More Anti-chiropractic Silliness from Chirotalk

Having seen the way the Chirotalk forum would attack anything and everything chiropractic in their "skeptical" and "anti-chiropractic" fashion, and having seen the changes over the past few weeks, I find this interesting.

It seems that the owner of the site, Mr Allen Botnick, has devised a spinal realignment system that he claims cures asthma. After all of their posturing, apparently in the name of making a buck, Mr Botnick is willing to re-clothe himself in the chiropractic regalia, and promote his "technique" for spinal realignment to "cure" a condition which is, by their own rants, not within the chiropractic scope of practice, much less, realm of treatment.

And one of their staunchest spokesman, Nemo, who by admission likes to bash chiropractors for the sheer fun of it, as, in his own words, it is like a video game, a way to unwind after a long day at the office, defends his guru now.

I give you three posts regarding this change in the "skeptics" attitude:



By chilkatkid on Chirotalk -

"There is this ex chiropractor. His name is Allen Botnick. He actually believes that you can cure asthma of some type with fixing the spine! He has no evidence based studies but he just has anecdotal alleged evidence from one person and that is him! He has no studies but he wants to market the device. He believes it works but has no real evidence to support it. Additionally there is no rational mechanism by which asthma may be caused through aberrant spinal function. He also believes that supplements can help fix the asthma as well.

I mean think about it. He says he fixed one patient. HIM!!!! And now he wants to market the device. I mean what would ever possess a person to believe that they could cure asthma through the spine?? And to jump to conclusions with no evidence based studies. And this is chiropractic even though Botnick holds no license in anywhere I can find. And on this one interview he even says a rib can misalignment at the sternum. There is no proof of that.

I don't know who Botnick is but this is very extreme. I men if Botnick says that asthma can be caused from a spinal alignment problem then what will stop him from saying heart problems can??I am shocked by this."


By Nemo -

"Hey FancyPants!

Did you know that, according to the National Board of Chiropractic Examiners, chiropractic is, in fact, a treatment for Asthma? Why 60% of the time the diagnosis is a subluxation....and 70% co-manage this condition. You can check it out in Chapter 9 of the 2005 Job Analysis Bulletin. You wouldn't call the NBCE stupid, would you?


They claim that "adjustments' not only increase mobility for asthmatics, but stimulate the "psychoneuroimmune" system for relief.

Now go back and read your Gatterman like a good little chiro and leave Allen alone. What chiropractic planet are you from anyway? "

Also by Nemo -

"Wait!.....Hold on FancyPants!.....I forgot to tell you that the NBCE
( the people who legally certified you as a DC) also treat heart conditions. In fact, the following quote was taken right off the business website of National Board Examiner Ted Scott:

"Dr. Scott helped me understand that treating the spinal area from which the heart receives it’s nerve energy, had restored my heart and my health - "Just another daily miracle." said Dr. Scott. Thank you so verrry much! ~Elaine" "

Now I ask you, is this sarcasm or just plain hypocrisy?

But this one is by far the most classic. A direct response from Mr Botnick himself to chilkatkid -

Botnick - "Ribs dislocate so if they can dislocate they certainly can translate enough to lock out the joints.Your bias notwithstanding, there is nothing wrong with speculating and using personal experience to come up with a testable theory provided one doesn’t take the alternative med approach of never testing it."
chilkatkid - "Joint instability causing pathology like asthma. Do you realize how off base that is?
Botnick - "You have no proof that it can’t cause it. You are speculating. Further, costochondritis is idiopathic."
chilkatkid - "Oh and I find it so funny you moved my post and relabeled it. I mean just step back and look at the big picture. Botnick is saying that subluxation causes asthma. Pure and simple. He is basing it on his one "experience". He then muses about nutrition being able to help asthma. I tell you that correlation does not imply cause. But seriously. Bones in the back that are unstable do not cause asthma.
Botnick - "You are biased.
chilkatkid - "Oh and as far as the physicians at the New York University School of Medicine. Support in what sense and what are their names and phone numbers? I will call them right the heck now. I want them to tell me where they stand and how they are "supporting" you. "
Botnick - "Given your lack of objectivity, I doubt you would be able to help the research so there’s no point in wasting their time with you. At least I'm testing the theory. "


Amazing isn't it. Especially the comment, "You have no proof that it can't cause it". Isn't this the very argument these anti-chiro skeptics have been shooting down and hammering with insults when presented by chiropractors defending their trade on the chirotalk forum? Isn't it exactly what they were banning chiropractors from the Chirotalk forum for? The classic response from Chirotalk was that there is no evidence for patients positive response to chiropractic treatments; that it could be nothing but placebo; that chiropractors were quacks for having no evidence and using anecdotal stories as their only evidence.

