Q and A #61-80
The following past entries are in descending order. The most recent letter is at
the top.
Letter #80
You guys sicken me. You are the type that is hurting the profession. I am a
musculoskeletal specialist. I manipulate the joints of the body so as to return
normal range of motion. You Upper Cervical dinosaurs need to go extinct. Every
time you do not manipulate a spine you are driving a nail into the coffin of
chiropractic. I have had a few patients come in and state that their old D.C.
would only adjust their neck. Well I educated them on that old concept.
I think I even read on your web site that you will adjust kids with asthma. I
suspect that you will print my letter with some flippant response and that I am
thus only prolonging the death of U.C. work, but I had to get this thought off
of my chest. Why don't you shut down your web site and spend more time
practicing your voodoo.
Dr. L.__________, Colorado
Reply oncause to letter #80:
Dr. L
The following link will take you to a case history written by the mother of one
of our asthma cases.
Letter #79
Explaining upper cervical brain stem pressure to heart, liver, kidney problems
and any disease process for that matter to patients is very easy. But how do
you relate low back pain to cause and effect chiropractic when the patient comes
in and tells you that they injured their low back when they bent over picking up
the newspaper? Please be as specific as possible.
Dr S.__________, Michigan
Reply oncause to letter #79:
First of all, we would explain to them that the human spine when it is
functioning properly is a magnificent system of pulley’s and levers capable of
enormous feats of strength. However, because of the mechanics involved – the
verticality of the system and the way it is constructed, if it is not
functioning properly it is vulnerable to injury through all types of movement,
even just bending over to pick a newspaper.
If the patient injured his or her back while picking up a newspaper, then the
spine was not functioning properly at the time. Picture a crane attempting to
raise something when the arm of the crane has been bent or distorted on three
planes. That’s how the injury occurred.
When done properly a supine Spinal Balance Test will indicate whether or not the
spine is functioning properly and the DC can do nothing so effective in
relieving back pain as rendering the S.B.T. test negative through location and
removal of upper cervical nerve interference.
Letter #78
What is your opinion of the Sherman College Diplomate Program in Upper Cervical
Technique which starts Sept. 8 & 9 2001?
Dr. F.__________, Canada
Reply oncause to letter #78:
I suppose I have read the same things you have read about the diplomate program,
so I can only comment in a general way based on over 40 years of experience
practicing UC work exclusively.
First of all this is obviously an attempt, like many other aspects of the
current chiropractic scene, to mimic the medical profession. There is an old
saying that goes something like this: imitation is the truest form of adulation.
Could it be that this is simply another indication of insecurity, the lack of
understanding of who we are?
And as I think about this, a couple of other questions come to mind:
In the spirit of true mimicry, could you imagine a medical diplomate program in
which various phases of the presentation actually directly contradict other
phases of the same presentation.
Could you imagine internal contradictions in some medical Board certification
program where one part of the curriculum teaches that things should be done one
way, and within the same certification ordainment other parts of the curriculum
disagree and teach that things should be done very differently indeed? But they
all wind up with the same "Board Certification?"
You see how silly we can make ourselves through insecurity, not knowing who we
are? Maybe there’s a reason why we don’t have the overflow practices anymore.
Maybe there’s a reason why there is such financial weakness in UC work today.
As a matter of fact, this brings to mind another little lesson in history. BJ,
when he was still alive and had control of the P.S.C., had been through enough
wars to get chiropractic to where it was, had practiced chiropractic enough and
thus was wise enough to maintain one technique as the technique taught and
fostered at the P.S.C. Other full-spine techniques were taught because P.S.C.
graduates had to know them to get through the various state boards; but they
were not fostered, they were taught tongue-in-cheek. No doubt BJ knew that the
vast majority of P.S.C. graduates would not actually stick to pure UC practice;
however, he maintained the stance of a pure UC philosophy and technique for one
simple reason: he knew that the teaching of a multiplicity of techniques would
lead to a confusion within the DCs’ minds as to what should actually be done,
how the patient should actually be adjusted, and that that confusion would
inevitably lead to a weak presentation in their offices.
Soon after Dave Palmer came into power, I received (being a member of the
alumni) a letter from him in which he stated that (here I am paraphrasing, but
this is very close to the original quote) – "We want to graduate doctors who
have learned a wide variety of chiropractic techniques and thus will be like
carpenters who have a variety of tools available to them to address whatever
type of job they need to do."
Dr. Dave never practiced chiropractic.
Ergo confusion!
Letter #77
Could you elaborate on your Vertex film comments. I do not shoot mine at 90
degrees. What do you mean by the "lollipop" effect.
Dr. C.__________, California
Reply oncause to letter #77:
The "Lollipop Effect" is, as I mentioned in my previous comment on the vertex
film, (See x-ray technique #2.) a result of not having the central-ray projected
at 90 degrees to the base of the skull. When this happens it is because the tube
has been positioned not high enough/too far behind the patient and/or the
patient’s head has not been tipped up (chin raised) enough. The more any
combination of these two errors occurs, the more the A-P axis of the skull will
appear shortened and usually the more of the cervical spine will show on the
film, giving the entire image on the film the appearance of a lollipop.
