.net/english/

http://www.cna-nurses.ca/CNA/practice/advanced/initiative/default_e.aspx
http://www.npcanada.ca/modules/news/

I'm not sure of the credibility of any of these organiziations. I'm an American, dammit!

Under the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, medical doctors, dentists, psychologists, podiatrists, optometrists, and chiropractors have been given the right and the obligation to communicate a diagnosis and the right to use the term doctor. There are no other health professions that may refer to themselves as 'doctors'.

If there are legally licensed osteopaths in Canada, which I sincerely doubt, then they still wouldn't be able to refer to themselves as doctors.

Our system is different in Canada...I was born and raised in Canada and lived here for 21 years, I've never heard of an osteopath before I joined this site. The vast majority of Canadians probably also never heard of an osteopath because we don't have any in the country, or not legally anyways. In the US, osteopaths are required to get their full medical license, so they are REAL doctors, but we just don't have them here.

We only have one type of doctor, as in medical doctor, and those are MD's.

 

[ProZackMI]

Under the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, medical doctors, dentists, psychologists, podiatrists, optometrists, and chiropractors have been given the right and the obligation to communicate a diagnosis and the right to use the term doctor. There are no other health professions that may refer to themselves as 'doctors'.

If there are legally licensed osteopaths in Canada, which I sincerely doubt, then they still wouldn't be able to refer to themselves as doctors.

Our system is different in Canada...I was born and raised in Canada and lived here for 21 years, I've never heard of an osteopath before I joined this site. The vast majority of Canadians probably also never heard of an osteopath because we don't have any in the country, or not legally anyways.

We only have one type of doctor, as in medical doctor, and those are MD's.

Sean, I believe that the RHPA is in Ontario only, right? Under that act, anyone with a legitimate doctoral degree may use the term "doctor", but only those professions you mentioned may use the term in clinical practice. Podiatrists, pharmacists, and others with professional degrees may append their letters after their name, but not use the title with patients.

Also, you have physicians educated in India, China, the Mid East, and the UK who only have bachelor's degrees in medicine (MBBS) who are considered equivalent to an MD. So, they are considered MDs in Canada and the US after they have undergone an appropriate Canadian or US residency and licensing exam. I believe a US trained DO is able to practice as an MD in some parts of Canada if he/she has undergone the necessary residency and lincesing exam. I have a friend who went to Michigan State's Osteo Med school and practices in Ontario, but uses MD after his name. If a bachelor's of med from India can practice in Canada as an MD, I would think a US trained DO (who has the same education as an MD) would be able to practice there as well.

However, you're correct...there are no DO schools in Canada. In the UK, osteopathy is considered a hybrid of chiropractic and homeopathy and is not considered medicine.

In the US, in the 1960s and 1970s DOs gained equal status with MDs. Prior to the 1960s, they had limited scopes of practice and were second class practitioners. They had their own hospitals and were often barred from practicing in allopathic hospitals. Also, in many places, they could not perform surgery or prescribe meds. Today, those restrictions are gone and they have full medical authority in all 50 states and Puerto Rico. They dx, tx, Rx, perform surgery, and occupy every medical speciality conceivable. Only the OLD MDs look down upon DOs. Most younger MDs like me think of DOs as equals. In fact, my internist is a DO.

 

[611]

www.ccoe.ca

 

[611]

www.osteopathiecollege.com

 

[seanjohn]

Sean, I believe that the RHPA is in Ontario only, right? Under that act, anyone with a legitimate doctoral degree may use the term "doctor", but only those professions you mentioned may use the term in clinical practice. Podiatrists, pharmacists, and others with professional degrees may append their letters after their name, but not use the title with patients.

Also, you have physicians educated in India, China, the Mid East, and the UK who only have bachelor's degrees in medicine (MBBS) who are considered equivalent to an MD. So, they are considered MDs in Canada and the US after they have undergone an appropriate Canadian or US residency and licensing exam. I believe a US trained DO is able to practice as an MD in some parts of Canada if he/she has undergone the necessary residency and lincesing exam. I have a friend who went to Michigan State's Osteo Med school and practices in Ontario, but uses MD after his name. If a bachelor's of med from India can practice in Canada as an MD, I would think a US trained DO (who has the same education as an MD) would be able to practice there as well.

