4 of 4
4
Maximized Living? or Maximized Fraud?
Posted: 15 January 2016 08:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4231
Joined  2006-11-28

Sidney1,

As for your allegation that you can refute efficacy of most chiropractic interventions with competing studies consider this. Most research trials on pharma interventions are funded by drug companies so the outcome of many of those studies might be forgone conclusion because, well, that’s how the game is played. The chiropractic research world has no such luxury of drug companies funding studies.

So, this argument makes no sense.

First off, the studies that show a lack of efficacy to chiropractic aren’t funded by Big Pharma, and they have nothing to do with that industry. Studies showing chiro doesn’t work aren’t part of some kind of plot to make only drugs look like they work. And yes, of course financial bias in the pharma industry is a problem. That has nothing to do with whether or not chiro works, though, it’s just a distraction.

If your pint is that drugs have evidence showing they work where chiro doesn’t only because of funding bias, then you’re ignoring 1) the regulatory oversight which reduces funding bias, 2) the study methodology which reduces funding bias, and 3) all of the studies showing therapies other than drugs work. Funding bias shifts the balance of the literature in favor of drugs, but it doesn’t make the entire medical literature wrong or irrelevant.

And if you are worried about funding bias, then you should be worried about the chiro industry too. The industry generates billions of dollars in revenue, and this supports colleges of chiropractic and journals which conduct and publish chiro research. Research money doesn’t materialize magically. Someone always pays for medical research, and usually that money comes from an industry interested in using and/or selling the therapy. The chiro industry has its own professional lobby, which contributes to campaigns and lobbies politicians just like every other industry. So you can’t simply say that the research for chiro is pure and the research for other medical therapies, including drugs, is so corrupt it should be ignored.

Finally, you ignore all the other kinds of bias that influence studies. That vast majority of the sources of error in medical research have nothing to do with money, but with confirmation bias, selection bias, placebo effects, and all kind sof othe rmethodological and cognitive errors that obscure the truth about therapies being tested.

What you are doing here is constructing a narrative where research is meaningful if it supports your position and worthless if it doesn’t. That’s the mark of a true crusader.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet Blog
You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place. 
Johnathan Swift

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 January 2016 08:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2901
Joined  2007-04-26
sidney1 - 15 January 2016 09:37 AM

mckenzie….

Here are a few studies for you to no doubt find fault with which point to efficacy of chiropractic..

Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003 (Jul 15);  28 (14):  1490–1502

  J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2005 (Jan);  28 (1):  3–11

http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/ABSTRACTS/Adding_Chiropractic_Manipulative_Therapy.shtml

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012 (Aug 28);  13:  162 ~

I quickly looked through these studies. None of them have sham controls, they are only compared to other treatments. In addition while there is little information available in the abstracts concerning what they call “Standard Medical Care” at least one of the studies implies that the standard care was only medication. If true then the authors of the study don’t know what standard care is. Standard medical care for lower back pain includes in addition to anti-inflammatories, the use of local heat, moderate activity to reduce stiffness, and when appropriate, physical therapy.

Also as McKenzie already correctly pointed out, one needs to look at the entirety of the research done with an attempt to grade the quality of the studies and combine the data in a meta-analysis.  Short of that its easy for anyone to cherry pick the few studies that simply support their own personal point of view which is what you have done here.

[ Edited: 15 January 2016 08:30 PM by macgyver ]
 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 February 2016 04:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  13
Joined  2016-01-11

wow…you are in the medical profession and you criticize studies that are done in respected journals which are utilized by your own profession (all three are listed on index medicus) you set a standard higher than your own profession utilizes…but then that has always been the way in which the medical profession has judged chiropractic…we are held to a higher standard than medicine itself is…oh, the hypocrisy…!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2016 05:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2901
Joined  2007-04-26
sidney1 - 01 February 2016 04:41 PM

wow…you are in the medical profession and you criticize studies that are done in respected journals which are utilized by your own profession (all three are listed on index medicus) you set a standard higher than your own profession utilizes…but then that has always been the way in which the medical profession has judged chiropractic…we are held to a higher standard than medicine itself is…oh, the hypocrisy…!

Yes that IS how medicine works. we do not accept the outcome of a study as fact simply because it was published in a journal somewhere. Each study has to be judged on its merits regardless of where it was published. The studies you have listed have significant flaws as I outlined. That is the difference between chiropractic and medicine. We can’t just go and cherry pick the few studies that support our point of view. The results have to be reproducible and verifiable and the weight of the evidence determines what our recommendations will be.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2016 06:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4243
Joined  2014-06-20
sidney1 - 14 January 2016 03:20 PM

to senior member…you may want to look through JMPT, a peer reviewed journal which contains a number of chiropractic research studies..i’ll provide you with a number of studies in other peer reviewed journals…..now one other thing to consider…here in canada where the public has the choice of going to one’s MD and being seen for free…or visit a chiropractor ...in which case, you will be required to pay for service (unless you have been injured in a MVA or have had a workplace injury, in which place, we are covered). Now if what Chiropractor’s did was as much scientific nonsense as you say it is…then why would people choose to see us?


