Anchors Away -- Navy Deep-Sixes Commissioning
Dear Editor:
I just read the "News in Brief" item on Dr. Gary J. Miller being refused a US Navy commission as a chiropractor in the February 11, 1994 issue of "DC." I had a similar experience recently.
On Dec. 14, 1993, I called the US Navy Reserve Officer Recruiting Station in Minneapolis, Minnesota inquiring about having them send me an application for commissioning packet, so that I could get the paperwork process started or completed and be ready to be among the first DCs accepted for commissioning. The person I talked with thought this was a good idea, but being new on the job (of recruiting) thought they should get more information from the regional recruiting office in Chicago. A short time later my call was returned. I was told, politely but firmly, they were not authorized to send out any applications to chiropractors and not to call again. It made no difference that I have 14 years in the Navy as a hospital corpsman, three years on active duty, and 11 in the reserves.
Whether you want to be a part of the military or not, military personnel, retired military and dependents do not have chiropractic services available to them on base or in CHAMPUS. They have to go off base and pay for the services themselves. Write to your congressman. Ask them to bring chiropractic into the military as a Chiropractic Corps rather than part of the Medical Service Corps.
Wallace R. Cole, DC
Fergus Falls, Minnesota
Dear Editor:
It was with great interest that I read your editorial in the latest (in Australia) edition, January 14, 1994 (Vol. 12 Num. 2) of Dynamic Chiropractic.
In it you described what we as a chiropractic profession could do if we all got together and contributed to national marketing campaign. You went on to state that in the USA you could generate about $25 million a year to fund this campaign.
Wouldn't this be wonderful. I think that William Esteb succinctly challenged the chiropractic profession to get behind a ten year marketing campaign. And asked us if we had the maturity to do this: another wonderful idea, and what a challenge.
Well we in Western Australia have done this. We are a small group of chiropractors. Our practicing number in our state is about 80, yet every chiropractor contributes $25 a week, or $100 a month towards a marketing campaign. We thus have in the region of $125,000 a year to put towards our marketing campaign.
At this stage our strategy is to educate the public on the education, safety, and training of a chiropractor. We have three television advertisements that are shown on three TV channels throughout the state. The feedback has been incredibly positive. We do however have chiropractors who find it hard to dip into their pockets every month to pay their share. Same old thing, that they aren't getting a direct "bums on seats" benefit. Yet generally it is very well supported by our association in Western Australia.
We are trying a "corporate chiropractic" marketing approach. We do not allow any other form of advertising. Only the association can advertise as a whole or a specific group of chiropractors together can advertise as a whole. Once again trying to follow the strategy of the association marketing campaign.
Dr. Sportelli recently viewed the adverts in Sydney and commented that they were professional and very positive. I believe we are the only chiropractic group in the world to have done this. At this stage we are trying to go nationally with the adverts throughout the whole of Australia. Because they work.
I hope that you can accomplish the same in the USA. You guys have so much potential as a group and we the chiropractors in the rest of the world are always looking to the North American chiropractors to take chiropractic to new heights of universal acceptance and usage. So good luck in your endeavors.
Dirk Jacobsz, DC
Public Education Chairman
Chiropractors' Association of Australia
Western Australia Branch
Dear Editor:
Thanks so much for printing part I of "Chiropractic Scope of Practice" by Craig Nelson, DC. Seldom does an article as lucid as this come along. That one must define one's terms in order to have meaningful dialogue has never been more true than in the present "politically correct" environment where words are used to set a mood or impression rather than to convey information.
Recently, at one of our state association's seminars, a speaker asked the audience what chiropractic was. All present being reluctant to answer, the room was quiet. The speaker then said, "Ok, so what do you guys do for a living?" Being older than the others I thought I could answer that one and said, "Well, I look at myself as an orthopedist. I treat: sacroiliac strains, olecranon bursitis, neck pain, that sort of thing." You could have heard a pin drop. Later, when I recovered from my embarrassing admission I felt like yelling, "What are the rest of you guys treating anyway, cancer?"
The truth is, of course, we all treat the same stuff, namely low backs and necks, or should I say the "skeletal disadvantaged," but seemingly it has become incorrect to say so.
William E. DeRegibus, DC
Farmville, Virginia
Dear Editor:
Cerebral chiropractors will not argue with Dr. Craig Nelson's eloquent elaboration of the urgency for a clearly defined SOP. Unfortunately, the chiropractic bureaucracy and its institutions have selectively eliminated or discouraged these critical thinkers from taking a position of leadership or decision making. Until the collective mind of the profession recognizes this ostensible deficiency, Dr. Nelson and others of his caliber will have little influence on the prevailing attitude. We desperately need Dr. Nelson to take the lead. Let's hope it's not too late.
Robert Falco, DC
Weehawken, New Jersey
Dear Editor:
After reading your Dynamic Chiropractic paper for the past several years I felt it was time to write.
Your paper has condemned the medical profession time and time again. Your editorials seem to give the picture that medicine is a practice that limits itself to prescribing analgesics and performing unwarranted back surgery.
Believe it or not, medicine is much more than that, and without reservation I can say that medication has increased the quality of life for many individuals. To give just a few examples, L-Dopa (editor's note: levodopa) for Parkinson's, digitalis for heart failure, beta-blockers for hypertension and post MI arrhythmia, hydrocortisone for RA and transplant rejection, neuroleptics for schizophrenia, antibiotics for infection, and edrophonium (anticholinesterase) for myasthenia gravis. Even a simple operation such as an appendectomy for a patient with acute appendicitis could be the difference between life and perforation of the appendix with subsequent peritonitis, sepsis, and death. As with all treatment strategies, the benefits must be weighed against the cost.
