ChiroHistoryPrimer
ChiroHistoryPrimer
net/publication/239735121
CITATIONS READS
11 6,750
3 authors, including:
J Michael Menke
University of Arizona
82 PUBLICATIONS 998 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by J Michael Menke on 22 May 2014.
1
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 2
The NCMIC Insurance Company is proud to make this primer of chiropractic history
possible through a grant to the Association for the History of Chiropractic. NCMIC
recognizes the importance of preserving the rich history of our profession. This primer will
hopefully stimulate your interest in this saga, help you to understand the trials and tribula-
tions our pioneers endured, and give you a sense of pride and identity.
I know that liberty brings with it some obligations. I know we have it today because others
fought for it, nourished it, protected it, and then passed it on to us. That is a debt we owe. We
owe it to our parents, if they are alive, and to their memory if they are not. But mostly we have an
obligation to our own kids. An obligation to pass on this incredible gift to them. This is how
civilization works... whatever debt you owe to those who came before you, you pay to those who
follow.
That is essentially the same responsibility each of us has to preserve and protect the
extraordinary history of this great profession. We share this primer with you, and hope that
you in turn will do your part for the good of the order. Enjoy.
2
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 3
Contents
3
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 4
4
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 5
Patients protest outside the Ohio jail where their doctor, Herbert R. Reaver, D.C., was imprisoned.
5
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 6
Table 1: Several health care options available to Americans in the 19th century
bonesetting herbalism| Native American remedies Physical Culture
Christian Science heroic medicine naturopathy phrenomagnetism
eclectic medicine homeopathy osteopathy Thomsonianism
electro-medicine magnetic healing patent medicines
6
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 7
from his circulation. Although heroic medicine was in decline by 1850 (Starr 1982, p. 56),
its use continued through the rest of the century (Joachims 1982).
Against this backdrop of heroic medicine, the Native American and Thompsonian
traditions of herbal and other botanical remedies grew popular, and were joined in the early
part of the 19th century by the infin-
itesimal doses of homeopathic med-
icine (promoted by Samuel
Hahnemann, M.D., of Germany)
and the magnetic healing methods
of Franz Anton Mesmer, M.D.
Mesmer’s doctoral dissertation at
the University of Vienna in 1776
had introduced “animal magnetism”
as a vital and transferable force in
living things. Although the French
Academy of Sciences, including
prominent member Benjamin Dr. Franz Anton Mesmer, 1734-1815 19th c. caricature of the
Franklin, repudiated Mesmer’s magnetic practitioner
ideas as little more than suggestion
(Armstrong and Armstrong 1991,
pp. 186-8), magnetic methods were imported to the New World in the 1830s where they
grew to be as popular as in Europe. As well, magnetic healing concepts and practices would
influence the founders of several other alternative health care schools, including Mary Baker
Eddy, founder of Christian Science; Andrew Taylor Still, founder of osteopathy (Gevitz
1982); and D.D. Palmer, father of chiropractic (Gielow 1981; Keating 1997a).
Political medicine had much to be humble about, but instead behaved in rather
aggressive and arrogant fashion towards its competitors. Organized medicine wrapped itself
in a cloak of science, and worked to convince governments and a sizable portion of the pop-
ulace that it alone had the knowledge to justify licensure. Although medical statutes were
rarely enforced in the 19th century, they laid the groundwork for allopathic dominance in
years to come. Medical doctors became the nearly exclusive source of advice to lawmakers,
and the sole arbiters of health care within the embryonic government hospitals and health
7
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 8
8
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 9
He heals the sick, the halt, the lame, and those paralyzed, through the medi-
um of his potent magnetic fingers placed upon the organ or organs diseased
and not by rubbing or stroking, as other ‘magnetic curers’ do… Dr. Palmer
seeks out the cause, the diseased organ upon which the disease depends, and
treats that organ. Magnetics generally treat all cases alike, by general stroking,
passes or rubbing. I think Dr. Palmer’s plan is much more rational, and should
be the most successful” (Livezey, cited in Palmer 1896).
