[saurik]

FWIW, after spending a year seeing some doctors and getting not even a friggen correct diagnosis for my in-the-end-not-actually-a-"back"-issue, I saw an osteopath (of all things, and he did, in fact, come off like a quack) who suggested I had what I had originally self-diagnosed myself with before seeing the doctors who convinced me otherwise--a sacroiliac joint dysfunction--and then (after wasting some thankfully-small amount of time with even more doctors again) finally went to see a chiropractor to get the specific adjustment all the studies I was reading (sadly, while lying on the floor of my apartment watching BoJack Horseman wishing I were dead as the pain had gotten so bad I could barely even sleep anymore) would simply immediately fix that kind of issue (but which was going to take ridiculously long to convince a physical therapist to do... like, I had even already done months and months of PT) and it was almost like night and day... I only needed to see him like three times over the course of a week (to let the inflamed tissue slowly start to heal correctly while I wore a sacroiliac belt to sleep) and I was essentially fixed. So, I totally appreciate chiropractors have a lot of woo-woo to them (mine included: he seemed to worship a bone in your neck that I am pretty sure doesn't do shit all), but frankly: doctors suck too and chiropractors ain't that bad :/. Like, seriously: I was diagnosed with mild scoliosis of my spine when I was a kid, and the chiropractor I saw was the only person who cared enough--even with my explicitly bringing up that hint--to figure out if I was standing crooked (which he admittedly did with a silly iPad camera app ;P)... shouldn't that be "table stakes"? It turned out I was (and that that fits the pattern of sacroiliac joint dysfunction). Had I just gone to see the chiropractor in the first place--as has been recommended by my (honestly also a bit woo-woo ;P) friends, and which I had turned my nose up at, as being anti-chiropractor is "cool"--I would have likely saved myself a year of pain and a number of secondary effects I accumulated (such as a ton of weight gain from being increasingly unable to move for a year), as I am very confident he would have just done that adjustment on me as a matter of course, and if not he definitely would have noticed how I was standing a bit crooked immediately (unlike any of the three doctors I saw ;P).

[CarelessExpert]

I'm just gonna quote the last paragraph in the article (which really should have been the first for folks unwilling to read the whole thing);

> I get it, you’re going to occasionally hear a friend say that chiropractic helped him de-clutter his alcove or do 87 sun salutations… but that’s an anecdote, and data is more important, and trustworthy than anecdotes. The data on chiropractic supports that the practice is nothing more than a collection of broken promises and fake medicine.

[saurik]

The problem is that that doesn't actually mean "chiropractors are useless"--as it is too focused on what they are claiming to sell rather than what they are capable of--nor certainly does it mean "doctors are effective" (and, if you actually look at the studies, most of the interventions performed by orthopedic surgeons are apparently at best no better than just getting physical therapy and at worst ridiculously horrible: they are mostly short-term hacks that cause long-term tradeoffs... which might sound familiar ;P). I spent a ton of time avoiding the chiropractor because I had been indoctrinated into the world of "chiropractors are useless hacks selling snake oil" until I realized that I specifically needed to get a "grade 5 lumbopelvic mobilization" and it suddenly occurred to me "I bet a chiropractor knows how to do that!"... it turns out they do, and are a lot easier to "manipulate" (pun absolutely intended ;P) into getting what you want than physical therapists.

[CarelessExpert]

> The problem is that that doesn't actually mean "chiropractors are useless"

That's true. A blind pig does find an acorn from time to time. :)

Look, you found a chiro that basically did physiotherapy for you for a problem you were experiencing. Great! I'm glad it worked out!

But that doesn't change the fact that the profession at large is 1) founded on a fundamentally pseudo-scientific basis that has no grounding in reality, 2) is absolutely riddled with charlatans who claim to cure basically every human ailment, and 3) the professional associations actively defend those who make these claims rather than insisting on rigorous, evidence based, ethical standards of care.

If chiropractors want to be taken seriously, it's pretty easy: expose your treatments to the rigors of the scientific method, only support those treatments that have demonstrable benefits, and take away the licenses from the fraudsters who prey on those who are desperately suffering and looking for a way out.

[doggodaddo78]

I'm trying not to roll my eyes at some mumbo-jumbo pseudoscience.

Get an inversion table, a strong masseuse, sublingual CBD tincture, some shots of vodka, and a scrip for baclofen. Problem solved without snakeoil.

[LBJsPNS]

Mmmhmm.

Selective data collection and interpretation can say pretty much anything you want it to, can't it.

[CarelessExpert]

Which is why we have the scientific method. Shame that the chiropractic "profession" refuses to use it.

[wizzwizz4]

That doesn't mean that no chiropractors use it.

And even the quackiest quack's “I've seen this problem before, this fixed it” is better than the best doctor's “I've never seen this before, but I can guess what might help”. You can have empiricism without science.

