Why is “organized medicine” anti-chiropractic?  That is a good question.  Research is affirming the efficacy of chiropractic care; Chiropractic is routinely demonstrated to be a patient-preferred treatment delivery system; many symptoms respond positively to chiropractic care and even seemingly unrelated health complaints may be improved. Chiropractic schools have, for years, worked with medical schools here in Texas. Yet the self-proclaimed “organized medicine” in the United States of America is routinely “anti-chiropractic” and would presume to establish the practice of ALL practitioners in their own image. But, as we have seen with the TMA v TBCE lawsuit and others, they would prohibit others from performing it.  This is not new, it has been in evidence since the turn of the LAST century.

From the earliest days of chiropractic “organized medicine” has been anti-chiropractic, but it is no secret that many individual medical practitioners are not fans of chiropractic, and often times not fans of other complementary practices either.  Some medical practitioners won’t accept referrals from a chiropractor, some hospitals refuse requests made by a chiropractic doctor for medical services, and my favorite examples from my own experience--the medical doctor who visibly recoiled when introduced to a chiropractor, and the medical doctor who receives chiropractic care, improves from it, and then continues to tell his patients not to see chiropractic doctors.  Of course they have the right to do and say as they feel they should or should not do.  By pretending to be an altruistic authority always acting in the public’s interest and yet reflexively responding in self-centered and self-serving ways, however, dilutes their ability to claim such a public-spirited platform.

The reasons “organized medicine” and hypocritical practitioners often give for not working and playing well with others are not always clear, but generally lie somewhere between being worried that either such care is unsafe, and their fear that their own practice or profession will be harmed in some way.

It is time for medical practitioners in general, and “organized medicine” specifically, to learn more about chiropractic care rather than stand in the way of progress.  Chiropractic care can often provide safe, effective and fast-working treatment.  Here are but a very few examples: 

Evidence-based research is demonstrating that chiropractic care is safe, clinically effective and cost-efficient.  Mercer Health and Benefits in San Francisco funded a study to review existing literature on the efficacy of chiropractic.  Their conclusion is that chiropractic works as well as, or better than currently conventional modalities for treating many forms of low back and neck pain.  Numerous other studies also support the effectiveness for spine and neck issues in particular.  A 2002 study of patients with nonspecific neck pain found that pain was reduced and function was improved for 68.3% after seven weeks of chiropractic care, while the success rate for those in the care of general practitioners was only 36%.  The chiropractic patients also missed work less frequently and needed less pain medication.  There are a multitude of less well known, or less extensive studies that indicate the safety, clinical effectiveness, and cost-efficiency that have been being offered for decades.

A specific “safety concern” offered by some is that of stroke.  It has become popular amongst the anti-chiropractic community to fear that, in a vulnerable patient, twisting or stretching vulnerable arteries during a manipulation could cause rupture. Recently studies were performed to investigate this fear and it was determined that it would take nine-times the force of a typical manipulation to cause damage to these arteries and mobilize plaque.  It was determined that normal head and neck movement presented a greater risk, in fact there is a term for one of these common movements--the beauty parlor stroke. 

There are other studies, of course, but perhaps the most realistic demonstration that chiropractic is safe is the cost of malpractice insurance--the actuarial studies done by these insurance companies demonstrate that the safety of chiropractic is such that chiropractic malpractice insurance costs only about one-tenth what an MD has to pay--an average of $1300 versus $10,000 to $20,000 for general physicians.

So, why is the medical community anti-chiropractic?  Individual safety cannot be the issue, chiropractic safety is widely demonstrable.  Public safety cannot be the issue , because the public is defended by state and federally mandated laws to insure such safety issues.  Clinical efficacy cannot be an issue, for scientific studies have abounded for decades regarding chiropractic clinical efficacy. 

In the final installment we'll look at the root cause of why "organized medicine" is anti-chiropractic.