The same issue of The Magnetic included Palmer’s thoughts about treatment of the internal
organs:
By late 1895 or early 1896, Palmer’s theorizing had progressed even further. Based
on the premise that inflammation occurred when displaced anatomic structures rubbed
against one another, causing friction and heat, he sought to manually reposition the parts of
the body so as to prevent friction and the development of inflamed tissue. The first recipi-
ent of this new strategy was a janitor in the building where Palmer operated his 40-room
facility. Patient Harvey Lillard reported in the January 1897 issue of The Chiropractic that:
9
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 10
10
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 11
Chiropractor, filled with anti-mixing rhetoric. And D.D.’s continuing diatribe against
allopathy and his use of testimonial advertising prompted his arrest for practicing medicine
without a license late in 1905. Tried, convicted and sentenced in 1906 to 105 days in Scott
County jail or a fine of $350, Old Chiro went to jail for principle, insisting that he was not
practicing medicine when he practiced chiropractic. B.J. featured his father as a “Martyr to
His Science” in the pages of The Chiropractor, but when the elder Palmer finally paid the
fine and was released after several weeks behind bars, the friction between father and son
reached a pinnacle. They negotiated a settlement of their shared property, and the elder head-
ed for Medford, Oklahoma, where his brother Thomas was in business. For a while, the
father of chiropractic once again operated a grocery store, but by 1907 had established yet
another school, this time in partnership with Alva Gregory, M.D., D.C. The school survived
for several years, but D.D. Palmer again found it difficult to share leadership, and left the
Palmer-Gregory College of Chiropractic for greener pastures. In November 1908, he estab-
lished the D.D. Palmer College of Chiropractic in Portland, Oregon. It was here that he
authored his classic, thousand-page volume, The Chiropractor’s Adjuster: the Science, Art
and Philosophy of Chiropractic (Palmer 1910). It was apparently in Portland as well that his
third and final theory of chiropractic (Palmer 1914) emerged.
B.J. Palmer, meanwhile, continued the growth of the PSC, expanding enrollments
and developing extensive marketing programs for the school and its graduates. He was a
curious soul; B.J. engaged in
some of the earliest research in the
profession and greatly expanded
the osteological collection his
father had established. He hired a
succession of MDs for his faculty,
who provided a degree of legal
protection from prosecution (Iowa
did not pass a chiropractic law
until 1921). In 1908 the PSC com-
menced publication of a series of
volumes on the chiropractic art
that would be known as the “green
books,” and in 1910 B.J. intro- B.J. (center) and the Palmer osteological collection, c. 1915
duced x-ray technology to the pro-
fession.
Old Dad Chiro died of typhoid fever in Los Angeles in 1913. Father and son had vied
with one another for recognition as the “developer of chiropractic” for several years, and
there was unresolved bitterness. Several of the elder’s followers campaigned to have B.J.
prosecuted for injuring his father during a chiropractic parade down Davenport’s Brady
Street hill (home of the PSC) earlier that year, but three grand juries refused to indict him
(Gibbons 1994; Keating 1997a). Nevertheless, B.J. would be haunted by unjustified claims
of patricide for the rest of his life. It was a bitter pill, and perhaps one that explains some of
his ferocity in challenging his political opponents within the profession in later years.
From 1913, when his father passed away, until his 1924 introduction of the neu-
11
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 12
A significant turning point in B.J.’s career and in the course of the profession came
in 1924 with the official inauguration of Palmer’s “BACK-TO-CHIROPRACTIC” program
at the PSC’s lyceum (homecoming) (Palmer 1924b). The NCM, a two-pronged spinal-heat
sensing instrument, was heralded as the only scientifically valid method of detecting spinal
subluxations, and henceforth, the “Developer” announced, practice without the device
would be considered unethical (Keating 1991 1997). Invented by engineer-chiropractor
12
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 13
13
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 14
Dr. John F.A. Howard Dr. T.F. Ratledge Dr. Charles Cale founded Attorney-chiropractor
founded the National founded the Ratledge the Los Angeles College of Willard Carver founded
School of Chiropractic in System of Chiroprac- Chiropractic in 1911. his first school in
1906. tic Schools, Los Oklahoma City in 1906.
Angeles, in 1911.
14
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 15
15
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 16
16
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 17
17
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 18
18
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 19
Dr. Herb Reaver, Sr., was Dr. Courtney adjusting in the Los Angeles Dr. Eckols and Irish in the
arrested repeatedly in Ohio County jail, 1922 San Diego County jail, 1921
for “practicing medicine
without a license.”
North Dakota’s first Board of Chiropractors, 1915. Standing l-r: George Anna M. Foy, DC, received
Newsalt, DC, of Fargo, Guy G. Wood, DC, of Minot and S.A. Danford, DC license #1 in Kansas and served
of Bismarck; seated l-r: A.O. Henderson, DC, of Mandan and S.A. Reed, for many years on the state’s
DC, of Valley City Board of Chirorpactic Examiners
Morris and his law partners were very busy in the next few years. Prosecutions of
chiropractors grew increasingly common, often instigated by state medical boards that were
determined to crush all challengers to their authority. Although Morris and his team won an
estimated 75% of the cases they handled (especially when the verdict was rendered by a jury
rather than by a magistrate), it was a harrowing ordeal for the chiropractors. Police officers
19
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 20
Table 4: Early chiropractic acts in the United States, based on Wardwell (1992, 110-111)
were repeatedly sent in plainclothes to pose as patients and gather evidence for political
medicine. Patients rarely agreed to testify against chiropractors, and often had to be sub-
poenaed to testify in court as hostile witnesses for the prosecution. In some jurisdictions,
massive sweeps were made to round up chiropractors for trial, and DCs learned to dread the
unknown knock at the door.
