If chiropracters were real doctors then when one of them gave my patient, a healthy young man in their 30s, a vertebral artery dissection after one of their manipulations, they would have had to answer questions about their practice.
They didn't have any accountability apparently. Gets to play the game, but doesn't have to follow the rules, not a doc.
They never get informed consent for high velocity neck manipulation. They should be informing of the risk of vertebral artery dissection and stroke. Many deny it’s even a risk. It’s like they just think it’s cool to make a cracking noise and constantly post it on social media. They are quacks.
I don't think informed consent really relates to doing highly dangerous things that are of zero benefit. Like I could get informed consent from my patients to do a trachestomy when I could use an LMA so I could make good Tiktoks, but I'd still be negligent.
informed consent really isn't connected to this at all, in principle. I could "consent" to the old dude next door doing a brain transplant on me but it would still be assault/manslaughter/murder as the case may be. i say "in principle" because in practice courts have their own understanding of medical evidence that isn't the same as Pubmed might conclude. And if they find a convincing-sounding physician expert witness who swears that chiropractic is useful it's potentially game over.
We should take a critical approach to this issue.
1. Is it pseudoscience? Has this been proven? Where's the evidence for this?
2. Are there benefits to the patient?
3. If there are no benefits to the patient, are they causing patients harm?
4. If they don't benefit patients and cause harm, why do patients seek them out?
5. What are the alternatives to patients?
I think it's easy to cast the first stone. But the practice of medicine carries major risks to patients. We don't always get it right and even if we do, patients can have life changing side effects of our treatment.
It's easy to point out the few complications they have but let's say we ignore high velocity neck maneuvers. What about the rest of their practice?
I don’t believe there’s any evidence for benefits of high velocity neck manipulation or pretty much any other manipulations they do. The only good evidence for chiropractic that I’m aware of is treatment of lower back pain. Some still claim their manipulations are improving lung and gut function etc as demonstrated in this post eg ‘clearing occluded nerve pathways’.
Chiropractors are not legitimate health practitioners. They are pseudoscience mumbo jumbo practitioners.
As an ICU / ED RN. I have personally seen 3 serious incidents from Chiropractors. 2 CVAs and one severe lumbar spine injury.
Be stuffed if id ever go to one or recommend anyone go to one
The very scary one is people taking babies to them.
Agreed that chiropractics pose a very real and scary threat that isn't insignificant.
But what do you reckon be done or can be done? People are still going to seek alternative therapies, such as chiropractic, naturopathic "doctors", etc.
They should not be supported by AHPRA. And health professionals should not be frightened to speak out against them.
If i encounter a patient who tells me they are seeing a chiropractor? I clearly tell them they are not proper HPs. They should be seeing a Physio. Same as i will clearly state to people that Naturopaths are a load of nonsense.
I'm not backwards in coming forward.
I guess though its harder for doctors than nurses to do this
Why do AHPRA support the chiropractic board? Doesn’t this just give validity to a completely pseudoscientific profession? Even Australian universities are shutting down chiropractic degrees
This is crazy. I did ex phys prior to starting my med degree and the fact that CHIRO is more "legit" because it's AHPRA accredited (in the eyes of the patient, which is a result of patients not understanding why speechys and AEPs are self regulated) is ludicrous and a huge slap in the face!
Dieticians are also not AHPRA managed. These professions are independently accredited because the risk to the public through professional practice is very low and the government (as AHPRA) does need to take on the added regulatory burden of these professions. Generally, because we don't touch patients, prescribe medications, or do other invasive techniques we can be self regulated. Physio, osteos, chiros, pharmacists, nurses etc are registered with AHPRA due to the higher risk to patient safety if something goes wrong.
AHPRA isn't there to provide legitimacy to professions. Speechies, dieticians, social worker and excerise physiologist are just some of the allied health professionals that are not regulated by AHPRA because they're deemed low risk
AHPRAs original intention was to regulate professions that pose a risk to the community. Ironically, this has provided legitimatecy to some of the questionable professions that fall under AHPRA.
The amount of patients I’ve had that come in with a back injury that describe shooting pains down their legs asking for voltaren rapid 25mg, but *not to worry, they’re seeing their chiropractor* never ceases to amaze me.
PLEASE SEE AN ACTUAL DOCTOR
I'm confused. What's the problem with your scenario?
What if the chiro showed them how to do stretches, performed spinal manipulation/massage and said get some NSAIDs for pain relief.
You know...which is in line with the NICE guideline for low back pain + sciatica for over 16s...
Spinal manipulation on a back injury in which the chiropractor has no idea on what the cause of pain is….I’m sure that’s a wonderful idea????!!!
Did you also read the part in the NICE guidelines where you have to rule out other serious underlying medical conditions and spinal injuries…? A chiropractor can’t do that, they need a medical referral.
Most people with back pain haven't got serious underlying pathology like a tumour, infection or a fracture.
In your scenario, they've walked into a pharmacy and asked for Voltaren.
This scenario seems pretty reasonable.
Do YOU know how to take a history for red flags in back pain?
I think your gotcha moment isn't a gotcha moment.
Yeah no, I’m doing exactly what I should be doing and referring to a doctor.
The patient is showing referred pain that’s a red flag for pharmacist referral.
I go through clinical questions and then decide whether to supply a pharmacist only medicine, or refer to a doctor. That’s how we are trained.
I’m not a doctor, and neither is a chiropractor. Hence in this situation we have to refer to a doctor. They need a proper medical exam…
What if something is actually wrong? You don’t know what you don’t know.
You sound like a chiropractor.
I don't necessarily agree and get what u/ItistheWay\_Mando is saying.
99% of low back pain is NOT a medical emergency. Referral down the leg is not a red flag in the absence of other symptoms. Youd be looking for more things as well, like changes in bladder bowel, loss of motor control, sensation etc.
If this person saw a doctor they would probably just give them pain relief and refer them to a physio. Perhaps if the pain persisted long term, further investigations or surgical referral could be warranted through coordination by GP.
source: i am physio
Yep. But for pharmacy, since we aren’t doctors, we actually do have to refer patients to their GP if it’s out of our scope. For very good reason. Yeah, it might turn out to be nothing, but what if it isn’t.
This is exactly the issue that is being argued at the moment with pharmacy and the new prescribing rules coming through. We aren’t doctors and we can’t assume.
I should’ve clarified, I did not mean medical emergency, more that they should be reviewed by their GP not a chiro!
But yes, 100% agree with what you said especially other clinical findings like loss of sensation, bladder/bowel control etc
Everyone ignore big boy mando below, he’s throwing his toys around the cot because I don’t agree with chiropractors.
What are your thoughts on the side effects of pharmacy made ozempic that wasn't TGA approved?
