General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: Science vs Scientism

Started by Orac · · Last activity · 1 post · 280 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
15 May 2004
Last activity
15 May 2004
Original author
Orac
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
280
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Dave Wickware said:

    Science vs. scientism

    by Dr. Christopher Kent

    [Snip]

    Quoted message said:

    I have heard many chiropractors parroting the misconception that patients
    and insurance companies will only pay for care rendered to symptomatic
    patients.

    Such utter nonsense has caused many to promote the notion that D.C.s should
    treat pain syndromes only. In fact, chiropractic may be the only health care
    discipline which sports a faction that does not consider early detection of
    an asymptomatic, progressive process a virtue, if not a necessity.

    Of course. Because if the patient remains asymptomatic, then
    chiropracters can take credit for their remaining asymptomatic.

    Quoted message said:

    Abnormalities can exist in the absence of symptoms! Consider asymptomatic
    breast cancer, asymptomatic dental caries, or the "silent killer"
    hypertension. Basing outcome assessments for these conditions on patient
    symptomatology would have disastrous results.

    These abnormalities also can be detected at the asymptomatic stage. For
    instance, breast cancer can be detected by mammography and then treated.
    We know that if not treated it will continue to grow. We also know that
    the tumor is removed because the mammographic abnormality is gone and
    the pathology report tells us we got the whole tumor. What specific
    asymptomatic condition is chiropracty treating and how do we know
    patients actually have it if they're asymptomatic? What tests show it?
    What test show it getting better with adjustment?

    Quoted message said:

    I find it repugnant to force an asymptomatic patient to wait for pain to
    manifest before receiving an adjustment.

    I find it repugnant to con an asymptomatic patient into adjustments if
    one cannot demonstrate with objective tests (similar to a mammogram, a
    blood pressure reading, or a dental X-ray) a pathologic condition that
    adjustment will help and then show with objective tests that the
    adjustment did indeed help it.

    Quoted message said:

    Clinical strategies must be based
    upon subluxation-based outcome assessments which address aspects of health
    beyond the amelioration of symptoms.\

    In other words, chiropracters should line their pockets off of
    asymptomatic patients.

    --
    Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
    |
    |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
    | inconvenience me with questions?"

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.