However, you're correct...there are no DO schools in Canada. In the UK, osteopathy is considered a hybrid of chiropractic and homeopathy and is not considered medicine.

In the US, in the 1960s and 1970s DOs gained equal status with MDs. Prior to the 1960s, they had limited scopes of practice and were second class practitioners. They had their own hospitals and were often barred from practicing in allopathic hospitals. Also, in many places, they could not perform surgery or prescribe meds. Today, those restrictions are gone and they have full medical authority in all 50 states and Puerto Rico. They dx, tx, Rx, perform surgery, and occupy every medical speciality conceivable. Only the OLD MDs look down upon DOs. Most younger MDs like me think of DOs as equals. In fact, my internist is a DO.

Prozack, I absolutely agree that DO's trained in the US are equivalent to MD's, not from personal experience of course, but by reading these forums. It's very possible that a DO trained in the US would be able to practice in Canada as an MD, since their training and knowledge is equivalent to an MD, if they passed all the Canadian MD licensing exams. However, a DO trained in the US cannot practice in Canada as an osteopath with the DO degree because I don't think osteopaths are legally recognized as doctors anywhere in Canada, not just in Ontario, they have to get their MD.

 

[ProZackMI]

www.osteopathiecollege.com

Read the information you posted. It is not a DO program and graduates of the "five year program" (undergrad) do not receive medical training = to an MD or DO. It is a chiro massage program, not a medical degree.

 

[ProZackMI]

Prozack, I absolutely agree that DO's trained in the US are equivalent to MD's, not from personal experience of course, but by reading these forums. It's very possible that a DO trained in the US would be able to practice in Canada as an MD, since their training and knowledge is equivalent to an MD, if they passed all the Canadian MD licensing exams. However, a DO trained in the US cannot practice in Canada as an osteopath with the DO degree because I don't think osteopaths are legally recognized as doctors anywhere in Canada, not just in Ontario, they have to get their MD.

Sean, I think you are correct. However, it appears that things are changing in Quebec.

 

[611]

Read the information you posted. It is not a DO program and graduates of the "five year program" (undergrad) do not receive medical training = to an MD or DO. It is a chiro massage program, not a medical degree.

Sounds like a pretty fishy place.

 

[nebrfan]

www.ccoe.ca

Funny screenshot from that site....

 

[Jack Daniel]

There was a nice post recently describing practice opportunities for US trained DOs in Canada--but can't find it. However, I found an older post by OceandocDO dated 10-27-2003 that's about the same topic:

It's dictated by province. Most allow full licensure, the others probably havent been approached much regarding the subject, hence I imagine within the next few years you'll see these few remaining provinces open up.

This is from do-online.org:

Alberta
Scope of Practice: unlimited
Requirements: Must have completed at least 2 years of GME accredited by the ACGME or AOA and must have passed the Universities Coordinating Council Exam, a basic sciences exam, and have passed all three parts of the licensing examination of the Medical Council of Canada (LMCC)
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta
900 Manulife Place
10180-101 Street
Edmonton Alberta T5J 4P8
CANADA
(780) 423-4764
http://www.cpsa.ab.ca

British Columbia
Scope of Practice: one licensure pathway provides D.O.s with unlimited practice rights, and another pathway limits D.O.s to practice OMM
Requirements: To be eligible for unlimited licenses: must have completed at least one year of GME approved by the AOA or the ACGME, completed at least 1 year of GME in Canada, passed all three parts of the LMCC. For licenses limited to OMM: must have completed at least 2 years of AOA approved GME and passed all three parts of the NBOME or COMLEX.
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia
1807 W. 10th Avenue
Vancouver British Columbia V6J 2A9
CANADA
(604) 733-7758
http://cpsbc.bc.ca

Manitoba
Scope of Practice: unlimited
Requirements: In 2002, the College voted to register U.S.-educated and trained DOs.
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba
1000-1661 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg Manitoba R3J 3T7
CANADA
(204) 774-4344
http://www.cpsm.mb.ca

New Brunswick
Scope of Practice: unlimited
Requirements: Must have completed at least 2 years of GME approved by the AOA or the ACGME and have passed all three parts of the LMCC. There is also a reciprocity pathway for D.O.s holding a license to practice medicine in Maine.
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick
1 Hampton Road, Suite 200
Rothesay, New Brunswick E2E 5K8
CANADA
(506) 849-5050
http://cpsnb.org

