5 ms·

Chiropractors don't fall just into "straights" and "mixers", there are entire schools which focus on evidence-based biomechanic adjustments and others that get

by gooseus 10y ago

Chiropractors don't fall just into "straights" and "mixers", there are entire schools which focus on evidence-based biomechanic adjustments and others that get way more woo-woo about it with energy healing and whatnot. https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/science-based-chiropractic-an-oxymoron/ https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/science-based-chiroprac... That guy spent years being a chiropractor and while he acknowledges that the postulates of vertebral subluxation theory is implausible, he was also able to spend years helping people with spinal manipulations working as a chiropractor. It was only until recently that physical therapists began doing adjustments which began competing with chiropractics Like with anything, there are good and bad actors and even a bad actor may help people even if their justification for why something is helping is fundamentally flawed. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

dpark 10y ago
> That guy spent years being a chiropractor and while he acknowledges that the postulates of vertebral subluxation theory is implausible, he was also able to spend years helping people with spinal manipulations working as a chiropractor. Did he help them or did he deliver placebos? "Most cases of back pain are self limiting, and spinal manipulation is not often more effective than other physical treatment modalities in affecting the final outcome." > Like with anything, there are good and bad actors and even a bad actor may help people even if their justification for why something is helping is fundamentally flawed. Is there actual science supporting the claims? Not the mechanism claims, which are clearly bullshit. Is there even any support in the science for the claims of effectiveness?
- gooseus 10y ago
  Effectiveness in treating what? And what do you mean when you say chiropractics? You want a study on effectiveness in treating asthma or deafness, then it's probably not available. Effectiveness in treating something like scoliiosis? Yep, there is a study for that[1]. How about headaches? Seems to be some positive research on it[2]. Now I'm no scientist or statistician and there are also studies point to non-effectiveness in things like lower back-pain[3], yet even that study acknowledges that it's difficult to ascertain since most chiropractic packages aren't limited to simply adjustments. I find it interesting how many people denounce sweeping generalizations when it comes to programming paradigms and approaches to infrastructure and application development... yet still fall victim to it when it's a topic outside their domain. We're still just talking about problem solving here, so how come it's not a matter of defining the problem and assessing each approach in context of that problem? [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259989/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259989/ [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8775024 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8775024 [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447290/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447290/

by gooseus 10y ago

dpark 10y ago

> That guy spent years being a chiropractor and while he acknowledges that the postulates of vertebral subluxation theory is implausible, he was also able to spend years helping people with spinal manipulations working as a chiropractor. Did he help them or did he deliver placebos? "Most cases of back pain are self limiting, and spinal manipulation is not often more effective than other physical treatment modalities in affecting the final outcome." > Like with anything, there are good and bad actors and even a bad actor may help people even if their justification for why something is helping is fundamentally flawed. Is there actual science supporting the claims? Not the mechanism claims, which are clearly bullshit. Is there even any support in the science for the claims of effectiveness?

gooseus 10y ago
Effectiveness in treating what? And what do you mean when you say chiropractics? You want a study on effectiveness in treating asthma or deafness, then it's probably not available. Effectiveness in treating something like scoliiosis? Yep, there is a study for that[1]. How about headaches? Seems to be some positive research on it[2]. Now I'm no scientist or statistician and there are also studies point to non-effectiveness in things like lower back-pain[3], yet even that study acknowledges that it's difficult to ascertain since most chiropractic packages aren't limited to simply adjustments. I find it interesting how many people denounce sweeping generalizations when it comes to programming paradigms and approaches to infrastructure and application development... yet still fall victim to it when it's a topic outside their domain. We're still just talking about problem solving here, so how come it's not a matter of defining the problem and assessing each approach in context of that problem? [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259989/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259989/ [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8775024 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8775024 [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447290/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447290/