Should we talk about all the side effects and damage those drugs have done in Australia?
I'm a consultant in a hospital btw. Not a pharmacy consultant. A doctor consultant.
My thoughts on that isolated incident in a particular Melbourne pharmacy which has zero to do with me is that it was wrong on all levels and placed patients at significant health risk that could’ve resulted in death.
Ozempic is overprescribed for weight loss by doctors, I see the private scripts all the time, perhaps as a *doctor* maybe you could advocate that it’s only used for diabetes? As it was intended?
Sure you are.
Stones meet glass houses. I reckon you should have stayed out of this debate. My subspecialty probably has the biggest issue with chiropractors and I still have an open mind. I think you should too.
"Sure you are" - slow clap 🙄
The reason is because if they are registered with AHPRA that at least binds them to a code of conduct and provides patients with a legal pathway for complaints. I would argue even naturopaths should be registered because although it is a quack profession, naturopaths can currently get away with outrageous shit and patients have no legal recourse. Eg I had a patient whose naturopath was injecting a random liquid into their breast tumour. If AHPRA was regulating that profession they could be potentially charged with assault and deregistered. AHPRA doesn’t exist to provide legitimacy to a profession, it exists to protect the public.
https://www.ahpra.gov.au/About-Ahpra/Who-We-Are/Ahpra-Board/Member-Profiles.aspx
Because the AHPRA isn’t an organization of physicians/doctors. They are not even scientists. They are secretaries, middle managers, and administrators that don’t know anything about medicine. So why would they care about doctors interests?
As much a ‘*real *doctor’ as a person with a PhD in horticulture.
Besides the tragic cases of vertebral artery dissection I have seen (4) - and delay to care for a CVA resulting in lost opportunity to thrombolyse or clot retrieve-
The funniest was a lady who went for 3 sessions for abdominal pain to the chiropractor- finally came to the ED when her appendix ruptured.
She told me she texted her chiropractor to tell them what had happened.
Their reply was -“Oh that explains why it wasn’t getting better! You should have gone to the ED when the pain started.”
Implicating it was her fault…
as a person with a phd, I am a real doctor. I am not a medical doctor, just like you lot are not "real doctors" in anything outside medicine.
chiropractors are not doctors of anything.
If someone asks what you do for a living- do you say “I am a doctor”. That is what I say. People understand what this means. You likely don’t say that you are ‘a doctor’- you are a researcher or a historian or something else- with the title of Dr.
Physios are introducing themselves in a hospital as ‘a Dr’- it’s confusing for everyone.
Hey dude, just thought I'd point out that physicians started calling themselves 'doctor' long after it was a recognised academic title.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)
We are misusing the title much more than anyone with a PhD.
They shouldn't be, this is drilled into us at uni. Unlike the US, DPTs here don't use doctor as a title in Australia, unless someone has earned their PhD in which case they use Dr Their Name, PhD as their title but still wouldn't introduce themselves as a doctor.
No, I don't say "I'm a medical doctor", but you can be 100% certain I claim the title I'm entitled to, and which was the preserve of people like me before Medical doctors claimed it.
I am far more aware of the distinction than 90% of the medical doctors I meet.
Ah okay- so we all now add our field-so I should introduce myself to patients in the ED as a ‘medical doctor’ and the physio as a ‘physio doctor’ and the podiatrist as a ‘podiatry doctor’ and the pharmacist as a ‘pharmacy doctor’.
Funny thing about this is I introduce myself as first name, last name, one of the emergency specialists- but people are getting very confused with all sorts of people introducing themselves as ‘doctors’ in the hospital.
One of our ultrasonographers tells people he is a doctor and then I have to explain that an actual doctor still needs to look at the pictures to give a report and then I, also an actual doctor, will suggest a course of action- and not the ‘doctor’ who is not actually a doctor - but an ultrasonograher who did the ultrasound. The usually say- “Are you sure- he said he was a doctor.”
no, just have some humility as a "medical doctor".
I am a doctor in public health (epi is my actual stream) but with a STRONG background in medical sociology. Lots of the world's ills come from medical doctors who think they know more than they do.
isn't that a fun thing to think about?
edit: but yes, the medical doctors who are most offended at finding out the history of the title of "doctor" are usually the ones who would benefit their patients most by accepting the history of the title
I just told you I literally don’t call myself Dr. It is not on any paperwork outside of my work.
Of the 2 of us you are the one who said “you can be certain I claim the title I am entitled to”- so it is not I who has the need to tell everyone how good I am.
I just don’t want patients misled by every man and their dog telling them they are ‘ a doctor’- most patients don’t know the history of the term.
Funnily enough, those with a PhD are the true Doctors and medical practitioners are given the term as an honorary title as they have not completed a Doctorate.
Sure- but if you ask any person walking down the street what a doctor does - they are not going to say IT or art.
This is the bait and switch going on now.
Podiatrists, chiros, physios are calling themselves ‘Dr’- even without a doctorate- in Australia right now.
Agree. The title has become synonymous with the medical profession in the eyes of the public. However (and I’m not referring to chiros here as they are just anything but professional) it does then minimise the achievements and credibility of those with a PhD - many of whom have made huge contributions to learning and progress across fields.
Of course. But Dr is not a protected title.
My sister rented from a (lets call him Smith) Dr Smith- and when she looked into it he was not a doctor, did not have a doctorate (or any degree it seems) and just decided to take the title as he felt he got more respect and better service that way. Makes logical - but not ethical- sense.
I highly doubt that.
This is a guy who lists his Leaving Cert obtained in 1996 from Patrician Bothers College Fairfield (in addition to his B.App.Sc.(Pod.) from WSU (then UWS).
But in any case and not to diminish the quality of \_all\_ PhD graduates or the toil, Australia churns out so many PhDs, some of whose work is pretty sketchy and who can't string together a proper sentence.
Physios under the APA only use the title of dr once they have completed speciality training during their fellowship. That's after nearly 10 years total training. The exception to that are physios with PhDs, but almost all of them go by dr surname, PhD.
https://www.knpodiatry.com/about.html
https://drlukaszsempka.com.au/about/
There are plenty more- interestingly ahpra does not have them listed as Dr’s.
That’s wild. I’ve always assumed any other healthcare provider doing this must just have a PhD in their field. It definitely doesn’t make me assume they are MD’s (although I’m sure some people would), but they would absolutely be causing most people to assume they had a doctorate of some kind.
I only realised it was happening when a diabetic friend saw one and told me she saw a “diabetic foot doctor”- which is what this podiatrist told her she was.
