Highhanded Ways
Dear Editor:
Please let me extend our thanks and gratitude for giving such spectacular play to our article in your November 8, 1991 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic (South Central Forum). Already we have begun to receive letters from your readers.
Although we are forced by "medical convention" to have to deal primarily with MDs, I cannot express to you how deeply offended I am for their highhanded treatment of the chiropractic profession, especially in regard to infant mortality and birth trauma. I have been in the field of infant survival for more than two decades, and I know of no other profession that has worked harder to bring to light the difficulties, often long-term, and (we suspect) deadly, associated with birth trauma and neck, spinal, and brain injuries caused by over-drugging mothers during childbirth, twisting/yanking the baby out of the womb, and then, at very early ages, pumping the infant full of too-powerful, too-heavily dosed vaccines right at the very point when the infant is most vulnerable to SIDS and other infant killers.
To top this off, the highhanded disdain in which they hold any suggestions for improvement in their procedures, or any suggestions that they look for patterns of large numbers of "minor" symptoms as precursors to death, makes our job doubly difficult.
America has the third highest infant mortality rate in the developed world at least in part because medical care is far too often administered "by the book" (even when the book is very obviously wrong) and by "following routine procedures" when good medicine and common sense dictate otherwise.
Only Portugal and Greece have higher infant mortality rates than we do. A baby born in Hong Kong stands a better chance of celebrating his first birthday than does an American child.
Our group and our subgroup, the American Forces Guild for Infant Survival (for which our test is named, for these were the first families to participate), is rooting for the admission of chiropractors into military medicine. Perhaps they will bring some thinking, common sense, and the art of listening to the parents back into patient care.
Scott Hessek, President
American Guild for Infant Survival, Inc.
Virginia Beach, Virginia
Bringing Chiropractic to Nicaragua Dear Editor:
We would like to thank you for making mention in your article, "Cleveland Chiropractic News," in your September 13, 1991 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic (California Forum), of our trip to Nicaragua, for the purpose of advising members of the 1992 Olympic teams and other young athletes on injury prevention. Having recently returned from this trip, we would like to inform you that not only was it a successful venture, but during its course an even greater opportunity was opened up for chiropractic.
Dr. Ernesto Salmeron, the minister of health of Nicaragua, expressing an interest in having chiropractic health care available in his developing country, has invited us to return and complete a one-year residency in Managua. During this time, we shall be working as team doctors for the national baseball teams, city baseball teams, Olympic teams, and the general public. It is one of our goals to spend a certain amount of time out in the farmlands, helping those who do not have the means to come to the ministry of health (in the city) for chiropractic care.
We hope, within the ensuing year, to help as many people as possible, and to give chiropractic a strong foothold in Nicaragua. This could open many doors for chiropractic and for those who need it. At this moment we are seeking means to acquire physiotherapy equipment, such as ultrasound, EMS, etc. We anticipate working with a sufficiently high number of adults, especially athletes, to whom this would be an invaluable aid.
Luis Ocon, D.C.
Greg Meissner, D.C.
Glendale, California
Subheading
Ready to Sign Up I currently hold the rank of Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve. My military assignment at this time is Liaison Officer for West Point. I have direct contact with Congressman Robert Lagomarsino here in California. He does, in fact, support H.R. 608.
I've spoken directly with many active duty personnel and their dependents. I can say without reservation that overall, service members support chiropractic health care. If H.R. 608 does bear fruition, I would be the first to sign up.
Robert G., Vertrees, D.C.
Santa Maria, California
Editor's note: This is a letter from chiropractic patient Hattie Iverson to Pennsylvania Blue Shield
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
Numerous times over the years, I have been treated by different medical doctors for various health issues. I experienced headaches, periodic dizziness, and chronic back pain, among other ailments. Prescription medication was dispensed to relieve certain symptoms. I have taken pain relievers as well as Antivert for dizziness. The symptoms described above continued to recur.
My two daughters have been helped through chiropractic treatment. I finally overcame my lifelong fear of chiropractic and agreed to visit their chiropractor, Dr. G.M. Nunnari, for an evaluation. Words cannot adequately express the relief I have experienced through subsequent treatment. After only two treatments, the dizziness and headaches virtually disappeared. Aside from the obvious physical benefits, this has given me peace of mind as well. I was frightened that I was headed for a stroke or that I might pass out while driving if the dizziness should suddenly occur. The relief I have experienced from this worry alone is invaluable.
Chiropractic has proven to be an excellent treatment for the osteoarthritis in my spine as well. I am no longer in constant pain. I must still exercise caution and care, but as long as I do so the pain is not a constant companion. I have been so helped through chiropractic that I felt compelled to write and let you know.