For exactly the same reason people buy snake oil and homeopathic remedies.


Especially when they can get medical care for free…the answer lies in the fact that what we do provides relief for people and it is a means of getting musculoskeletal problems alleviated drug free…

Look, it bothers me when my colleagues make outlandish claims about things outside our area of expertise. Just as it bothers me when family doctors try and deal with treating back and neck pain in patients which is biomechanical in nature -which is the majority of them. There is virtually nothing medicine can provide for these patients and a good MD will find a Chiropractor in their area to work with. It happens here routinely. I refer out to a number of MD’s and they to me. When they do, I will send back a report of my findings and inform them of my intended treatment plan.
I have no problem when those in the medical community get irate when they see a chiropractor advertising that they can cure asthma or whatever. But to try and discredit the whole profession will just leave you looking like a bitter jaded person with a personal vendetta.

The chiropractic professiom discredits itself. These are the kind of things that are taught in chiropractic colleges! Chiropractors are taught to ignore medical science and the scientific method. When chiropractors bring themselves and their “profession” into the scientific community and use scientific methods, they may receive more respect. As long as they remain outside it their claims will be looked upon skeptically.  It’s up to chiropractors and the chiropractic community to show evidence that every one of their claims is scientifiically valid and that they can stand up to scientific scrutiny. It is not up to the medical community to prove them false. Nevertheless, the medical community has shown that many chiropractic claims are NOT scientifically valid and that some can cause damage. Meanwhile, chiropractic colleges continue to teach a philosophy and methods of treatment that are NOT scientifically valid. They SHOULD be discredited.

And one other thing. We don’t need an MD telling us what we can and cannot treat or who should be sent to us by referral…save your arrogant patronizing attitude as it doesn’t work in 2016 anymore. People have many choices for healthcare. And, Chiropractors are portal of entry physicians which means patients don’t need a referral to see us.

Nobody needs a referral to see “Snake Oil Sam” either. If our ““arrogant patronizing” attitude doesn’t work in 2016 anymore, it’s because chiropractic philosophy and techniques have NEVER been shown to work scientifically. When you can show that they are and that chiropractic colleges are NOT teaching snake oil techniques, you might have a case worth considering. 

As I said previously, i’ll provide some more research data shortly.
Let’s have a healthy discussion without the hyperbole folks…

We’ll be waiting.

[ Edited: 03 February 2016 06:34 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2017 05:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2017-03-03

I have been saddened by the high-pressure sales by Maximized Living in Indianapolis Indiana. The office operation was as described by other postings here. I felt like I was being herded through the diagnostic procedure and other patients were like hampsters being rushed through the procedures. Initial visit with husband who was told he had spinal pressure on the nerves to his heart and the condition was extremely threatening. I was told I had stage 2 arthritis in my spine and my condition was extremely serious. We were scheduled to come in on Saturday for a presentation about care options. It was like being intimidated by a used car salesman but it was a chiropractor. We were told my monthly visits would be $850 and my husband’s would be $1200, but entirely necessary if we wanted to maintain our health. When we said we did not have the money we were suddenly treated as second class citizens by Dr. S. Horrible experience. I feel like this chiropractic office’s staff would say just about anything to get clients (victims) to sign on the dotted line. Felt totally scammed.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2017 09:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4243
Joined  2014-06-20
LoisL - 03 February 2016 06:29 PM
sidney1 - 14 January 2016 03:20 PM

to senior member…you may want to look through JMPT, a peer reviewed journal which contains a number of chiropractic research studies..i’ll provide you with a number of studies in other peer reviewed journals…..now one other thing to consider…here in canada where the public has the choice of going to one’s MD and being seen for free…or visit a chiropractor ...in which case, you will be required to pay for service (unless you have been injured in a MVA or have had a workplace injury, in which place, we are covered). Now if what Chiropractor’s did was as much scientific nonsense as you say it is…then why would people choose to see us?


For exactly the same reason people buy snake oil and homeopathic remedies.


