Re: The Science of Chiropractic

[Guest guest]

I remember seeing a news segment on a Canadian TV (CTV?) where a cardiologist

strongly

recommended against chiropractic treatments, especially for those who may have

build-ups of

plaque or or partial occlusion of their arteries. He said that the worst was

neck and head

manipulation which violently dislodged the plaques in the arteries and these

plaques of course

can cause heart attacks.

The news continued with an interview with a chiropractor and a patient, and they

actually

demonstrated the manipulation in question (of course, both thought it was

benefical).

Now I don't know much about chiropractic philosophy, but I do know this: that

neck manipulation

is exactly what I do to cause a serious whiplash and neck injury to somebody

when I am fighting.

The patient was facing down, his head off the table. The chiropractor then

cradled the patient's

head and kind of lightly but quickly nudged the head to one side once or twice

as if to get ready,

and bam! quickly pulled his to the opposite side, causing that creaky, bone

crunching noise that

was beautifully captured on camera.

I was wincing so hard when I actually saw that.

In one martial art (Burmese bando) that I saw, the neck attack (strangulation or

break) could be

applied in the exact manner for restorative purposes (loosen the neck muscles,

increase the circulation).

Now the speed at which it was done was very slow and steady: there was

absolutely no abrupt change of

direction in manipulating the head. The chiropractic manipulation that was

broadcast, of course, was

way above what I consider to be safe speed.

I am not saying that there are no violent, abrupt manipulations in Eastern

healing arts, but I know

that they are used exactly once (such as resetting a bone), not every time the

patient visits!

Bob Yu

Montreal, Canada

[Guest guest]

Bob Yu wrote:

> Now I don't know much about chiropractic philosophy, but I do know this: that

neck manipulation

> is exactly what I do to cause a serious whiplash and neck injury to somebody

when I am fighting.

Here is something from my files that relates to this topic. I haven't checked to

see if every link is still working.)

The following material deals primarily with neck manipulation and strokes.

------------

KILLER INSTINCT

This interesting item from Chiropractic OnLine Today could use a follow-up,

showing that the " danger move "

depicted in Nintendo's game, Killer Instinct, is in fact just that! It's

potentially dangerous - no matter who does

it - trained or not:

http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html

" On September 7, 1995, Chiropractic OnLine Today broke the story of Nintendo's

new game, Killer Instinct,

which blatantly defamed the whole Chiropractic Profession.

" Since then, others have picked up on this story. Chiropractic OnLine Today is

proud to be a part of a community

which cares, and urges everyone to contact Nintendo at the number listed below.

" With this update on October 20, 1995, a position paper by the International

Chiropractic Pediatric Association

is presented:

http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#ped

" Further, Chiropractic OnLine Today, with thanks to Dr. M. Guest

(DrGuest@...), c/o Chiro-List,

contacted Nintendo via Email and is now publishing the following reply from a

Nintendo representative:

http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#reply "

----------

My comments:

The following quote implies that the " forceful twisting of a child's neck by a

TRAINED person CANNOT of course

cause serious injury " . While the original quote below is most certainly true,

the implication and intent of the quote

is most certainly misleading.

" The ICPA is particularly concerned about the " Chiropractor " move used in

" Killer Instinct. " The forceful twisting

of a child's neck by an untrained person can of course cause serious injury. The

ICPA calls for the immediate

elimination of their " danger move " from the game. "

http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#ped

Nintendo should be contacted to reasure them that they, in fact, were not that

far wrong. They need to be made aware

of some of the following information:

The Spin Doctors Investigation - http://www.canoe.ca/ChiroYork

Sudden neck movement and cervical artery dissection

http://www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-163/issue-1/0038.htm

Complications of cervical manipulation, etc.:

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Link & db=PubMed & dbFrom=PubMed & \

from_uid=3612063>

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Link & db=PubMed & dbFrom=PubMed & \

from_uid=8452341>

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Link & db=PubMed & dbFrom=PubMed & \

from_uid=3632387>

-------------

Chiropractic's Dirty Secret: Neck Manipulation and Strokes

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirostroke.html

Excellent, with many references and links.

---------------

Canadian Neurologists Warn against Neck Manipulation

http://www.chirobase.org/15News/neurol.html

Brad , MD, FRCPC

Sixty-two clinical neurologists from across Canada, all certified members of the

Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons,

have issued a warning to the Canadian public and provincial governments 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, they warn that stroke and death due to neck manipulation

has been reported in the scientific literature

for over 50 years and that manipulation is one of the leading causes of stroke

in the under 45-age group. The neurologists

express six basic concerns:

They first call upon physicians to be more vigilant. All patients presenting

with a stroke, especially those less than 45,

should be questioned about recent neck manipulation. They advise that physicians

need to make an immediate referral to

a neurologist for any patient with a history of neck manipulation that is

followed by symptoms of stroke.

They uge the public to recognize that symptoms such as sudden neck pain, visual

disturbances and nausea following neck

manipulation are not normal. They warn that under no circumstances should an

individual allow their necks to be

manipulated if any of these symptoms are present.

They endorse the Inquest Jury recommendations into the death of Laurie Jean

Mathiason of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,

a 20-year-old woman who died following a chiropractic neck manipulation. That

Jury recommended that the " risk of

stroke and other inherent risks associated with chiropractic treatment be

visible and available in the reception area

of every chiropractic facility. "

They express concern that in a routine autopsy " the vertebral arteries in the

neck are almost never removed and

examined. " As it is these arteries that are most often damaged by neck

manipulation, they urge close inspection of the

vertebral arteries in all suspicious cases. Further, such cases should be

referred to the office of the regional coroner.

They urge all the provincial Ministries of Health to act upon the strong

concerns expressed by the Canadian Pediatric

Community about neck manipulation in the pediatric age group. They call for an

" immediate banning of all spinal

manipulation of infants and children " .

They call for an Inquiry into what they consider to be " endless non-scientific

claims being made as to the uses of neck

manipulation. "

----------------------

Statement of Concern to the Canadian Public from Canadian Neurologists

Regarding the Debilitating and Fatal Damage Manipulation of the Neck May Cause

to the Nervous System

February 2002

We Canadian neurologists hereby express our strong concern and thereby issue

this warning to Canadians. The

public must be made aware that the neurological damage that can result

subsequent to upper neck manipulation can

be debilitating and fatal.

We make the following recommendations for the attention of the Canadian public,

the practitioners of manipulation,

the medical community, the provincial Ministries of Health and the health care

professional regulatory bodies.

Our concerns are significant. Stroke and death due to neck manipulation has been

reported in the scientific literature

for over 50 years [1-10]. New deaths, in the past few years, have been reported

to the Canadian Stroke Consortium [11].

The Canadian Stroke Consortium recently published a major prospective study

[12]. The latest data from the Stroke

Consortium indicates that " more than 100 cases of dissection per year are

associated with neck manipulation. " [13]

The resulting stroke and debilitation from such a large number is very

significant.

A recent study by the Institute of Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES Ontario)

indicates that patients with posterior

circulation strokes under the age of 45 are 5 times more likely than controls to

have visited a chiropractor within

one week of the event [14].

===

Concern #1: Physicians need greater diagnostic awareness of the neurological

complications that may result

from neck manipulation,

Many physicians are not aware of the risks associated with neck manipulation and

thus fail to undertake the appropriate

investigations [15] A history of neck manipulation or severe neck pain

accompanied by signs or symptoms of stroke should

prompt an immediate referral to a neurologist for examination and appropriate

investigation.

Multiple neurological complications can result subsequent to neck manipulation.