Once again, as always, the anti-chiros and "skeptics" become the pot calling the kettle black, using the same arguments they themselves have been condemning when used by chiropractors. Total hypocrisy! And it is rampant in the anti-chiro/skeptical world.

Mr Botnick, you sound strangly like a chiropractor. Too bad you have no license.

I, personally, have seen how chiropractic manipulation can effect asthma. I hope that any research for this "technique", shows it to be as effective as Mr Botnick says it is. What a great testimony it would be for the potential of chiropractic, and that, coming from the leader of the skeptical, anti-chiro, Chirotalk community.

Informed Consent or Full Disclosure

Recently a bill was introduced in Connecticut which would have required chiropractors to give informed consent to all patients prior to any treatment, specifically cervical spinal manipulation, which is perceived by some to represent a stroke risk to patients. The bill was defeated which has many proponents of the legislation up in arms, claiming that chiropractors don't want to divulge the dangers of cervical manipulation to the public, thus exposing patients to a "dangerous" procedure without adequate disclosure.

On various forums I have seen it said that the bill would have required informed consent from all providers, not just chiropractors. If so, then the bill was defeated not just by a chiropractic movement, which actually might not have been involved, but by others who had an interest in defeating this bill.

I personally don't have a problem with letting patients know it has been suggested there might be a very slight risk, albeit unproven, of stroke after spinal manipulation, but I do believe the "informed" part of consent should be required across the board by all health care providers.

It would appear that the medical community does not want to put the risks associated with medications, both prescription and over the counter, into plain language that the average person would understand. Nor do they seem to want to do so with medical procedures.

But lets face facts about true risks to patients. The risk of stroke due to cervical manipulation is now estimated to be 1 in 5 million or so. The studies to date even suggest that patients who have suffered stroke were probably in the process of having the stroke already and had they gone to their PCP and never received cervical spinal manipulation, would still have had the stroke. Essentially, there is little or no true evidence that any cervical manipulation has ever caused a single stroke. Some "science based" bloggers have suggested that there is the equivalent of a "smoking gun" to suggest a danger, but that is just an anti-chiropractic bias coming to the forefront, in an attempt to continue the denigration of non-medical associated health care. It is a weak attempt at best, but appears to be satisfying among their other "science based" cronies.

The fact of the matter is, if anyone should be afraid of informed consent it should be the medical health care providers and the pharmaceutical companies. A brief search of the Internet will reveal article after article, many from respected medical journals like JAMA, stating the risks and dangers of medical procedures, drug reactions, pharmaceutical errors and medical mistakes. All combined, un-necessary deaths caused by the afore mentioned is estimated to be the number three cause of death in the US. It might possibly be higher.

The medical community claims to give informed consent (apparently not in Connecticut) but I simply do not see the "full disclosure" that they and the anti-chiropractic community are asking of chiropractors with respect to spinal manipulation.

One simple example I have seen mentioned many times on the Topix forums is the risk of death due to ibuprofen, estimated to be about 3000 deaths per year. Various bureau's of statistics give the number of deaths per year due to all non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications (acetaminophen, ibuprofen, naproxen, etc) to be nearly 8000 deaths per year. As was pointed out, this statistic is not found on any bottle of ibuprofen found in the local drug store.

Given the extreme risks due to these over the counter medications, adding in the dangers associated with prescription medications, which must be significantly greater, as well as the dangers associated with medical procedures and medical errors and mistakes, one would think that the true need for "full disclosure" of medical risks, namely death, would fall on the medical community. Any call for full disclosure of the minuscule risks due to spinal manipulation would be almost non-sequitur by comparison.

Yet the anger and venom of those calling for informed consent from chiropractors is extreme, to say the least. Why, when faced with the dangers of medicine? To me, it is nothing more than anti-chiropractic bias, grasping at straws in their efforts to limit and decrease chiropractic utilization, ultimately hoping to eliminate it altogether as an alternative to medical treatment.

There is no "higher calling" by these individuals who want to appear to have the "safety" of the public in mind; not when faced with the facts related to the dangers and true risk of death at the hands of medical science. No, they have an agenda; an anti-chiropractic agenda and nothing more. Whether they perceive chiropractors as quacks or just a threat to their income, so to speak, they are, ultimately not concerned for public safety. Not in the least.

I say let ALL health care providers give full disclosure in their "informed" consent, and not just get "permission" to treat, which is essentially what is done at present.

