RICHARD A. GOHL CHIROPRACTIC
      Bringing Balance Back Into Your Life

LET THE FACTS SPEAK THE TRUTH

Chiropractic is failing the concept!

There is a conflict between the Philosophy and the Application of Chiropractic.

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?

It has become obvious that Chiropractic has been weakened and distorted to a great extent by following medical concepts and theories. These theories and concepts have been proven to be incorrect in the process of restoring health. Chiropractic should have launched its principle by concentrating on the cause of the malfunction not on the medical concept of named diseases. Chiropractors should not have been called Doctors but rather "Chiropractic Physicians", thus separating themselves from the treating methods of medicine.

From the beginning D.D. Palmer and B.J. Palmer were justifying the application of adjusting by comparing the nerve pathways emitting from the spinal column, as the segment that was causing the electrical system to be altered. They associated the segments with the organs and their named diseases.

This thinking produced the Metric system and later to HIO, and so many other techniques using adjusting the subluxations as their premise. These methods used the principle that we needed to at least adjust the spine. There are many others that don’t use any chiropractic yet call what they do Chiropractic.

There was ample justification for the early conclusion arrived at by .D. D. Palmer. However, that wasn’t the total explanation of what actually occurs. We have to explain why adjusting these segments produced such positive results not achieved by other methods.

This has been demonstrated and explained by A. D. Speransky in his book  A THEORY FOR THE BASIS OF MEDICINE. Chiropractic did and does get positive results in diseased conditions no matter what is adjusted or how. However, changing symptoms by this method, as medicine does, will not correct the cause of the problem.

A.D. Speransky has proven over the years that alterations of the nervous system at a different location can alter a condition other than by stimulating, or adjusting the vertebra at the level of the nerves exit.

A.D. Speransky proved this in his research over ten years.
From his book A THEORY FOR THE BASIS OF MEDICINE
Basic Propositions. Page 344 ...

" The second thesis concerns all the processes not belonging to the first group. To whatever chapter of pathology they belong, however complicated their composition and however variable their course, the nervous component remains from beginning to end the factor that determines the general state. It, as it were, unites the separate elements into a whole; it forms the cement, any change in which inevitably alters the appearance of the process in all its other parts. It is impossible to separate it from the remaining elements of the complex process. Apart from memory, we do not know of a single nervous function, which can be realized by itself, without change in the state of some other organ. It is clear from this that the external manifestations of nervous processes in a complex organism must be just as diverse as in general all the manifestations of life. Under the conditions mentioned, an appraisal of the role of the nervous component of pathological processes presents innumerable difficulties."

A THEORY FOR THE BASIS OF MEDICINE  Page 343
"As a result of several years of work, my collaborators and I have become convinced that in studying processes of this nature the traditional subdivision of the nervous system into central, peripheral, sympathetic, etc, has no justification. Many examples in thisbook have shown that from any point it is easy to bring into action nerve mechanisms, the functioning of which terminates at the periphery in changes of a bio-physico-chemical character. Let us suppose that the final part of the process is realized in all cases by a particular portion of the so-called vegetative nervous system. Is that really sufficient cause for isolating the whole process in a special group? Much greater justification exists for the thesis that any nerve point, not excluded peripheral nerve structures, can become the originator of neuro-dystrophic processes servicing as the temporary or permanent nerve center of these processes."

We find the proof of this in our adjusting or manipulations where the patient came in with a low back condition and by altering the nervous system in the lumbar area the asthma the patient had for years is altered.

Chiropractic has concentrated and promoted the philosophy as the principle foundation of D.D. Palmer’s concept. However, they forgot to develop the process to support the philosophy. They used symptomatic changes in conditions to justify the premise. This has lead to ridicule by those opponents, inside and outside, of our profession.

As you can see there are two approaches to health. One is based on D.D. Palmer’s adjusting subluxation to restore health. The second is the medical treatment method to change symptoms. It is distressing to see the chiropractic colleges taking the second approach in the education of our future chiropractors.

The chiropractic premise has always been correct. It was proven correct by the Medical research of A. D. Speransky, the Russian researcher in charge of experimental medicine. His research proves the nervous system controls all functions of the body.

The overall conclusion in Speranskey’s book is as follows:
A THEORY FOR THE BASIS OF MEDICINE
Chapter XXXIII SUMMARY page 399.

"At the present stage of science, what has to be done is to look for the qualitative distinguishing features within each of these conceptions. It seems to me, that as far as disease in a complicated organism is concerned, we have succeeded in solving this task. The form in which the nervous component of pathological processes makes its appearance does not occur under normal conditions."

This statement verifies the justification and validity of Dr. Palmer’s concept of Chiropractic. Now we have to determine what makes this concept work and how can we prove it.

Altering symptoms is not enough to prove the effectiveness of our chiropractic application. The first line of defense is the physical analysis of the spinal dynamics that the patient’s spine has experienced since birth. This can only be accomplished by viewing the entire spine, A.P. and Lateral in a standing position. These are the spinograms that belong to chiropractic alone.

No one else uses this information, not even our Chiropractic colleges. This is because the medical x-rays departments, that know nothing about chiropractic, control the colleges. Yet we let this departments sell the medical theory and application to our students. They claim the above procedure is of no use and is dangerous to the patient.

