Chiropractic & Atheism

[Fidel_Castronaut]

To answer the OP: Yes. Chiropractic techniques are known to be used to successfully treat certain back problems and joint pains. .

Is it, though?

I'm not critiquing the view, but I wonder if there is any hard evidence to back that up? Like I said, most studies that I've come across register either "no" or "inconclusive".

I'd recommend the http://www.chirobase.org site for a wealth of information on it (from both pro- and skeptics like).

[Minimalist]

I've always considered chiropractic mere quackery but my dad went to one every month before he died and the placebo effect was obvious...even if the very next day his back hurt just as bad as ever. But, WTH, insurance paid for it and it was an excuse to get him out of the assisted living facility and take him to lunch.

[Angrboda]

Well, we could debate the evidence for and against the validity of it until the cows come home. A few things from this and other threads (not trying to derail, honest).

First, there's a demarcation problem. There is no clear way to define what does and does not qualify as good science, or alternately, what qualifies as bad science or pseudoscience. So there's no 10 step process that a person can use to give the thumbs up or the thumbs down. And it can take a lot of expertise and knowledge (and experienced judgement) to come to a reliable conclusion about this or that particular "science." Pseudoscience really pisses me off, but I'm a lot more tolerant of somebody believing in bad science or medical claims, than I perhaps am when people buy into bad religious arguments. Should I treat them differently? There are powerful market and psychological forces conspiring to get people to buy both, so why am I more willing to give being taken in by pseudoscience a pass when I wouldn't be as accepting of religious claims?

It brings to mind a related question that I've been asking myself over the past few days (and whateverist has made some good stabs in.... I believe his "why do we need a case" thread). The question is what motivates the intense debates such as occur between atheists and theists. I'm sure some are sincerely trying to change minds, but I don't think that is what really drives these encounters. I generally go to psychology and evolutionary psychology to explain human behavior, and likewise, I'm trying to place this in that framework. People debate someone like "Muslim Scholar" ad nauseum, with great fervor, and yet, it's clear that the people debating him know he's not competent enough to have a substantive discussion, and his views are not going to change. But having been there, I know the emotions generated are at odds with the simple knowledge of the futility of the exercise. So my question has become, why do we do it — not what is our immediate motivation, but what is the evolutionary story that underlies that response? (Or other explanation.) The best I've been able to come up with so far is that demonstrating our superiority and vanquishing foes is a part of the competitive drive that has evolved to separate desirable mates from less desirable ones; we compete because sex and reproduction is, in effect, on the line. I'm not sure I find this explanation all that fulfilling.

(Addendum: Are there particular features about, say, bad religion, which are more emotionally provocative than those about bad medicine? Are the evolutionary consequences of reacting to one more vital than reacting to the other?)

[NoraBrimstone]

Oh come on, it's bollocks. Like Acupuncture and bloody cupping, or whatever it's called. So what if it van have a placebo effect? Chiropractors are still ripping people off. Plus it can do harm. My Grandfather went to one years ago with problems with his hip. He thought it was great, they fixed the issue fine. Except it just felt fine; now, years later, whatever the fuck they did is causing problems and his doctor is pissed off at him for going to a Chiropractor in the first place.

[KichigaiNeko]

Quite clearly .... much more work needs to be done in the area of the physiology of the human body

[thesummerqueen]

Minor note - last I heard, at least in the US - chiropractors didn't need a proper license, while physical therapists did. That alone to me, even if the chiro isn't one who ascribes to woo, is a reason just to go to the physical therapist instead.

[KichigaiNeko]

Sorry, but here in Australia. Chiropractors, Physiotherapists and Osteopaths need a licence and suffer rigorous testing/ training and ongoing skill development.

yeah we're kinda weird here

---

Mind you, i would rather someone who has an in-depth knowledge of the mechanics of the human skeletal-muscular system to treat me for a minor "adjustment" than say a cardiologist who has no knowledge of the said system.

Essentially I think I comes down to the "customer/ patient" to take guidance from his General practitioner as to just what is an appropriate course of treatment for any given condition.

[NoraBrimstone]

Is it true that Midwives are banned in most of the USA? lol

[thesummerqueen]

Hadn't heard - I thought some of my friends used one, so if they are I don't think that's true in NC. I'd look it up but I'm about to get the mail.

[KichigaiNeko]

Midwifery here is part of a nursing degree.