The further off the 90 degrees to the plane of the base of the skull, the more
the film in essence becomes a P-A cervical view, and the more the atlas
rotational measurement is distorted.
Just as a side note here, I have seen many so-called vertex films shot at such
angles that the slope of the condyles can actually be seen.
An easy way of reducing the atlas rotation factor without ever adjusting the
patient is to simply shoot the Post X-ray at a flatter angle.
A. Proper angle.
D. Approaching a P-A view -- squeezes image resulting in diminished atlas
rotation measurement.
Letter #76
In regards to patients taking medications, how do you handle that? Do you tell
them to stop taking all medications; or just pain relievers; do you tell them
it's "ok" to just take them when they're really in a bind?
How is this issue handled in your office?
Dr S.__________, Michigan
Reply oncause to letter #76:
When I first started practice I was very adamant about patients taking pain
medication, since as we know pain medication tends to inhibit and confuse the
nervous system. However, I found through experience that, for the most part, I
was wasting time and energy. It takes a lot of breath and energy to continually
bang heads about taking medication, and since anyone’s energy is finite, it is
much better used when it is applied to checking and adjusting – locating and
removing nerve interference.
And ironically, I found that when I put the ball in the patient’s court, I got
much better compliance. Now we will tell the patient something like: "We want
you to know that when you take pain medication you are simply slowing down your
progress under our care. It’s going to take you much longer to get well. So keep
it to a minimum. It’s up to you."
Now we are not treating admonishing the patient as though he or she is a child,
and we tend to get much better compliance.
Letter #75
I have an odd question for you. What do you wear into the office? Do you wear a
"polo" shirt, or a shirt and a tie. I feel that presentation is an important
part of my patient management. What are your feelings on the subject?
Dr. B.__________, State unknown
Reply oncause to letter #75:
All doctors on our staff wear white clinic jackets, clean each day. Sometimes,
if for instance, a clinic jacket becomes spotted by a slight amount of ink, or
whatever, it is changed immediately. Why are we so strict about this, and all
other aspects of the presentation of our doctors, our clerical staff and our
facility? Because if you are practicing true "cause-and-effect" chiropractic,
the very essence of your work deserves your finest presentation.
Letter #74
I must say thank you!!
Your web site has helped me more then any re-liscensing seminar or practice
management course that I have taken from any of the self proclaimed gurus.
Thanks for offering up these free pearls of wisdom. Please keep it up, you are
helping the profession.
Dr. F__________, Michigan
Reply oncause to letter #74:
You are welcome, glad to be of help.
Letter #73
I have read your web site since its inception and I find it interesting. I agree
with most of the things that you discuss. I have a question for you that I have
wrestled with in my mind for the better part of a decade. What do you think of
the dentate ligament theory? It is purported to be the end all hypothesis that
explains U.C. work. I think the theory is flawed.
Dr. B__________,Washington
Reply oncause to letter #73:
You got that right. A real stretch-it's reaching for it.
Letter #72:
Dear Dr's,
I am an upper cervical enthusiast as well and was happy to find your web site.
I am still in school and involved with a few upper cervical clubs. I agree
that critical thinking is a must in our profession but so is tolerance. I guess
I find it annoying to see people bash other techniques because it happens all
the time at school. I don't think there is one perfect system, because if there
was then everyone who wanted the best for the patient would practice this
perfect system.
I agree with a lot of the critiques made on vectored adjusting, but having been
adjusted by both a vectored and non-vectored system my body was free of
neurological interference for a longer period of time with the vectored
adjustment. In fact I was adjusted by both hand and instrument and the hand
adjustment was by far superior.
If a system can remove interference (and objectify that it is gone) then does it
really matter how the adjustment was applied. If a chiropractor is principled
about "cause and effect" and if his/her mission is to remove nerve interference
then why would you still critique the method that was used if their patients
proved to be clear for a very long time?
I would be interested in any info you think it is necessary for a student to
have before graduating.
Sincerely,
Jason zzz, state unknown
Reply oncause to letter #72:
Dear Jason,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.
Let’s start our reply to you by looking at the last sentence of your e-mail to
us: "I would be interested in any info you think is necessary for a student to
have before graduating."
Bottom line, that’s what you are interested in, what will help you the most,
right?
Okay, let’s address that issue.
Whether you know it or not, what you are really searching for is not "info" as
such, but a method or regimen of thought that will guide you out of the
confusion that you have been subjected to while going through chiropractic
college. You have had enough disparate, disorganized information thrown at you
to keep you guessing for a lifetime. So, humanely, I’ll not suffer you any
further. What I will do is to try to point you in the right direction, point you
toward a method, or regimen of thought that will help you keep your head above
water--and, considering what you have been through, that is not easy.
What will make the difference in whatever you do in the future, will be your
ability to make information subservient to clear, critical, independent thought.