The most dramatic is arterial dissection

leading to stroke and death. Cervical manipulation most commonly causes stroke

occurring in the back part of the brain.

This can be particularly disabling as it can affect such basic functions as

swallowing, speaking and walking.

We recommend that the neurology community undertake an educational program for

primary care and emergency room

physicians to increase diagnostic awareness of the dangers of neck manipulation

and its multiple neurological

complications.

===

Concern #2: There is an urgent need for the public to be fully and properly

informed of the dangers of neck manipulation.

Members of the public are largely unaware of the complications of neck

manipulation. Well-documented complications

include damage to the nerves in the neck, compression of the spinal cord by

unstable discs, tearing of the arteries in

the neck, stroke and death.

The most significant complication of manipulation is stroke secondary to torn

arteries in the neck. The first symptom

may be sudden neck pain following neck manipulation [12]. Patients often ignore

this pain, as it may have been neck

pain that prompted the visit in the first place.

Other important symptoms suggestive of stroke include visual disturbances,

nausea, dizziness, poor co-ordination, and

weakness or numbness on one side of the body. The onset of these symptoms should

prompt an immediate medical assessment.

Under no circumstances should an individual allow their necks to be manipulated

if any of these symptoms are present.

We recommend that the medical community undertake an information campaign to

increase public awareness of the risks

of neck manipulation. Special attention should be paid to increasing awareness

of the symptoms of stroke following

manipulation.

===

Concern #3: The individual patient needs to be fully and directly aware that

serious risks do exist.

We endorse the major recommendations of the 1998 inquest into the

manipulation-induced death of Laurie Mathiason

of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. This Inquest recommended that the " risk of stroke

and other inherent risks associated with

chiropractic treatment be visible and available in the reception area of every

chiropractic facility. " [16]

We further recommend that other practitioners of manipulation therapy, including

physiotherapists, should have a

warning posted in their offices about the risks of neck manipulation.

Qualified epidemiologists, medical scientists and legal experts should develop a

patient information form that it truly

reflective of the risks. This should be presented to every patient. This should

include up to date scientific information

on the risks per individual patient rather than dated, non-scientific claims

that significantly underestimate the risk

to the individual patient.

===

Concern #4: We are concerned that current autopsy procedures fail to diagnose

all cases.

In the course of a routine autopsy, the vertebral arteries in the neck are

almost never removed and examined. Cases of

death due to neck manipulation have been missed [17]. It is important to know

the true incidence.

As there may be a significant time delay between manipulation and stroke, any

person dying of stroke within three months

of a neck manipulation should have their carotid and/or vertebral arteries

examined by a pathologist. This is especially

important in those patients under the age of 45 in whom a clear cause for stroke

cannot be identified [14].

Suspicious cases should be reported to the office of the regional Coroner. This

will allow a better estimate of the true

incidence of stroke and death secondary to cervical manipulation.

===

Concern #5: Provincial Ministries of Health should ackowledge and act upon the

strong concerns and recommendations

of the scientific pediatric community regarding so-called " pediatric

chiropractic. "

Chiropractors in Canada perform cervical manipulation in children for the

" treatment " of infantile colic, inner ear

infections, bedwetting and a myriad of other paediatric illnesses. Chiropractic

authorities claim that parents should bring

their new-born baby to a chiropractor " as soon as possible after birth. " [18]

Such claims and recommendations have no

scientific basis and only expose infants and children to unwarranted neck

manipulation.

Strong concerns have been expressed by the Chiefs of Paediatrics of our Canadian

Hospitals [19] and by the Canadian

Paediatric Society regarding chiropractic manipulation on the spines of infants

and children [20].

Paralysis and other complications in infants and children following cervical

neck manipulation have occurred [21].

Death has also been reported [23].

We strongly recommend that each provincial Ministry of Health order the

immediate banning of all spinal manipulation

of infants and children.

===

Concern #6: We express our strong concern about the many non-scientific claims

made as to the conditions that

purportedly may benefit from neck manipulation.

There are endless non-scientific claims being made as to the uses of neck

manipulation. The public must be made aware

that the very great majority of these claims have little or no evidence to

support them.

We call upon the responsible governmental health authorities to conduct a full

inquiry into the dubious claims being

made. Representatives of all concerned parties should be brought together in

such an inquiry. This should include an

examination of the information being taught at all schools and courses dealing

with manipulation therapy.

References given ....

-------------

[in a previous letter I asked if any chiropractors on this list would care to

summarise the different schools of chiropractic

philosophy, some of which make wanton and routine of spinal manipulation for

almost every problem. This would now be

an opportune time for such a summary because the discussion so far has created

the impression that all chiropractors are

the same and apply the same approach. It would also be useful if some

references could be cited which show that the

circumspect application of controlled and graded manipulation or mobilisation

does have some scientific basis and is

safe as a therapeutic intervention. We also need to note that far too many

average persons twist, turn and " crack " their own

necks, thereby acting like amateur therapists - they also need to be far more

aware of the potential problems associated

with their form of amateur treatment. Mel Siff]

Regards,

Lee, PT

The Quack-Files

http://www.quackfiles.com

Anti-Quackery Resources & WebRing

http://quackbusters.quackfiles.com

Anti-Quackery Ring - Join now!

http://g.webring.com/hub?ring=antiquackerysite

Danish

http://dansk.quackfiles.com

Submit your site!!

http://www.geocities.com/healthbase/xlinks.html

----- Original Message -----

> I remember seeing a news segment on a Canadian TV (CTV?) where a cardiologist

strongly

> recommended against chiropractic treatments, especially for those who may have

build-ups of

> plaque or or partial occlusion of their arteries. He said that the worst was

neck and head

> manipulation which violently dislodged the plaques in the arteries and these

plaques of course

> can cause heart attacks.

>

> The news continued with an interview with a chiropractor and a patient, and

they actually

> demonstrated the manipulation in question (of course, both thought it was

benefical).

>

> Now I don't know much about chiropractic philosophy, but I do know this: that

neck manipulation

> is exactly what I do to cause a serious whiplash and neck injury to somebody

when I am fighting.

>

> The patient was facing down, his head off the table. The chiropractor then

cradled the patient's

> head and kind of lightly but quickly nudged the head to one side once or twice

as if to get ready,

> and bam! quickly pulled his to the opposite side, causing that creaky, bone

crunching noise that

> was beautifully captured on camera.

>

> I was wincing so hard when I actually saw that.

>

> In one martial art (Burmese bando) that I saw, the neck attack (strangulation

or break) could be

> applied in the exact manner for restorative purposes (loosen the neck muscles,

increase the circulation).

> Now the speed at which it was done was very slow and steady: there was

absolutely no abrupt change of

> direction in manipulating the head. The chiropractic manipulation that was

broadcast, of course, was

> way above what I consider to be safe speed.

>

> I am not saying that there are no violent, abrupt manipulations in Eastern

healing arts, but I know

> that they are used exactly once (such as resetting a bone), not every time the

patient visits!

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if

you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

Mel Siff wrote:

<In a previous letter I asked if any chiropractors on this list would care to

summarise the different schools of chiropractic

philosophy, some of which make wanton and routine of spinal manipulation for

almost every problem. This would now be

an opportune time for such a summary because the discussion so far has created

the impression that all chiropractors are

the same and apply the same approach. It would also be useful if some

references could be cited which show that the

circumspect application of controlled and graded manipulation or mobilisation

does have some scientific basis and is

safe as a therapeutic intervention. We also need to note that far too many

average persons twist, turn and " crack " their own

necks, thereby acting like amateur therapists - they also need to be far more

aware of the potential problems associated

with their form of amateur treatment. >

There are many different competing schools of thought in the chiropractic

profession, and the infighting is often quite

bitter. They can very roughly be divided into two basic ways of thinking, called

" straights " and " mixers " . The difference

is often considered to be in their use of techniques, but that is not the whole

story, nor the most important difference.