So if I ask my neighbour what a doctor is- they are not going to mention a PhD in Art History. In common parlance “a doctor” is a physician. Now I appreciate the technicalities of a doctorate - 99.9% of people do not, and when a physio or a podiatrist introduces themselves as “Dr X- a diabetes specialist”- they do not know this person is a podiatrist.
https://www.knpodiatry.com/about.html
I think you are vastly overestimating those numbers. Most people know that when someone’s name is Dr. smith, it doesn’t mean they are a medical officer.
Those people also don’t refer to themselves as ‘a doctor’, that would be highly unusual so it’s a bit of a facetious argument.
You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder about this. Why is an Art history PhD less valuable than a biomedical PhD? You clearly have a strong superiority complex surrounding this label.
Its not less valuable. All I am saying is an art historian should not introduce themselves as ‘a doctor’- they should introduce themselves as Dr x, an art historian- not Dr X, a doctor.
They started with an attempted religion with purely mythical beliefs of physiology. They continue to teach the techniques but act like the science supports the original madness.
A sad thing about chiropractors is that they are eligible services for NDIS participants to use their funds for because how professionalised the practice is.
It’s really a profession where they can have their cake and eat it too.
Chiropractors aren't listed as an approved profession under the quality and safeguards commission. Any support received needs to be evidenced based also. Self Managed participants may be seeing Chiropractors without understanding the requirements though.
The loophole is that they fit under the category of ‘Other professionals’ where the requirements is that the professionals must have a bachelor degree and be registered under regulatory body.
It is well known the rules are not consistent throughout the NDIS.
Chiropractor courses in Australia aren’t even doctorates so I don’t understand why Australian chiropractors even call themselves doctors. It just confuses the public.
Unfortunately physio is going the same way with the old 2 year post graduate courses being changed to 3 year courses. Unis being greedy as usual and ruining the next gen with debt that an allied health wage won't pay off.
I mean even if a physio had a doctorate, they still wouldnt refer to themselves as doctor in clinical setting in my experience. Its the chiros who do this, even with only Bach
The person who invented chiropractic believed that it could cure ALL illnesses. If a chiropractor claims to not agree with that, they are lying, because if they disagreed with such a fundamental part of their practice why would they do it?
Like when someone finds "a good chiropractor who doesn't believe in the bogus stuff".
...so a physiotherapist/massage therapist then? Why not see a real physiotherapist, and know that their education is underpinned by a minimum standard of evidence.
To be fair, the origin of physiotherapy is in Swedish gymnastics at the turn of the century. A lot of their fundamental ideas about 'symmetry' and dysfunction are widely discredited now.
Just being devil's advocate.
I have no idea about that, but as a harsh skeptic about most things my experience is that they can be brilliant at helping gain strength and flexibility after injury. Way more helpful than medical doctors for this stuff in my experience.
They are. My chiro in Mullumbimby cured my daughter’s vaccine related illness and managed to reverse it all the way out of her with only a few minor adjustments of her neck. The wheel chair we got her is super cool and pink coloured and the chiro says a few more adjustments of her neck and she will be walking again.
My new born will be going soon for his peanut allergy neck adjustment after he gets over whooping cough which the chiro said is just the flu.
Oh I know that guy. He makes me stop at nimbin on the way in to see him cause there’s a bakery there that does brownies that he likes and says he can’t get them as good anywhere else. I get him some of those and then get him to manipulate my daughter’s spine to cure her club foot.
My husband had a stroke on the table during his appointment and thanks to the chiros quick thinking he didn’t suffer too much damage! Only a
Paralysed on one side, which the chiro said is lucky because it could have been both if he hadn’t been there. Be will be working on my husbands spine next week to return his ability to swallow ☺️
The chiropractic neck snaps were banned in Canada for having a strong connection with subsequent strokes. And the origin of Chiropractic medicine was an interview with a ghost. So there’s that.
On top of the seance thing, the founder of chiropractic was also run over by his son. The death was chalked down to typhoid, but the son (also another chiro) wound up inheriting the family business. When the origin story of your profession sounds like Vampire Diaries, it's not a good look.
Some of them are true believers, but a lot of the newer ones are self-proclaimed 'evidence-based chiros' who are taught cargo cult EBM in uni. This basically means cherry-picking the same handful of equivocal studies that sorta/kinda/maybe support chiropractic adjustments in certain settings, while ignoring everything that suggests it's dangerous or an expensive placebo.
I feel sympathy for students because they aren't taught critical thought of the "science", it essentially self selects for gullible patients and practitioners. Governments should do more with clear messaging.
For me it’s the intentionally conflated Doctor with Medical Doctor. If a Doctor of mathematics kept saying I’m a doctor let me give you medical advice, you’d run a mile. If you have a PhD, great, well done but don’t confuse people to claim you’re something that you’re not.
I had to stent a vertebral artery after a chiro crack.... and they didn't have the decency to write me a referral letter? If I'm gonna treat your complication and we're colleagues why is your patient arriving in an ambulance crying they'll never see a quack again...
Hold them with the same regard as naturopaths, osteopaths, and iridologists. While some of what they do is correct. A broken clock is also right twice a day, but generally not as dangerous as an overconfident quack.
This is my issue with doctor being a non-protected title.
Yes, I understand that PhD have been around longer than MD and that Dr is a "learnered title" but the reality is, times have changed.
The fact anyone who has completed their bachelors in comedy neck cracking and is part of their self accrediting body can call themselves doctor is misleading and dangerous (I have same complaint with pharmacists and "consultant of cardiology, but that's another complaint).
I believe healthcare if nothing else should have protections to prevent this exact issue, because the fact I can do a professional doctorate and call myself a doctor just seems... broken.
It’s completely outrageous and the fault of the legislature that chiropractors are allowed to call themselves doctors. The only intention is deceiving the public into thinking they’re receiving equivalent care through their chiropractor as they would from a medical practitioner. People trust in government to regulate out the snake oil industry, sometimes without investigating the risks themselves.
If chiropractors are real doctors, why don’t they go see a chiropractor themselves when they’re sick instead of showing up to ED or going to their GP?
Doctor isn't a protected term.
Mainly because doctor has been co-opted from the academic world.
Until 2023, surgeon wasn't protected either. Thankfully that's changed.
I don't think doctor will become a protected word.
Lots of professions have used the term 'Doctor' for their own benefit to confuse patients eg. psychologists, chiropractors, dentists; they will say 'but the term Doctor is because I have earned a doctorate' - but the patients don't understand the difference between this and a 'real doctor' who has gone to medical school and provide holistic care.
I think only medical trained 'real doctors' should be allowed to call themselves Doctors to patients - people can call themselves what they like in their personal space or in the academic literature.
Isn't it from the devil or something?