Okay, having said as much as a preface, let’s do some critical thinking of our
own now, zeroing in on your letter as a case in point.
You write that, "I don’t think that there is one perfect system, because if
there was then everyone who wanted the best for the patient would practice this
system."
And then later you write, "If a system can remove interference (and objectify
that it is gone) then does it really matter how the adjustment was applied. If a
chiropractor is principled about "cause and effect" and if his/her mission is to
remove nerve interference then why would you still critique the method that was
used if their patients proved to be clear for a very long time?"
First point: just how would you go about objectifying that interference has been
removed? Obviously there is no universally accepted method for objectifying the
presence or absence of interference. There is only disagreement, usually
emotionally charged disagreement. Keep in mind that each technique teaches its
own method based on the very subjective attitude of whoever the technique Guru
happens to be. And that method, whatever it is, might very well just happen to
be convenient to that particular technique. And that technique might very well
be convenient to the economic and/or emotional interests of that particular
Guru. Further, in practice, the actual methods and skill levels of the followers
of that particular Guru, not only might, but more often than not, do vary
enormously from practicing DC to practicing DC, within the same technique group.
So what has happened to objectivity? Just how would you go about objectifying?
If you really could objectify the presence or absence of interference, then you
would have what you have chosen to call "the one perfect system," would you not?
It would be the end of the UC technique debate.
So you have a contradiction within the point or points you are trying to make in
your letter. You cannot, in truth, write, "I don’t think that there is one
perfect system" and later speak of "objectifying" the absence of nerve
interference. Obviously the objectifying is in the eye of the beholder. And that
ain’t objective!
Further, who determined that your "body was free of neurological interference
for a longer period of time?" Was it the person who made the adjustment? Would
other UC practitioners agree with that doctor’s conclusion? Or did you just feel
better for a longer period of time. As you no doubt know, cause-and-effect
chiropractic is not a symptom-based procedure. Fact is: neither of these methods
of evaluation are objective. They are both highly subjective, and thus typical
of "chiropractic science."
You wrote, "…if their patients proved to be clear" for a long period of time???
What is "a long period of time"? Would that "long period of time" be a longer
period of time or a shorter period of time if that patient had been adjusted and
checked by a different UC practitioner using a different UC technique?
As you write in your e-mail, you are thinking and speaking in typical
chiropractic non-science, which is the antithesis of clear, critical thought.
You ask, "…does it really matter how the adjustment is applied?"
Again, think about your train of thought here. If it doesn’t matter, then what
is all of this about? Does it really matter how a golf ball is struck, or how a
bridge is constructed? Or how a surgery is done?
Also, you mention that "I was adjusted by both hand and instrument and the hand
adjustment was far superior."
From this I have to assume that you have drawn a conclusion based on a survey of
one case--your own.
Ask yourself: how many variables are possible in these two occurrences? How many
variables are possible and inherent in the analysis and application of the hand
adjustment? How many variables are possible and inherent in the analysis and
application of the instrument adjustment?
A survey of one???
We have had letters from patients requesting a DC in their area who uses an
adjusting machine. Why did they specifically request a DC who uses an adjusting
machine? Obviously because--at some time in the past--they had better results
from some DC who adjusted them with a machine.
We have had letters from patients specifically requesting a DC in their area who
does hand adjusting. Why did they request a DC who adjusts by hand? Obviously
because--at some time in the past--they had better results from some DC who
adjusted them by hand.
Again, this is a survey of one. But from a patient’s viewpoint, this is entirely
reasonable. They responded better to the one system than the other. That has
been their experience and that is all that they are interested in. They are not
professionals in the field. Consequently, their reasoning in this matter had no
necessity to go any further than it did.
But--and this is very disturbing, but very typical--we have had DCs write to us
explaining that they have made their decision on what technique they use in
their practices based on how they themselves responded to one technique or
another. They have based their entire clinical procedure, possibly for a
lifetime, on a survey of one--their own case.
This is much like stepping up to the roulette table in Las Vegas, playing a few
numbers until you have a winner, and from then on, bit by bit, placing your
future on that number.
All of this discussion can be summed up very simply (simple in words, but often
very difficult in application): do not ever accept assertion--do not ever accept
soft, off-the-shelf or philosophical answers.
FROM THE INCEPTION OF THIS WEBSITE, THIS HAS BEEN OUR MESSAGE.
Letter #71:
Very interesting letter (letter #69 and its reply). I agree that people use
statements made by so called "leaders" to serve their needs. Furthermore, I
agree with your hypothesis that BJ was probably referring to "that something
extra" as extra attention to detail and concentration.
I noticed that you have coined a new term for the subluxation, "neuro-mechanical
interference". It is a more apt definition, but harder to say, maybe you
abbreviate it NMI.