These mounting pressures prompted strenuous, grass roots, political campaigns by
DCs to secure “separate and distinct” licensing laws and boards of chiropractic examiners
as a means of staying out of jail. Ironically, they often found that going to jail, instead of
paying a fine when convicted of unlicensed practice, was an excellent strategy for securing
chiropractic statutes. Doctors who chose jail instead of paying fines created a martyr image
for public consumption, and deprived state medical boards of money that could be used to
harass additional chiropractors. Palmer and attorney Morris initially opposed the introduc-
tion of separate licensing for chiropractors (Keating 1997a), but eventually acquiesced to the
overwhelming sentiment in the profession. The first state to pass a chiropractic statute was
Kansas, but the governor refused to appoint a board of chiropractic examiners, on the
20
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 21
grounds that all the DCs in the state had practiced illegally prior to the law’s passage, and
were therefore ineligible to serve. North Dakota awarded the first chiropractic licenses in
1915, and several other states soon followed suit (see Table 4). However, six more decades
were required to secure chiropractic statutes in all 50 states.
By 1924 more than two dozen jurisdictions had authorized the practice of chiro-
practic by statute. Alarmed at this encroachment on what had been a near monopoly, polit-
ical medicine devised new strategies to contain the
chiropractic profession in those states where they
had failed to block licensure. Basic science statutes
were first introduced in Connecticut and Wisconsin
in 1925, and eventually spread to 24 American
jurisdictions (Gevitz 1988). Basic science laws cre-
ated independent basic science boards of examin-
ers who were charged with testing applicants for
licensure in several disciplines (chiropractic, med-
icine, naturopathy, osteopathy) in such subjects as
anatomy, bacteriology, physiology, and public
health. These basic science examinations must be
passed before the applicant could sit for testing by
her/his respective licensing board.
Chiropractors cried foul, noting that the
explicit purpose of basic science boards was to
This 1936 cartoon from the NCA’s journal shows prevent non-MDs from securing licenses. As well,
chiropractic being held up by organized allopathic they argued, the tests administered by boards were
medicine with the aid of politics. The payoff is the
right to practice. often biased in favor of medical practitioners. The
boards were often comprised of medical school
faculty members, and though the basic science examiners were not supposed to know the
professional identities of those they tested, this confidential information was often available
to them, thereby introducing bias in the scoring of the tests. The basic science statutes had
21
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 22
22
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 23
Table 5: D.D. Palmer’s concepts during three periods of publications (from Keating 1993)
aThe Chiropractic was the title of D.D. Palmer’s journal during the early years of his practice in Davenport, Iowa
bThe Chiropractor was published by D.D. and B.J. beginning in December 1904 from the Palmer School in Davenport
cThe Chiropractor Adjuster was D.D. Palmer’s journal published in Portland by the D.D. Palmer College of Chiropractic,
while The Chiropractor’s Adjuster was the title of his book.
23
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 24
24
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 25
B.J. Palmer, DC, c.1924 Mortimer Levine, DC, c.1957 Willard Carver, LLB, DC,
c.1943 (NCA photo collection)
25
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 26
26
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 27
The McManis table was first patented in 1909 by osteopath-chiropractor J.V. McManis who served on the faculties of the
American School of Osteopathy in Kirksville, Missouri, and the National College of Chiropractic in Chicago. The
McManis table is a precursor to chiropractor James Cox’s contemporary flexion-distraction table.
James Franklin McGinnis, D.C., one of the earliest chiropractic radiologists, at work at the
Palmer School in 1912
their earlier focus on the nervous system. However, his introduction of the NCM in 1924
gave a renewed importance to neural function. Although Palmer initially threatened to sue
anyone infringing on his patents, the NCM spawned a variety of spinal heat-sensing
devices (see Table 6). Generally reliable as thermometers, these instruments have not been
validated for the purpose of subluxation detection.
