Dear Editor:
It is a pleasure to read Dynamic Chiropractic and to understand that the editor is truly motivated by the chiropractic principle.
For some months, I have read your editorials and your readers' letters regarding membership in the various chiropractic professional organizations: some pro, some con. I can tell you that the input is helpful and is the subject of several board of director meetings.
Naturally, we would prefer that all doctors of chiropractic join the professional association of their choice and actively participate in the future of chiropractic. Unfortunately, most do not. Of the over 10,000 active licencees in California, only a small percentage join any organization. You have chronicled this very accurately and eloquently in several issues of Dynamic Chiropractic.
I would like to invite all doctors of chiropractic to join some organized and active group to further the chiropractic profession and principle. However, if he or she just cannot join one of the organizations for whatever reason, there is still a way to help the profession through the important venue of legislation. This program is called "Legislative District Director." To participate in this program, all you have to do is call (800) 275-3515 and speak to Executive Director Eric Banta. All that is expected is to tell your patients about chiropractic, and occasionally sign, stamp and mail one or two letters to your respective legislature. You don't have to pay anything or even write the letters. If 10,000 letters arrive in Sacramento anytime any bill regarding chiropractic comes up, think what that could do for chiropractic and to all of our practices. Talk about practice building.
No more excuses. Let's get busy.
Robert Johnston,DC
Vice President
International Chiropractors
Association of California
Sacramento, California
www.icacweb.com
"a glaring error"
Dear Editor:
Your coverage of the American Chiropractic Association's recent House of Delegates (HOD) meeting contained a glaring error. The HOD ratified a new policy statement on spinal manipulation/adjustment, not "spinal manipulation/mobilization," as mentioned in your article. The combination term "spinal manipulation/adjustment" is used throughout the policy to stake claim on a procedure that is referred to in the health care arena as "spinal manipulation," but is known to the chiropractic profession as "adjustment."
The new policy statement on spinal manipulation/adjustment was drafted by a team of ACA leaders, well-known chiropractic researchers and educators to "protect the art as uniquely chiropractic."
"As interest grows in spinal manipulation by other provider disciplines," the team wrote in a cover memo to the policy statement, "we feel a duty to advance a credible policy statement regarding the education, skill and quality performance standards necessary to safely perform chiropractic spinal manipulation/adjustment . . . The research evidence supports chiropractic spinal manipulation/adjustment as being effective, cost-effective and quality-driven. High patient satisfaction levels already tell the story: the best educated, trained and skilled clinician for performing spinal manipulation is the doctor of chiropractic."
The polict statement includes sections dealing with the definition of manipulation and mobilization, clinical education standards, a risk benefit analysis and the science and "art" of spinal manipulation. Also included in the policy statement are recommendations to develop a research program to enhance future studies of chiropractic spinal manipulation/adjustment, to create medical profession awareness about the benefits of early, integrated chiropractic care to restore and maintain spinal health and to disseminate this important safety and quality information to consumers, policymakers and payers.
Garrett Cuneo
Executive Vice President
American Chiropractic Association
Editor's note: A correction on the ACA's policy statement was made on the front page of the Oct. 18th issue of DC.
"My profession ... left to bleed."
Dear Editor:
This is a response to your question put to the profession: "Who are you and what do you want?" I have the vantage point of having watched chiropractic evolve since my graduation from chiropractic school in 1968. I have also been in full-time practice all the while and feel qualified to respond to your question.
What I have seen in recent years is chiropractic leadership competing so strenuously that my profession is pried open and in many cases left to bleed by the loss of focus of our national, state and local leaders. The lip service given to solidarity and unity is disheartening.
We have also recently been subjected to a new and in many cases more dangerous adversary: chiropractors hurting other chiropractors. We have watched the evolution of chiropractic IMEs, those hired guns of the insurance industry. These unscrupulous entities take the information chiropractors submit as the rationale for the patients' need for care and ultimately conclude that the patients have reached their maximum benefits. Who is fooling whom? They would never have been able to perpetuate this immoral and unethical practice if our leadership had stayed together and protected the profession.
We now have a new brand of wolf at our doors: chiropractic insurance companies, chiropractic HMOs, and PPOs owned by chiropractors. These powerful organizations are using their strength for the bottom line, often at the expense of chiropractors and our profession.
Our leadership has allowed the beauty of our scope of practice to be revamped and perverted by these enemies. The unencumbered ability to identify and correct spinal subluxations has been changed by the collusion of insurance companies lobbying legislators and chiropractors and their business ambitions hurting other chiropractors.
What I want is very simple. I want our leadership to realize that while they're fighting windmills and each other, an unscrupulous cancer has driven a truck through the hole they were entrusted to protect. We are at war and should act accordingly.
I cannot speak for the majority of my profession, but I am certain they are, as I am, tired of the circular firing squad our profession has elaborately allowed to develop while diligently keeping an eye on each other.
Richard Gill,DC
Jersey City, New Jersey