Here's the *very* short, simplified version.

Differences in use of techniques:

" Straights " are the original type of " real " chiropractor, and should (by their

own standards) only adjust using their hands.

But that's rare. They also should also limit themselves to the use of

adjustments for the treatment of practically all diseases.

This is because of their philosophy. They primarily treat only the spine, since

they believe that all diseases are caused by

spinal subluxations.

" Mixers " allow that other forms of therapy than adjustments are necessary and

desirable. They use many physiotherapeutic

modalities, and often work more like PTs, bearing little resemblance to " real "

DCs. They treat the neuromusculoskeletal

system, and often limit themselves to this area, but some would like to be MDs

or just like MDs.

Philosophical Differences:

" Straights " believe in the original chiropractic philosophies of Universal

Intelligence (UI), Innate Intelligence (II), etc. Basically

they are pantheistic biotheologists. They are the high priests that connect one

to god. They restore the blockages of UI, that

then are the cause of all diseases. Palmer stated that all diseases were caused

by chiropractic subluxations (not the real ones):

95% of diseases caused by subluxations of the spinal vertebrae, and 5% by

subluxations of other joints. Only a chiropractor

can detect and correct these subluxations. They are not visible on x-rays, and

may not have any symptoms, yet they need to

be corrected, otherwise one's health will be poorer and one will die earlier.

The extreme statements of straight chiropractors are

often quite radically anti-MD, anti-science, anti-vaccination, anti-germ theory,

etc. They are adamant in denying that they

diagnose any disease or perform differential diagnosis. They only detect and

correct subluxations. They walk the straight and

narrow path laid out for them by their founder, the grocer, D.D. Palmer. They

worship him and they are fanatical about defending

the Big Idea: that all disease is caused by subluxations. They are usually

members of the ICA and WCA.

" Mixers " use whatever that works, but are still much more dependent on

adjustments than PTs, DOs or MDs. They are, after all,

chiropractors. They are more prone to accept scientific data, use vaccinations,

cooperate with MDs and PTs, admit that germs

can cause disease, admit that not all diseases are caused by nerve pressure from

subluxations, etc. Where permitted by State

laws, they diagnose and perform differential diagnosis. They would like to

completely take over the techniques used by MDs

and PTs, and would eventually like to totally replace/displace them, since they

still often consider chiropractic to be the only

complete and correct healing art. But there are vast differences among mixers.

They are not a homogenous group. Most are

members of the ACA.

Then there are the members of the NACM and the Orthopractors. They are the

reformers who are scientific and are (vainly)

attempting to reform the profession from within. Read their guidelines:

National Association For Chiropractic Medicine (NACM)

http://www.chiromed.org

The Orthopractic Guidelines for Science-Based Manual Therapy

http://www.chirobase.org/07Strategy/ortho.html

Canadian Orthopractic Manual Therapy Association

http://orthopractic.org/

These links have some information on different schools of thought and

techniques:

Bonesetting, Chiropractic, and Cultism

by Homola, DC

Ch 11: Chiropractic " Technique Wars "

http://www.chirobase.org/05RB/BCC/11.html

Read the whole book online!

CHIROPRACTIC BELIEF SYSTEMS

http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/ahcpr/chapter2.htm

This provides some insights into differences in the profession. Being written by

chiros, it tends to gloss over the

differences, and make modern chiropractic rosier than it is. But there is still

some good stuff here.

Glossary of Chiropractic Terms

http://www.chirobase.org/01General/chiroglossary.html

Questionable Diagnostic and Treatment Practices

http://www.chirobase.org/#dd

---------------

An interesting article that caused the blood of chiros across the nation to boil

in rage:

Time Magazine:

Wednesday, Feb. 27, 2002

<http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,213482,00.html>

Back Off, Chiropractors!

Recent research suggests some chiropractic techniques may be dangerous for

patients

by Leon Jaroff

Chiropractors have been taking their lumps lately. And not all of the criticism

has come from their usual critics in the

medical profession. Indeed, some chiropractors themselves are cautiously calling

for reforms.

The most recent and most disturbing news (at least as far as chiropractors are

concerned) was announced at a recent

meeting of the American Stroke Association in Texas. There, neurologists from

Toronto University reported analyzing

156 cases of stroke and finding that nearly 40 percent of them had apparently

resulted from chiropractic neck

manipulation. This hands-on treatment had caused tearing in the inside walls of

the neck arteries, resulting in clots that

blocked blood flow to the brain, bringing on the strokes. The neurologists

called for a ban on the procedure.

Chiropractors immediately challenged these findings, claiming that earlier

studies had verified the safety of neck

manipulation. Yet even the doctors who concede that spinal manipulation can be

beneficial for lower back pain and

stiffness generally exclude neck manipulation from their endorsement.

Doctors find many of the other claims and practices of chiropractic

questionable, if not downright objectionable. Most

chiropractors, for example, believe that " subluxations, " or minor dislocations

of the spine, put pressure on spinal

nerves, resulting in a wide variety of disorders. Spinal manipulation, they

claim, can effectively treat these disorders

and, some even suggest, strengthen the body's defenses against infectious

diseases.

Chiropractors differ widely in their methods of treatment, some attempting to

adjust only one specific vertebra at the

top of the spine, others concentrating on a lower vertebra and still others

focusing on the entire spine. All this despite

the fact that no uniform criteria exist for even identifying a subluxation, let

alone what it causes.

Chiropractors also employ a bewildering variety of weird practices to diagnose

their patients. Some use applied

kinesiology, a muscle test that supposedly can diagnose allergies and diseased

organs. Hair analysis and iris readings

are commonplace in the profession. Even sillier are many of the treatments that

chiropractors use and recommend:

homeopathic potions, colon irrigation, magnetic therapy, enzyme pills,

colored-light therapy, and something called

" balancing body energy, " among other mystical procedures with undocumented

effects.

Even more troublesome, all too many chiropractors urge their patients to eschew

such widely-accepted health

measures as immunization and fluoridation and to be suspicious of anything

medical. Are these guys for real?

Confronted about these therapies and theories, chiropractors like to claim that

they do not represent the mainstream of

chiropractic medicine. But Jaroslaw Grod, a faculty member at the Canadian

Memorial Chiropractic College in Toronto,

has undercut that argument. " We're trying to get the profession to look at

itself critically, " he says. With two

associates, Grod collected and evaluated informational brochures from nine

leading chiropractic organizations in

Canada and the U.S. (In other words, the " mainstream. " ) Their conclusion,

published in the Journal of Manipulative

and Physiological Therapies, was damning. All of the brochures, they wrote, made

claims " that are not currently

justified by available scientific evidence or that are intrinsically

un-testable. "

None of the more bizarre advice and treatment that chiropractors often give

their patients was repeated or described in

these brochures, most probably to fend off any government censure. Yet Grod's

group found repeated and dubious

references to subluxations as the cause of many problems, and discovered scores

of assertions unproven by scientific

testing.