27
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 28
Drs. Warren Sausser and Sol Goldschmidt with a Dr. C. O. Watkins of Sidney,
full-body radiograph; from the NCA’s Journal, Montana, demonstrates chiroprac-
February 1935 tic use of fluoroscopy, c. 1935
28
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:35 AM Page 29
Dr. Joseph Janse, presi- Dr. George Haynes, Dr. Rex Wright of Attorney-chiroprac-
dent of National administrative dean of the Kansas, president of the tor Orval Hidde of
College of Chiropractic LACC and chairman of Council of State Wisconsin, chairman
and member of the the NCA/ACA Council of Chiropractic Examining of the CCE’s
NCA/ACA Council on Education Boards and a strong sup- Commission on
Education porter of the CCE Accreditation, 1975
29
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 30
30
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 31
Table 8: Chronology of the formation and renaming of chiropractic colleges in North America, 1973-2002 (based on
Keating et al. 1998a; Musick 1979; Strauss 1994; Peterson and Wiese 1995)
1973 (Jan 11): Sherman College of Chiropractic 1980 (Sept 18): Northern California College of
chartered in South Carolina; later renamed Sherman Chiropractic renamed Palmer College of Chiropractic
College of Straight Chiropractic West
1973 (Jan 31): International College of Chiropractic 1981: Pacific States College of Chiropractic renamed Life
Neurovertebrology chartered in California (later Chiropractic College-West
renamed University of Pasadena, College of 1984: ADIO renamed Pennsylvania College of Straight
Chiropractic; Southern California College of Chiropractic
Chiropractic; Quantum University 1991 (May): Palmer West and Palmer combine as Palmer
1974 (Sep 12): Life Chiropractic College formed in Chiropractic University
Georgia; later renamed Life University 1991: University of Bridgeport College of Chiropractic
1976 (Nov 9): Pacific States Chiropractic College formed in Connecticut
chartered in California 1992: Chiropractic program announced at the University of
1977 (Jul):ADIO Institute of Straight Chiropractic Quebec, Trois Rivieres campus (UQTR)
chartered in Pennsylvania 1993: UQTR enrolls first class
1978 (Aug 3): Northern California College of 2001: Colorado College of Chiropractic opens and closes
Chiropractic chartered in California 2002 (Oct): Palmer College of Chiropractic Florida enrolls
1978 (Mar 8): Parker College of Chiropractic chartered first class
in Texas
31
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 32
32
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 33
Attorney George McAndrews, Dr. Chester A. Wilk, c. 1990 Walter Wardwell, Ph.D.,
c.1981 c.1995
Michael D. Pedigo, DC (left), president of the ICA Dr. Jerome McAndrews, future
and co-plaintiff in the Wilk case, confers with president of Palmer College of
Kenneth Luedtke, DC, president of the ACA, during Chiropractic, c.1972
a visit to Palmer College of Chiropractic West in
Sunnyvale, California, in 1986
tions over recognition of a chiropractic accrediting agency was one arena in which political
medicine sought to influence government (Accreditation 1973; Wardwell 1992, p. 163); a
similar exercising of political muscle took place in New York State when the National
College of Chiropractic sought regional accreditation through the state’s education depart-
ment (Beideman 1995). And when the Medicare program was introduced by Congress in
the 1960s, chiropractors were initially excluded.
Wilbur J. Cohen, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare
(DHEW), was directed by Congress in 1967 to prepare a report on the inclusion of chiro-
practic and other non-allopathic, independent health care providers in the Medicare health
care reimbursement program. Sociologist Walter Wardwell, Ph.D., was a participant in the
sham investigation conducted by the surgeon general of the U.S. Public Health Service
(USPHS), a division of DHEW. Early on, Dr. Wardwell recognized that the 22-member
committee of scholars, professionals and businessmen assembled by the federal agency
would have no actual voice in the final report, which had already been prepared by staff
members of the USPHS (Wardwell 1992, p. 165). Secretary Cohen’s 1968 report,
Independent Practitioners Under Medicare, dealt a serious blow to chiropractors, who were
excluded from the Medicare program until 1973.
33
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 34
…Although the conspiracy ended in 1980, there are lingering effects of the ille-
gal boycott and conspiracy which require an injunction. Some medical physi-
cians’ individual decisions on whether or not to professionally associate with
chiropractors are still affected by the boycott. The injury to chiropractors’ repu-
tations which resulted from the boycott have not been repaired. Chiropractors
suffer current economic injury as a result of the boycott. The AMA has never
affirmatively acknowledged that there are and should be no collective impedi-
ments to professional association and cooperation between chiropractors and
medical physicians, except as provided by law. Instead, the AMA has consis-
tently argued that its conduct has not violated the antitrust laws…
An injunction is necessary to assure that the AMA does not interfere with the
right of a physician, hospital, or other institution to make an individual decision
on the question of professional association… (Getzendanner 1988).
Published in the pages of the AMA’s journal, the judge’s findings and injunctions
against the national medical trade association were forcefully brought to the medical pro-
34
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 35
fession’s attention. Although various appeals were filed, Getzendanner’s findings still stand.
