by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Chiropractic Journal of Australia : CJA June 2012
70 Chiropractic Journal of Australia Volume 42 Number 2 June 2012 successful in what they practiced. Professor Webb became Vice Chancellor of Macquarie University in December 1975 and continued in that position to December 1985. In the Chiropractors Association of Australia (National) Limited March, 1993 Chiropractors Fight Back-The Response to the Australian Medical Association’s “Chiropractors in Australia” it is stated (p13): "The AMA seems to be under the impression that chiropractors still speak of and conceptualise spinal disorder in the terms of "misalignments of vertebra". This is a completely false impression of the majority view. Spinal disorders on which chiropractors focus are complex clinical "entities" emanating from a multitude of different pathological states, traumatically induced mechanical disorders or anatomical abnormalities of the vertebral column." 4 It must be remembered that chiropractic did not start in 1990 when chiropractic was frst taught in a university. One of the main reasons for entering the university scene was to engage the practice of the profession with appropriate research. Also, while considering aspects for the initial NSW Chiropractors Registration Bill 1978, it was decided not to include a defnition of the practice, particularly to allow for the profession’s development. Chiropractic research of course does not necessarily mean following the medical model. Medicine has undergone several changes over many years and has dramatically altered its approach to its treatment method of mankind with the advent of researchers such as Robert Koch and Louis Pasteur and the evolvement of the germ theory. The pharmaceutical research and the subsequent development of the drug industry have produced what is described as the life saving “wonder drugs” with their associated “side effects” which have been described as iatrogenic diseases. These changes in approach to practise have moved the medical interest further from manipulation to the prescription of medicines. Although medicine claims to have a scientifc approach it could be readily argued that some of its base was not ‘science’. In fact under an established evidence based system some of medicine practised today may likely disappear. Based on offcial government reports and published research papers there needs to be concentrated investigation into the iatrogenic factors and the costs incurred with the practice of medicine. Chiropractic from this writer’s view is in great need of more targeted investigations into “cause and effect” research. It is not good enough for some academic statements to be made in support of an evidence based philosophy, to the effect, that there is no evidence, therefore it does not exist. If science rested on that type of cliché it would still be back in the dark ages. Science has taken huge leaps with the inquiring minds of the giants of the past. This is shown in Jon Balchins, Quantum Leaps, 100 Scientists Who Changed The World,5 Thomas Alva Edison states on page 131: 'Until man duplicates a blade of grass,' he once said, ‘nature can laugh at this so called “scientifc” knowledge,' adding, 'we don't know one millionth of one percent of anything.' The Sunday Telegraph 11-12-2011 reported that “Thirty- four top doctors; medical researchers and scientists have signed a partition challenging universities that 'give undeserved credibility to “alternative therapies.”6 According to the report they want university courses in acupuncture, chiropractics and naturopathy to be scrapped. This type of opposition from some members of the medical fraternity is not new. It is the experience of this author that history is riddled with reports of medical squealing about other practises of healing to such a degree that a high percentage of the general public have come to recognise those performances as turf wars and market place reactions. In fact, records show that Henry VIII established a Charter to protect some other forms of practitioners due to the activities of members of the then “medical profession.”7 James Paget in 1867, in a clinical lecture delivered at St Bartholomew’s Hospital on CASES THAT BONE SETTERS CURE advised his medical colleagues:8 " Learn then to imitate what is good and avoid what is bad in the practice of bone-setters; and , if you would still further observe the rule, Fas est ab hoste doceri, which is in no calling wiser than ours, learn what you can from the practice of rubbers and plaisterers: for these also know many clever tricks; and, if they had but educated brains to guide their strong and pliant hands, they might be most skilful curers of bad joints and many other hindrances of locomotion" The statement by James Paget makes one wonder what he would have to say in relation to the standard of education and practice of chiropractors in this modern era. It would be interesting to know how he would react to the endeavours of certain members of the medical profession that try to undermine and shunt modern chiropractic education from the universities. Eiler H. Schiotz quotes the Lancet editorial in 1925:9 "The medical history of the future will have to record that our profession has greatly neglected this important subject ... The fact must be faced that the bone- setters have been curing multitudes of cases by movement...... And by our faulty methods, we are largely responsible for their very existence..." As Professor Webb indicated the chiropractic profession was serving the community. The question arises, why would some members of the medical fraternity attempt to remove from university education a registered and community sought after health service? The allegation is that chiropractic is not science based, but it can be said in return, neither are poorly based attempts to discredit a registered health profession. It is expected that all registered health professionals act in the best interest of the general public. In a democratic society all persons are entitled to choose their own professional treatment, including members of the medical profession. The narrow concept publicly aired by the few is not the attitude of all of those that are dedicated to medical service. The chiropractic profession must move on and continue with its intention to promote the in-depth research of chiropractic philosophy and practice. Research is expensive and all registered health professions are entitled to seek funding through government agencies. Perhaps, attempts to keep the CURRENT CHIROPRACTIC STATUS IN AUSTRALIA 2012 DEVEREAUX
CJA March 2012
CJA September 2012