Some examples:

" 80 percent of all headache sufferers obtain substantial relief from

chiropractors. "

" A chiropractor could prevent...arthritis from developing in the first place by

reducing their subluxations. "

" A spinal malfunction can interrupt this internal communications system and

cause pain, muscle and organ

dysfunctions and other imbalances. "

Pulling no punches, Grod's group concluded that " the distribution of patient

brochures involving unsubstantiated

claims for the healing art meets several of the formal criteria for quackery. "

Strong words. But they are highly appropriate and badly needed for a profession

that has lost its way.

Chiropractic, heal thyself.

-----------------

I just found another study in my files.

This statement from the last paragraph is quite alarming. There is also a

correction at the end:

" The patients were 5 times more likely than controls to have visited a

chiropractor in the previous week

and to have had 3 or more cervical chiropractic visits in the previous month. "

Stroke, May 2001 (Vol 32, No 5)

http://www.medscape.com/medscape/features/JournalScan/Neurology/2001/js-neu0305.\

html

Chiropractic Manipulation and Stroke: A Population-Based Case-Control Study

Rothwell DM, Bondy SJ, I, et al.

Stroke. 2001;32:1054-1060

Dissection of the extracranial carotid or vertebral arteries can result in

cerebral infarction. The injury may produce

hemorrhage into the vessel wall leading to occlusion of the vessel or possible

thrombus formation with subsequent

embolization. In comparison to atherosclerotic stroke, the patients who suffer

carotid or vertebral artery dissection

tend to be younger in age and the injury may occur spontaneously or in

association with trauma. Several case reports

have suggested a link between vertebral artery dissection and chiropractic

manipulation of the neck. In this new study,

Rothwell and colleagues conducted a recent population-based, nested,

case-control study to examine the possible

association.

In total, 582 patients with a diagnosis of vertebrobasilar dissection or

occlusion were identified from review of hospital

records over a 6-year period. Each case was age and sex matched to 4 controls (N

= 2328) with no history of stroke at

the event date. The majority of the group was male (61%) and 19% were younger

than 45 years old (mean, 60 years;

SD, 18.2). A total of 221 (38%) had occlusion or stenosis of the basilar artery;

283 (49%) had occlusion or stenosis of

the vertebral artery; 28 (5%) had occlusion or stenosis of both basilar and

vertebral arteries; and 50 (9%) had an injury

to an unspecified blood vessel of the head and neck.

An association was found between recent chiropractic visits and the risk of

vertebrobasilar accidents in patients under

45 years of age. The patients were 5 times more likely than controls to have

visited a chiropractor in the previous week

and to have had 3 or more cervical chiropractic visits in the previous month. No

significant associations were

discovered for the patients aged 45 years and older. Although the results

demonstrated an association, further

investigation is required to provide conclusive evidence.

------------

Note a correction to an error in the (complete) article referenced in the

summary above:

http://www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-165/issue-7/0907.asp

In the fourth paragraph, the sentence that begins " This placed the risk of

stroke for individuals aged under 45 years at

about 1.3 per 100 000 chiropractic visits ... " should instead begin as follows:

" This placed the risk of stroke for

individuals aged under 45 years at about 1.3 per 100 000 people who had had one

or more chiropractic visits in the

previous week ... . " (CMAJ 2002;166(7):886)

--------------

Chiro

[Guest guest]

To the thread on chiropractic, I add my bit.

Some years ago when I thought I might become a doctor, I pursued some MD

education. The general

impression of chiropractic I absorbed at that time was that it was generally of

no value at all, to say

the least. That impression remained with me until recently when I suffered the

torn supraspinatus of

which I have posted earlier. Since the orthopedic MDs did not have anything to

help me continue on my

bodybuilding, I looked up something I had earlier heard of called ART ( " Active

Release " Techniques)

which some chiropractors use. I checked with an ART web site and learned there

was one in Dallas who

rated high with them. I underwent therapy at his hands and, while it was the

most painful treatment I

have ever endured, it did do some good, enough at least to allow me to continue

working out. I have since

turned to the supplement regimen of which I also have posted on this site and it

has been beneficial, but

I believe the help of the supplements may also have been built on progress

gained with the ART.

The ART site is http://activereleasetechniques.com/

Any comments on this 'unique' method?

[My summary of therapeutic interventions covered at the SWIS symposium also

applied to this

method, by the way. Mel Siff]

Pasco

Dallas, Texas

[Guest guest]

Hi :

I've been trained in the ART technique and have seen the results; it works

effectively if there is a muscular dysfunction or adhesion causing

altered biomechanics. Other things are also needed like nutrition,

rehabilitation and also joint mechanics restored to normal motion if

needed. Again, ART is a piece of the puzzle and can be quite effective

if used as such.

[Does this imply that " muscle dysfunction " occurs largely at a local

level rather than at a more global neuromuscular level?

Are there any studies which show that manual pressure can " break down "

adhesions or fibrous connective tissue which forms at the site of

injury? Or is the foundation more the result of what Travel & Simons

refer to in their work on Myofascial Trigger Points? After all, if one

looks at ART methods, its relationship to the work of Janet Travel seems

highly suggestive, with static " trigger pointing " simply being replaced by

dynamic trigger pointing combined with passive limb movement. What about

the similarities to some methods used in " Rolfing " ? Mel Siff]

Mel, Did you attend Dr. Leahy's presentation or have seen him present

before? I didn't see you there in the room.

[i was there for part of his one presentation and the whole of this other one on

the lower extremities. I was sitting at the back. Mel Siff]

Dr. Ken Kinakin

Mississauga, Canada

---------------

Pasco wrote:

> To the thread on chiropractic, I add my bit.

>

> Some years ago when I thought I might become a doctor, I pursued some

> MD education. The general

> impression of chiropractic I absorbed at that time was that it was

> generally of no value at all, to say

> the least. That impression remained with me until recently when I

> suffered the torn supraspinatus of

> which I have posted earlier. Since the orthopedic MDs did not have

> anything to help me continue on my

> bodybuilding, I looked up something I had earlier heard of called ART

> ( " Active Release " Techniques)

> which some chiropractors use. I checked with an ART web site and

> learned there was one in Dallas who

> rated high with them. I underwent therapy at his hands and, while it

> was the most painful treatment I

> have ever endured, it did do some good, enough at least to allow me to

> continue working out. I have since

> turned to the supplement regimen of which I also have posted on this

> site and it has been beneficial, but

> I believe the help of the supplements may also have been built on

> progress gained with the ART.

>

> The ART site is http://activereleasetechniques.com/

>

> Any comments on this 'unique' method?

>

> [My summary of therapeutic interventions covered at the SWIS symposium

> also applied to this

> method, by the way. Mel Siff]

>

> Pasco

*Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence

if you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

HI :

There is a court case, inquest, here is Canada as you may or may not be

aware of, in the death of a person who is alleged to have had a stroke

due to a chiropractic adjustment, which is being revealed as not true.

Here are some of the court proceedings and references and politics of

Dr. Norris a neurologist revealing the premature release of stroke

information and Dr. Murray Katz, the president of the orthopractic

association, connection to all of this.

On Thursday, May 16th Dr. Norris, neurologist at Sunnybrook Health

Sciences Centre and a member of the Canadian Stroke Consortium, took the

stand at the Inquest.

The morning started out with cross-examination by Mr. Tom Schneider,

crown counsel for the coroner’s office. Mr. Schneider questioned Dr.

Norris on the definition of a dissection; risk factors associated with

stroke and atherosclerosis; and reviewed the basic details related to

the SPONTADS (Spontaneous versus Traumatic Arterial Dissection) study.