THE RESEARCH ENTERPRISE (1975 TO PRESENT)
Although research in chiropractic legitimately claims its roots in the various theories
and clinical techniques propounded throughout the chiropractic century, little more than
sporadic efforts at meaningful data collection in the profession’s first 50 years are apparent
(Keating et al. 1995). Gitelman (1984) suggested that the modern era, involving sustained
scientific investigation of the chiropractic healing art, may be dated to the 1975 conference
on spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) hosted by the National Institute of Neurologic and
Communicative Diseases and Stroke (NINCDS) in Bethesda, Maryland, with funding pro-
vided by the U.S. Congress. The published proceedings of this meeting (Goldstein 1975),
which brought together chiropractors, osteopaths, manual medicine practitioners and
researchers, revealed the state of knowledge about SMT at that time. The consensus reached
was that the clinical value of SMT was unproved, but merited serious investigation.
Clarence W. Weiant, DC, PhD, Cover of the New England Journal of Drs. Andries M. Kleynhans and Joseph
was appointed director of Chiropractic for Spring 1975 fea- Janse, director of research and president,
research for the NCA in 1943 tured the NIH site of the first federal- respectively, of the National College of
and later served a similar role ly sponsored conference on the Chiropractic, 1975; they nurtured the infant
for the Chiropractic Research research status of spinal manipulative research enterprise.
Foundation, forerunner of therapy.
today’s FCER.
Although the first few randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of SMT were
just getting underway in this period, chiropractic contributions to this scholarly literature
were slow in coming. Not until 1978 did the National College of Chiropractic launch the
profession’s most scholarly and enduring periodical, the Journal of Manipulative and
Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT), and not until 1986 was the first RCT of chiropractic
adjusting published (Waagen et al. 1986). However, if the content of JMPT is any guide
(e.g., Keating et al. 1998b), there has been a slow but steady expansion of clinical and basic
research within the profession. By 1994, the volume of trials related to the benefits of SMT
for patients with low back pain, including studies by researchers and clinicians in several
disciplines, prompted the federal Agency for Health Care Policy and Research to issue clin-
ical practice guidelines which included manual therapies as one of a few recommended
means of helping low back pain patients in the acute stage of their disorder.
35
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 36
Table 10: Several categories of research and scholarship appearing in the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics, 1989-1996 (adapted from Keating et al., 1998b)
Researchers and college administrators gather at Logan College of Chiropractic in 1977 for a seminar jointly sponsored
by the Foundation for Chiropractic Education and Research and the Springwall Education and Research Trust
(Springwall 1977)
36
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 37
Australia, Canada, Denmark, Great Britain, South Africa) suggests increased public fund-
ing for training and research. However, training in the philosophy of science and in the
methods of clinical research for chiropractors is still embryonic (Keating 1992).
Chiropractic research to date has helped to establish the benefit of SMT for a limit-
ed number of musculoskeletal (“Type M”) problems, most especially low back pain
(Bronfort 1999) and, to a lesser extent, headaches and neck disorders (Coulter et al. 1996).
However, the mechanism(s) of this benefit remain uncertain (Haldeman 2000), as do the eti-
ologies of these conditions. The scientific literature bearing on the possible benefit of
manipulation for a broader range of health problems (termed “Type O” for organic or vis-
ceral diseases) remains very limited, although not completely unexplored (Budgell 1999;
Masarsky and Todres-Masarsky 2001). The scientific data base has also facilitated efforts
to establish guidelines for clinical practice and for encouraging greater quality in the clini-
cal services rendered by chiropractors (Haldeman et al. 1993;
Henderson et al. 1994; Vear 1992).
A significant and continuing barrier to scientific progress
within chiropractic are the anti-scientific and pseudo-scientific
ideas (Keating 1997b) which have sustained the profession
throughout a century of intense struggle with political medicine.
Chiropractors’ tendency to assert the meaningfulness of various
theories and methods as a counterpoint to allopathic charges of
quackery has created a defensiveness which can make critical
examination of chiropractic concepts difficult (Keating and Mootz Button proclaims popular
1989). One example of this conundrum is the continuing contro- slogan among some chiro-
versy about the presumptive target of DCs' adjustive interventions: practors in 2003
subluxation (Gatterman 1995; Leach 1994). While some in the
profession question the meaningfulness of the traditional chiropractic lesion (e.g., Nelson
1997), others proclaim its significance routinely in marketing materials distributed to the
public (Grod et al. 2001).
Dr. Alan Breen of the Anglo- Drs. Silvano Mior (left) and Howard Vernon, Dr. John Triano, c. 1995
European College of researchers at CMCC, accept awards for
Chiropractic their distinguished service in 1993
37
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 38
the chiropractic curriculum continues today as complex and varied, many of these subse-
quent schisms among professional associations and the schools may be seen as a variation
on this first dispute over scope of practice and length of training.
Many of the early 20th century schools were not just new institutions, but new
“schools” in the broader sense, based on creative and alternate interpretations of what was
considered the most appropriate and efficient application of the ideas first expressed by D.D.
