Science and Healthcare

One of the most common, yet ridiculous knocks against my profession is that it is lacking in scientific backing. 

This is one of the reasons, in which many doctors specializing in Upper Cervical/brainstem arena choose to steer clear of the term "chiropractic."  Not many versions of chiropractic are all that scientific.  While there is certainly a lot to be said for intuition, many chiropractors rely on their hands to detect something that you cannot feel.  You cannot feel neurologic distortion with any kind of accuracy - or certainly not with consistency.  Many Upper Cervical practitioners, though, utilize thermography to study patterns of inflammation specific to a particular misalignment.  It's something that can be reproduced from one doctor to the next.  Combine that with the hormonal, blood pressure, blood sugar, and other internal and external changes that result from precisely correcting a misalignment and you have not only a philosophy and an art, but also a science. 

Medicine likes to hang its hat on being "scientific."  Is it really, though?  When you watch those commercials for the latest and greatest drugs, do you see the symptom-treatment that has a laundry list of side effects with a wide range of severity and think "scientific"?  The FDA approval label...does that make you think "scientifically sound"?  You can't predict how a chemical concoction is going to affect each individual.  That's why they have to name all of the side effects in the commercials. 

I ask you, though, what does it really mean if something is labeled as scientific?  Science is just a means of obtaining knowledge.  There's a big difference between science, which requires experimentation, and a law of nature.  Gravity is a law.  Science was used to define it.  Drop a rock from the roof, it hits the grounds.  Scientific study complete.  The Law of Gravity established. 

Medicine is a very experimental science.  It always has been.  It's not being studied based on the idea of some physical or chemical law.  It's basis for study is actually in direct opposition to a fundamental law...The Law of Cause and Effect.  For every action, there's a reaction.  Medicine studies only the reactions and effects but not the actions and causes.  That's why it is so hit or miss. 

It's easy to develop double blind studies (the main cog in the medical science wheel) that look at effects.  All then that you must do to give the study a passing grade is to temporarily subdue the effect.  Healing is a tad more complicated than just subduing effects.  Removing the cause of a health problem has its own set of effects.  So, we have to be careful to look at the big picture when we look at what is referred to as science in healthcare. 

BJ Palmer did fifteen years of research on getting sick people well through Upper Cervical.  The results were astronomical.  Removing the upper cervical subluxation (misalignment to the effect that disrupts normal brainstem function) got sick people well by allowing them to heal from the inside.  Effects/symptoms were monitored, along with blood work and urinalysis, but the big picture was that the cause was being removed; the cause that had interrupted the pancreas from producing insulin or the blood pressure from being properly regulated or the reproductive cycle to be abnormal or any other of the thousands of effect producing internal causes that exist because the brainstem is compromised. 

The science of Upper Cervical Care proves the Law of Life.  No further experimentation is required.  It's just time for sick people to wake up and get well.