There are diseases that medicine and surgery can help, such as neoplasm (benign or malignant), diabetes, congenital anomalies, epilepsy, kidney failure, and even trauma patients just to mention a few, and I feel the above mentioned have little to do with the scope of chiropractic and the subluxation complex.
I think your paper should use more caution in its critique of the medical profession especially when the critique is based on presumption and not knowledge.
P.S. Your paper is informative and quite fun to read.
Kerry Filler, DC (and 3rd year medical student)
Uppsala, Sweden
Editor's note: Life is chemistry, but not everyone welcomes levodopa or anitcholinesterase drugs flowing through their veins (to use two of your examples). When administering levodopa for Parkinson's, the Physicians' Desk Reference warns, in part:
"Other serious adverse reactions are mental changes including paranoid ideation and psychotic episodes, depression with or without development of suicidal tendencies, and dementia. A common but less serious effect is nausea. Less frequent adverse reactions are cardiac irregularities ... anorexia, vomiting, and dizziness.
Concerning anticholinesterase drugs, the Physicians' Desk Reference warns: "Whenever anticholinesterase drugs are used for testing, a syringe containing 1 mg of atropine sulfate should be immediately available to be given in aliquots intravenously to counteract severe cholinergic reactions which may occur..."
Thanks, but no thanks.
Dear Editor:
I read with great interest Dr. Marc E. Chasse's indictment of lumbosacral support belts used in an industrial setting and your admission that you were unaware of any studies which deal with the efficacy of using these belts. I have in my possession, specifically a study done in 1990, published in the Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, which discusses the use of prophylactic work belts. I believe the point is very adequately made. In understanding the use of these belts, the purpose is not support of the back muscles but the main purpose of these belts is for supporting abdominal muscles and as we all know, biomechanically, increased abdominal pressure stabilizes the lumbar spine. These belts do very little in my opinion and in my experience, to limit, weaken or adversely affect the lumbar paraspinal musculature.
Whereas I certainly agree that hard bracing for long periods of time will adversely affect the muscles, as in when a person is wearing a cast, soft support such as these belts has a very beneficial effect in reducing the daily avoidable microtrauma to which many jobs subject the lumbar spine. I have mainly noted this in my patients who are roofers, or have similar jobs where there is very little way to modify their work to protect their back. When this belt is worn loosely (which, because of the suspenders, increases patients' compliance) it reminds the patient to maintain an upright posture. When increased loads are placed on the back, the patient can increase the support of the belt to protect them from strain or trauma. I certainly see this as a beneficial adjunct to the work that we do in terms of instructing in proper lifting, instructing in proper lifting, instructing in proper exercise when off the job, and of course, spinal manipulation to maintain proper mechanical integrity of the lumbar spine.
I hope the information that I have included is beneficial in expanding your understanding of these belts. I do want to state that I have no particular financial interest in have no particular financial interest in the companies that make these belts nor do I sell these belts out of my office. I do believe they are a reasonable and worth while adjunct to the work that we do in terms of preventing industrial back injury and therefore I support their use.
Elliot Eisenberg, DC
Richmond, Virginia
Dear Editor:
The CliniCorp Directory of Exclusive Providers list that the Motion Picture Industry Health Plan sent to patients specifically says that no claims will be recognized (and therefore reimbursed) unless they are done by these CliniCorp chiropractors. Last year they had a PPO contract with chiropractic services, but the patient still had the right to see DCs outside the PPO list -- they just had to be responsible for co-payments and deductibles, etc. This CliniCorp plan is exclusive. All TV and Motion Picture employees are covered by this plan. Therefore this will have a major impact for DCs in West L.A., Santa Monica, L.A., Hollywood, and Burbank areas. I noticed that in my area, West L.A., there are only a few DCs on the list. CliniCorp never contacted me or any other DCs that I know of to join them. Now they will probably tell us that even if you want to join, it will have to be next year, IF they have any openings left.
I know that Dr. Faye and Dr. Perry practice in my area as well, and other MPI doctors.
I propose that some DCs join together and perhaps approach this insurer and discuss this. Maybe we can say we will all agree to be paid in the same amount they pay CliniCorp DCs, but do not want to join them, so if their excuse is money savings, that can be addressed. Also point out to them that we were not even given a change to join this PPO. I know that many patients are also very angry about this.
Vincent Tokatlian, DC
Los Angeles, California
Continuing to impress the advertising and marketing world, The Foundation for Chiropractic Progress (F4CP) has again been recognized by industry organizations for its excellence in educating consumers on the benefits of chiropractic, this time through social media, newsletters, and demonstrating thought leadership by promoting holistic well-being.
Dr. Louis Sportelli received the Lee-Homewood Chiropractic Heritage Award during the annual conference of the Association for the History of Chiropractic (AHC). During his nearly 60-year career, Dr. Sportelli has embodied the spirit of the award, given to “living individuals who have made outstanding contributions to the chiropractic profession.”
Presently there is no consensus on the best treatment for Achilles tendon rupture; and its management is still controversial. The treatment options are conservative treatment and surgical repair. With either treatment, be it conservative or surgical, Achilles tendon tears necessitate prolonged recovery and rehabilitative management.
| Digital Exclusive