Archived Comments for:
Differentiating intraprofessional attitudes toward paradigms in health care delivery among chiropractic factions: results from a randomly sampled survey
I have three questions regarding the paper by McGregor et al, [1] if I may.
1. On page 3 of the article it is stated that the “most extreme unorthodox view” in chiropractic was the one that treated a “lesion” (e.g., chiropractic subluxation) to remove an “obstruction to human health.” Dr. James Winterstein, then-president of the National University of Health Sciences, has indicated that the target of chiropractic intervention is a “functional articular lesion,” [emphasis added], and that the purpose of said intervention is to “produce [a] beneficial neurological effect.” [2] Do the authors consider this latter similar viewpoint, also to be “extremely unorthodox”?
2. For a definition of “orthodox,” the authors defer to a group outside of chiropractic, namely “a majority of North American orthopedic surgeons.” Here, the definition is based on what chiropractic is not, e.g., chiropractic intervention is “not effective for non-musculoskeletal conditions.” Is there some reason the authors did not cite the statistic by McDonald et al [3] who found that the majority of North American chiropractors (76.5%) do think there is a relationship between vertebral subluxation and visceral health?
3. Would the authors consider a chiropractic study on atlas re-alignment and blood pressure, led by a researcher at the University of Chicago [4] as extremely unorthodox or just mildly unorthodox?
References
[1] McGregor M, Puhl AA, Reinhart C, Injeyan HS, Soave D. Differentiating intraprofessional attitudes toward paradigms in health care delivery among chiropractic factions: results from a randomly sampled survey. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2014, 14:51.
[2] Winterstein J. Semantics. Outreach. National University of Health Sciences. October/November 2003: 1, 3.
[3] McDonald WP, Durkin KF, and Pfefer M. 2004. How chiropractors think and practice: The survey of North American chiropractors. Seminars in Integrative Medicine 2:92-98.
[4] Bakris G, Dickholtz M, Meyer PM, Kravitz G, Avery E, Miller M, Brown J, Woodfield C, Bell B. Atlas realignment and achievement of arterial pressure goal in hypertensive patients. Journal of Human Hypertension 2007; 21:347-352.
Unorthodox?
26 September 2014
Editor:
I have three questions regarding the paper by McGregor et al, [1] if I may.
1. On page 3 of the article it is stated that the “most extreme unorthodox view” in chiropractic was the one that treated a “lesion” (e.g., chiropractic subluxation) to remove an “obstruction to human health.” Dr. James Winterstein, then-president of the National University of Health Sciences, has indicated that the target of chiropractic intervention is a “functional articular lesion,” [emphasis added], and that the purpose of said intervention is to “produce [a] beneficial neurological effect.” [2] Do the authors consider this latter similar viewpoint, also to be “extremely unorthodox”?
2. For a definition of “orthodox,” the authors defer to a group outside of chiropractic, namely “a majority of North American orthopedic surgeons.” Here, the definition is based on what chiropractic is not, e.g., chiropractic intervention is “not effective for non-musculoskeletal conditions.” Is there some reason the authors did not cite the statistic by McDonald et al [3] who found that the majority of North American chiropractors (76.5%) do think there is a relationship between vertebral subluxation and visceral health?
3. Would the authors consider a chiropractic study on atlas re-alignment and blood pressure, led by a researcher at the University of Chicago [4] as extremely unorthodox or just mildly unorthodox?
References
[1] McGregor M, Puhl AA, Reinhart C, Injeyan HS, Soave D. Differentiating intraprofessional attitudes toward paradigms in health care delivery among chiropractic factions: results from a randomly sampled survey. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2014, 14:51.
[2] Winterstein J. Semantics. Outreach. National University of Health Sciences. October/November 2003: 1, 3.
[3] McDonald WP, Durkin KF, and Pfefer M. 2004. How chiropractors think and practice: The survey of North American chiropractors. Seminars in Integrative Medicine 2:92-98.
[4] Bakris G, Dickholtz M, Meyer PM, Kravitz G, Avery E, Miller M, Brown J, Woodfield C, Bell B. Atlas realignment and achievement of arterial pressure goal in hypertensive patients. Journal of Human Hypertension 2007; 21:347-352.
John Hart, DC, MHSc
Greenville, South Carolina
USA
Competing interests
None