Especially when they can get medical care for free…the answer lies in the fact that what we do provides relief for people and it is a means of getting musculoskeletal problems alleviated drug free…

Look, it bothers me when my colleagues make outlandish claims about things outside our area of expertise. Just as it bothers me when family doctors try and deal with treating back and neck pain in patients which is biomechanical in nature -which is the majority of them. There is virtually nothing medicine can provide for these patients and a good MD will find a Chiropractor in their area to work with. It happens here routinely. I refer out to a number of MD’s and they to me. When they do, I will send back a report of my findings and inform them of my intended treatment plan.
I have no problem when those in the medical community get irate when they see a chiropractor advertising that they can cure asthma or whatever. But to try and discredit the whole profession will just leave you looking like a bitter jaded person with a personal vendetta.

The chiropractic professiom discredits itself. These are the kind of things that are taught in chiropractic colleges! Chiropractors are taught to ignore medical science and the scientific method. When chiropractors bring themselves and their “profession” into the scientific community and use scientific methods, they may receive more respect. As long as they remain outside it their claims will be looked upon skeptically.  It’s up to chiropractors and the chiropractic community to show evidence that every one of their claims is scientifiically valid and that they can stand up to scientific scrutiny. It is not up to the medical community to prove them false. Nevertheless, the medical community has shown that many chiropractic claims are NOT scientifically valid and that some can cause damage. Meanwhile, chiropractic colleges continue to teach a philosophy and methods of treatment that are NOT scientifically valid. They SHOULD be discredited.

And one other thing. We don’t need an MD telling us what we can and cannot treat or who should be sent to us by referral…save your arrogant patronizing attitude as it doesn’t work in 2016 anymore. People have many choices for healthcare. And, Chiropractors are portal of entry physicians which means patients don’t need a referral to see us.

Nobody needs a referral to see “Snake Oil Sam” either. If our ““arrogant patronizing” attitude doesn’t work in 2016 anymore, it’s because chiropractic philosophy and techniques have NEVER been shown to work scientifically. When you can show that they are and that chiropractic colleges are NOT teaching snake oil techniques, you might have a case worth considering. 

As I said previously, i’ll provide some more research data shortly.
Let’s have a healthy discussion without the hyperbole folks…

We’ll be waiting. [/quote

[ Edited: 03 March 2017 09:22 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2017 09:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4243
Joined  2014-06-20
mckenzievmd - 15 January 2016 08:16 PM

Sidney1,

As for your allegation that you can refute efficacy of most chiropractic interventions with competing studies consider this. Most research trials on pharma interventions are funded by drug companies so the outcome of many of those studies might be forgone conclusion because, well, that’s how the game is played. The chiropractic research world has no such luxury of drug companies funding studies.

So, this argument makes no sense.

First off, the studies that show a lack of efficacy to chiropractic aren’t funded by Big Pharma, and they have nothing to do with that industry. Studies showing chiro doesn’t work aren’t part of some kind of plot to make only drugs look like they work. And yes, of course financial bias in the pharma industry is a problem. That has nothing to do with whether or not chiro works, though, it’s just a distraction.

If your pint is that drugs have evidence showing they work where chiro doesn’t only because of funding bias, then you’re ignoring 1) the regulatory oversight which reduces funding bias, 2) the study methodology which reduces funding bias, and 3) all of the studies showing therapies other than drugs work. Funding bias shifts the balance of the literature in favor of drugs, but it doesn’t make the entire medical literature wrong or irrelevant.

And if you are worried about funding bias, then you should be worried about the chiro industry too. The industry generates billions of dollars in revenue, and this supports colleges of chiropractic and journals which conduct and publish chiro research. Research money doesn’t materialize magically. Someone always pays for medical research, and usually that money comes from an industry interested in using and/or selling the therapy. The chiro industry has its own professional lobby, which contributes to campaigns and lobbies politicians just like every other industry. So you can’t simply say that the research for chiro is pure and the research for other medical therapies, including drugs, is so corrupt it should be ignored.

Finally, you ignore all the other kinds of bias that influence studies. That vast majority of the sources of error in medical research have nothing to do with money, but with confirmation bias, selection bias, placebo effects, and all kind sof othe rmethodological and cognitive errors that obscure the truth about therapies being tested.

What you are doing here is constructing a narrative where research is meaningful if it supports your position and worthless if it doesn’t. That’s the mark of a true crusader.

[ Edited: 03 March 2017 09:20 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2017 09:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4243
Joined  2014-06-20

I tried to respond to Sidney, who said he would send data supporting chiropractic. When I tried to
fix a sentence my submission would not go through because it said it could be spam. The correction was essentially the same as the original post, except for a few additional words and corrected typos. I tried several times and got the same result. Something is wrong with the CFI Forum program.

I wanted to point out that after a year and a month, Sidney had never provided the data he had promised.

[ Edited: 03 March 2017 09:28 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 4
4