The Basic Principles of Chiropractic
Cannot Be Debated
May 1, 2002
It is unfortunate that so many of the comments supporting chiropractic care resort to infantile and reactionary remarks, rather than focusing on the simple fact that, chiropractic, being an art, science and philosophy based on the principles of vitalism cannot properly be understood through the necessarily reductionist, mechanistic lens that is modern science. Having studied aquatic biology in my undergraduate education, with training in the scientific method and how hypotheses and theories are tested, i am familiar with the tools necessary to come to any relevant conclusion regarding the natural world. However, as i am sure you will agree, any conclusions are based first and foremost upon the premises which one takes as self-evident.
From an understanding of those premises, logic can follow. And this is where chiropractic takes a large detour from traditional, mechanistic health care. Simply put, chiropractic is based on the premise that there is a Universal Intelligence in all matter, continually giving to it all its properties and actions, thus maintaining it in existence. Chaos theory, fractal geometry, as well as quantum physics provide innumerable examples of this. Further, this intelligence is present in living beings, in our lexicon, termed Innate Intelligence. Ask any pharmaceutical executive for examples of this, for without the inherent intelligence of the human body and its production of biological substances, this billion dollar industry would not exist. Thirdly, within living systems, this inherent, inborn intellligence expresses itself over and through the nerve system of the organism. Again, ask anyone, from the janitor to the neurosurgeon, which is the primary system in the body, the one which cannot be transplanted, the one which declares, upon its cessation of function, our clinical death.
These three principles are the premises upon which the practice of chiropractic is based. They cannot be debated...but rather accepted or denied. I do not believe that we are in disagreement as to the truth of these statements. After all, there is ample evidence everywhere one chooses to look. Therefore, the only remaining thorn for the sake of argument, in my opinion, is the focus of application; namely, that providing forces to the spinal column has an effect, be it positive or negative, on the function of the organism. And it is here where i find the largest reason to discount your site and those like it. To what extent do you focus your attention on the relationship between structure and function, especially as it relates to neurophysiology? To what extent haveresearched the anatomy of the spinal column and the concomitant effects to said through the gravitational and geometric forces which we as human beings encounter on a daily basis? Are you at all familiar with the research of Dr. Christopher Kent, or Dr. Alf Brieg, himself a neurosurgeon? Can you deny that motion of the spinal column is inherently crucial to the proper function of that system, and that by providing motion, chiropractic spinal adjustments help normalize it? It is surprising to me that attacks against chiropractic practice pay so little attention to these questions, questions of physiology and structure/function interrelationships, and so much attention to cures, symptomatology, disease states, etc., all of which are traditionally, and, in my opinion, rightfully so, the domain of medicine.
Are you seriously interested in finding common ground of understanding, or in simply undermining another profession in order to assuage your own opinions?? I look forward to hearing from you.
kevin m. phillips, d.c.