I agree, in principle, with the author's sentiment and concerns, but I do find two qualms with the editorial:

>>But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic.<<

My own experience - admittedly anecdotal but key, nonetheless, imo - reveals the weakness of this line of thought.

• Briefly put, a chiropractor saved my life from the horrible death a MD nearly blundered me into. Didn't just identify the problem - fixed it. MD begged me not to sue. I didn't. That was dumb of me, huh? But irl I'm a stupidly nice guy.

• More pertinently, the chiro's treatment restored to me a level of mobility that 100% of MDs I consulted assured me strongly that I would never regain. Also significantly lowered pain level, thank Bog. The rush of relief was so sudden that I actually went into a little bit of shock from it. Within minutes of the procedure I *stood up*, which, at the time, seemed nothing short of miraculous, especially in light of having been told it was not something I could ever look forward to without aid again. Now, a few years later, I can walk, even jig a little bit. This is a significant contrast from "You will have to learn how to negotiate a life without the use of your legs" and "never try to lift anything over 5 lbs, for the rest of your life".

• "Conventional therapy", nonsurgically speaking, for back pain, is a myth. There is literally no such thing, unless "conventional" is meant to describe "whatever weird bullshit this particular MD is into". Steroid shots aren't 'therapy' for back pain, they're a pain management solution. An important one, no doubt! But any responsible MD will tell you straight up: "we got nothin' for ye 'ceptin' the steroid shots and opium. Sorry." They work twice, on average, and for about 3-6 months. After that, you're fucked. I'm immune to opium, so... I have some experience with this, you might say.

• The serious dangers associated with "conventional" medical care don't seem to merit the author's consideration. This kind of spot blindness is a serious problem in the war between those who think "alternative" medicine is all roses and magic and those who think it's all charlatanry and lies. It's a false dichotomy, and it's a tragic one that lets people suffer horribly and die messily while transparent fantasists and incompletely educated naysayers argue over flower water. If the author's conscious intent was to suggest that the dangers of MDs's attention are significantly less serious than those associated with chiros, well, fuckin' SHAME on that asshole.

So-called 'doctors' (the word means 'person who acts with the authority of God' by the way) killed so many more people than chiros in 2005, 2006, and 2007 that I think a case could be made that they are serial murderers. Certainly, the anti-gun lobbyists should turn their attention away from insentient power tools and immediately onto active living doers-of-harm, post-haste, if statistics are any measure of danger. With regard to chiros v MDs, I strongly doubt the proportional danger of chiro is anything even approaching the statistical deadliness of what we're calling "conventional" western medicine.

>> - if spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.<<

Nope. Not sure what universe the author is living in. Canada, it seems like? But no. Not only *not* taken off the market, but recommended by supposedly decent doctors and associations thereof because, hey: money is money.


Most people don't need nearly as much health care as they believe they do, while our system (in the USA) socially and financially rewards MDs for A) doing too much, B) prescribing too much, C) playing it legally safe by administering far more medicine (of whatever sort) than is necessary or beneficial.

I take a very dim view of people that strain to insist that MDs are the only solution to health care. It's not just incorrect, it's a bad idea. The real argument seems to be "which of them gets to be considered the best choice in 100% of situations?" and the overwhelmingly obvious answer is "duh: neither". Same answer to "which of them is truly right about what causes all cases of autoimmune disease?" or "all cases of depression?" or "all cases of pretty much anything you care to name?"

If your spine is messed up, I feel confident that you are going to be just as fucked, whatever charlatan or ideologue or pseudoscientist you unquestioningly entrust with your well being. What you want is a healer, and they come in all flavors. Balinese witch doctor still outperforms Boston MD's success rate by so startling a % it literally boggles my mind. Look into it yourself; learn from this. If you catch yourself thinking "yeah but there's an explanation for that" then you are obviously far too healthy and hale to be worrying yourself with this shit. Go outside and play, for the sake of the sweet baby Jesus.