As an observation I have had a few interesting cases with psychological changes
when someone was in versus when they were out (by the way, I adjust at Atlas
only). One such case I will share with you. A 76 year old man, born in Germany,
immigrated here after WWII was convinced that he was Hermann Goering. His son
brought him into me, because I had helped his family with a multitude of
problems. When he walked into my reception area, dressed in his German military
Class A uniform barking orders at my receptionist in German. I thought oh-no
what have I got myself into. To make a long story short I tricked him into
getting X-rayed and examined by having his son write out orders on my letterhead
to submit for a physical examination. He signed it Adolf Hitler. Over the next
three months he slowly calmed down and started speaking to me in broken English
and eventually he would tell me old war stories. When I last saw him he was
"back to normal". He passed away shortly after the last office visit in a tragic
golf cart collision. I have included a download of a picture that I had taken
with him when he was still dressing up. Please do not post this photo on the web
site since I do not have the families permission.
Keep up the good work. You are helping to educate the UC community -- kicking
and screaming sometimes.
Dr. S__________,Pennsylvania
Reply oncause to letter #71:
A pretty colorful case. But I don’t doubt it at all, and I don’t doubt the
outcome you achieved with the proper atlas adjustment.
We haven’t had any cases quite that exotic, but we have had some very
interesting cases.
Recently we took care of a young boy nine years old, very bright, who, when his
teacher would ask the class a question, would shout out the answer before anyone
else had a chance to raise their hand and answer. This obviously created a
problem, and the teacher got in touch with the mother and suggested that he see
his pediatrician for a Ritalin prescription.
We had seen the boy previously. We have cared for four generations of the
family, including the boy’s great-grandfather and great-grandmother,
grandmother, grandfather, mother, father, his three brothers and his sister, and
they all keep checked quite regularly. But we hadn’t seen this boy for a couple
of months.
Previously, one of the symptoms that the boy had shown when he was out of
adjustment (which is indeed quite typical) was a tendency to be aggressive and
contrary. In short, he was, as his mother described it, "a pill to be around."
So his mother recognized the behavior and brought him in to be checked. He was
out of adjustment, was adjusted and the problem at school cleared up
immediately. A month or so later the problem recurred, the teacher called, the
boy was adjusted and again the problem cleared up immediately. The problem
recurred a third time with the same outcome. The boy has not been out of
adjustment now for several months and he is doing well in school and at home.
A cute kid. His name isn’t Gus, but he insists that everyone call him Gus
because Gus sounds more like a ballplayer.
Letter #70:
After 36 years in practice I find myself returning to what got me into the
profession in the first place and that was UpC adjustments. Further I have found
your comments on x-ray set up most useful. My son has taken over the practice
for the last 3 years and has now installed a new x-ray unit and there is
considerable changes needed including getting a tilting bucky or changing the
stationery one to tilt for the nasium view. Could you explain how you determine
that a subluxation is holding as you mentioned that you do not rely on heat
sensitive instruments? Again congratulations on your web site as I support your
observations about chiropractic moving away from fundamentals.
Dr. E__________,Canada
Reply oncause to letter #70:
We have found that, when the supine spinal balance test is done properly,
eliminating as many variables as possible, this is the most reliable test for
determining the "when" factor.
Also, I might add that we consider the application of the Supine Spinal Balance
Test to be an art. When taking a new doctor onto our staff, we can teach and
have the doctor become proficient in the other aspects of our work (X-ray
placement, analysis, table placement, etc.,) in a shorter period of time than it
takes him or her to learn to properly apply the S.B.T. Why? Because, as I
mentioned above, applying the S.B.T is an art which requires eliminating
variables, and it takes time and practice to learn how to do that.
Please see our website entry Spinal Balance test variables #1, #2
Letter #69:
Doc,
Three questions and one comment.
Q1. Have you been trained in any specific upper cervical technique(s)?
Q2. Do you actively practice upper cervical chiropractic ?
Q3. Have you thoroughly read B.J. Palmers writings in his green books regarding
the delivery of an adjustment "with that extra something" ?
Comment: Newtonian physics cannot provide adequate understanding of "real
chiropractic". BJ stated that a true adjustment is mostly mental. Without
realizing it at the time, BJ was implementing applied quantum physics to his HIO
work. Those of us who practice upper cervical chiropractic as a philosophy,
science and art understand that BJ was well ahead of his time. It is a wonderful
blessing to discover BJ's inspired wisdom in our work. It is our passion that
this most important work thrive as we re-acquaint our profession with the truth
that optimum health can only be realized when body, mind and spirit are fully
integrated.
This requires overcoming the notion that an adjustment is simply a mechanical
action. (ie: unit of work) A real adjustment has always been, is, and will
always be the blended intelligent energy of loving intention and specifically
applied mechanical effort.
Innately,
Dr. E__________,Arizona
Reply oncause to letter #69:
Dear Dr. E.
Thanks for the E-mail.
Q1. Have you been trained in any specific upper cervical technique(s)? See
letter #12.
Q2. Do you actively practice upper cervical chiropractic? See the mission
statement.
Q3. Have you thoroughly read B.J. Palmers writings in his green books regarding
the delivery of an adjustment "with that extra something" ? Yes. Also I attended
a number of his lectures.