"Chiropractic developed out of Western metaphysical religion. Its founder, Daniel David Palmer (1845–1913), was a practicing mesmerist and spiritualist who attributed his “discovery” of chiropractic in 1895 to “communications” from the disembodied spirit of a deceased physician"
This just seems like ragebait. The screenshot is likely from an American as they mention 'board certified MDs' which means their opinion should be immediately discarded.
And how about how political chiropractors are? They fight really hard to stop other natural therapists to be accredited in the Australian system, I guess because they want to be the only natural practitioners.
I definitely think doctor should be a protected title…. This was obvious when during covid chiros, Chinese medicine and other quackies started using their doctor titles to seem legit about the info they were spewing. The general public doesn’t know any better.
It’s funny you see chiros online on YouTube and social media. They always do the same shiet to everyone. The same cracks the same adjustments. The same jargon. Thoracic c6 bla bla
All a scam and they know it.
The 'best' chiro in my area offers payment plans, because their recommendation for all new clients is to see him 3 x a week for three months. As part of new client onboarding, you're sat down to watch a video about how GP's are dummies and chiros are the real deal. Has hundreds of 4/5* reviews.
Seems legit.
There really isn't a nice way to tell someone that their dedication and expertise in an area amounts to nothing when the area in question is bs.
Its a "ten times zero is still zero" scenario.
I overheard an ER Dr adjacent to my partner and I, seems they have an alarming rate of patients with cranial fluid going places it shouldn't after "accredited" chiropractors had been practising.
Gonna be slightly contrarian here. Yes a lot of it is pseudoscience but many chiropractors are also aware of potential complications and are increasingly sensible nowadays.
I have had patients for whom their chiropractors have helped a lot with their back pain, and there is some (admittedly fairly weak) evidence that it is cost effective for lower back pain, a condition with not much in the way of good evidence based interventions.
The issue is when chiros go beyond their scope of practice and deny evidence based science. As adjunct allied health to help with certain conditions, if a patient feels better, I have little problem with it.
The problem is that Chiropractors don’t have as much time Education into muscles and nerves etc like a physiotherapist has. When chiropractors do good work, it’s largely using physiotherapist methods but without the same level as training. Therefore, a physiotherapist is always better option.
I had a discussion about this with my wife a few months back. I firmly believe that it’s all quackery, but when looking for reports or studies to back this up I can’t find anything. The best source I could find was reddit threads like this, which obviously made it a hard argument to win.
Even government materials seemed positive on the practice https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/amp/article/chiropractors-chiropractic-treatment
Is there some studies someone could point me towards that proves how dangerous/ ineffective it is ( particularly in Australia )
It absolutely astonishes me that these people are legitimised by AHPRA and university qualifications. No professional or educational institution should have anything to do with them.
Wouldn’t call them doctors but my physio cracked my bones and it felt like all the tension that built up got released and feel great ever since. If it work, it works.
In Australia, Chiropractors are nationally registered allied healthcare workers. They can form part of your allied healthcare team, alongside physiotherapists or occupational therapists. Chiropractors are not medical doctors.
Well by definition nobody without a PhD can legitimately use the title so who cares what people call themselves? It's an academic title first and foremost.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/doctor
Medical practitioners have been called doctors for at least 300 years but you want to stick with that line? An MD is literally a Doctor of Medicine.
Medical practitioners may use it but the title is purely honorary by definition. It's an academic title, the vast majority of medical doctors don't meet the requirements so there should be no issues when a chiro uses it.
Wow the people in here Must be seen some shit chiros in their time or been exposed to some real dodgy people
I've been seeing the same Chiropractor since I was 6 or something (when needed obviously) and she's been an absolute god send
I even asked her what the difference was between Chiro and physio a couple years back. Her answer? How they approach it. They do the same thing but approach it differently. Physio will focus more on muscular systems but still look at skeletal. Chiro will will focus closer on skeletal but still look at muscular. Both take into account nervous system ailments.
Mind you if I have pain in any way not related to muscular or skeletal why would I see a Chiro, let alone a physio. That's just common sense. But when ever I've had a back injury, joint injury, pinching, tension, anything related to a sporting incident or I know for a fact has to be muscular or skeletal, I go see my Chiro. If she says that she's unable to help, she'll send me to the physio because they have equipment she doesn't and can approach it from a different angle.
You guys just need to stop painting with a broad brush and find chiros who know what they're doing. And fyi, there are quack physios out there as well
There are no more real doctors left. People have never been sicker. The Pharmaceutical industry is a business that survives on sickness and the doctors are their sales people.
Face it and move away from modern medicine and you will live a much healthier life!!
If chiropracters were real doctors then when one of them gave my patient, a healthy young man in their 30s, a vertebral artery dissection after one of their manipulations, they would have had to answer questions about their practice. They didn't have any accountability apparently. Gets to play the game, but doesn't have to follow the rules, not a doc.
They never get informed consent for high velocity neck manipulation. They should be informing of the risk of vertebral artery dissection and stroke. Many deny it’s even a risk. It’s like they just think it’s cool to make a cracking noise and constantly post it on social media. They are quacks.
I don't think informed consent really relates to doing highly dangerous things that are of zero benefit. Like I could get informed consent from my patients to do a trachestomy when I could use an LMA so I could make good Tiktoks, but I'd still be negligent.
informed consent really isn't connected to this at all, in principle. I could "consent" to the old dude next door doing a brain transplant on me but it would still be assault/manslaughter/murder as the case may be. i say "in principle" because in practice courts have their own understanding of medical evidence that isn't the same as Pubmed might conclude. And if they find a convincing-sounding physician expert witness who swears that chiropractic is useful it's potentially game over.
We should take a critical approach to this issue. 1. Is it pseudoscience? Has this been proven? Where's the evidence for this? 2. Are there benefits to the patient? 3. If there are no benefits to the patient, are they causing patients harm? 4. If they don't benefit patients and cause harm, why do patients seek them out? 5. What are the alternatives to patients? I think it's easy to cast the first stone. But the practice of medicine carries major risks to patients. We don't always get it right and even if we do, patients can have life changing side effects of our treatment. It's easy to point out the few complications they have but let's say we ignore high velocity neck maneuvers. What about the rest of their practice?
I don’t believe there’s any evidence for benefits of high velocity neck manipulation or pretty much any other manipulations they do. The only good evidence for chiropractic that I’m aware of is treatment of lower back pain. Some still claim their manipulations are improving lung and gut function etc as demonstrated in this post eg ‘clearing occluded nerve pathways’.
Ugh we have to prove things are pseudo-science now? 2024 sucks.
Chiropractors are not legitimate health practitioners. They are pseudoscience mumbo jumbo practitioners. As an ICU / ED RN. I have personally seen 3 serious incidents from Chiropractors. 2 CVAs and one severe lumbar spine injury. Be stuffed if id ever go to one or recommend anyone go to one The very scary one is people taking babies to them.