Post written by Mark Rayshell

Hospital Bills in Dallas

I wanted to get this up today. I had a patient in an MVA a few weeks ago and she brought in her hospital bill for me to fax out to her attorney for her. She is about 4 months pregnant and only had low back pain when she came to me.

Radiology - just over $500 (She said they took one shot of her low back and used shielding. How, I don't know.)

other radiology - just over $1200 (I think two sonograms.)

Routine chemistry - just under $100 (One tube of blood was drawn, no UA.)

Special chemistries - just over $700

ER bill - just under $1300 (She was there about 6 hours.)

transfusion - just over $500 (Don't know what that is.)

pharmacy - just under $600 (She was given pre-natal vitamins, had to pay $8 for those and told to take tylenol.)

This is a medical hospital in Dallas. I was born there.

A Quote from Chirotalk

Today A J Botnick said - "It's a dirty little secret that if you remove the quackery from chiropractic there is nothing unique left. "

Funny as it sounds, I could actually agree with this to a certain extent. In many ways chiropractors such as myself are really not much more than glorified PT's. We treat musculoskeletal problems with physical medicine.

But much more than PT's, we can take in patients without referral, we are responsible for examination and diagnosis, we can order x-rays and interpret them, we can order MRI/CT and some of us can interpret them, we can order all manner of diagnostic testing as an extension of our exams, we formulate treatment plans, implement them and manage the patients care through all of it's aspects. We make referrals to specialists, review and discuss their findings and recommendations with our patients, and basically oversee literally all aspects of the patients care. We can even do blood work and urinanalysis if we want to, or order it out.

As to the quackery Mr Botnick is referring to, I would assume he means the dreaded subluxation and other off the wall, on the fringe, types of treatments, some less scientific than others. One has to admit, there is that element out there giving us a bad name. (Too bad so many weak minded individuals get into chiropractic because they actually thought they could remove "subluxations" and cure disease. They must have thought they were going to be little Christs or something, laying hands on folks and letting their faith heal them. I mean really, how could you have bought into that Mr Botnick?)

But nothing unique? Hardly.

Too Typical

I have commented before that these anti-chiro zealots are the typical unsuccessful chiropractor, who went into the profession with the idea that they were going to strike it rich. Most were so uneducated and weak minded that they couldn't see through the "subluxation" cause of disease. In their own words they bought into it hook, lone and sinker.

And many times their anti-chiro rants swing to the threat of God's wrath against those who still practice chiropractic.

This pattern of "seduction" to unrealistic, illogical and un-scientific beliefs permeates the anti-chiro world. Take for example one segment of one comment on chirotalk today:



"""For me...16 years in chiropractic...struggled to make ends meat...attended chiropractic seminars...Parker and DE...to learn how to do what it took to succeed...already aware that patients were not flocking to my office...and for me...eventually seeing what I had also bought into and why it was a scam...I had to leave...and the reason for me was this...I could find no way to practice chiropractic honestly.

Now for those of you whose beliefs embrace the Bible...as well as all others...and what their beliefs or lack of beliefs may be...to me...when it comes to what I believed regarding the "subluxation" and what it was and what it caused...to me...to continue to believe these thungs...amounted to believing a lie. AND THAT WAS WHY I LEFT.

SO THIS IS A STORY OF WHAT ATTRACTED ME AND A STORY OF WHY I LEFT. A decision that I made based on my understanding of chiropractic...not someone elses...and I say this because it is important that whatever you do...you will have solid ground or reason that you chose to stay or leave...and hopefully it will be...if you are a christian...a reason God will accept when the day comes and you will have to give an account. """"

Although apparently free of the "seduction" of the belief in subluxation as a cause of disease, it would appear that this anti-chiro commenter has found a new seduction. For this person, has one "cult" been replaced by another?

Corruption in PI, Workers Comp and Health Care in General

Of all the things I get to do in my practice, doing PI and Workers Comp is by far the most fun. The patients are truly injured and their pain is real, at least the ones who are actually hurt.

But as in all aspects of everything, there are levels of corruption which can be a discouragement and even represent a deterrent to an injured patient being able to get good care and treatment.

Of course the worst of these in the PI arena are the money patients, the one's who want to get "paid" so to speak, for their injuries. One extreme case recently being a person who walked into my clinic stating that they were in an MVA a few days ago, the insurance company had settled out for the damage to the car and they were working to settle out the "PI" portion of the case, as this patient referred to it. Of course the "patient" was referring to the money the insurance company would apparently give for their injury, pain and suffering. The problem for this patient was that they worked, had little time to come to a clinic but needed to "generate some bills".