It appears as though you have taken a sincere, honest approach to practicing
chiropractic. However, I think you have to be very careful with what you read
into BJ’s writings. As with all innovators and doctrinal pioneers, BJ said
things that can be interpreted in many different ways.
"With that extra something" is a vague phrase, and your latching on to it and
construing it to mean that the location and removal of nerve interference can
somehow be equated with quantum physics is quite a leap, one that I don’t think
BJ would be happy with.
A prize-winning physicist, chemist, writer, actor – all could be said to have
that extra something. Could that be what BJ meant? Ted Williams, who is arguably
the greatest hitter of all time, even at the height of his career, spent hours
in front of a mirror working on the mechanics of his swing. Tiger Woods no doubt
spent hours working on the mechanics of his game. Could that be what BJ meant?
Could that extra something mean more push, more diligence and attention to the
work at hand? More applied thought, better judgment? How about extra diligence
and attention in our own work, such as putting the mental energy into making
sure that our X-ray units are in alignment and our films are taken with proper
contrast, detail and placement, with a minimum of distortion. Maybe BJ meant
extra attention to proper table placement for the adjustment, and maybe more
attention to contact location, and maybe more care in delivering the proper
mechanical force with the adjustment, and maybe being extra careful with the
when factor so that the patient is not continuously re-subluxated by the doctor,
and maybe more attention to properly educating the patient in the
cause-and-effect principle. These are all extra things and they are all mental
aspects of practicing UC chiropractic that we could be extra about.
Maybe that is what BJ meant.
As you have read (our answer to your question # 2), we conduct the world’s
largest exclusively upper cervical practice, and when we step up to make a UC
adjustment we have one goal in mind – clear out C.N.S. interference. That is
what is making the patient sick. That is why they have consulted us, and it is
our responsibility to remove that interference. That is a neuro-mechanical job
which is quite a big enough job for anyone - a lifetime of observation, study
and work.
As for myself, some of the most miraculous results I have achieved in the past
four decades have been on patients whom I didn’t particularly like, let alone
love, and I’m sure the feeling was mutual. They didn’t love me and I didn’t love
them. So what? They got well anyway! Why? Because I was able to remove the nerve
interference that was making them sick – the neuro-mechanical interference that,
had it not have been corrected, would have remained in their systems and would
have continued to contribute to pathology and a steady down hill momentum in
their health
And incidentally, regarding the "mind": we find that a high percentage of our
patients are depressed and/or irritable to the point of hostility to everyone in
their environments when they are out of adjustment. Some depressions run to
strong suicidal urges when the patient is carrying nerve interference. And
usually the condition clears up completely, or is vastly improved when the
interference is removed. That figures though, doesn’t it? The brain being a
major part of the C.N.S., we remove C.N.S interference and the condition clears
up, or at least improves significantly. We also have excellent results with
children with ADD and all the other faddish psycho/pediatric diagnoses that
primarily result from nerve interference.
The "spiritual" stuff we leave to others. As I mentioned above: locating and
removing nerve interference is quite enough to keep us thoroughly occupied.
Dr. E., the profession has moved far enough away from locating and mechanically
removing nerve interference. As a matter of fact, the reality of locating the
neuro-mechanical subluxation and addressing its removal can now barely be seen
on the chiropractic horizon. If you are going to take it upon yourself to
"re-acquaint" chiropractic with anything, it seems as though the profession
would be better served if you concentrated on hard-science/subluxation-removal
rather than propagating some ephemeral notion that would tend to cause it to
wander even further from the reality of neuro-mechanical interference.
Letter #68:
Dear Dr. Molthen:
I have read through semi-carefully all of the material on your website. I have
several questions.
I saw several references to locating the anode. I am in the process of setting
up an upper cervical x-ray station and want my equipment properly aligned. What
I did to center my tube was to put a lead slug
over the port with a pin hole in the center and shoot a film. When the dark
spot hit the film center, I assumed my tube was centered.
We all should know where "assuming" can lead to by now. So I thought I would
check with you to see if this procedure gets me in the ball park. Since an x-ray
machine is nothing more than a high powered pin hole camera, I don't see any
better way of checking it. Do you?
On vectored adjusting:
I agree with you that the theory of vectored adjusting by hand has many holes in
it. What I believe is that although the rationale for the Grostic may be
invalid, in practice something is being done with the hands that often
contributes to a deep healing process.
That's the main thing. I would like a valid explanation. What is your idea?
Again I assume ( there is that word again ) that you still do hand adjusting.
Am I right? So how do you think about the hand adjustment if not based on the
vector model?
Yours Truly,
Dr. W__________,Missouri
Reply oncause to letter #68:
We assume that you have located the (hypothetical) central-ray in your unit and
that that, projected through the “pin hole” in the lead slug, is what you are
seeing on your film.
However, if the exposure shows up in the center of the film, it does not
necessarily mean that your unit is aligned with your in-front-of-the-tube
equipment.