Palmer a few years earlier. Among the early competing educational enterprises was the
broad-scope National School of Chiropractic (later National College of Chiropractic and
now National University of Health Sciences), founded in 1906 by Palmer graduate J.F. Alan
Howard, and located just blocks from the Palmer School. The National School relocated to
Chicago in 1908.
First campus of the National School of By not later than 1918, the National School of Chiropractic offered a
Chiropractic in Davenport, Iowa, in 1906. degree in Chiropractic and Physiological Therapeutics
Located in the Ryan Building at 2nd and
Brady.
From this environment of creativity and controversy emerged various factions and
viewpoints within the chiropractic community that still exist today. The key elements of
division are the following:
*What should appropriately be included and applied in the scope of chiro-
practic practice;
*The likely effects of chiropractic care for the patient;
*The clinical value of subluxation correction;
*The appropriate language with which to describe chiropractic methods and
their effects; and
*How to interact with other health care practitioners and professions, espcial-
ly allopathic doctors.
39
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 40
40
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 41
loskeletal complaints? While the vast majority of chiropractors hold positions in the broad
middle ground between these extremes, the question of how to resolve conflicts among sci-
entific evidence, belief, and tradition remains unanswered. An additional element of inquiry
relative to the chiropractic paradigm is the influence of routine and/or maintenance spinal
adjustive care and its effect on sustaining health and wellness. At this time, many issues can-
not be resolved based on firm evidence. Nevertheless, the way the profession ultimately
addresses the inevitable conflicts between newly emerging evidence and traditional beliefs
will undoubtedly shape its future.
Language for Describing Chiropractic
The words used to describe the principles and practices of chiropractic continue to
stir emotion and controversy even today. To some chiropractors, the issue is purely seman-
tic; to others, it is a matter of principle in which the choice of terminology is a strong indi-
cator of one’s stance on major issues confronting the profession. Should the chiropractor’s
primary manual intervention be called “adjustment” or “manipulation”? Is chiropractic care
a form of “treatment” or does this term indicate something strictly allopathic? Similarly, is
the chiropractic adjustment/manipulation a “therapy,” with “therapeutic effects,” or is it bet-
ter termed an “intervention” or “procedure”? Chiropractors have argued over these and
related matters for almost the entire history of the profession. The scope of this debate can-
not be resolved within this booklet, but the key issues can be framed in a non-adversarial
context, so that entry-level students and other readers can understand the major points of
view.
To a great extent, controversy regarding choice of language in chiropractic derives
from a concern on the part of traditionalist straight chiropractors that adopting the language
used by the medical and osteopathic professions (i.e., manipulation, treatment or therapy,
and lesion or somatic dysfunction rather than adjustment and subluxation) represents an
unacceptable compromise for the sake of acceptance within the mainstream health care sys-
tem. A parallel concern on the part of broad-scope, mixer chi-
ropractors is that failing to adopt the terminology in widespread
use throughout the health professions will contribute to the con-
tinued marginalization of chiropractic.
It must be acknowledged that B.J. Palmer’s early strat-
egy and use of terminology in defining chiropractic as the
antithesis of medicine carried important implications for the
fate of the profession at that time. The ruling by the
Massachusetts Supreme court in the Zimmerman case in 1915
(Wardwell 1978) reflected the basic legal interpretation of the
medical practice acts of the day. The practice of chiropractic
was legally interpreted as the practice of medicine, and not just
in the context of prescribing pharmaceuticals but to include the
therapeutic regimes of the diagnosis and treatment of disease.
The unlicensed chiropractor engaging in clinical practice was
therefore held to be practicing medicine without license and An image of a subluxated verte-
bra (courtesy of Cleveland
was in violation of state law. Chiropractic College)
As a survival strategy, the younger Palmer and his chief
41
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 42
Interprofessional Relations.
Historically, relations among doctors of chiropractic and doc-
tors of medicine have been marked by acrimony and competition,
although this has begun to diminish in recent years. Having been
disparaged by most medical physicians since the profession’s incep-
tion, many chiropractors have understandably been cautious in
seeking alliances with medical physicians or integration into the
mainstream medical delivery system. While some chiropractors
have always wanted to ally and integrate with the medical profes-
sion, others have staunchly opposed such moves. Ironically, the
decision to integrate did not belong to the chiropractors; chiroprac-
Symbol of the ICA, 1950s tors remained outside of mainstream health care. Change is finally
occurring, but progress remains quite slow.
As a profession matures, its relations with other professions
must mature as well. Healthy interprofessional relations must be based on mutual respect
and understanding. A key question for chiropractic’s future is how can chiropractors be inte-
grated into the mainstream health care delivery system so that chiropractic services are read-
ily available to all who can benefit from them? And, of equal significance, how can such
integration be achieved without diluting the uniqueness of chiropractic to the point where it
is unrecognizable?
