"Space Aliens Suck Brains Out of Chiropractors"
Dear Editor:
In your December 6 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic, Chap Reaver, D.C. talks about his disgust and disdain in seeing the "Miracle Diet, Lose 30 Pounds in 30 Days" in the tabloid near the checkout line of a grocery store. The tabloid article, the service in the checkout line, and the absurdity of a "fat girl" picking up the tabloid was enough to make him say a filthy word.
After reading that article and then turning about four pages into your publication, I noticed a full-page advertisement about building a high-volume practice. It stated that if I took the course at $375, I could serve 1,500 patient visits per week and provide $2,000,000 in services. Flipping a few more pages, a half-page advertisement appeared that stated the doctor presenting the course x-rayed, examined and treated 2,000 patients himself in one month. Searching further, another full-page advertisement by a smiling gentleman who looks like he's showing off his new dentures in a dental commercial, promises a "practice explosion."
It so happened that the same day the "other" chiropractic tabloid also arrived. Even more wonderful riches were promised in it. One promised a "mega volume." I could guadruple my practice, see more than 200 patients a day, lower my overhead by 25 percent and have zero paperwork.
Even more amazing was an ad that said by adding just one procedure, I could have a million dollar practice. (This ad wasn't read so I'm not sure if the procedure was larceny.)
And finally, one advertisement said if I simply used a specific charge plan, I could make $68,000 more per year.
What's the point? Wilt Chamberlin in his recent autobiography said he serviced 20,000 women in his life so far. He didn't say he satisfied them all, but he did service all of them. Somehow, I get the feeling that these 1,500 or 2,000 patients per week are getting serviced about the same way Wilt did it. It's doubtful they're all satisfied.
There are outlandish claims in our profession, obviously. These claims are placed in the chiropractic literature that is read leisurely similar to glancing at the tabloids in a checkout line. Similar to the fat girl who picked up the tabloid with the miracle diet, there are those who can't resist a sure way to get rich quick, no matter what the cost to their own reputation or profession.
Like Chap Reaver, I might say a filthy word when I see another "Miracle diet" story or "Woman Gives Birth to Bowling Ball," but I might pick up the tabloid with the story, "Space Aliens Suck Brains Out of Chiropractors."
John S. Chicoine, D.C.
Parker, South Dakota
The following is a letter to Ivan A. Goldfarb, D.C., a copy of which was forwarded to Dynamic Chiropractic with permission to publish.
Dear Dr. Goldfarb:
Where do we begin to thank you for how you've touched our lives. When we came to you with Matthew's problem, I'll be honest in saying we were not sure how a chiropractor was going to be able to help an infant's hearing problem. After going from ear doctor to ear doctor all the results were coming out the same, that Matthew, our 6-months-old son, had a hearing loss that would require surgery and a hearing-aid probably for life. Then someone suggested that we see a chiropractor. I thought it was a little strange bringing a baby to a chiropractor, but we were willing to try anything to help him.
Well, to our amazement that same night after you examined and treated Matthew, he was hearing sounds. He woke when hearing the doors lock on the car and again when crumpling a bag. Within a few days we were convinced he was hearing just fine. One week later, we took him to an ear specialist in Manhattan. He diagnosed Matthew as hearing 100 percent. They cancelled the surgery and are amazed at the sudden change.
I believe Matthew hears better than any of us. So, we thank you, Dr. Goldfarb, for helping us with your miracle hands. We are so glad that you were able to help us and know this will leave a lasting impression in all our lives.
Kelly, Raymond, and Matthew Rizzo
Valley Stream, New York
Editor's Note:
The following letter from Chester Wilk, D.C. is a response to the article, "Unity?" in "Report of My Findings" (December 6, 1991 issue).
Dear Editor:
What Is Unity?
Unity is when people with diverging views have the maturity or objective realization that they can disagree with each other while remaining under one roof. They agree to disagree. This does not mean that they compromise or surrender their principles but that they can fight for what they believe in, and if at first their views do not prevail within their organization, they keep on trying.