Your in-front-of-the-tube equipment could very easily be out of plumb with your
central-ray and then you may have angled your C-R in such a way that it merely
has found the center of the misaligned in-front-of-the-tube equipment. See Fig
1.
There are other, more subtle aspects of this problem, such as: is your anode
directly behind the "pinhole" in the lead slug. See Fig 2.
If you have any other questions feel free to contact us. If you will e-mail your
address we will send you a copy of the original mimeographed X-ray alignment
instructions that J.F.G., Sr. gave out in class. These should give you a good
guideline from which to work. Aligning an X-ray unit is not that difficult, it’s
just somewhat tedious and time consuming. But it is very well worth it!
Now to the 2nd part of your questions:
Yes, vectored adjusting by hand does have many holes in it, as do current
machine adjusting vectored techniques, but I would not go so far as to say that
they are “invalid in practice.” They all work i.e., produce a certain level of
results. That is simply because the UC area is so neurologically dynamic. Of
course that is the problem with chiropractic in general – as long as a force is
being put into the spine in some way, DC’s will get a certain level of results.
A certain number of people will utter the words “I feel better,” to the DC,
whether the DC is an artist or a blacksmith. That is why chiropractic has had
such a devil of a time figuring out what to do. There are, no doubt, almost as
many chiropractic techniques and technique-combinations as there are
chiropractors. And many DC’s have, what amounts to an unswerving belief in the
technique or technique-combination that they use.
But it is obvious that the technique that is most effective in elaborating when,
where, and how to remove neurological impedance will consistently produce the
highest percentage of results, and all other things being equal, the most
consistent, high level of results will produce the most successful and the most
satisfying practice.
How do you figure out the best method for determining when, where, and how to
adjust? Think for yourself! That’s the fun of it!
Now, regarding another of your questions: “Something is being done with the
hands that often contributes to a deep heeling process.” Maybe. There may be
some benefit in the laying on of hands. There is no way of knowing that. But
remember, what we do know is that nerve interference has a disastrous effect on
the human body, and when practiced intelligently and honestly, no other method
of healing comes close to what we can do with cause and effect chiropractic.
That’s our job.
No, we do not do hand adjusting. We use an adjusting machine of our own design
and our own when, where and how analysis.
As a kind of post-script here I’d like to add an observation that is a result of
over forty years of studying the minds of DC’s and how they apply their work.
The following is particularly true of UC DC’s: and practitioners of other
techniques who wrap the cloak of “science” around themselves and the techniques
they either teach or both practice and teach: DC’s can be extremely impressive
when it comes to calculating their adjustments. They frequently go into
enormous, quite complicated, mathematically based subtleties and nuances with
their analysis and force calculations and then, apparently oblivious to the when
factor, they proceed to crank or thump on the spine (or both) every time the
patient comes into their offices. So, the when factor is simply whenever the
patient shows up.
Does this make neurological sense?
We, in our practice have found, based on our experience in handling well over a
million office calls, that the successful recovery of the patient is every bit
as much tied in with the when factor as the how and where factors. Or, to put it
another way, regardless of the mathematical calculations involved, an ill-timed
adjustment will almost invariably cause neurological confusion for the patient
and therapeutic confusion for the Dr. In effect, control of the recovery process
has been lost and it is very difficult to regain. Keep in mind, we are not in
the business of selling adjustments: we are in the business of getting sick
people well. Two very different things!
Letter #67:
Dear Doctors,
I ran across your web site looking for a good chiropractor. My whole life I have
seen Chiropractors that would only adjust just my atlas. This has helped me with
many many health problems. Chiropractors have helped me with everything from low
back pain to hemorrhoids, by adjusting my atlas. As I get up in years I have had
trouble finding me a good honest Chiropractor, and now is when I need it the
most. Everyone I have tried the last few years wants to adjust my low back and
sell me a bunch of vitamins. How come there are no more good atlas adjusting
only Chiropractors?
Tony B. Florida
Reply oncause to letter #67:
We have had a number of questions from patients regarding UC work; however,
since this site was originally intended for D C’s only, we have, up until now,
only responded by private e-mail.
But we have to say that your question is so on target – a simple and direct
question: (What has happened to the practice of cause and effect upper cervical
chiropractic?) – that, in addition to answering you by private e-mail, we are
going to address this on our website.
Ok, are you ready? First of all we could discuss this with you far into the
night and we would love to do so, but having mercy on all concerned, we will
make our answer as simple and as direct as your question is.
For starters, we have no doubt whatsoever that, in the past, with the proper UC
adjustment, you received wonderful results for a wide range of health problems,
including hemorrhoids.
WHAT? many DC’s will no doubt exclaim when they read this. HEMORROIDS RESPOND TO
UC VERTEBRAL CORRECTION?
But you have personally experienced relief, and we have seen numerous cases in
which this condition has responded very well to our care.
One patient in particular comes to mind: immediately after the first adjustment
was made, while she was still on the table she could apparently feel the
hemorroidal plexus retracting. As you could imagine, she was surprised and
rather delicate about reporting the relief.
