(Editor's note: The following two letters were written in response to "A Tale of Two Tables," which appeared in the August 10th issue of Dynamic Chiropractic.)
DC's "Jerry Springer Style of Journalism"
Dear Editor:
In regards to your story "A Tale of Two Tables," I would like to mention some points that you neglected to print.
In your article, you stated that the episode between Rick Flaherty and Dr. Eckard began on September 12, 1998. This story did not start on September 12; it started in 1989, at the time Leander's wife Jan was diagnosed with terminal liver cancer. Obviously, this became Dr. Eckard's top priority. Dr. Eckard hired Mr. Flaherty to run his business so that he could be with Jan.
As Jan's health declined, Dr. Eckard was spending most of his time with Jan, traveling to numerous clinics and doctors, trying to beat the cancer. During this time, Mr. Flaherty was pushing Dr. Eckard relentlessly to sell him the company. I personally feel Dr. Eckard agreed to this under duress, and given different circumstances, he never would have sold the company.
I do not think that it was coincidence that Mr. Flaherty took over the company in January 1992, and Jan passed away in April of 1992. I spent time with Dr. Eckard and Jan in March of 1992, and they had misgivings then. Did Mr. Flaherty mention the fact that he asked Dr. Eckard to put the money he received from Jan's life insurance policy into Mr. Flaherty's new company? Fortunately, Dr. Eckard did not act on Mr. Flaherty's device.
You state that the company was bought for over $2 million in cash and other fees. From the beginning, I have watched Dr. Eckard have to fight for every dime he has received, and what he did receive was only a fraction of the amount he should have been paid. I have watched Mr. Flaherty blatantly disregard agreements while Dr. Eckard still kept his end of the agreement. Dr. Eckard through five years of a non-complete agreement, completely honoring it before he started his current company.
In your article, you state, "All of this would be of little or no interest to the chiropractic profession" except that people called Leader thinking they bought a Leander table from them. I find that hard to believe. Anyone who has ever been to a Parker seminar knows exactly who Dr. Leander Eckard is and who they are buying from.
Countless people watched Dr. Eckard spend 16 hours a day treating anyone and everyone, from doctors and CAs to hotel staff, just to help them, expecting nothing in return. I can't begin to count how many doctors have told me they wait from seminar to seminar to get adjusted by Dr. Eckard. It doesn't matter to Dr. Eckard whether or not the doctor is buying a table -- he takes care of everyone unselfishly. I don't know if you realize that or not, but when your father was alive, Dr. Eckard donated a table to him to help with his back challenges.
It is my understanding that the rules of investigative journalism requires at least two sources for your information and that you name them in order to print the information. It appears your information came solely from Mr. Flaherty. I have heard you say several times that you keep your publication neutral and do not pick sides. If that is the case, you should have been honest with your readers and disclosed that you and Mr. Flaherty are extremely close personal friends, and also point out that Mr. Flaherty has become an advertiser with your newspaper while Dr. Eckard has not.
The slanted article, which you had the audacity to publish, is not an article of true journalism brought forth to the chiropractic public to help. It is merely your attempt to put a man who does not advertise in your publication out of business so you can do your good buddy a favor.
Mr. Petersen, there are many more pressing issues before chiropractic that deserve front-page attention from you. It would be much better for all of chiropractic if you stay away from the Jerry Springer style of journalism and let private disputes between people be settled between them.
There are two ways to have the tallest building in town. One is to build the tallest building in town. The other is to tear all the others down. In this story, Dr. Eckard is the biggest. Please stop showing you are the smallest.
Jeff Gibbens
(Editor's postscript: It should be noted that after following this situation for almost a year, and reviewing over two inches worth of documents, both Mr. Flaherty and Dr. Eckard were sent interview questions. Mr. Flaherty responded; Dr. Eckard did not.)
Exposing Dr. Eckard
Dear Editor:
How apropos that Leander Eckard is being exposed. I have sat on boards with Mr. Flaherty in the past and find him to be of sound mind and good character. While Dr. Eckard gives a great adjustment (albeit nonspecific) and has an endearing smile, he did sit on the Parker board that ousted Dr. Jim Parker as president of Parker College, the beginning of a sad stage that ultimately killed him. I was told by Dr. Jim before he died that he felt Dr. Eckard instigated the entire coup.
Your article clearly illustrates that apparent greed has gotten the best of Dr. Eckard in his attempt to copy what he previously sold his rights to. I hope he gets his just rewards and gets squashed like a bug on a windshield. (It would take an 18-wheeler, I'm afraid.)
Glenn Fischel, DC
Los Angeles, California
Well Done, United Kingdom
Dear Editor:
In his article on chiropractic education in the August 10, 1998 issue, Dr. Joseph Morley stated:
"The rancor that existed between medicine and chiropractic in the U.S.A. does not seem to exist here in the U.K. Relations and cooperation between the two professions seem to be much better in the U.K. than in the U.S.A. In my opinion, this is due to the excellent work of the BCA in promoting interprofessional cooperation at the practice level and at the scientific/research level. In American terms, the U.K. has a wide scope of practice that could easily be abused. Fortunately, the BCA's chiropractors are professionally and politically mature and responsible, so the unscientific extremists in our profession do not have much influence in the U.K., nor are they as likely to have."
I remain hopeful that the American system will yet develop a sense of the scientific/research orientation which will lead to a similar unity without conformity that apparently exists in the U.K.
Thank you, Dr. Morley.
R. Vincent Davis, DC, PT, DNBPM
Independence, Missouri
A World of Gray
Dear Editor:
I am writing a summary of a letter that I am sending to Dr. John McDaniel that I want to share with DC. I never thought I could be provoked enough that I would feel it absolutely necessary to write a letter to the editor, but Dr. John McDaniel has changed that belief. My first impulse was to give him a world-class tongue lashing, but this would not help anyone.
I think that if we ask the right questions, we may be able to get the right answers. Doctor, have you recently taken the 100 hour basic course work for applied kinesiology? If you haven't I would highly suggest that you do so before rendering such a strong opinion about the technique. If you have recently taken the course, I believe you may have missed one of the most important aspects of the course.
Applied kinesiology attempts to help people with their functional problems. I say attempt because in dealing with health care, there are not any absolutes. These functional problems are not frank pathologies, but cause people to express less than their full genetic potential. These functional problems decrease the quality of life for the people that suffer from them. Some of the more common systemic conditions successfully treated with AK procedures include relative hypoadrenia, blood sugar handling stress and diaphragmatic hernia. AK doctors attempt to help people with the functional disorders by examining the chemical, structural and emotional status of that person. It is important to understand that functional problems are difficult to detect using the available conventional diagnostic measures. Is an MRI always correct? Are diagnoses always correct?
What chiropractic techniques do you use in your office? There are many great chiropractic techniques that have helped millions of people live brighter lives, but I challenge you to throw your technique into the ring to see if it has any weaknesses. Like Dr. Mally says at his CTS seminars, "Techniques don't fail; doctors using the techniques fail."
Are you a clinician or a scientist? Clinicians use science to help them make decisions that will hopefully benefit the patient. If you read Dr. Walther's text Applied Kinesiology Synopsis, I believe you will see that there is sound clinical reasoning behind many of the AK procedures. If you want to work with things that are reliable and repeatable, I would suggest you work with lawnmower engines, not people.
In closing, I ask one more question. Do you see many basketball players that can reliably repeat what Michael Jordan does on the basketball court? Should his baskets count less because of the way he makes them? When Dr. Goodheart does something I have difficulty repeating, I don't blame it on AK. Do you think you or anyone else should?
Eric Chandley, DC
Laurinburg, North Carolina