This is the same as saying a map is of no use and is dangerous to the driver.

The second process is how the spinograms are taken, the safety of the process to the patient and the ability to show the structural changes that occur after proper adjusting. The proper adjustment is vital to the process. We as a profession do not do this. Yet it has been done with 20,000 pre-and-post spinograms to prove this occurs.

To do this you have to have a marking system, which is simple and can be duplicated with repeated consistency, which is also safe and diagnostic.

Second, we need a simple method, requiring no additional expense that can read the interference in the electrical impulse transmitted by the nervous system. With this information we can tell if a proper adjustment has been made or if the doctor or student only thrust into the spine and made it worse. There is a difference with an adjustment or a manipulation no matter what some of our profession think and state.

Third, no one teaches the direct mechanical application that allows a spinal segment to be moved when a proper thrust has been given. All that is taught is what you should do, or not do, but not on how to achieve that goal.

Yet all of these procedures have been used and demonstrated for over 40 years. You can only teach this on a one-on-one application.

We have let the technique peddlers destroy the value of our profession by bleeding our doctors with promises that are not complementary to the premise of our profession. This allows the pseudo-chiropractic doctor in our profession to attack our principles for the wrong reason. It is too bad that so much money is drawn out of our profession with little Chiropractic to show for it.

I do not challenge the integrity of the dedicated doctors of chiropractic, of which there are thousands. There are many techniques that have much to offer. But I see none of them qualifying what they do.

How to get more patients, or how you operate your office has nothing to do with chiropractic It may help you make more money but that doesn’t help demonstrate the effectiveness of our profession. Obviously having a good attitude and being dedicated to a principle is the desire of all. However, every medical man or other profession has the same goals that they want to achieve. This has nothing to do with the mechanics of our profession, as it has to be applied.

The number of patients one sees is no indication of the quality of the work they perform. I know of large practices that don’t even give an adjustment. They sell things to make people feel better. In our profession, you can do almost anything, call it chiropractic and get away with it

I have experienced, believed, and supported Chiropractic since l940 and have practiced Chiropractic for over 50 years. I have shared my knowledge for over 40 years with students and doctors.

I do not write to be an antagonist to anyone but only to support the premise of D.D. Palmer’s original concept as it relates to health.

I have known many of the giants in chiropractic that have devoted their lives, totally, to the premise of our profession. These giants have been responsible for the survival of chiropractic, in spite of our distracters, in our colleges and throughout the profession.

How can a student know anything about chiropractic when they are taught it doesn’t work?

How can I say this? Because no college teaches them how to make an adjustment, nor are they required to prove they have given an adjustment, other than to make a thrust in some of the (straight) colleges. Most of the others don’t even pretend to apply chiropractic. They follow medical opinion and medical treatment methods.

I do not make statements I cannot prove by demonstration. I do this for all students and doctors, and also to my patients. I have yet to be challenged on these statements. I have been criticized but not challenged. To be challenged I want them to prove what they do and I will prove what I do.

I want to quote from A.D. Speransky to shed light on the scientific support of our position on health. A THEORY FOR THE BASIS OF MEDICINE
Page 400

"It should not be thought, however, that the diversity of therapy must correspond to that of pathology, that every disease must have its particular form of treatment. We have seen that the various forms of neuro-dystrophic processes despite their diversity have a group character. Moreover, every act of interference on our part has not one but many consequences. The effect may depend both on the sum total of all the parts and on each part in particular. This is the reason why different kinds of certatits, gastric ulcer, gangrene of the extremities, septic and many other pathological processes, may yield to externally identical forms of action. At the same time, one and the same procedure, applied in one and the same disease, often gives different effects. The cause lies in the fact that in our diagnosis we actually fasten on the result and do not take into account the mechanism of the pathological process. Let us take sepsis as an example. In its first stage, sepsis starting from the uterine cavity has little in common as regards the mechanism of its development with sepsis starting from sore throat, since the primary focus determines at least for a time the form of then neuro-dystrophic process. Under these circumstances, it is clear that a single form of operation cannot have the same effect on the course of the disease in all cases. Subsequently, when the process has assumed the standard form of development, any new action may serve to aggravate it. In such cases it is often too late.

But whatever turn the process may take, whether towards aggravation of, on the contrary towards extinction, it remains a fact that the basic consistent feature of the process, its "leading link" is the nervous component.

The second condition for the theory of medicine is, as was mentioned above, the union of all the varied data of pathology around a common center. I shall not repeat here either the reasons making this task a very urgent one at the present moment or the data which testify to the fact that the desired center has been found by us in the nervous component of pathology process.

The investigation of this aspect in not only interesting on its own account but also makes it possible to give a suitable arrangement to all the other facts, to find the proper place for each constituent and to determine the order of functioning of the separate parts."

I am making my views known because I see our profession drifting, or should I say hurdling itself, into the medical arena of disease conceived and supported by medical concepts. I must state here that emergency services are the best in the world and are needed. However, not the invasion of normal process directed by man’s interpretation of what he thinks he can create with his intervention in the process itself. Man has altered the creative process into his own interpretation and it always leads to disaster.

Chiropractic has a much greater dedication to the creative process than to dictate to it what it should do.

Richard A. Gohl, D.C.