In most cases where hemorrhoids are present, the patient will have to hold the
adjustment for a while and usually the response is not quite so dramatic; but,
in this case, for the next few months whenever she was out of adjustment the
hemorrhoids would recur, and when she was adjusted the results were the same –
relief on the table. "Well, it’s all going back in place now, where it should
be," she would say, kind of demurely. "Thank you."
After those first few months the condition never returned.
I might also mention here that this lady had tried everything for her
hemorrhoids with not the slightest bit of relief. She had consulted us for an
entirely different set of symptoms and had not mentioned it on her case history,
probably because she was shy and she could see no reason to mention it. She had
consulted us for migraine headaches and a painful knee, and she did mention that
she had been troubled by chronic, lifelong constipation, which cleared up with
the first adjustment and never returned.
Now to answer your question: to the best of our knowledge, the true philosophy,
science and art of upper cervical chiropractic is not being taught anywhere, and
this has resulted in a steady decline in the number of DC’s who understand the
Principles and Practice of UC work, particularly case management, well enough to
make the very good living that they should make by practicing it. Therefore, in
order to survive, bit-by-bit they find it necessary to add other techniques and
gadgets to their practices, and soon, rather than practicing cause and effect
chiropractic, they are merely selling "adjustments and "treatments," and not
managing the case back to maximum health by keeping them clear of nerve
interference.
Letter #66:
1. How often should a person be checked during initial care?
2. On average, how often do you find a person needs an adjustment?
DR. V__________, Michigan
Reply oncause to letter #66:
We see a patient 3 times per week for the first two weeks. We will usually
adjust 2 or three times in that period. However, one-adjustment cases are not
uncommon, and if the patient is holding well on the first adjustment, we try to
cut down on the frequency of their office calls very quickly. Many times, if
they are holding well, we will see them 6 or 7 times in the first month and go
from there, continuing to cut down on the frequency of their calls. "See you in
a month." If they are still holding, "See you in another month." Then two
months. This varies of course, depending on the difficulty of the case.
Sometimes, we see a patient 8 or 10 times in the first month, but that would be
very much the exception. The basic idea is to get the patient well as soon as
possible, get them on their way and get them talking about us and the help they
have received under our care. That is a fundamental principle of cause and
effect chiropractic that seems to have been lost, or at least has become very
rare.
Regarding the second part of your question: Our average patient is adjusted 5 or
6 times per year. Again, this is just an average. The longest we have ever had a
patient hold clear of interference is 9 years. This was a lady whose entire
family was under our care and, as a matter of course, she was checked 3 or 4
times per year during the 9 year span.
Letter #65:
I have a office related question. In my office I spend a lot of time reading and
researching how to operate an efficient small business. I look at cash flow
analysis charts. I track which products sell well and which ones have higher
profit margins. I understand that you do not “peddle”, but most of us have to in
order to survive. Do you put any time or effort into this? I understand that I
will probably be skewered in your response, but that is okay, I am curious.
DR. R.__________, New York
Reply oncause to letter #65:
First of all, you will not be skewered. We try to reply in kind. Your question
was sincere and well stated; therefore we will try, as I mentioned, to reply in
kind.
No. We put no time whatsoever into small business thinking, analysis, etc. Why?
Because the practice of chiropractic, when applied properly, has a dynamic about
it that should obliterate all aspects of the small business consciousness. When
you are able to rid yourself of all aspects of the small business, or for that
matter any other business psychology, you will notice an enormous increase in
the number of people who will seek your care. Simply put, a businessman and a
healer are two different creatures. There are and there always have been more
than enough, zillions of business people around. The world doesn’t need any
more. Healers – and that is exactly what we are, if we can consistently remove
the cause of disease – are very few and far between.
Learn to locate and remove nerve interference and you can stop with the
inventory control and cost analysis.
The income will take care of itself very well!
Letter #64:
Without any other jargon and a simple straightforward answer, can you tell me
what I should explain to a patient at their report of findings? Actually as
close to word for word as possible would help. Thanks.
DR. V__________, Michigan
Reply oncause to letter #64:
No, I am sorry we cannot give you a word–for-word answer as to what you "should
explain to a patient at their report of findings," because no such method of
reporting exists in our practice. We do not use any "canned" procedures of
reporting, explanation or patient education.
However, presuming your intention in asking the question, I will try to give you
some information (our approach) that, I think, may help you.
First of all, I will start with a quote by BJ. Some one asked him if he could
tell them what the key to success was. (I do not have the quote in front of me
at the time of writing this, but I think this is about verbatim.) BJ replied,
"No, I cannot give you the key to success, but I can give you the key to certain
failure. And that is: Try to please everyone."
This of course, is not the "straightforward, word-for-word answer" you wanted.
But let’s look at it and think about it.
Assuming you are dealing with the location and removal of the subluxation, how
about telling the patient exactly what you found in your preliminary exam – what
it is doing to his or her health and what you intend to do about it. In
principle, it’s that simple!
But in practice it isn’t quite that simple, and that is where the art of
chiropractic comes in.
