Multidisciplinary Care: Great Opportunities Are Out There
Dear Editor:
I read with great interest the article about a new doctor beginning in a hospital. This is a great opportunity for him and for chiropractic.
I have experiences that many DCs simply do not know exist. I am fully integrated and supported by my group (of course, I fully support them as well). Most MDs are totally fine with chiropractic once they understand what it is that I do. Almost 90 percent of my patients have never been to a chiropractor and 100 percent are referred by my partners (ortho, spine surgery, pain management, primary care, OB/GYN, etc.). This is a great way to reach a new and untapped market. I share responsibilities with pain management and orthopedic spine surgery, as we see each other's patients. I enjoy full autonomy (just as any other physician would) and am free to decide how I will build/maintain my practice.
The point I am making is that more DCs need to know this model of care exists. There could be a great opportunity waiting for someone. Maybe there should be a series regarding this type of practice setting to help get others interested and spread the news.
Scott Seidel, DC
Houston, Texas
National Chiropractic Unity: All Too Similar to American Politics?
Dear Editor:
I wanted to comment on your latest editorial regarding unity in our profession ["Avoiding the Mistakes Our Fathers (and Mothers) Made," Aug. 12 issue]. Having observed this issue from the trenches for the past 35 years of practice, I'd have to say, "Right on!" It seems our situation in chiropractic mirrors what is going on in the country as a whole - politically, that is. Two sides that can't seem to compromise, leading to gridlock and nothing ever getting accomplished.
Dynamic Chiropractic has always fairly presented both sides of an issue, something I have to admit seems to be lacking from the competition. I can just picture some of the spirited debates we would see at a national unity convention - the end result could only be positive for the profession.
Richard A. Del Balso, DC
Auburn, Calif.
What's Wrong With a Water Pik?
Dear Editor:
I enjoyed Dr. Douglas Briggs' column, "Critical Thinking: Be Careful of What You Endorse and Promote" (July 1, 2011), in which he cautions chiropractors to use our critical-thinking skills to evaluate the treatments we choose. However, as an example of a treatment Briggs seems to think would not pass the critical-thinking test, he tells us that he uses and recommends a neti pot for nasal irrigation, and then points to a patient's question about using a water-pik device for the same purpose, stating:"Aggressively forcing water up your nose is not going to clean the sinuses, and can potentially cause more tissue damage. I think this is an excellent example of 'just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.'"
There actually is a sound rationale for using a water pik for nasal and sinus irrigation. As a longtime sinus sufferer, and having eventually undergone successful sinus surgery and septoplasty, I have used both a neti pot and a water pik with a nasal tip attachment. The water pik is set at the lowest level, and the pulsating action of the water stimulates the motion of the ciliary cells lining the mucus membranes of the nose and sinuses, which may have ceased their activity while inflamed; and encourages them to resume sweeping debris from the sinus tract. Additionally, the pulsations help to dislodge mucus from the nasal and sinus tract. I have used the water pik many times and it has almost always helped successfully avoid infection and having to use antibiotics; which most chiropractors would probably agree is a good thing.
So, I thank Dr. Briggs for his article, but encourage him to recommend a water pik as well as a neti pot in cases of sinusitis.
Shimon Metz, DC
Cedarhurst, N.Y.
Editor's Note: The following letter to the editor is directed to DC columnist Dr. Warren Hammer, who authored "It's the Fascia, Stupid" in the July 1, 2011 issue.
Focus on the Fascia: Thanks for the Reminder
Dear Editor:
It is rare that I come across such a well-written and comprehensive article / piece of literature in Dynamic Chiropractic. A lot of times the writeups not only fail to be applicable to the work I do day-to-day in my office , but also often appear to be out of touch with the average biomechanically focused DC.
Thank you for writing this article. My hope is that many readers of DC took the time to read your article as I did. I cut the article out, laminated it and have it as a reference in my own research, which is in the area of the golgi tendon organ. Currently, I am day to day in the trenches of private practice, making things happen for the masses with complicated, unresolved (medically managed) musculoskeletal dysfunction(s). Thank you reminding me that there are many chiros (and other practitioners) out there who share the same approach.
Rudy Gutierrez, DC, ART, CSCS, ATC
Walnut Creek, Calif.
Delivering Confident Care
Dear Editor:
Keep up the good work with your publications. The chiropractic profession needs good, solid information to hold its position in our health care system (if that's possible). Many DCs have gotten behind the 8-ball with taking insurance assignment, only to find that the money is not there for them to thrive on. Many patients and insurance companies appear to be "not credit worthy" these days, so why are docs risking their paychecks on them? Because many are not confident in their abilities to be their doctor, so they think, "if I let them charge it, they will follow my recommendations better"?
Not so, in my opinion. I believe that value determined by the patient in health care delivery is based on the results they are expecting from the medical intervention, which the doctor must adequately understand (diagnosis), predict (prognosis) and deliver (treatment). If those three things aren't delivered by the provider, whether free or at great expense to the patient, they will not be satisfied - even if the doctor gets them better.
Steve Engen, DC
Kearney, Neb.
Dynamic Chiropractic encourages letters to the editor to discuss any issue relevant to the profession, including response to articles that appeared in a previous issue of the publication. All letters should be e-mailed to
with "Letter to the Editor" in the subject field. Please include your full name, degree(s), and the city and state in which you practice. Submission represents acknowledgement that your letter may appear in a future issue of DC, but does not guarantee publication. We receive considerable correspondence and endeavor to publish as many perspectives as possible.