In his testimony, Dr. Norris noted that " Nearly all cases of dissection

are caused by tears which started extra-cranially. " Dr. Norris said he

would expect to see a dissection in the upper neck (C1-C2) if the

chiropractic manipulation had caused an injury. While Dr. Norris

indicated he was not familiar with the six stage development of

atherosclerotic disease to which Dr. Pollanen referred, he did agree

that Dr. Pollanen's theory on how the thrombosis developed and broke

away " sounded credible " .

Dr. Norris referred to statistics from the Health and Stroke Foundation

of Canada and pointed out that there are 75,000 documented cases of

stroke each year in Canada, in which 55 per cent of the time the

underlying cause can be clearly defined and linked to the stroke. The

remaining 45 per cent of the time there is an indirect link to stroke.

That is, the exact cause of these strokes cannot be pinpointed and

agreed upon by the medical community. He added that radiological data

and angiograms are important diagnostic tools for assessing the presence

of a dissection. He indicated that it is rare for someone in their 40’s

to have a stroke, but that the presence of risk factors would increase

the chance of a stroke occurring. About 90 per cent of all strokes are

ischemic. The fact that the majority of Ms. ’ family suffers one or

more of the factors which are considered to increase the incidence of

stroke, such as high blood pressure, was emphasized.

On the matter of the SPONTADS study, Dr. Norris indicated that the

collection of information started in 1998 for the purposes of

accumulating data to better understand the cause of arterial dissection.

This project began as a feasibility study, and has gathered data via

written and telephone surveys from 38 neurologists across Canada.

Dr. Norris stated that it was his belief that 99% of all dissections

were a result of trauma, and he further noted that in those cases

classified as spontaneous or unknown if one looked harder they may find

that these too are linked to some form of trauma. He agreed that there

are recorded cases of dissection resulting from trivial trauma such as

simple, everyday movements like backing a vehicle out of the driveway or

swinging a golf club. He also stated that " We know that dissection is

distinguished by neck pain...and that the neck pain generally manifests

itself within minutes or hours of the dissection occurring. " Despite

this statement he cited one case in which, he believes, the dissection

occurred two months following the trauma. Mr. Schneider asked Dr. Norris

if he agreed that the longer the gap between the time of the trauma and

the time of the dissection, the less likely it would be possible to

attribute an association between the two, and that beyond an hour it

becomes difficult to associate the two. Dr. Norris agreed.

Dr Norris agreed that a dissection due to chiropractic was very rare and

indicated that he " ...lacked sufficient knowledge on the degree of force

used in neck manipulation. " He further noted that he " intuitively believed that

a

dissection could occur, although he lacked the scientific data to prove

this. " Dr. Norris acknowledged that Dr. Haldeman was an expert in this area.

Danson Cross-Examines Dr. Norris

Just prior to lunch, Mr. Tim Danson, lawyer for The CCA(Canadian

Chiropractic Association) and CMCC (Canadian Memorial Chiropractic

College), began his cross-examination which included questions on Dr.

Norris’ participation in the Family’s November 1999 news conference

announcing their lawsuit against the treating practitioner, CMCC, CCPA, and

CCO;

his involvement with Dr. Katz; Dr. Katz's appearance at the April 2000

Sunnybrook

and Women's College Hospital Grand Rounds; and his knowledge of the case.

Dr. Norris was asked what prompted him to participate in the 1999 news

conference held by the family at which they announced a $12

million lawsuit against Ms. ' chiropractor, CMCC, Dr. Moss,

CCPA, Dr. Carey, CCO and Dr. Jaroslaw Grod, then Deputy Registrar

of the College of Chiropractors of Ontario. Dr. Norris replied " I was

there to give support to the family, " as well as attest to the

possibility that neck manipulation can cause a dissection of the

vertebral artery and lead to a stroke. He was further questioned about

the professional and scientific appropriateness of using this news

conference to release preliminary and unverified data from an

uncorroborated survey on the incidence of stroke associated with neck

adjustment. Dr. Norris replied that he did not think it was

inappropriate since he was speaking to a " lay audience " . He further

said, " It didn't enter my mind that it was a conflict of interest or the

wrong thing to do. " The Superior Court of Ontario has since ruled that

there is no basis in law for the inclusion of CMCC, CCPA, CCO, and Drs.

Moss, Carey, and Grod in this lawsuit.

Mr. Danson also questioned Dr. Norris about his relationship with Dr.

Murray Katz, who had organized the news conference and invited Dr.

Norris to participate. Following intense cross-examination, Dr. Norris

stated that Dr. Katz, whom he first met in the fall of 1999, was a

" crusader against chiropractic. "

Orthopractic Manipulation Society of North America president is Murray

Katz, MD, who is Medical Director of Tiny Tots Medical Center, the

largest private practice pediatric clinic in Canada. When asked his own

view on chiropractic, Dr. Norris said, " I don’t agree with him. I don't

share his views on chiropractic in general. " He further indicated that

" I do not refer my patients to a chiropractor. But I believe they are good

for some things. " He further noted that " some of my patients have seen a

chiropractor, and they tell me they feel better. "

Dr. Norris testified that he had arranged for Dr. Katz to speak on the

topic of chiropractic stroke to the medical staff of Sunnybrook Hospital

in April 2000 and despite the fact that he had already extended an

invitation to Drs. Sil Mior and Vernon of CMCC, to present at

this venue, he withdrew the invitation at Dr. Katz’s request.

Mr. Danson entered into evidence a letter of apology from Dr. J.

McCutcheon, President and CEO of Sunnybrook Hospital to the CMCC wherein

profound regret was expressed for the unfair attack on the chiropractic

profession which took place during Dr. Katz’s presentation. Mr. Danson

also entered into evidence a second letter to CMCC from Dr.

Edmeads, Chief of Sunnybrook’s Department of Medicine and Dr. Norris’

direct superior, which characterized Dr. Katz’s presentation as a

" rambling and savage sandbagging of chiropractic. " Dr. Edmeads also

stated that doctors at Sunnybrook had " expressed their dismay " that such

an event could have been permitted to occur. Dr. Norris agreed that Dr.

Katz’s presentation was " unfair, unprofessional and completely

unscientific, " that it caused embarrassment to Sunnybrook and that he

did nothing to stop it.

Mr. Danson next asked Dr. Norris if he was aware of any professional

credentials which Dr. Katz possessed which would qualify him to speak on

chiropractic related matters and Dr. Norris replied that he was not aware of any

such

credentials. He further noted that he had only recently read a copy of

the report of the 1978 New Zealand Commission of Inquiry into Chiropractic. The

court heard quotes from the report stating that Dr. Katz had indulged in a

" deliberate

course of lies and deceit … without any appearance of shame " and which charged

him

with " plainly fraudulent conduct " with regard to his appearance before that

Commission. Mr. Danson then asked why Dr. Norris continued to assist and support

Dr. Katz, even up to and including e-mail correspondence between them on May 15,

2002,

knowing that Dr. Katz was associated with the inquest and that Dr.

Norris had been called as an expert witness. Dr. Norris replied that Dr.

Katz was a " friend. "

In January 2001, Dr. Norris prepared a medical/legal report for this

inquest, which connected Ms. ' stroke to a chiropractic adjustment.

Dr. Norris testified that he could not recall, without looking at his

file on this case, what information he had used in reaching his opinion.

Dr. Norris conceded that he had never reviewed Ms. ’ medical

records and knew nothing of her medical history when he wrote his

opinion. He then agreed that seeing her medical records would be

important to coming to a conclusion.

(Unfortunate story, but true. This is the same person that is claiming

that he has research, inappropriately, and publishing it in the

newspapers across Canada linking increased strokes to chiropractic

adjustments.)