Needless to say, I was not interested in being involved in any "bill generating" activities. I informed the patient that I treat injured people who come to me for help. I also indicated that the use of the term "generate bills" was a signal to me that this person was not going to even be evaluated, on any basis. A couple of grunts and huffs later the patient left the clinic.

This example illustrates a major problem in PI work and also why so many look down on both the PI doctor and the PI patient. Additionally, in workers comp, much the same occurs with just a slight twist on the common theme: fake an injury and get some form of monetary award or payment for it. A dishonest form of entitlement, basically.

As providers we have the responsibility to document our patients history, exam findings and treatment, attributing these to a history of occurrence usually associated with a certain date of injury. If we cannot, then we bow out and send the patient on their way.

Is this the only form of corruption we see? Certainly not. Health care is riddled with examples of various forms of corruption associated with defrauding an insurance company or patient of money for services, rendered or not.

I knew a girl once who went to work for an MD's office. Her job was to call patients insurance companies in order to find out what they were most likely to reimburse the doctor for. The doctor used that information to determine the treatment for his/her patients. If the service was not typically reimbursed for by the insurance company then the doctor would, coincidentally, not recommend that service. Basicly, the insurance company determined services to patients indirectly by having patterns of coverage that the doctors apparently would exploit to maximize their reimbursement rates for patient treatments, exams, etc. Needless to say, the person I am referring to left the company and went elsewhere to work. We spoke with her about filing a complaint against the doctor but she was reluctant to get involved to that degree.

The anti chiro's like to point out the corruption that occurs in the chiropractic practice. They like to use this as a weapon against the profession as if health care corruption only exists in chiropractic. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is simply in the nature of the beast, the human beast that is. Where man is involved, if a way can be found to get something for nothing, it will be found and exploited, PI cases, workers comp cases or what ever, including major medical practices.

In the PI world this probably happens quite a bit and so doctors have to beware of it and be careful to get good histories, perform good evaluations and not offer treatment where it is not needed.

The involvement of attorneys is also a problem,especially when they try to dictate care and influence the doctor in his duties to the patient, or when they cause the doctors to have to reduce their bills in order to accommodate the attorney in the attainment of their legal fees. Insurance companies should try being more compliant with paying for services they are responsible for and stop fighting with the health care providers over the medical necessity of services. Otherwise the attorney's will continue to be a "necessary evil", so to speak, for the patients to avoid being hit with medical bills which they cannot afford and should not have to pay.

Insurance company's unwillingness to pay medical bills is especially true in workers compensation cases as well as PI cases. One tactic is to hire corrupt, insurance whore doctors to write phony, idiotic reports stating that the patients treatment was not needed; basically paying the whore/prostitute doctor to say exactly what the insurance company wants them to say, then use this "expert" opinion to base their denial upon. Real class act for sure.

But all that aside, PI and W/C is the way to go if you want to see patients with more than sore shoulders after a long day at the office. The patients who are really hurt and injured need good doctors to manage their care. Their PCP's usually won't see them and apparently some health insurances have stipulated that the doctors can't treat injuries due to MVA and only a few actually treat work injuries. It is definitely an under served branch of health care.

The patients who have been helped are usually very grateful and although I am probably not the best there is, I have had some truly great successes.

Anti-chiropractic Nonsense - But Maybe there is Something to this Thing Called Chiropractic

Is it me or do the anti-chiro wacko's just keep saying the same things over and over again? I keep waiting for something new to come up that has any substance at all.

It seems that they all want to be nurses or something and just can't get over not being able to be real doctors.

What amazes me is that they actually thought they would go to chiropractic school and come out with a way of treating diseases like colds, flu, etc. just like a PCP. Get real boy's and girls. Are you going to have us believe that you bought into that when it is perfectly clear that chiropractors do physical medicine for the most part?

When you looked into what chiropractic was, did you actually believe that nonsense about subluxations curing diseases?

In my case I was looking to go into PT as I was interested in physical medicine and rehab. I was actually steered into chiropractic by a PT who new all too well that chiropractors did much the same work they do but were free of the bondage of medical referrals.

How could you have possibly thought there was any more to it than that?

Now, having treated so many patients I can actually see how some of the subluxation theories came about. I have seen plenty of changes in non-musculoskeletal conditions as a result of manipulation of the spine. I can truly see that there might actually be something to the effects which the more "radical" chiropractors, as I view them, claim. Hopefully there will be more research into at least some of this.

In the mean time, I stand amazed that so many "believed" the hype, bought into to it hook, line and sinker, failed at it and now have nothing better to do than to obsess over it and try to harm it in a juvenile attempt to get back at it. Surely some of their inability to succeed should fall on their own shoulders and their own misguided motivations.