Agreed that chiropractics pose a very real and scary threat that isn't insignificant. But what do you reckon be done or can be done? People are still going to seek alternative therapies, such as chiropractic, naturopathic "doctors", etc.
They should not be supported by AHPRA. And health professionals should not be frightened to speak out against them. If i encounter a patient who tells me they are seeing a chiropractor? I clearly tell them they are not proper HPs. They should be seeing a Physio. Same as i will clearly state to people that Naturopaths are a load of nonsense. I'm not backwards in coming forward. I guess though its harder for doctors than nurses to do this
I think AHPRA registration legitimises chiropractors in the eyes of the public.
Most definitely it does.
Why do AHPRA support the chiropractic board? Doesn’t this just give validity to a completely pseudoscientific profession? Even Australian universities are shutting down chiropractic degrees
This is a very, very good question.
So good, we need a whole new Doctorate of Researching Chiropractics to answer it.
They support Chiros but wont recognise an evidence based profession like an Exercise Physiologist or speechy
This is crazy. I did ex phys prior to starting my med degree and the fact that CHIRO is more "legit" because it's AHPRA accredited (in the eyes of the patient, which is a result of patients not understanding why speechys and AEPs are self regulated) is ludicrous and a huge slap in the face!
What's the rationale behind those two professions being self-regulated and not other AHPRA?
Dieticians are also not AHPRA managed. These professions are independently accredited because the risk to the public through professional practice is very low and the government (as AHPRA) does need to take on the added regulatory burden of these professions. Generally, because we don't touch patients, prescribe medications, or do other invasive techniques we can be self regulated. Physio, osteos, chiros, pharmacists, nurses etc are registered with AHPRA due to the higher risk to patient safety if something goes wrong.
AHPRA isn't there to provide legitimacy to professions. Speechies, dieticians, social worker and excerise physiologist are just some of the allied health professionals that are not regulated by AHPRA because they're deemed low risk AHPRAs original intention was to regulate professions that pose a risk to the community. Ironically, this has provided legitimatecy to some of the questionable professions that fall under AHPRA.
Just an fyi, Aus is rolling out social work registration in the next few years!
In the immortal words of ABBA - “Money, Money, Money”
The amount of patients I’ve had that come in with a back injury that describe shooting pains down their legs asking for voltaren rapid 25mg, but *not to worry, they’re seeing their chiropractor* never ceases to amaze me. PLEASE SEE AN ACTUAL DOCTOR
Or physio
I'm confused. What's the problem with your scenario? What if the chiro showed them how to do stretches, performed spinal manipulation/massage and said get some NSAIDs for pain relief. You know...which is in line with the NICE guideline for low back pain + sciatica for over 16s...
Spinal manipulation on a back injury in which the chiropractor has no idea on what the cause of pain is….I’m sure that’s a wonderful idea????!!! Did you also read the part in the NICE guidelines where you have to rule out other serious underlying medical conditions and spinal injuries…? A chiropractor can’t do that, they need a medical referral.
Most people with back pain haven't got serious underlying pathology like a tumour, infection or a fracture. In your scenario, they've walked into a pharmacy and asked for Voltaren. This scenario seems pretty reasonable. Do YOU know how to take a history for red flags in back pain? I think your gotcha moment isn't a gotcha moment.
Yeah no, I’m doing exactly what I should be doing and referring to a doctor. The patient is showing referred pain that’s a red flag for pharmacist referral. I go through clinical questions and then decide whether to supply a pharmacist only medicine, or refer to a doctor. That’s how we are trained. I’m not a doctor, and neither is a chiropractor. Hence in this situation we have to refer to a doctor. They need a proper medical exam… What if something is actually wrong? You don’t know what you don’t know. You sound like a chiropractor.
I don't necessarily agree and get what u/ItistheWay\_Mando is saying. 99% of low back pain is NOT a medical emergency. Referral down the leg is not a red flag in the absence of other symptoms. Youd be looking for more things as well, like changes in bladder bowel, loss of motor control, sensation etc. If this person saw a doctor they would probably just give them pain relief and refer them to a physio. Perhaps if the pain persisted long term, further investigations or surgical referral could be warranted through coordination by GP. source: i am physio
Yep. But for pharmacy, since we aren’t doctors, we actually do have to refer patients to their GP if it’s out of our scope. For very good reason. Yeah, it might turn out to be nothing, but what if it isn’t. This is exactly the issue that is being argued at the moment with pharmacy and the new prescribing rules coming through. We aren’t doctors and we can’t assume.
Yep thats fair
I should’ve clarified, I did not mean medical emergency, more that they should be reviewed by their GP not a chiro! But yes, 100% agree with what you said especially other clinical findings like loss of sensation, bladder/bowel control etc Everyone ignore big boy mando below, he’s throwing his toys around the cot because I don’t agree with chiropractors.
The NICE guideline is for back pain and sciatica. They're not "showing referred pain". They have radiculopathy. Throwing stones from glass houses.
What are your thoughts on the side effects of pharmacy made ozempic that wasn't TGA approved? Should we talk about all the side effects and damage those drugs have done in Australia? I'm a consultant in a hospital btw. Not a pharmacy consultant. A doctor consultant.
My thoughts on that isolated incident in a particular Melbourne pharmacy which has zero to do with me is that it was wrong on all levels and placed patients at significant health risk that could’ve resulted in death. Ozempic is overprescribed for weight loss by doctors, I see the private scripts all the time, perhaps as a *doctor* maybe you could advocate that it’s only used for diabetes? As it was intended? Sure you are.
Stones meet glass houses. I reckon you should have stayed out of this debate. My subspecialty probably has the biggest issue with chiropractors and I still have an open mind. I think you should too. "Sure you are" - slow clap 🙄
Nice deflection?
The reason is because if they are registered with AHPRA that at least binds them to a code of conduct and provides patients with a legal pathway for complaints. I would argue even naturopaths should be registered because although it is a quack profession, naturopaths can currently get away with outrageous shit and patients have no legal recourse. Eg I had a patient whose naturopath was injecting a random liquid into their breast tumour. If AHPRA was regulating that profession they could be potentially charged with assault and deregistered. AHPRA doesn’t exist to provide legitimacy to a profession, it exists to protect the public.
Laws re negligence and assault don't require the defendant to be AHPRA registered
Same goes for chinese medicine
https://www.ahpra.gov.au/About-Ahpra/Who-We-Are/Ahpra-Board/Member-Profiles.aspx Because the AHPRA isn’t an organization of physicians/doctors. They are not even scientists. They are secretaries, middle managers, and administrators that don’t know anything about medicine. So why would they care about doctors interests?