Newfoundland
Scope of Practice: To be determined
Requirements: in 2002, the College committed itself to seeing that the government establishes a registration pathway for U.S.-educated D.O.s. It is anticipated that establishing guidelines may take a couple of years.
Contact: Newfoundland Medical Board
139 Water Street, Suite 603
St. John?s Newfoundland A1C 1B2
CANADA
(709) 726-8546

Northwest Territories
Scope of Practice: unlimited
Requirements: While no specific provisions are in place, the AOA has been told the government will grant registration to any physician that qualifies for licensure in any other province.
Contact: Government of the Northwest Territories
Centre Square Tower 8th Floor
Yellowknife NWT X1A 2L9
CANADA
(867) 920-8058

Nova Scotia
Scope of Practice: unlimited
A new regulation was put into effect in 2002 to recognize U.S.-educated osteopathic physicians.
Contact: Provincial Medical Board of Nova Scotia
Sentry Place
1559 Brunswick Street, Suite 200
Halifax Nova Scotia B3J 2G1
CANADA
(902) 422-5823
http://www.cpsns.ns.ca

Ontario
Scope of Practice: Unlimited
In 2002, the Premier of Ontario and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) announced that changes were being implemented to recognize international medical graduates, including D.O.s. In addition, the CPSO has created a Fast Track Assessment Program for international medical graduates who wish to practice in Ontario. The Fast Track Assessment is an expedited process designed for doctors with experience. It focuses on an evaluation of practice skills and can be tailored to the individual applicant. By evaluating the practice skills of the individual doctor rather than looking at the grades and training programs, the College acquires a more realistic view of the abilities of the individual physicians. For more recent graduates, there is the Standard Assessment process. It concentrates on examination grades and completion of an approved course of education and residency. All candidates are assessed in the same way. For more information on Ontario?s registration, go to http://www.cpso.on.ca/info_physicia...nts/regist.htm.
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
80 College Street
Toronto Ontario M5G 2E2
CANADA
(416) 967-2600
http://www.cpso.on.ca

Prince Edward Island
Scope of Practice: no provisions exist for licensing US-trained D.O.s
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of Prince Edward Island
199 Grafton Street
Charlottetown, PEI C1A 1L2
CANADA
(902) 566-3861

Quebec
Scope of Practice: unlimited
Requirements: Must have completed at least 1 year of GME approved by the AOA or the ACGME, must have completed at least 1 year of GME in Quebec, passed the written, oral and clinical board examination of the College of Family Physicians of Canada and must speak French fluently.
Contact: College des Medecins du Quebec
2170 Rene-Levesque Blvd West
Montreal Quebec H3H 2T8
CANADA
(514) 933-4441
http://www.cmq.org

Saskatchewan
Scope of Practice: limited to OMM
Requirements: Must have completed at least 1 year of AOA-approved GME.
Contact: College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan
211 Fourth Avenue South
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 1N1
CANADA
(306) 244-7355
http://www.quadrant.net/cpss

 

[wayttk]

Read the information you posted. It is not a DO program and graduates of the "five year program" (undergrad) do not receive medical training = to an MD or DO. It is a chiro massage program, not a medical degree.

"It is a chiro massage program" Oh Really? How did you determine this? Is it somehow affiliated with CMCC or Université Du Québec A Trois-Riverés? Those are the two canadian DC schools. You wouldn't be passing erroneous or misrepresentative rumors now------would you?

 

[ProZackMI]

"It is a chiro massage program" Oh Really? How did you determine this? Is it somehow affiliated with CMCC or Université Du Québec A Trois-Riverés? Those are the two canadian DC schools. You wouldn't be passing erroneous or misrepresentative rumors now------would you?

I read the link, did you?

 

[wayttk]

Yes- did you?

It is NOT a chiropractic program. A DC degree in Canada can be awarded ONLY by the two Canadian schools I cited.

 

[Mike MacKinnon]

I think this website clears it up:

http://www.chirowatch.com/cw-corruption.html

Chiropratice is nothing less than a bunch of whitch doctors pretending to be physicians. Im not a physician, but i know evidence based medicine and Voodoo when i see it.