[CarelessExpert]

Uhuh.

So the associations who ostensibly regulate this "profession" allow chiropractic practicioners to make absurd claims about curing asthma or hearing loss.

But there's good chiros out there so that makes it all fine!

Got it.

Should we just jump to the No True Scotsman thing, now, or should we go back and forth a bit first?

[wizzwizz4]

My attempt at nuance wasn't intended as a rebuttal. I'd pick a random doctor over a random chiro any day.

[JeremyNT]

It's not like they need data, when they can recruit plenty of satisfied customers to go sing their praises on the Internet with powerful anecdotes.

Placebo is a hell of a drug, most especially when it comes to nebulous and subjective pain.

[fartcannon]

Let me start by saying that I agree that doctors do suck. They are people and that should be enough to understand them. But all self regulating industries with a financial incentive to lie suck. I realize this topic treads deeply into quasi-religious territory so forgive me in advance, but couldn't this just be the placebo effect? Mixed with the healing effect of someone caring about you?

Maybe your physio actually got you on the way to recovery. And the chiropractor is simply taking credit.

Also what actually does an 'adjustment' do?

Just thinking out loud here.

[prossercj]

Not OP, But I've also had some success with chiropractic. There is some wackiness to avoid out there (the ones who treat it like a spirituality), but the one I go to currently takes a disciplined approach. They only target a few specific places based on thermal scans on the spine.

Their argument is that subluxations (misalignment of the vertebrae) impair nerve function, kind of like having a kink in a hose. Misaligned vertebrae press on nerves and make them less able to deliver signals from the brain. Those signals trigger healing, so by relieving the pressure, the body becomes more able to heal itself.

[CarelessExpert]

> Their argument is that subluxations (misalignment of the vertebrae) impair nerve function, kind of like having a kink in a hose.

And this "theory" is--pardon the expression--complete horseshit that's unsupported by any scientific evidence.

The article actually covers this topic at some length, including the fact that this "theory" regarding subluxations was discovered through the very scientific practice of seance...

[prossercj]

I've had to think hard about engaging with you, because I don't think you're engaging in good faith. I didn't say that chiropractic is a science, nor did I use the word "theory."

In fact, it's not scientific, and that's why I consider it valuable. It can see things that science misses.

Science is often the best method we have, but it's far from infallible. And the idea that there must be a total disconnect between science and mysticism is simply false. Many of the best scientists have had a mystical bent (Einstein, Newton, Bacon).

[doggodaddo78]

Thank god someone else has some sense. I'm trying to not double facepalm at all the flat earthers' voluminous, glowing reviews of osteopathic "medicine" and chiropractic, both of which are pseudoscience medical equivalents of Scientology, which itself abuses the word "science."

[saurik]

No: I had stopped seeing my physical therapist months earlier for various reasons, including that I was experiencing setbacks that I found emotionally demoralizing.

What a "grade 5 lumbopelvic mobilization"--what all the medical science people (online) were saying I needed to get done (like, I was at the point where I was watching talks from conferences on lumbar spine radiculopathy issues)--does is it takes the ilium and the sacrum in one's pelvis and separates them slightly, essentially stretching the sacroiliac joint a bit (which is hard to do and requires enough directed force to make it really hard to do to yourself... that joint "normally" barely moves at all: it is at best a shock absorber) and then allowing it to go back to a maybe-more-normal position in the case that they have accidentally gotten locked into a bad place and ended up with some tissue (or even a nerve) getting pinched. Physical therapists will also do this, but as far as I can tell--after starting to try to get an appointment with a new one at around the same time (but unable to get one for weeks out)--they are way more addicted to following only the pathologies that have actually been determined by the doctor who prescribed you to see them (as that's how they work: the doctor give a you a prescription).

[planet-and-halo]

Fwiw I have no dog in this fight, but I am personally very skeptical of chiropractors. Nevertheless my doctor said he might actually prescribe me to see one for a long term (decade+) back and neck issue. His exact words were "normally I would never send anyone to a chiropractor, but one thing they are great at is getting dislocated things back into place." Which sounds like the kind of thing you were dealing with.

[doggodaddo78]

You seem to me to be barking up the wrong tree by lionizing osteopathy, which is junk science, with "doctor" skill. (DOs are poser MDs from the STEM equivalent of Scientology.)

I saw two otolaryngologists. One was an arrogant prick who said I had allergies despite having an extreme left lateralization Weber test, the other found what I suspected from research: SCDS visible on a CT scan requiring forthcoming invasive brain surgery to repair it. It has nothing to do with MD, DO, or RN but the skill, wisdom, and professionalism of a specific provider.

[cosmotic]

There are definitely bad doctors out there. However, this is, at best, personal anecdote about a single case and hardly evidence of systemic failure of modern medicine nor evidence that chiropractic is effective.