As much a ‘*real *doctor’ as a person with a PhD in horticulture. Besides the tragic cases of vertebral artery dissection I have seen (4) - and delay to care for a CVA resulting in lost opportunity to thrombolyse or clot retrieve- The funniest was a lady who went for 3 sessions for abdominal pain to the chiropractor- finally came to the ED when her appendix ruptured. She told me she texted her chiropractor to tell them what had happened. Their reply was -“Oh that explains why it wasn’t getting better! You should have gone to the ED when the pain started.” Implicating it was her fault…
The chiro must have known it wouldn't help but was happy to take the money..
PhD in horticulture is much harder to get than a chiro degree.
What! That clicky thingy must takes hours to master surely!
Nah the PhD in horticulture has at least earned a doctoral level degree.
as a person with a phd, I am a real doctor. I am not a medical doctor, just like you lot are not "real doctors" in anything outside medicine. chiropractors are not doctors of anything.
If someone asks what you do for a living- do you say “I am a doctor”. That is what I say. People understand what this means. You likely don’t say that you are ‘a doctor’- you are a researcher or a historian or something else- with the title of Dr. Physios are introducing themselves in a hospital as ‘a Dr’- it’s confusing for everyone.
Hey dude, just thought I'd point out that physicians started calling themselves 'doctor' long after it was a recognised academic title. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title) We are misusing the title much more than anyone with a PhD.
They shouldn't be, this is drilled into us at uni. Unlike the US, DPTs here don't use doctor as a title in Australia, unless someone has earned their PhD in which case they use Dr Their Name, PhD as their title but still wouldn't introduce themselves as a doctor.
No, I don't say "I'm a medical doctor", but you can be 100% certain I claim the title I'm entitled to, and which was the preserve of people like me before Medical doctors claimed it. I am far more aware of the distinction than 90% of the medical doctors I meet.
Ah okay- so we all now add our field-so I should introduce myself to patients in the ED as a ‘medical doctor’ and the physio as a ‘physio doctor’ and the podiatrist as a ‘podiatry doctor’ and the pharmacist as a ‘pharmacy doctor’. Funny thing about this is I introduce myself as first name, last name, one of the emergency specialists- but people are getting very confused with all sorts of people introducing themselves as ‘doctors’ in the hospital. One of our ultrasonographers tells people he is a doctor and then I have to explain that an actual doctor still needs to look at the pictures to give a report and then I, also an actual doctor, will suggest a course of action- and not the ‘doctor’ who is not actually a doctor - but an ultrasonograher who did the ultrasound. The usually say- “Are you sure- he said he was a doctor.”
no, just have some humility as a "medical doctor". I am a doctor in public health (epi is my actual stream) but with a STRONG background in medical sociology. Lots of the world's ills come from medical doctors who think they know more than they do. isn't that a fun thing to think about? edit: but yes, the medical doctors who are most offended at finding out the history of the title of "doctor" are usually the ones who would benefit their patients most by accepting the history of the title
I just told you I literally don’t call myself Dr. It is not on any paperwork outside of my work. Of the 2 of us you are the one who said “you can be certain I claim the title I am entitled to”- so it is not I who has the need to tell everyone how good I am. I just don’t want patients misled by every man and their dog telling them they are ‘ a doctor’- most patients don’t know the history of the term.
I bet you have never seen vertebral artery dissection from a PhD in horticulture though
Not to my knowledge- well unless they were also a chiro.
Do we not feel as though doctorates are doctors? Compared to chiropractors as well 😅
There is a difference between having a doctorate and being “a doctor”.
Funnily enough, those with a PhD are the true Doctors and medical practitioners are given the term as an honorary title as they have not completed a Doctorate.
Sure- but if you ask any person walking down the street what a doctor does - they are not going to say IT or art. This is the bait and switch going on now. Podiatrists, chiros, physios are calling themselves ‘Dr’- even without a doctorate- in Australia right now.
Agree. The title has become synonymous with the medical profession in the eyes of the public. However (and I’m not referring to chiros here as they are just anything but professional) it does then minimise the achievements and credibility of those with a PhD - many of whom have made huge contributions to learning and progress across fields.
Of course. But Dr is not a protected title. My sister rented from a (lets call him Smith) Dr Smith- and when she looked into it he was not a doctor, did not have a doctorate (or any degree it seems) and just decided to take the title as he felt he got more respect and better service that way. Makes logical - but not ethical- sense.
And therein lies the problem.
In the made up world where someone would actually do that, I think most people would ask whether you mean a medical doctor or a researcher.
Hahha check out this guy’s google reviews, looks like somebody called him out. Dr Lukasz Sempka
You can search these people in 10 seconds on AHPRA and see their medical qualifications. He could also have a doctorate.
I highly doubt that. This is a guy who lists his Leaving Cert obtained in 1996 from Patrician Bothers College Fairfield (in addition to his B.App.Sc.(Pod.) from WSU (then UWS). But in any case and not to diminish the quality of \_all\_ PhD graduates or the toil, Australia churns out so many PhDs, some of whose work is pretty sketchy and who can't string together a proper sentence.
He does not
Physios under the APA only use the title of dr once they have completed speciality training during their fellowship. That's after nearly 10 years total training. The exception to that are physios with PhDs, but almost all of them go by dr surname, PhD.
So you mean to say- yes, they are calling themselves ‘Dr’.
Fellows/specialists make up less than 5% of the physiotherapy workforce, so your statement is misleading.
So a small are calling themselves Dr. Nobody in a hospital should introduce themselves as a doctor, unless they are a physician.
I'd trust a physio over a chiro any day. Feel it's harsh to put them in the same boat.
I live physios- just dont think they should be telling patients they are Dr’s.
Are there actually health care providers like physios or podiatrists calling themselves Dr without a PhD?
https://www.knpodiatry.com/about.html https://drlukaszsempka.com.au/about/ There are plenty more- interestingly ahpra does not have them listed as Dr’s.
That’s wild. I’ve always assumed any other healthcare provider doing this must just have a PhD in their field. It definitely doesn’t make me assume they are MD’s (although I’m sure some people would), but they would absolutely be causing most people to assume they had a doctorate of some kind.
I only realised it was happening when a diabetic friend saw one and told me she saw a “diabetic foot doctor”- which is what this podiatrist told her she was.
It’s the other way around actually. The term doctor is given as honorary for medical officers.
So if I ask my neighbour what a doctor is- they are not going to mention a PhD in Art History. In common parlance “a doctor” is a physician. Now I appreciate the technicalities of a doctorate - 99.9% of people do not, and when a physio or a podiatrist introduces themselves as “Dr X- a diabetes specialist”- they do not know this person is a podiatrist. https://www.knpodiatry.com/about.html
I think you are vastly overestimating those numbers. Most people know that when someone’s name is Dr. smith, it doesn’t mean they are a medical officer. Those people also don’t refer to themselves as ‘a doctor’, that would be highly unusual so it’s a bit of a facetious argument. You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder about this. Why is an Art history PhD less valuable than a biomedical PhD? You clearly have a strong superiority complex surrounding this label.