There was recently a huge expose on chiro and how its a fraud on either 60 minutes or 20/20.

 

[nebrfan]

I think this website clears it up:

http://www.chirowatch.com/cw-corruption.html

Chiropratice is nothing less than a bunch of whitch doctors pretending to be physicians. Im not a physician, but i know evidence based medicine and Voodoo when i see it.

There was recently a huge expose on chiro and how its a fraud on either 60 minutes or 20/20.

Scientific American Frontiers had a good series on CAM, including an interview w/ an ex-DC questioning some Chiropractic philosophy, available online at...
http://www.pbs.org/saf/1210/video/watchonline.htm

 

[wayttk]

I think this website clears it up:

http://www.chirowatch.com/cw-corruption.html

Chiropratice is nothing less than a bunch of whitch doctors pretending to be physicians. Im not a physician, but i know evidence based medicine and Voodoo when i see it.

There was recently a huge expose on chiro and how its a fraud on either 60 minutes or 20/20.

Are you for real? Are you serious? Are you that clueless?, that gullible?


Yeah sure-----I guess chirowatch clears everything up!! That is my preferred source for up to date, accurate, unbiased, and objective information! I don't care what they say!!! Who needs PubMed? Peer-reviewed Journals?..........



Oh--And-- I always set aside Friday night ( call it: "study night") to watch 20/20 to keep current on the latest academic, scientific, and clinical information.

Hey----why read, dry, lengthy journal studies?, when I can get it all, in a few minutes, and in living color, no less, on 20/20?


BTW- WHAT is "nothing less than"?


YUP!!----- Someone that cites chirowatch and 20/20 for the basis of their opinion..................... how can anyone argue with that esteemed bastion of accurate, indexed, information?

 

[Mike MacKinnon]

Hey

Would you like to to post ALL the articleds on pub med vs Chiro? Cause there is NONE for. AT ALL.

Chiro has ABSOLUTELY 0% science and its total witchcraft. BS.

Geesus, why dont you read a little?

Are you for real? Are you serious? Are you that clueless?, that gullible?


Yeah sure-----I guess chirowatch clears everything up!! That is my preferred source for up to date, accurate, unbiased, and objective information! I don't care what they say!!! Who needs PubMed? Peer-reviewed Journals?..........



Oh--And-- I always set aside Friday night ( call it: "study night") to watch 20/20 to keep current on the latest academic, scientific, and clinical information.

Hey----why read, dry, lengthy journal studies?, when I can get it all, in a few minutes, and in living color, no less, on 20/20?


BTW- WHAT is "nothing less than"?


YUP!!----- Someone that cites chirowatch and 20/20 for the basis of their opinion..................... how can anyone argue with that esteemed bastion of accurate, indexed, information?

 

[611]

Here's some bathroom reading...knock yourselves out
http://journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/ymmt

 

[wayttk]

Here's some bathroom reading...knock yourselves out
http://journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/ymmt

HA! HA! HA! 611!

That will be wasted on MikeM. He has problems with complete sentences, words over five letters, singular/plural applications, and forming a coherent thought!!

His post from above:

>>>Would you like to to post ALL the articleds on pub med vs Chiro? Cause there is NONE for. AT ALL.<<<

WTF is THAT?

 

[Mike MacKinnon]

Buddy

I have been published in peer reviewed journals.

Let me enlighten you. This is a propoganda machine. Where are the double blind repeated trials? Oh there are none. Medicine has formally "debunked" chiro on multiple occasions.

Get your facts straight

 

[611]

Buddy

I have been published in peer reviewed journals.

Let me enlighten you. This is a propoganda machine. Where are the double blind repeated trials? Oh there are none. Medicine has formerly "debunked" chiro on multiple occasions.

Get your facts straight

You are so correct. SDN is a propaganda machine.

 

[ProZackMI]

Yes- did you?

It is NOT a chiropractic program. A DC degree in Canada can be awarded ONLY by the two Canadian schools I cited.

I realize you're only a DC, and therefore, it's a forgone conclusion that you barely passed high school and worked really hard for 5 years for that associate's degree in heating/cooling, and then on to chiro school, BUT...if you read my original comment, I said it was NOT a DO program and seemed to be some sort of massage therapy, quasi-chiro certificate program. You might want to give them a call and see if you can afford to attend. I'm sure management jobs at McD's pay better than peddling subluxations at the mall.