Dr. Ken Kinakin

Mississauga, Canada

-----------------

Lee wrote:

> Mel Siff wrote:

>

> <In a previous letter I asked if any chiropractors on this list would

> care to summarise the different schools of chiropractic

> philosophy, some of which make wanton and routine of spinal

> manipulation for almost every problem. This would now be

> an opportune time for such a summary because the discussion so far has

> created the impression that all chiropractors are

> the same and apply the same approach. It would also be useful if some

> references could be cited which show that the

> circumspect application of controlled and graded manipulation or

> mobilisation does have some scientific basis and is

> safe as a therapeutic intervention. We also need to note that far too

> many average persons twist, turn and " crack " their own

> necks, thereby acting like amateur therapists - they also need to be

> far more aware of the potential problems associated

> with their form of amateur treatment. >

>

> There are many different competing schools of thought in the

> chiropractic profession, and the infighting is often quite

> bitter. They can very roughly be divided into two basic ways of

> thinking, called " straights " and " mixers " . The difference

> is often considered to be in their use of techniques, but that is not

> the whole story, nor the most important difference.

>

> Here's the *very* short, simplified version.

>

> Differences in use of techniques:

>

> " Straights " are the original type of " real " chiropractor, and should

> (by their own standards) only adjust using their hands.

> But that's rare. They also should also limit themselves to the use of

> adjustments for the treatment of practically all diseases.

> This is because of their philosophy. They primarily treat only the

> spine, since they believe that all diseases are caused by

> spinal subluxations.

>

> " Mixers " allow that other forms of therapy than adjustments are

> necessary and desirable. They use many physiotherapeutic

> modalities, and often work more like PTs, bearing little resemblance

> to " real " DCs. They treat the neuromusculoskeletal

> system, and often limit themselves to this area, but some would like

> to be MDs or just like MDs.

>

> Philosophical Differences:

>

> " Straights " believe in the original chiropractic philosophies of

> Universal Intelligence (UI), Innate Intelligence (II), etc. Basically

> they are pantheistic biotheologists. They are the high priests that

> connect one to god. They restore the blockages of UI, that

> then are the cause of all diseases. Palmer stated that all diseases

> were caused by chiropractic subluxations (not the real ones):

> 95% of diseases caused by subluxations of the spinal vertebrae, and 5%

> by subluxations of other joints. Only a chiropractor

> can detect and correct these subluxations. They are not visible on

> x-rays, and may not have any symptoms, yet they need to

> be corrected, otherwise one's health will be poorer and one will die

> earlier. The extreme statements of straight chiropractors are

> often quite radically anti-MD, anti-science, anti-vaccination,

> anti-germ theory, etc. They are adamant in denying that they

> diagnose any disease or perform differential diagnosis. They only

> detect and correct subluxations. They walk the straight and

> narrow path laid out for them by their founder, the grocer, D.D.

> Palmer. They worship him and they are fanatical about defending

> the Big Idea: that all disease is caused by subluxations. They are

> usually members of the ICA and WCA.

>

> " Mixers " use whatever that works, but are still much more dependent on

> adjustments than PTs, DOs or MDs. They are, after all,

> chiropractors. They are more prone to accept scientific data, use

> vaccinations, cooperate with MDs and PTs, admit that germs

> can cause disease, admit that not all diseases are caused by nerve

> pressure from subluxations, etc. Where permitted by State

> laws, they diagnose and perform differential diagnosis. They would

> like to completely take over the techniques used by MDs

> and PTs, and would eventually like to totally replace/displace them,

> since they still often consider chiropractic to be the only

> complete and correct healing art. But there are vast differences among

> mixers. They are not a homogenous group. Most are

> members of the ACA.

>

> Then there are the members of the NACM and the Orthopractors. They are

> the reformers who are scientific and are (vainly)

> attempting to reform the profession from within. Read their

> guidelines:

>

> National Association For Chiropractic Medicine (NACM)

> http://www.chiromed.org

>

> The Orthopractic Guidelines for Science-Based Manual Therapy

> http://www.chirobase.org/07Strategy/ortho.html

>

> Canadian Orthopractic Manual Therapy Association

> http://orthopractic.org/

>

> These links have some information on different schools of thought and

> techniques:

>

> Bonesetting, Chiropractic, and Cultism

> by Homola, DC

> Ch 11: Chiropractic " Technique Wars "

> http://www.chirobase.org/05RB/BCC/11.html

> Read the whole book online!

>

> CHIROPRACTIC BELIEF SYSTEMS

>

> http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/ahcpr/chapter2.htm

>

> This provides some insights into differences in the profession. Being

> written by chiros, it tends to gloss over the

> differences, and make modern chiropractic rosier than it is. But there

> is still some good stuff here.

>

> Glossary of Chiropractic Terms

> http://www.chirobase.org/01General/chiroglossary.html

>

> Questionable Diagnostic and Treatment Practices

> http://www.chirobase.org/#dd

>

> ---------------

>

> An interesting article that caused the blood of chiros across the

> nation to boil in rage:

>

> Time Magazine:

> Wednesday, Feb. 27, 2002

>

>

> http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,213482,00.html>

>

> Back Off, Chiropractors!

> Recent research suggests some chiropractic techniques may be dangerous

> for patients

>

> by Leon Jaroff

>

> Chiropractors have been taking their lumps lately. And not all of the

> criticism has come from their usual critics in the

> medical profession. Indeed, some chiropractors themselves are

> cautiously calling for reforms.

>

> The most recent and most disturbing news (at least as far as

> chiropractors are concerned) was announced at a recent

> meeting of the American Stroke Association in Texas. There,

> neurologists from Toronto University reported analyzing

> 156 cases of stroke and finding that nearly 40 percent of them had

> apparently resulted from chiropractic neck

> manipulation. This hands-on treatment had caused tearing in the inside

> walls of the neck arteries, resulting in clots that

> blocked blood flow to the brain, bringing on the strokes. The

> neurologists called for a ban on the procedure.

>

> Chiropractors immediately challenged these findings, claiming that

> earlier studies had verified the safety of neck

> manipulation. Yet even the doctors who concede that spinal

> manipulation can be beneficial for lower back pain and

> stiffness generally exclude neck manipulation from their endorsement.

>

> Doctors find many of the other claims and practices of chiropractic

> questionable, if not downright objectionable. Most

> chiropractors, for example, believe that " subluxations, " or minor

> dislocations of the spine, put pressure on spinal

> nerves, resulting in a wide variety of disorders. Spinal manipulation,

> they claim, can effectively treat these disorders

> and, some even suggest, strengthen the body's defenses against

> infectious diseases.

>

> Chiropractors differ widely in their methods of treatment, some

> attempting to adjust only one specific vertebra at the

> top of the spine, others concentrating on a lower vertebra and still

> others focusing on the entire spine. All this despite

> the fact that no uniform criteria exist for even identifying a

> subluxation, let alone what it causes.

>

> Chiropractors also employ a bewildering variety of weird practices to

> diagnose their patients. Some use applied

> kinesiology, a muscle test that supposedly can diagnose allergies and

> diseased organs. Hair analysis and iris readings

> are commonplace in the profession. Even sillier are many of the

> treatments that chiropractors use and recommend:

> homeopathic potions, colon irrigation, magnetic therapy, enzyme pills,

> colored-light therapy, and something called

> " balancing body energy, " among other mystical procedures with

> undocumented effects.

>

> Even more troublesome, all too many chiropractors urge their patients

> to eschew such widely-accepted health

> measures as immunization and fluoridation and to be suspicious of

> anything medical. Are these guys for real?