Doing less means quitting. They realize that nothing can be accomplished under separate roofs but confusion of going in separate directions, duplications of costs, and counterproductive results. Does it mean that they must agree with the policies of their national organization? Of course not. But they also realize without cross fertilization, which can only occur under one roof, can they ever present a united front to a highly competitive and sometimes hostile society. They also realize that the costs and waste of multiple headquarters, staffs, officers, employees, duplicate travel, separate lobbying, and resulting confusion because of a variety of conflicting policies, are the adverse results of dichotomy. They realize that intraprofessional dialogue under one roof is the only way to successfully make organized chiropractic conduct itself responsibly and receptively to the majority of the chiropractic profession, while dichotomy divides and weakens the profession and even obstructs healthy competition.
A practical definition for unity: based on the above facts, it is simply to have the professional maturity to agree to disagree, together, and not run away and establish multiple dynasties based on differing views, charismatic leaders, and dogma.
Is unity achievable? Yes indeed, because we have a higher caliber of college students today than ever in our history. These are professional students with significant college backgrounds upon entering chiropractic colleges. It's not like the olden days when we had naive "greenhorn" kids right out of high school which could be molded or led according to the views of some charismatic leaders. Today these same students will simply not be led like sheep and can think for themselves, and when they do, will view dichotomy with disgust. They represent our future.
Chester Wilk, D.C., P.C.
Chicago, Illinois
Surgery at Palmer? Dear Editor:
In the November 22, 1991 edition of Dynamic Chiropractic, we noticed your excellent editorial which addresses, in part, the evolution of the CCE and gives reasons why those who remain outside some jurisdictions should get involved and assist in their further evolution from within. There is an inaccuracy in the editorial which we would like to bring to your attention.
In 1974, when Palmer College of Chiropractic first applied for status with the CCE, the standards did indeed recommend the inclusion of minor surgery in chiropractic college offerings. However, the verbiage read "should include" which made it non-mandatory. Palmer College of Chiropractic at no time taught minor surgery. By the time Palmer College applied for and received accreditation status in 1978, the standards had been amended removing minor surgery and adding emergency procedures.
Thank you for your continued, tireless efforts on behalf of the chiropractic profession.
R. Douglas Baker, D.C.
Davenport, Iowa
The Name Game Dear Editor:
I loath to suggest to the leaders of the chiropractic profession, or to any of the media in the profession, that a practitioner in the field might be heard, or heeded to, regarding the everlasting dilemma of "What's in a name."
Dating back to the occasion of the leaders of the profession legislating the title of "chiropractic physician" to our profession, I personally contacted the telephone company requesting that my listing be under "chiropractor" in the yellow pages. I was informed the requirements were for my name be in the "chiropractic physician" listing only.
As a natural consequence, a whole new can of worms penetrated the profession in the form of gaudy, misleading, degrading advertising of our honorable profession. Our image as a profession is just about at the bottom of the list, and it is disheartening to me that the Northeastern Ohio Chiropractors' Association is making an effort to cut out directory advertising over a period of two years on a voluntary basis. This suggests enlightenment of a few, hopefully, tomorrow the entire profession.
There is a simple solution to identity that could fulfill the correct and publicly-accepted understanding of what kinds of chiropractors are presently available, an identity that has withstood the rigors of time. One group seeks to eliminate the cause, the subluxation, with an adjustment. Another seeks to treat the cause with a manipulation augmented by physical therapy, food supplements, and any ancillary therapy to attend to the comfort of the patient. Still another addresses a specialty similar to the medical profession, radiology, orthopedics, sports medicine, etc.
I think it is apparent that the fist group mentioned above should have the identification of "chiropractor."
The second and third group should have the identification of "chiropractic physician."
The third group obviously is a specialty group and could augment their identity under the chiropractic physician listing as "radiologist," "orthopedist," or "sports medicine."
Arthur Nagode, D.C., Ph.C.
Parma, Ohio
How Do CCE/SCASA Educations Differ? Dear Editor:
Thank you for carrying the torch for "Unity without Uniformity." Since I am not a chiropractor, your newspaper is one of the few ways I have to keep informed and motivated about a profession that I care about very much. I hope to teach in a chiropractic school when I finish graduate school, so I have my own reasons for wanting to know what goes on in chiropractic. Other students and practicing chiropractors might also want to know about differences between CCE and SCASA colleges. I hope you can help answer the following questions I have about the state of affairs in chiropractic colleges.
