Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18512, 24 March 1922, Page 7

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —To “Grateful,” who has so gallantly championed a cause which its originator, Mr Christie, has evidently thought wise to abandon—in a literary sense, at least -I would like to make the following remarks;— 1. It is immaterial whether "Anti-Ohiro" is a member of the medical profession or not. At any rate, I seek no self-advertise-ment. in this controversy. My statements are facts, so why worry whether I be a medical man or merely a chiropractor in embryo? 2. “Grateful,” like tho author of the original cutting, is complacently satisfied m make sweeping statements with no proofs behind them. He says that many of the points raised in my previous letter can be controverted, point 5 being a mis-statement. Neither he nor Mr Christie, however, naa any apparent desire to controvert them. I am quite willing to have the anatomical and pathological questions referred to any higher authority m which the public can repose confidence. 3. Point 5 was only a mis-statement in that it was not stressed strongly enougn. Let “Grateful” disprove points 5 and i before again venturing on such a bold denial. As . regards bacteriology. I need only say that the Palmer School, Davenport, lowa, U.S.A. (one of the largest chiropractic institutions), ignores that science. In that school’s short and scrambled course not only is bacteriology not taught, but the students learn to ridicule it, “Wo don t believe in germs” is the sum total of thef knowledge. * 4. Cliiropractio is not a science, as it is so fondly advertised. It is based on an entirely erroneous theory—the nervous orgin of every disease—which chiropractic makes no attempt to prove correct and which pathology can afford to despise. Being erroneous in theory, chiropractic must of necessity be erroneous in its deductions and methods of -treatment, or rather method of treatment. Why not propound a theory that every disease has its origin in the heart and proceed to thump the ribs and “manipulate” the sternum ? One is no more ridiculous than the other. 5. Chiropractic does not attempt to ex plain its rationale (even supposing its own erroneous theory to be correct). Let anyone lake the dissected spinal column from a recently dead body and, using ell his force, try to push one vertebra permanently out of its alignment even to a small degree and ho will realise that “manipulations” and “adjustments” are somewhat imaginary. How much more so in. tlie living subject, where tho spinal column is surrounded by a very. thick layer of muscles which very materially assist in rendering the whole structure “fool-proof”? Even if any. pres sure obuld be brought to bear on the spinal canal by adjustments, physics proves that such pressure —exerted on a closed cavity containing liquid, tho cercbro-spinal fluid—is spread through the whole liquid rand is not localised at any one spot. Furthermore, even if it could be proved that “adjustments” could exercise even the most minute pressure on the spinal cord or nerves, physiology can prove that such pressure is not an adequate stimulus either for nerve-cell or fibre. (6.) Chiropractic claims that “manipulations" can rectify some slight dislocation. As before, where is the proof? Slippering such a dislocation had occurred and liad not spontaneously returned to normal, then in a few weeks the misplaced vertebra Mould fix itself in its new position by fibrous or libro-osseous adhesions, and so be us firm as ever. Supposing a chiropractor took the case early before adhesions bad occurred, bow would he determine exactly which vertebra was affected, in which direction, and exactly how far? Surely the X-rays Would assist him. But we never hear of X-rays used in chiropractic. Also, surely in such a case one “adjustment” would cure tho patient; but bow often do we hear of a chiropractor giving onlv one “adjustment; (7.) If “Grateful” applies to any of his personal friends in the medical profession ho will bo unfortunate if he does not bear of many cases where medical or surgical treatment is necessary, often for the life of the patient, after a long course of chiropractic. ' (8.) Chiropractors arc indisposed to make a diagnosis. They prefer a patient to go to a doctor for diagnosis first and then come to them for treatment. (9.) Chiropractic, having no foundation in anatomy, physiology, pathology, or baa teriology, can necessarily Vie of benefit only in patients open to suggestion. A chiropractic' cure is alivays a mind-enro. Ihe “manipulations” are merely a means to that end. Hence, chiropractic is eminently successful with ignore** people, who like to gaze noon wonderful diagrams and hear someone talk in terms they do not understand. In patients suffering from hysteria, neurasthenia, and hyjjochrondriasis, chiropractic may bo beneficial, exactly in the same M-ay as was tho reel-hot cautery used by doctors a century ago. 'Die patient is so impressed that he forget* his aches and pains. The only difference is that only one dose of tho cautery was usually necessary, an additional advantage to the patient being the saving of his bank book (at tho expense albeit of liis skin). (10.) To say that chiropractic "threatens seriously" to affect the • practice of medicine is puerile. Let “Grateful ’ think it over and he cannot but come to the sonic conclusion himself. "What would Grateful” do if he had diphtheria, typhoid fever, venereal disease, or cancer? (11.) Let “Grateful” remember that the person -who is so ready in praising chiropractic and deurei-iating medicine is usually the patient a doctor is glad to dispense M-ilh —tlie patient with nothing much wrong, but too careless to carry out bis doctoris instructions; the patient who shouts when medicine fails, but who cries dumb when unrelieved by herbalists, chiropractors, and tho like; the patient who takes it as a matter of course when medicine succeeds, but raves to all and sundry if he can persuade himself that he is improved by chiropractic or by any of tho numerous forms of quackery extant. I am. etc., Axti-Lhiko. Dunedin, March 21. —T txiu endorse “Anti-Cbiro s wol conic letter. To proclaim that all disease is nervous in origin is obviously false. Chiropractic is founded on a fallacy in every case, and therefore to lot such humbug loose upon the public is a wrong, in view of the establishment of the sciences—pathology and bacteriology.—l am, etc., ANTi-HrMßur,. Dunedin, March 22.