>

> Confronted about these therapies and theories, chiropractors like to

> claim that they do not represent the mainstream of

> chiropractic medicine. But Jaroslaw Grod, a faculty member at the

> Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College in Toronto,

> has undercut that argument. " We're trying to get the profession to

> look at itself critically, " he says. With two

> associates, Grod collected and evaluated informational brochures from

> nine leading chiropractic organizations in

> Canada and the U.S. (In other words, the " mainstream. " ) Their

> conclusion, published in the Journal of Manipulative

> and Physiological Therapies, was damning. All of the brochures, they

> wrote, made claims " that are not currently

> justified by available scientific evidence or that are intrinsically

> un-testable. "

>

> None of the more bizarre advice and treatment that chiropractors often

> give their patients was repeated or described in

> these brochures, most probably to fend off any government censure. Yet

> Grod's group found repeated and dubious

> references to subluxations as the cause of many problems, and

> discovered scores of assertions unproven by scientific

> testing.

>

> Some examples:

>

> " 80 percent of all headache sufferers obtain substantial relief from

> chiropractors. "

> " A chiropractor could prevent...arthritis from developing in the first

> place by reducing their subluxations. "

> " A spinal malfunction can interrupt this internal communications

> system and cause pain, muscle and organ

> dysfunctions and other imbalances. "

>

> Pulling no punches, Grod's group concluded that " the distribution of

> patient brochures involving unsubstantiated

> claims for the healing art meets several of the formal criteria for

> quackery. "

>

> Strong words. But they are highly appropriate and badly needed for a

> profession that has lost its way.

> Chiropractic, heal thyself........

--------------

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence

if you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

Hi Ken,

Yes, I am aware of this particular trial. The developments in this case have

been somewhat confusing because

of all the politics and legal technicalities and tricks involved.

On the one hand is what is going on in scientific circles outside the courtroom,

which happens independently

of the trial. This is the investigation all over Canada into just how many

strokes are caused by dissection. There

are a number of situations where this can happen. Then the process of trying to

determine how many (a minority)

are caused by deliberate, therapeutically administered manipulation/adjustment,

and whether it has been

performed by a DC, PT, MD, or DO. In practically all of the cases it has been

performed by a DC, which is also

quite logical, and is supported by other studies.

http://www.ptjournal.org/Jan99/v79n1p50.cfm I've made

clear my views on this in a previous mail. Anyone can cause these injuries. The

technique is the main culprit.

It's use should be severely limited by all practitioners. Since chiros do most

of it, it would be them that need

to do the most changing.

The big problem is to determine how many such cases have previously been

unreported. Naturally there has been

little accurate data, since the subject hasn't been dealt with very well before.

Chiropractic sources have stated that

it was not a problem, and that there may actually be overreporting of cases. But

that was based on a supposition,

and ignored what has later been proven to be true: that most cases have not been

discovered by anybody, because

nobody was looking.

On the other hand is the matter of legal technicalities and the well-known

tactics of trying to confuse and trick a

witness into looking bad. This is all typical in courts of law. The real truth

about the dangers of cervical manipulation

will not be determined in a court of law, although points may be made with the

public. Even the best of witnesses can

be made to look like fools, and their accurate testimony be thrown out on

technicalities. Your average MD is not used

to appearing in court, and can easily be confused and torn apart by the very

experienced lawyers which the chiropractic

profession employs. It is experienced at this, since its present competency and

scope of practice have been achieved

through political lobbying and court battles, not through scientific gains or

the respect and approval of the rest of

the health care system.

An interesting side note on this matter: In California, it has been hard to

discipline chiropractors who supplemented

their income by employing intimate masseuses in their clinics. Why? Because they

were covered by other regulations

than all other health care practitioners. It seems that California chiros got

their legal status through a referendum.

They couldn't gain approval by using the normal, scientific channels. So they

went to the people and got enough votes.

Their status can only be changed by another referendum. Weird!

No matter what happens in this case, it will not prove what was the cause of

death, but who was the best in the courtroom.

Regardless of the outcome, the investigations must continue. So far I consider

the attempts a pilot project. It's never

been done before, so they're learnig as they're going along. There will no doubt

be made some mistakes. But it has

already become clear that the cause of a lot of deaths has not be recognized for

what it was - iatrogenic, in this case

by chiros.

Iatrogenic means physician induced, but in reality can apply to any practitioner

or modality.

With time we'll get a more accurate understanding of the risks, and the

statistics. Then it will be harder for straight

chiros to claim that there is practically no risk at all from adjustments, and

that any injuries must have been by MDs,

DOs and PTs. Somehow these chiros think they can't make any mistakes. Not true.

They are also fallible. I've seen plenty

of unregistered chiro injuries. It's not the exclusive domain of MDs, DOs, and

PTs to be imperfect.

Regards,

Lee, PT

Denmark

The Quack-Files

http://www.quackfiles.com

Anti-Quackery Resources & WebRing

http://quackbusters.quackfiles.com

Anti-Quackery Ring - Join now!

http://g.webring.com/hub?ring=antiquackerysite

-------

From: Ken Kinakin

HI :

There is a court case, inquest, here is canada as you may or may not be aware

of, in the death of a person who is alleged to

have had a stroke due to a chiropractic adjustment, which is being revealed as

not true. Here are some of the court proceedings

and references and politics of Dr. Norris a neurologist revealing the

premature release of stroke information and

Dr. Murray Katz, the president of the orthopractic association, connection to

all of this........

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if you

wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

I would be very hesitant to take seriously any medical reports found

in TIME Magazine. They seem to be looking for anything in this

realm that's sensational and much of what they report otherwise is

in sound bite form. I have been very unimpressed with that magazine

in general of late. They have forgotten that the U.S. exists other

than to threaten war with Iraq. They should have devoted ten pages

to the story about the new robot that cleans houses. It is a

masterpiece of this type of science but all they said is that it

tended to miss a few corners.

As far as chiropractors, they're like any other medical

professional. Some are excellent, others are so-so and others are

charlatans. The trick, like with a doctor or dentist or whomever,

is to find a good one. This can take some searching. For a person

who trains with weights, I feel it is imperative to find a

like-minded chiro. Someone who him/herself is in the trenches

either as a bodybuilder, powerlifter, weightlifter.

I know I am lucky to have found the guy I see now on a monthly basis

just to keep the kinks from re-kinking.

Rosemary Vernon, Editor

Dolfzine On-Line Fitness, Inc.®

A Not-For-Profit Corporation

www.dolfzine.com

Marina del Rey, CA

IronRoses@...

http://www.chuckietechie.com

[Guest guest]

Mel -- Here is some info on the " Stats " of the risk of chiropractic adjustment

and how they were misinterpreted and released. An unfortunate situation

that the media picked up on as stated below in the other email.

That is what I was talking to you about how " research " or lack there of

can be used as a agenda. This was a press release in June for the papers

here in toronto into the inquest explained in court.

[since the vast majority of less severe problems caused by any medical or

therapeutic treatment do not become the focus of court cases, I wonder if we

can place any faith in statistics unless they have been produced in genuine,

large scale surveys. Are there any available on a wide variety of such

procedures? Mel Siff]

STROKE CONSORTIUM CHIEF BACKS DOWN:

ADMITS NECK ADJUSTMENT RISK IS MUCH LOWER THAN HE STATED

Toronto, June 18, 2002 - Dr. Norris, immediate past chair of the

Canadian Stroke Consortium, today admitted that the risk of stroke

associated with neck adjustment is far lower than he has previously publicly

stated. Dr.

