CHIROPRACTIC TREATMENT

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18529, 16 October 1934, Page 5

CHIROPRACTIC TREATMENT

CASE BROUGHT BY WIDOW NEGLIGENCE ALLEGED A claim i’or £4B 4s brought by Norah Annie Salisbury, widow. Gisborne, against Oinrence Leslie Turner, chiropractor, Gisborne, for alleged negligent treatment, was continued before Mr. E. L. Walton, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court to-day. Mr. L. T. Bnrnant appeared for the plaintiff and -Mr. F. U r . Nolan for the defendant. Dr. E. Ewart Brown said be saw the plaintiff during tiie latter part of last, year. She was suffering from neurosis caused by a common condition at her time of life. There was no evidence to support tiie contention that the nerves pointed out by the chiropractic witness had been interfered with or required treatment. It was absurd to diagnose from a single X-ray photograph in cases where a number of bones were being investigated. At least two photos should be taken in such an instance, and .where finer details were to be investigated stereoscopic photographs'were essential, it would be very difficult to replace any dislocation of the spine, and in fact it would be very dangerous to try and do so. for it might do more harm than good. Last August, the plaintiff saw the witness, and complained of paias in the neck, back and abdomen, and also loss of sleep. She had the same symptoms previously, except the pain in the neck. Witness treated her over about a fortnight. Mr. Burnard: What would be a reasonable charge? Witness : About 3gns. -

Mr. Nolan : You say that it is not possible to move joints in tiie way chiropractors move them ? —-Tliat- is so. It is impossible to move them more than a certain amount.

Do you know that chiropractors have moved them?—No, I do not. Are you prepared to shy that chiropractors are not able to produce results? I do not say that. They may produce results from massage, but they will not produce results from altering the position of the- vertebrae.

If the chiropractor claims to do nothing but alter the position of the vertebrae and obtains results, then the chiropractor must be listened to?—He does not alter the position of the vertebrae. You admit that, he frequently cures the patient?—l. would not. say that. Sometimes lie might relieve the patient. It is quite certain that the patients get no alteration in the spine. I put it to you that the patient does not go to have alterations to the spine, but, to get well?—lt is a bad thing for some people to think that they have something wrong with the vertebrae when nothing is wrong. Would you be astonished fo learn that 75 per cent, of the patients that have come to Mr. Turner have reported relief? —Yes, I would, and I would guarantee that ICO per cent, have had nothing done to their spines. To further questions, witness said he knew of the ease of Sir Herbert Barker, a specialist in manipulative surgery, who dealt successfully with hundreds of eases during the war, but the medical profession did not recognise hint. Mr Nolan: lie,was beyond the pale so far as the medical profession is concerned?—Yes. ‘The chiropractic is on much the same footing, though working in a more limited field?—Yes, its scope is not so wide. Have you hoard of any successful chiropractic treatments?—l have heard of one, but only one. This closed the case for the plaintiff. Mr Nolan, outlining the case for the defence, maintained that the case for the plaintiff had clouded the issue contained in the statement of claim by calling evidence purporting to show that the chiropractic profession was a quackery and a sham. The attitude of the medical profession was opposed lo chiropractic treatment, in spite of the fact that it was a profession recognised in many countries and from iwhich many people had derived a benefit. Counsel proposed to call the defendant and patients whn_ had been satisfactorily treated by him to give evidence.

The defendant, in evidence, said that he graduated at a recognised chiropractic college in Indianapolis. He had been practising iri Gisborrte for nearly ‘five years. If a patient would lie benefited bv medical attention, lie had no hesitation in advising such. He had never guaranteed anything, for it was an impossibility for anyone to guarantee a -cure. At least 75 per cent of his patients had <bben treated successfully, and most of his eases had been of the chronic typo. If there had ndt been complete recovery, there had been at least considerable improvement.

When the plaintiff came to witness, she seemed to be in a weak state, having had to rely greatly on a walking stick. He made ah examination and diagnosed her trouble as forms of insomnia and neuralgia and that most of her symptoms were coming from the region of the neck. Ho then suggested taking an X-ray photograph, lie told the plaintiff that lie thought he could help her, but guaranteed nothing. The X-ray verified his original diagnosis. His treatment sought to restore the alignment of the vertebrae by manipulation of the spine. No striking was ever given, but it was a quick, thrusting movement, the hand never being lifted off the tissue, or a levering movement. Right from the first few days of the treatment, Mrs Salisbury began to show an improvement, and one day she said she could almost cry bccausb she felt so much better, while on other occasions she stated that she could walk much further than formerly. (Proceeding)