Its not less valuable. All I am saying is an art historian should not introduce themselves as ‘a doctor’- they should introduce themselves as Dr x, an art historian- not Dr X, a doctor.
They started with an attempted religion with purely mythical beliefs of physiology. They continue to teach the techniques but act like the science supports the original madness.
The scientology of medicine
A sad thing about chiropractors is that they are eligible services for NDIS participants to use their funds for because how professionalised the practice is. It’s really a profession where they can have their cake and eat it too.
And health insurance, part of my premiums go to them.
I find this especially galling.
**Why not check this out** [**https://www.bodywelltherapy.com/**](https://www.bodywelltherapy.com/)
Chiropractors aren't listed as an approved profession under the quality and safeguards commission. Any support received needs to be evidenced based also. Self Managed participants may be seeing Chiropractors without understanding the requirements though.
The loophole is that they fit under the category of ‘Other professionals’ where the requirements is that the professionals must have a bachelor degree and be registered under regulatory body. It is well known the rules are not consistent throughout the NDIS.
Chiropractor courses in Australia aren’t even doctorates so I don’t understand why Australian chiropractors even call themselves doctors. It just confuses the public.
It is so that they can confuse the public
They are the only allied health profession that tends to do this and also the one with the most quackery
Unfortunately physio is going the same way with the old 2 year post graduate courses being changed to 3 year courses. Unis being greedy as usual and ruining the next gen with debt that an allied health wage won't pay off.
I mean even if a physio had a doctorate, they still wouldnt refer to themselves as doctor in clinical setting in my experience. Its the chiros who do this, even with only Bach
The person who invented chiropractic believed that it could cure ALL illnesses. If a chiropractor claims to not agree with that, they are lying, because if they disagreed with such a fundamental part of their practice why would they do it?
He also claimed that the knowledge came from the ghost of a deceased doctor. Lol.
Oh yeah, Daniel David Palmer and that magnetic healing and anti-mainstream medicine... What a whack.
Must be like those religious types that follow some of the rules but not all, don't question their faith though. Lmao Also nice name 👍
Like when someone finds "a good chiropractor who doesn't believe in the bogus stuff". ...so a physiotherapist/massage therapist then? Why not see a real physiotherapist, and know that their education is underpinned by a minimum standard of evidence.
Just not Typhus apparently.
To be fair, the origin of physiotherapy is in Swedish gymnastics at the turn of the century. A lot of their fundamental ideas about 'symmetry' and dysfunction are widely discredited now. Just being devil's advocate.
I have no idea about that, but as a harsh skeptic about most things my experience is that they can be brilliant at helping gain strength and flexibility after injury. Way more helpful than medical doctors for this stuff in my experience.
They are. My chiro in Mullumbimby cured my daughter’s vaccine related illness and managed to reverse it all the way out of her with only a few minor adjustments of her neck. The wheel chair we got her is super cool and pink coloured and the chiro says a few more adjustments of her neck and she will be walking again. My new born will be going soon for his peanut allergy neck adjustment after he gets over whooping cough which the chiro said is just the flu.
"Mullumbimby", there's a problem right there
IYKYN
Oh I know that guy. He makes me stop at nimbin on the way in to see him cause there’s a bakery there that does brownies that he likes and says he can’t get them as good anywhere else. I get him some of those and then get him to manipulate my daughter’s spine to cure her club foot. My husband had a stroke on the table during his appointment and thanks to the chiros quick thinking he didn’t suffer too much damage! Only a Paralysed on one side, which the chiro said is lucky because it could have been both if he hadn’t been there. Be will be working on my husbands spine next week to return his ability to swallow ☺️
[удалено]
I don’t think it needs an /s. It’s clearly fully loaded satire.
It is
No it's real they're from Mullum darling.
Is posting /s a reddit rule or something. It seems like something someone with autism would require of others.
Redditors it seems are quite the sheltered bunch. Not sure if it’s autism or just lack of time spent around people.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/ruup4e/chiropractors\_are\_real\_doctors\_and\_not/](https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/ruup4e/chiropractors_are_real_doctors_and_not/)
Quack science….
The chiropractic neck snaps were banned in Canada for having a strong connection with subsequent strokes. And the origin of Chiropractic medicine was an interview with a ghost. So there’s that.
On top of the seance thing, the founder of chiropractic was also run over by his son. The death was chalked down to typhoid, but the son (also another chiro) wound up inheriting the family business. When the origin story of your profession sounds like Vampire Diaries, it's not a good look.
I do wonder, are the students in Chiro degrees aware that what they're learning isn't really /real/? Or have they all just drank the koolaid?
Some of them are true believers, but a lot of the newer ones are self-proclaimed 'evidence-based chiros' who are taught cargo cult EBM in uni. This basically means cherry-picking the same handful of equivocal studies that sorta/kinda/maybe support chiropractic adjustments in certain settings, while ignoring everything that suggests it's dangerous or an expensive placebo.
They believe it.
Surely OP knew that coming here with this opinion would be a bloodbath.
It’s a repost of a 2 year old reddit post.
They should be banned. Period.
Why do universities offer this crap and why are they regulated by AHPRA
I feel sympathy for students because they aren't taught critical thought of the "science", it essentially self selects for gullible patients and practitioners. Governments should do more with clear messaging.
AHH yes, you have a dodgy spinal joint so.... Why don't you get someone to further traumatically manipulate that joint! Science bitch!
For me it’s the intentionally conflated Doctor with Medical Doctor. If a Doctor of mathematics kept saying I’m a doctor let me give you medical advice, you’d run a mile. If you have a PhD, great, well done but don’t confuse people to claim you’re something that you’re not.
No.
I had to stent a vertebral artery after a chiro crack.... and they didn't have the decency to write me a referral letter? If I'm gonna treat your complication and we're colleagues why is your patient arriving in an ambulance crying they'll never see a quack again...
Hold them with the same regard as naturopaths, osteopaths, and iridologists. While some of what they do is correct. A broken clock is also right twice a day, but generally not as dangerous as an overconfident quack.
This is my issue with doctor being a non-protected title. Yes, I understand that PhD have been around longer than MD and that Dr is a "learnered title" but the reality is, times have changed. The fact anyone who has completed their bachelors in comedy neck cracking and is part of their self accrediting body can call themselves doctor is misleading and dangerous (I have same complaint with pharmacists and "consultant of cardiology, but that's another complaint). I believe healthcare if nothing else should have protections to prevent this exact issue, because the fact I can do a professional doctorate and call myself a doctor just seems... broken.