Norris at first denied ever saying that the risk of stroke associated

with neck adjustment was as high as 1 in 5,000 treatments. When confronted with

an audio tape of an

interview he did on the CFRB radio program The Mott’s (June 1, 2000), in

which he clearly stated this risk ratio, Dr. Norris could offer no explanation

for spreading such serious falsehoods.

A news release issued by 60 neurologists in February 2002 quoting the

Stroke Consortium’s risk ratio of 1 in 5,000 treatments was also entered

into evidence.

Dr. Norris was listed as a media contact on the news release which

generated significant national media publicity. When questioned, Dr.

Norris again offered no

explanation for how this alarming and inaccurate statistic came to be a

cornerstone of the news release.

A letter from Dr. Norris to Dr. Moss, president of the Canadian

Memorial Chiropractic College, written in June 2000 was also entered

into evidence. In it,

Dr. Norris states that the Stroke Consortium’s numbers are " sheer

guesswork " . Under questioning, Dr. Norris agreed that the number of

cases he had reported at

that time actually equated to only 1 case in 2.2. million treatments -

approximately the same risk ratio as stated by the chiropractic

profession.

Ken Kinakin

Mississauga, Canada

-------------

Lee wrote:

> Bob Yu wrote:

>

> > Now I don't know much about chiropractic philosophy, but I do know

> this: that neck manipulation

> > is exactly what I do to cause a serious whiplash and neck injury to

> somebody when I am fighting.

>

> Here is something from my files that relates to this topic. I haven't

> checked to see if every link is still working.)

> The following material deals primarily with neck manipulation and

> strokes.

>

> ------------

>

> KILLER INSTINCT

>

> This interesting item from Chiropractic OnLine Today could use a

> follow-up, showing that the " danger move "

> depicted in Nintendo's game, Killer Instinct, is in fact just that!

> It's potentially dangerous - no matter who does

> it - trained or not:

>

> http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html

>

> " On September 7, 1995, Chiropractic OnLine Today broke the story of

> Nintendo's new game, Killer Instinct,

> which blatantly defamed the whole Chiropractic Profession.

>

> " Since then, others have picked up on this story. Chiropractic OnLine

> Today is proud to be a part of a community

> which cares, and urges everyone to contact Nintendo at the number

> listed below.

>

> " With this update on October 20, 1995, a position paper by the

> International Chiropractic Pediatric Association

> is presented:

>

> http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#ped

>

> " Further, Chiropractic OnLine Today, with thanks to Dr. M. Guest

> (DrGuest@...), c/o Chiro-List,

> contacted Nintendo via Email and is now publishing the following reply

> from a Nintendo representative:

>

> http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#reply " ........

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of

residence if you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

Mel:

There are studies on procedures, but again, I think its based on

scientific bias. To prove your point at the expense of the outcome. This

seems to be more common then what we think.

It seems more difficult to place your faith in even any studies as what

has happened in the stoke consortium study that I relayed to you. Some

of the criteria is skeptical, where if you have had a chiropractic

adjustment in the last three months, the chiropractic adjustment is

blamed if there is a stroke. A little unrealistic. When in fact getting

your hair washed at a salon or playing golf apparantly is the same risk

level based on their research.

There is one paper out there that I am looking for that the main topic

line is chiropractic adjustments cause strokes, but when reading the

paper, no chiropractors were involved in any of the incidents. It was

medical doctors and therapists and lay people. Again misinterpretation.

I will send you the study when I find it.

Ken Kinakin

Mississauga, canada

" Dr. Ken Kinakin " wrote:

> Mel -- Here is some info on the " Stats " of the risk of chiropractic

> adjustment

> and how they were misinterpreted and released. An unfortunate

> situation

> that the media picked up on as stated below in the other email.

>

> That is what I was talking to you about how " research " or lack there

> of

> can be used as a agenda. This was a press release in June for the

> papers

> here in toronto into the inquest explained in court.

>

> [since the vast majority of less severe problems caused by any medical

> or

> therapeutic treatment do not become the focus of court cases, I wonder

> if we

> can place any faith in statistics unless they have been produced in

> genuine,

> large scale surveys. Are there any available on a wide variety of

> such

> procedures? Mel Siff]

>

> STROKE CONSORTIUM CHIEF BACKS DOWN:

> ADMITS NECK ADJUSTMENT RISK IS MUCH LOWER THAN HE STATED

>

> Toronto, June 18, 2002 - Dr. Norris, immediate past chair of the

> Canadian Stroke Consortium, today admitted that the risk of stroke

> associated with neck adjustment is far lower than he has previously

> publicly stated. Dr.

> Norris at first denied ever saying that the risk of stroke associated

> with neck adjustment was as high as 1 in 5,000 treatments. When

> confronted with an audio tape of an

> interview he did on the CFRB radio program The Mott’s (June 1, 2000),

> in

> which he clearly stated this risk ratio, Dr. Norris could offer no

> explanation

> for spreading such serious falsehoods.

>

> A news release issued by 60 neurologists in February 2002 quoting the

> Stroke Consortium’s risk ratio of 1 in 5,000 treatments was also

> entered

> into evidence.

> Dr. Norris was listed as a media contact on the news release which

> generated significant national media publicity. When questioned, Dr.

> Norris again offered no

> explanation for how this alarming and inaccurate statistic came to be

> a

> cornerstone of the news release.

>

> A letter from Dr. Norris to Dr. Moss, president of the Canadian

> Memorial Chiropractic College, written in June 2000 was also entered

> into evidence. In it,

> Dr. Norris states that the Stroke Consortium’s numbers are " sheer

> guesswork " . Under questioning, Dr. Norris agreed that the number of

> cases he had reported at

> that time actually equated to only 1 case in 2.2. million treatments -

>

> approximately the same risk ratio as stated by the chiropractic

> profession.

>

> Ken Kinakin

> Mississauga, Canada

>

> -------------

>

> Lee wrote:

>

> > Bob Yu wrote:

> >

> > > Now I don't know much about chiropractic philosophy, but I do know

>

> > this: that neck manipulation

> > > is exactly what I do to cause a serious whiplash and neck injury

> to

> > somebody when I am fighting.

> >

> > Here is something from my files that relates to this topic. I

> haven't

> > checked to see if every link is still working.)

> > The following material deals primarily with neck manipulation and

> > strokes.

> >

> > ------------

> >

> > KILLER INSTINCT

> >

> > This interesting item from Chiropractic OnLine Today could use a

> > follow-up, showing that the " danger move "

> > depicted in Nintendo's game, Killer Instinct, is in fact just that!

> > It's potentially dangerous - no matter who does

> > it - trained or not:

> >

> > http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html

> >

> > " On September 7, 1995, Chiropractic OnLine Today broke the story of

> > Nintendo's new game, Killer Instinct,

> > which blatantly defamed the whole Chiropractic Profession.

> >

> > " Since then, others have picked up on this story. Chiropractic

> OnLine

> > Today is proud to be a part of a community

> > which cares, and urges everyone to contact Nintendo at the number

> > listed below.

> >

> > " With this update on October 20, 1995, a position paper by the

> > International Chiropractic Pediatric Association

> > is presented:

> >

> > http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#ped

> >

> > " Further, Chiropractic OnLine Today, with thanks to Dr. M.

> Guest

> > (DrGuest@...), c/o Chiro-List,

> > contacted Nintendo via Email and is now publishing the following

> reply

> > from a Nintendo representative:

> >

> > http://www.interadcom.com/nintendo.html#reply " ........

>

> * Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of

> residence if you wish them to be published!

>

>

>