There is probably no single answer to these questions. The future shape of the pro-
fession will likely be worked out, step by step, in numerous pilot projects in a wide range
of settings - in private chiropractic and medical practices where interprofessional referral in
both directions becomes the norm; in interdisciplinary (including joint chiropractic-med-
ical) practices where practitioners work out the best ways to cooperate for the benefit of
their patients; and in larger-scale enterprises such as the health care systems serving veter-
ans and the active duty military, where chiropractic inclusion is now in its early stages. In
42
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 43
each of these situations, it is important not to mistake uncertain beginnings for failures.
Inevitably, as new relationships are developed and tested, there will be both successes and
difficulties. Creating positive, sustainable interprofessional relations depends on willingness
by all involved parties to build on their successes and learn from their mistakes.
Contemporary Expressions of the Chiropractic Paradigm
Various authors have summarized a core chiropractic paradigm that includes the fol-
lowing:
1. The body is a self-regulating and self-healing organism.
2. The nervous system is the master system that regulates and controls all other
organs and tissues and relates the individual to his/her environment.
3. Spinal biomechanical dysfunction in the form of vertebral subluxation complex
may adversely affect the nervous system’s ability to regulate function.
4. The central focus of the doctor of chiropractic is to correct, manage or minimize
vertebral subluxation through the chiropractic spinal adjustment.
For many chiropractors, these four points constitute the foundation of traditional
chiropractic, but also reflect elements compatible with broad-scope perspective that
expands beyond these concepts in terms of scope of practice and patient assessment.
Moreover, these elements convey this essence without metaphysical terminology.
Chiropractors comfortable with the term innate intelligence will recognize this in the first
component. Likewise, those chiropractors who prefer to think of self-regulation and heal-
ing in terms of homeostasis and normal physiological function are accommodated. Notably,
the relationship between structure and function as mediated by the nervous system is given
prominence here. This is the essence, the distinctive feature, of chiropractic thought and
practice.
A contemporary perspective demonstrating the end ranges of the broad-scope/mixer
and purist/straight controversy is reflected in the published documents of two diversely con-
trasted chiropractic educational institutions - the National University of Health Sciences’
college of chiropractic, and that of Sherman College of Straight Chiropractic (SCSC).
Continuing under the heading “Profile of Chiropractic Medicine,” the NUHS para-
43
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 44
44
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 45
insurance in the 1970s, the health care environment again changed dramatically with the
arrival of managed care in the 1980s and 1990s. Managed care was designed to control costs
by forcing physicians to share financial risk. Though the concept may not survive the very
forces it set in motion, managed care has certainly changed the face of health care.
With the managed care revolution came a new cost consciousness. Chiropractors felt
the crunch of financial constraints and increased work. At the professional level, chiroprac-
tic was confronted with increasing demands to justify their expense with clinical outcomes
and economic sense, or face being cut out of the reimbursement plans they had fought so
hard to get into just two decades before. Fortunately, chiropractic research programs were
well underway when the managed care storm struck. Some clinical studies demonstrated the
efficacy and popularity of chiropractors’ services to patients. Unfortunately, the profession
had not demonstrated a cost advantage over standard medical care for any condition.
Chiropractors’ essential strengths (musculoskeletal treatment, high patient satisfaction, and
advocacy of the patient’s innate healing ability) had set it apart from other health care pro-
fessions, but for only 4% to12% of Americans (Rafferty et al., 2002; Burge and Albright,
2002; McFarland et al., 2002).
As chiropractic moves into the post-managed care era, it may split into two princi-
pal forms of delivery: one track as an “alternative medicine” practitioner, another track as a
fully integrated team member in conventional health care delivery. The former is “apart
from” the rest of health care, the latter is “a part of” health care. This will probably not
involve separate licensure for each type of chiropractor, since the legal maneuvers that
would be required for such division are staggering. In any case, the consensus needed for a
more unified profession, involving a shared vision of a more homogeneous role for the chi-
ropractor, is not on the horizon. Among the many natural fits for integrative chiropractors
are sports medicine, spine care, pain care, hospital emergency medicine, orthopedics, and
physical medicine. They may practice along with orthopedists, internal medicine specialists,
neurologists, acupuncturists and physical therapists.
In the foreseeable future, some chiropractors will take postgraduate rounds and res-
idencies in emergency medicine, integrated spine care, pain medicine, and primary care.
Others will graduate and set up solo and group practices and provide primary care to the
many underserved regions in the United States. Chiropractic education will evolve to pro-
duce doctors of chiropractic ready for the evidentiary health demands of the 21st century,
and less on the “alternative medicine” principles of chiropractic’s past. Even so, chiroprac-
tic’s fundamental perspective of respect for the body’s ability to heal itself will be preserved.