Recently, several people have made statements in your paper about how well their schools do on the national board exams, but wouldn't it be better if each of us could make an independent evaluation? Will the NBCE let you publish scores, listed by school? (I recognize that NBCE may not want this kind of comparison, since they are not in the business of promoting intercollegiate rivalry.)
We all expect the CCE to keep good tabs on the schools it accredits, but what observations has SCASA published on its schools? How does the curriculum in SCASA schools differ from that in CCE schools? Objectively assessing quality of education is not easy, but I hope you will marshall DCs' forces to let us know what goes on out there. We need "Unity without Ignorance," too.
Please allow me to direct the rest of this letter to Robert J. Manna (whose letter you published in the October 25, 1991 issue of "DC") and all students in straight chiropractic colleges.
Recently, you wrote that students in SCASA schools do well on national board exams. I wonder just what this means? I took Part I of the NBCE's exam in 1987; we were tested in all aspects of human anatomy, physiology, pathology, and even microbiology. We had to know something about all the physical aspects of health and disease. Are you learning these subjects, too? If you aren't, the exams you score so well on must have changed a lot since I took them. If you are learning the same things as other students, what is all the fuss about?
"The fuss," of course, is kicked up by both sides. Hey, CCE! Equal education should lead to equal privileges -- for the schools and students, at least, maybe even for the graduates. Hey superstraights! If students are learning all this stuff, shouldn't they use it is practice? Hey students! What are you learning anyway?
I'd like to know just what courses you take at Sherman. Do you think Micro and Path are a waste of time? (I'm sure some of my classmates at Western States thought so.) Do you feel that your education will help you "figure out what to do" with any and every patient that walks in your door? How much are you learning about the signs and symptoms you will observe in practice? The most ardent proponents of straight chiropractic philosophy seem to think such knowledge has no place in chiropractic. Does that attitude affect your education? How much?
How do you think your education differs from what you'd get in a CCE school? Is it similar in the first years and different in the later clinical years?
David J. Eliot,
Graduate Student
State University of New York
Stony Brook, New York
Chiropractic Physiotherapy vs. Physical Therapy Dear Editor:
A couple of chiropractors that recently opened a practice near mine have been advertising themselves as "board certified in physical therapy." I called them and cordially suggested that they adopt the recommendation of the Alabama board and call what they do "chiropractic physiotherapy" to avoid conflict of trade with registered physical therapists. My recommendation was greeted with contempt as well as the assurance that their chiropractic school provided them with extensive training in the use of modalities.
I called a Mayo Clinic trained RPT practicing in my town not one mile from these chiropractic physical therapists and asked her opinion on the use of this advertising. She was livid with anger and had already called the regulatory board.
I called my wife, a senior RPT at the Southeast's premier rehab hospital, and she had a similar reaction.
This may seem like a pedantic point to many chiropractors who still think that physical therapists are ancillary medical technicians that study for two years the proper application of ultrasound, but let me bring you into reality. This point is no less significant than if a barber were advertising in the phone book in big red letters "chiropractic adjustments!"
A physical therapist takes two years of secondary education in chemistry, biology, humanities, and physics. Then he competes through grades, references, and interviews with as many as three other applicants for his seat in physical therapy school. Compare this to the two to one national application rate for medical school or the pro forma acceptance to chiropractic school. Physical therapy school is two years of difficult, competitive, fast-paced study that imparts more detailed gross anatomy study and vastly more extensive neurophysiology than most chiropractors will ever see. Their training in rehabilitation, work hardening, and occupational therapy is something of another world to chiropractic. The use of specialized protocols for vestibular rehabilitation or the use of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation only serve to distinguish the training and scope of practice of the physical therapist from that of the chiropractor.
My physical therapy training, on the other hand, at the largest chiropractic college in the world was limited to approximately 36 hours of instruction in the use of modalities by a disgruntled physical therapist and a poorly trained chiropractor. I am certainly not qualified to treat head injuries, quadriplegia, spinal cord injuries, or stroke.
It may seem like a small point to many of my chiropractic colleagues, but in the spirit of professional courtesy, please advertise your therapy as "chiropractic physiotherapy" and your therapists as "therapists."
William H. Culbert Jr., D.C.
Clinton, Tennessee