Why? Because each person is different. Therefore, when you explain what you have
found and what you intend to do about it, you have to take into account the
person to whom you are speaking – and the words (not the principle content you
use) have to be appropriate to your assessment of that person’s ability to
understand what you are saying. As I mentioned, that’s the art of it!
Just say your piece in a way that you believe the patient will best understand
it.
And above all, keep it simple! You have found the cause, you intend to remove
it, and based on your experience and given their cooperation, this should result
in a major improvement in their health.
If the patient doesn’t like what you have told them, remember – don’t try to
please everyone. Tell them that they had better take their problem elsewhere.
Letter #63:
I have seen no mention on your web site of the annatometer? Do you use it in
your office?
Dr. L__________,Pennsylvania
Reply oncause to letter #63:
No, definitely not.
Letter #62:
I recently ran across an article in the Spring 2000 issue of Vector from the
AUCCO written about a Dr. Ingram from British Columbia. The article states that
Dr. Gregory could tell by looking at a set of Pre X-rays that he (Dr. Ingram)
had been adjusted by an adjusting machine. How could that be? How could Dr.
Gregory tell that? I’d like to know. Can you help me on this?
Dr. A__________, Maine
Reply oncause to letter #62:
Yeah, we read that article.
But before we address your question, we’d like to quote the paragraph from
Vector, so everyone knows what you are referring to. And in order to make it
clear and not take it out of context, we will also quote the preceding paragraph
from Vector.
Dr. Ingram had apparently built an adjusting instrument (gun as it is referred
to in the article), and the writer of the article says:
"Having no one to try it on, he (Ingram) used his friend, Howard Witt, the
builder of the device, for his first patient. The atlas subluxation reduced one
hundred percent. Dr. Ingram was out of adjustment at the time, so he had Mr.
Witt adjust him with the gun. It felt good, no depth and a definite feeling of a
correction happening."
Now for the paragraph to which you are referring:
"Two months later, he (Ingram) was pre X-rayed by Dr. Gregory. As Gregory was
analyzing the film, he glanced back at Ingram with a severe scowl on his face.
Finally he said, ‘You dumb (expletive), you were adjusted by a machine.’ Dr.
Ingram took a step backward with this verbal assault and replied, ‘Yes, Dr.
Gregory.’ Dr. Gregory replied, ‘If you ever are adjusted by a machine again, I
want nothing to do with you.’ He (Gregory) then proceeded to correct Dr.
Ingram’s spine."
Okay. Before we answer your question, Dr. A, we have some questions of our own.
Did Dr. Ingram ask Dr. Gregory just how Gregory determined that Ingram had been
adjusted by a machine?
If he did ask Gregory how he knew, why doesn’t he (Ingram) share the information
with us?
If Ingram didn’t question Gregory, why didn’t he?
Then, pursuing this reasoning further: did Dr. Gregory explain to Dr. Ingram
just how he knew that Ingram had been adjusted by a machine?
If he didn’t, why didn’t he?
Was it possible that Gregory had heard though the grapevine (Gregory being in
contact with other NUCCA practitioners in British Columbia,) that Ingram had
built an adjusting machine and had been adjusted by his own machine?
Does it take a Sherlock Holmes to figure this out?
ON CAUSE comment: Since we first initiated this website we have stressed the
necessity of thinking for yourself.
Dr. Ingram states that, (according to his measurements): "On his first patient
the atlas subluxation reduced one-hundred percent."
Quite a reduction in anybody’s league!
But when Gregory gave Ingram a "severe scowl" and verbally assaulted him,
Ingram, very obediently "took a step backward" and folded his tent, in spite of
the fact that he, Ingram, (according to his own measurements) had seen a
one-hundred percent reduction on the first patient he had adjusted with his
adjusting machine.
This is a classic example of a belief system at work. Do this! Think this way
because I am telling you to do so! And I am not going to tell you how I know
this. And don’t dare to ask me how I know this. And furthermore, if you don’t
think and do as I say, "I want nothing more to do with you."
Does this answer your question, Dr. A: THINK IT THROUGH AND THINK FOR YOURSELF!
ON CAUSE further comment: We have the answer to the causative factor of a good
portion of human disease and yet we consistently subordinate critical thinking
to belief systems! Why haven’t we been more successful than we have been in
getting our work across to sick and suffering humanity? FIGURE IT OUT!
Letter #61 (This letter refers to the oncause survey regarding atlas palpation.)
yes you can palpate the t.p.'s......if you can't maybe you should find another
profession!
Dr. C__________, State unknown
Reply oncause to letter #61:
Dear Dr. C.,
Try checking your contact point by taping a lead shot on the neck, as we
recommended.
Try critical thinking; you might like it.
Then again, maybe you won’t like it.
Maybe you should stick with your belief system.
Maybe you are in the right profession.
Maybe you should be on the faculty of a chiropractic college somewhere, where
assertion and belief systems flourish very well.
Then again, maybe you should read "Slipping and Checking" by BJ.