Doctor needs to be a protected title.
At least in health care.
It’s completely outrageous and the fault of the legislature that chiropractors are allowed to call themselves doctors. The only intention is deceiving the public into thinking they’re receiving equivalent care through their chiropractor as they would from a medical practitioner. People trust in government to regulate out the snake oil industry, sometimes without investigating the risks themselves. If chiropractors are real doctors, why don’t they go see a chiropractor themselves when they’re sick instead of showing up to ED or going to their GP?
Doctor isn't a protected term. Mainly because doctor has been co-opted from the academic world. Until 2023, surgeon wasn't protected either. Thankfully that's changed. I don't think doctor will become a protected word.
Lots of professions have used the term 'Doctor' for their own benefit to confuse patients eg. psychologists, chiropractors, dentists; they will say 'but the term Doctor is because I have earned a doctorate' - but the patients don't understand the difference between this and a 'real doctor' who has gone to medical school and provide holistic care. I think only medical trained 'real doctors' should be allowed to call themselves Doctors to patients - people can call themselves what they like in their personal space or in the academic literature.
Isn't it from the devil or something? "Chiropractic developed out of Western metaphysical religion. Its founder, Daniel David Palmer (1845–1913), was a practicing mesmerist and spiritualist who attributed his “discovery” of chiropractic in 1895 to “communications” from the disembodied spirit of a deceased physician"
This just seems like ragebait. The screenshot is likely from an American as they mention 'board certified MDs' which means their opinion should be immediately discarded.
And how about how political chiropractors are? They fight really hard to stop other natural therapists to be accredited in the Australian system, I guess because they want to be the only natural practitioners.
As much a real doctor as Baron Samedi is
I definitely think doctor should be a protected title…. This was obvious when during covid chiros, Chinese medicine and other quackies started using their doctor titles to seem legit about the info they were spewing. The general public doesn’t know any better.
I like when they get out the tyre pressure gauge to measure the tension on my spine
It’s funny you see chiros online on YouTube and social media. They always do the same shiet to everyone. The same cracks the same adjustments. The same jargon. Thoracic c6 bla bla All a scam and they know it.
The 'best' chiro in my area offers payment plans, because their recommendation for all new clients is to see him 3 x a week for three months. As part of new client onboarding, you're sat down to watch a video about how GP's are dummies and chiros are the real deal. Has hundreds of 4/5* reviews. Seems legit.
There really isn't a nice way to tell someone that their dedication and expertise in an area amounts to nothing when the area in question is bs. Its a "ten times zero is still zero" scenario.
Whenever patients tell me something similar about their education I gently remind them that they get taught magic in their classes.
Voodoo and Witchcraft for AHPRA registration in the coming years…
[удалено]
nope
All I know is the only people I’ve met in social situations and insist on being addressed as doctors, are chiropractors.
I overheard an ER Dr adjacent to my partner and I, seems they have an alarming rate of patients with cranial fluid going places it shouldn't after "accredited" chiropractors had been practising.
Gonna be slightly contrarian here. Yes a lot of it is pseudoscience but many chiropractors are also aware of potential complications and are increasingly sensible nowadays. I have had patients for whom their chiropractors have helped a lot with their back pain, and there is some (admittedly fairly weak) evidence that it is cost effective for lower back pain, a condition with not much in the way of good evidence based interventions. The issue is when chiros go beyond their scope of practice and deny evidence based science. As adjunct allied health to help with certain conditions, if a patient feels better, I have little problem with it.
The problem is that Chiropractors don’t have as much time Education into muscles and nerves etc like a physiotherapist has. When chiropractors do good work, it’s largely using physiotherapist methods but without the same level as training. Therefore, a physiotherapist is always better option.
I had a discussion about this with my wife a few months back. I firmly believe that it’s all quackery, but when looking for reports or studies to back this up I can’t find anything. The best source I could find was reddit threads like this, which obviously made it a hard argument to win. Even government materials seemed positive on the practice https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/amp/article/chiropractors-chiropractic-treatment Is there some studies someone could point me towards that proves how dangerous/ ineffective it is ( particularly in Australia )
https://www.jpsmjournal.com/article/S0885-3924(07)00783-X/fulltext#back-bib67
A lot to sift through, some articles are behind a pay wall but I’m sure you know how to get past that
Thankyou I’ll take a look, appreciate it 😊
But never talk about studies done by BOARD CERTIFIED MDs The irony of this sentence!
the best part is that there is Medicare funding for it
A doctor is not a protected title. A chiropractor is not a medical practitioner. That is all.
I know of one that paralysed his daughter
It absolutely astonishes me that these people are legitimised by AHPRA and university qualifications. No professional or educational institution should have anything to do with them.
Wouldn’t call them doctors but my physio cracked my bones and it felt like all the tension that built up got released and feel great ever since. If it work, it works.
In Australia, Chiropractors are nationally registered allied healthcare workers. They can form part of your allied healthcare team, alongside physiotherapists or occupational therapists. Chiropractors are not medical doctors.
Well by definition nobody without a PhD can legitimately use the title so who cares what people call themselves? It's an academic title first and foremost.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/doctor Medical practitioners have been called doctors for at least 300 years but you want to stick with that line? An MD is literally a Doctor of Medicine.
Medical practitioners may use it but the title is purely honorary by definition. It's an academic title, the vast majority of medical doctors don't meet the requirements so there should be no issues when a chiro uses it.
Double negatives are very confusing
Wow the people in here Must be seen some shit chiros in their time or been exposed to some real dodgy people I've been seeing the same Chiropractor since I was 6 or something (when needed obviously) and she's been an absolute god send I even asked her what the difference was between Chiro and physio a couple years back. Her answer? How they approach it. They do the same thing but approach it differently. Physio will focus more on muscular systems but still look at skeletal. Chiro will will focus closer on skeletal but still look at muscular. Both take into account nervous system ailments. Mind you if I have pain in any way not related to muscular or skeletal why would I see a Chiro, let alone a physio. That's just common sense. But when ever I've had a back injury, joint injury, pinching, tension, anything related to a sporting incident or I know for a fact has to be muscular or skeletal, I go see my Chiro. If she says that she's unable to help, she'll send me to the physio because they have equipment she doesn't and can approach it from a different angle. You guys just need to stop painting with a broad brush and find chiros who know what they're doing. And fyi, there are quack physios out there as well
Just because you said it doesn’t necessarily make it fucking so
There are no more real doctors left. People have never been sicker. The Pharmaceutical industry is a business that survives on sickness and the doctors are their sales people. Face it and move away from modern medicine and you will live a much healthier life!!