My husband has also received relief through chiropractic treatment, primarily for osteoarthritis in the spine. He had become unable to bend and was in a great deal of pain. One of my daughters had a pinched nerve which caused numbness and then pain. This has been resolved completely through chiropractic treatment. My other daughter once had back problems which caused her to miss several weeks of work. Medical doctors prescribed pain relievers and muscle relaxers and advised her that in time the pain should ease. The next instance was quickly resolved through chiropractic treatment with no further loss of work. I could go on, but I will simply say that our whole family highly recommends chiropractic treatment.
The primary purpose of this letter is to inform you of the success we have experienced with chiropractic treatment. The money that has been spent over the years on both doctor office visits and prescriptions is tremendous. Chiropractic has eased or even eliminated some symptoms through treatment of the actual cause. Had I given chiropractic a chance years ago, it would have saved a large amount of money for myself, as well as my insurance carriers. I feel that if more insurance carriers supported chiropractic treatment, they would save millions of dollars in the long run.
I am requesting that you please pass this letter on to the individuals at your organization who make decisions regarding coverage of chiropractic treatment.
Hattie l. Iverson, R.N.
Westminster, Maryland
Sherman Testimonial Dear Editor:
I read with great interest each issue of your publication. Over a period of time, I notice a trend toward Sherman bashing by many of your contributors -- many by chiropractors in places and offices of responsibility within the profession. Most, if not all, deal with SCASA and CCE accreditation. The latest I recall states the central theme of most critics: the training of Sherman graduates, both academically and clinically.
I am a Palmer graduate. I have been in active practice for almost 20 years. Since 1974, I have practiced in Spartanburg, South Carolina. I began practice here before Sherman graduated any students. At that time there were about six chiropractors in Spartanburg. Today, the number is probably around 50. The reason is that many states will not accept students from Sherman, so they stay here. I have been considered a mixer during all my practice by those who choose, by their own definition, to categorize the way another practices. I use modalities and offer advice on health. I offer many services to my patients, but the adjustment takes precedence over everything else. I mention this only to give the proper perspective to where I may be coming from.
Last year I wrote a letter to Dr. Gelardi to volunteer my services, free of charge, on Tuesday and Thursdays, to help out in any way they could use me. I don't work in my practice on Tuesday or Thursday and felt I may be able to return something to chiropractic for what it has given me. I was taken up on my offer and spent two trimesters helping out in technic classes. The experience was a positive one. The students were and are receiving a better education in technique and in clinical science than I received at Palmer. Their academic education is easily measured by the scores they achieve on national boards. What then is this criticism all about? I find Sherman students more dedicated to the original principles of chiropractic than students at other schools. Is this a crime? Does this hurt the profession? I have spoken with Dr. Gelardi on numerous occasions about his thoughts on the practice of chiropractic. They differ in some areas from mine, but I have never met a chiropractor who agreed totally with any other chiropractor. Dr. Gelardi believes in what he says and does with more force than the average chiropractor, and seems willing to sacrifice everything he has worked for all his life rather than compromise his principles. Is this a man we should fear? No, I think this is a man to be respected. Most people I know, and have ever met, will bend their principles to preserve their status quo.
I do not know Dr. Gelardi socially and have probably only met him to talk with 15 times in the last 18 years. But I respect his point of view and submit that his thinking is not that far off line from the silent majority of chiropractors. He is more principled and more focused than the majority. Is this a reason to fear him or his graduates? This is what the controversy is all about -- the paranoid fear of a minority of chiropractors in various states to an influx of ideas they know nothing about. Fear only occurs when knowledge is absent. We only fear the unknown. We, the silent majority who are too busy treating patients to become involved in politics, and let the few govern the state of our profession. And all too often these few are the paranoid chiropractors with the big egos who need and want power and control. Its time the silent majority spoke out.
The problem is, where do you get reliable information on which to make a decision? You cannot get this information from anyone with a vested interest in the outcome, or from anyone who speaks with information which is hearsay. You can't get this information from Sherman, they have a vested interest. You can't get it from other educators who spend a day or two in Spartanburg, they have a vested interest in their own schools.
I, on the other hand, have no vested interest in anything. I am surrounded by Sherman graduates in my town and state. I do not fear the ideology of Dr. Gelardi, or what he does. I do not fear what his graduates in practice around me do. They have educated more people in South Carolina in the chiropractic approach to health than all the chiropractors in the state prior to the inception of Sherman. Is this bad or to be feared?
As for the people who criticize the academic or clinical standards of Sherman, all I can say is they are totally wrong and speak from a position of ignorance. I invite them to communicate with me to discuss their points of view.
Again, I am a mixer, but I spend six months observing the academic and clinical teachings at Sherman. They graduate fine chiropractors with excellent academic and clinical skills. This is the most paranoid profession on the face of the earth. I personally think any graduate who passes the national board should be allowed into any state they wish to practice in without exception and without any further testing by that state. Anything less is a restraint of trade, and is done only to protect the paranoid attitude of the chiropractors of that state, not the public. We all know from our experience with the AMA what restraint of trade is like. Let's put an end to this in our profession.
H.D. Smith, D.C.
Spartanburg, South Carolina