Chiropractic research will continue, and will emphasize clinical outcomes and relative cost
savings. The creation of this expanded knowledge base will aid in creating cultural author-
ity; chiropractic will be considered an essential form of health care.
Chiropractors have long abided by the principle of restoring health through restoring
life balance. In the US, 50% of all deaths are due to poor lifestyle choices. Health problems
due to poor lifestyle produce the most chronic, debilitating, and medically untreatable dis-
eases of our day. The 21st century chiropractor will be vigilant for the manifestations of a
stressful and often unhealthy lifestyle. The chiropractor of the future will address subluxa-
tions beyond the spine – to nutrition, sleep, stress, family, and community. Recognizing that
alcohol and drug abuse, depression, and suicide may be symptoms of deeper “diseases
45
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 46
46
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 47
REFERENCES:
Abrams A. Spondylotherapy: Spinal Concussion and the Application of Other Methods to the Spine in the
Treatment of Disease. San Francisco: Philopolis Press, 1910
Accreditation opposed. American Medical News 30 April 1973, p. 9
Advertisement for Simmons-Service. National Chiropractic Journal 1943 (Aug); 12(8): 38
American University (Chicago) declared a fraud in court. Fountain Head News 1919 [A.C. 24] (Feb 7);
8(21): 4
American College of Chiropractors. Medical Education Versus Chiropractic Education. National Publicity
Series No. 3. New York: the College, 1927 (pamphlet: Ratledge papers, Cleveland Chiropractic College of
Kansas City)
Armstrong D, Armstrong EM. The Great American Medicine Show. New York: Prentice Hall, 1991
Beideman RP. In the Making of a Profession: the National College of Chiropractic, 1906-1981. Lombard
IL: National College of Chiropractic, 1995
Bergman TF, Peterson DH, Lawrence DJ. Chiropractic Technique: Principles and Procedures. New York:
Churchill Livingstone, 1993
Bigos S, Bowyer O, Braen G, et al. Acute low back problems in adults. Clinical Practice Guideline No. 14.
Rockville, MD: AHCPR Publication No. 95-0642, 1994
Bronfort G. Spinal manipulation: current state of research and its implications. Neurologic Clinics of North
America 1999 (Feb); 17(1): 91-111
Budgell BS. Spinal manipulative therapy and visceral disorders. Chiropractic Journal of Australia 1999
(Dec); 29(4): 123-8
Burge SK, Albright TL. Use of complementary and alternative medicine among family practice patients in
south Texas. American Journal of Public Health 2002 (Oct); 92(10): 1614-6
Carragee E. Diseases desperate grown. Spine 2001; 26(20): 2179
Carver FJ. The postural method of chiropractic diagnosis and adjusting. Wichita: the author, 1938
Chapman-Smith D. The Wilk case. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 1989 (Apr);
12(2): 142-6
Clapesattle H. The Doctors Mayo. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1941
Cooperstein R. Chiropraxis. Oakland CA: the author, 1990
Cooperstein R, Perle SM, Gatterman MI, Lantz C, Schneider MJ. Chiropractic technique procedures for
specific low back conditions: characterizing the literature. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics 2001 (July/Aug); 24(6): 407-24
Coulter ID, Hurwitz EL, Adams AH, et al. The appropriateness of manipulation and mobilization of the cer-
vical spine. Santa Monica CA: RAND Corporation, 1996
Davenport HW. Doctor Dock: teaching and learning medicine at the turn of the century. New Brunswick
NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1987
Dintenfass J. U.S. charges American Medical Association as health trust. The Chiropractic Journal (NCA)
1938 (Sept); 7(9): 25-7
Donahue JH. D.D. Palmer and Innate Intelligence: development, division, and derision. Chiropractic
History 1986; 6:30-6
Donahue JH. D.D. Palmer and the metaphysical movement in the 19th century. Chiropractic History 1987;
7(1):22-7
Dye AA. The Evolution of Chiropractic. Philadelphia: the author, 1939
Ferguson A, Wiese G. How many chiropractic schools? An analysis of institutions that offered the D.C.
degree. Chiropractic History 1988; 8(1): 26-36
Flexner A. Medical Education in the United States and Canada. New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1910
(reprinted 1967, Times/Arno Press, New York)
Fuhr AW, Colloca CJ, Green JR, Keller TS. Activator Methods Chiropractic Technique. St. Louis: Mosby,
1997
Gatterman MI. Foundations of Chiropractic: Subluxation. St. Louis: Mosby, 1995
Gatterman MI, Vear H J. Statutory determinants and curriculum development in chiropractic colleges in
the absence of university affiliation. Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association 1992; 36(4): 222-7
Gatterman MI, Cooperstein R, Lantz C, Perle SM, Schneider MJ. Rating specific chiropractic technique
47
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 48
48
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 49
49
PracticeMakers_504474 3/21/05 3:36 AM Page 50
50