 

[ProZackMI]

Are you for real? Are you serious? Are you that clueless?, that gullible?


Yeah sure-----I guess chirowatch clears everything up!! That is my preferred source for up to date, accurate, unbiased, and objective information! I don't care what they say!!! Who needs PubMed? Peer-reviewed Journals?..........



Oh--And-- I always set aside Friday night ( call it: "study night") to watch 20/20 to keep current on the latest academic, scientific, and clinical information.

Hey----why read, dry, lengthy journal studies?, when I can get it all, in a few minutes, and in living color, no less, on 20/20?


BTW- WHAT is "nothing less than"?


YUP!!----- Someone that cites chirowatch and 20/20 for the basis of their opinion..................... how can anyone argue with that esteemed bastion of accurate, indexed, information?

Nothing for less is chiropractic school. And, FYI, John Baldanes, the former DC who now debunks chiropractic, has a PharmD (Doctor of Pharmacy) degree from the University of Calinfornia at San Diego, which he earned after his DC. He now practices as a clinical pharmacist at a research hospital and understand empirical-based medicine. So, the article Mike MacKinnon referenced was not just media hype, it was based on revelations of a former DC who has since obtained a real education and practices in an EB health care profession.

 

[ProZackMI]

It's interesting to note that the forums section here on SDN includes sections for

- MDs and DOs
- PharmDs
- DPMs
- ODs
- Vets
- Clinical psychologists
- Dentists
- PAs/NPs, Nurses, and techs...
YET...nothing for chiropractors. There is no CHIROPRACTIC [DC] or pre-chiropractic (same thing, right?) section.

Why is this? SDN recognizes that chiropractic is quakery; it's pseudo-science wrapped up in a cure-all, know-all package of bunk. DCs are poorly trained, undereducated, and disrespected by almost all health care professionals.

 

[611]

Some people think certain areas of medicine are pseudo-science.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Some people think certain areas of medicine are pseudo-science.

Please define "some people" and tell us WHICH areas you mean?

Just because some guy off the street doesn't trust blood transfusions, doesn't mean that they are useless.

 

[victor14]

i might be a little late to reply, but...
working in retail sales i come across alot people. last week i came across the head plastic surgeon of a local burn center here in Los Angeles. i asked him what he thought of a chiropractor. he said they are good for what they do, aslong as they dont cross that bridge. i also told him that i had spoken to several MDs and they were telling me chiropractic is not a good profession and so on. he turned around and said, dont listen to any of that, that is called marketing. they just want more business for themselves. bottom line, DC are good for what they do, back problems, neck problems, muscle problems...

 

[611]

i might be a little late to reply, but...
working in retail sales i come across alot people. last week i came across the head plastic surgeon of a local burn center here in Los Angeles. i asked him what he thought of a chiropractor. he said they are good for what they do, aslong as they dont cross that bridge. i also told him that i had spoken to several MDs and they were telling me chiropractic is not a good profession and so on. he turned around and said, dont listen to any of that, that is called marketing. they just want more business for themselves. bottom line, DC are good for what they do, back problems, neck problems, muscle problems...

Business is a two way street.

 

[victor14]

the only thing i dont like about chiro schools is that they are not univeristy based. i visited one of the schools here in los angeles (cleveland). i really liked the settting. the classrooms are not big lecture halls, but they do fit maybe 100-150 students. they have a on campus health clinic where all the 4th yr students do there internships and residency there. they have 4 big labs. reason to why i know all this is because im deabting weather to go into dentistry or chiropractic lol.

also, a chiro is totally different than an MD. you wouldnt go to a MD with a tooth problem, woud you? you wouldnt fo to a dentist with a back problem. chiro is just another branch of health care. i closely resemble it to OD.

also, chiro education is just about the same as med school. there are more lecture hours in some courses in chiro school than there are at med school. also, there are a few DCs that teach in med schools and there are a few MDs that teach in chiro school. for example, harvard med school has a DC as a faculty member

 

[611]

I think the only university based chiro school is University of Bridgeport but it's not the best chiro. school. Look into Southern California University of Health Sciences in LA or National University of Health Sciences in Chicago.

 

[victor14]

611...

are you a chiro student?

 

[611]

D.c.