Current Events > Youtube Chriopractors have interesting thumbnails

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://youtu.be/5aABxNwK5lg

I guess a quarter of a million people are really interested in Chiropractic care.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci3zuPIwKWo

For some reason the comments are turned off on that video...

Pseudoscience grifters using cheap attention-grabbers? Color me shocked

Hayame Zero posted...

Pseudoscience grifters using cheap attention-grabbers? Color me shocked

But... a friend of mine swears by chiropractory and says it helped him immensely!?

It gets views man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75iOaMW-pTE&ab_channel=TripleLRusticDesigns

I still don't know if Chiropractors are legit or not. I'm like 50/50 on it.

It's clickbait.

Hot girls. Close up of weird faces etc.

Doesn't matter what the video is about. Those tits are garanteed to get some guys to click on the video

Same reason GTA always puts random half naked sexy chicks on their covers and artwork despite having like 3 female characters of note across the entire franchise

Sheiky-Baby posted...

I still don't know if Chiropractors are legit or not. I'm like 50/50 on it.

They're not

Screw chiropractic

lol

saspa posted...

But... a friend of mine swears by chiropractory and says it helped him immensely!?

Yeah and there are people who tell you crystal healing works too.

It's when you ask for large, peer-reviewed and randomized studies that things fall apart.

There is only one good channel. Chiropractic Medicine. (Kind of an oxymoron)

Sheiky-Baby posted...

I still don't know if Chiropractors are legit or not. I'm like 50/50 on it.

It was invented by a magnet healer who learned about it from the ghost of a dead physician during a seance.

And the core tenet is that all disease is caused by the spinal cord being subluxed.

All disease.

So if you're still 50/50, go for it.

DarkRoast posted...

It was invented by a magnet healer who learned about it from the ghost of a dead physician during a seance.

And the core tenet is that all disease is caused by the spinal cord being subluxed.

All disease.

So if you're still 50/50, go for it.

The man who established classical mechanics, was also an alchemist and tried to create a Philosopher's Stone (a subject of which he wrote numerous works on, along with using numerology and the Temple of Solomon to predict the end of the world) -- and when his corpse was exhumed, he had so much mercury in his body that he had probably developed mercury poisoning in his later life, through this pursuit.

coolguyjimmy posted...

The man who established classical mechanics, was also an alchemist and tried to create a Philosopher's Stone (a subject of which he wrote numerous works on, along with using numerology and the Temple of Solomon to predict the end of the world) -- and when his corpse was exhumed, he had so much mercury in his body that he had probably developed mercury poisoning in his later life, through this pursuit.

He also developed calculus and physics specifically through empirical and inductive methods. In fact, that was quite literally the point he was trying to make.

As opposed to a magical dead man telling him something.

Is chiropractics the new quackery joenumbers is advocating?

Obviously the mystical aspects of chiropractors are bullshit, but so are the mystical aspects of yoga. I figure having someone help align your spine must have some value or else why would doctors do referrals to chiropractors? I'm actually curious. I've never been to a chiropractor

ThyCorndog posted...

Obviously the mystical aspects of chiropractors are bullshit, but so are the mystical aspects of yoga. I figure having someone help align your spine must have some value or else why would doctors do referrals to chiropractors? I'm actually curious. I've never been to a chiropractor

Because Chiropractors have successfully lied their way into being accepted as legitimate by skillfully dodging any attempts to empirically prove it.

DarkRoast posted...

Because Chiropractors have successfully lied their way into being accepted as legitimate by skillfully dodging any attempts to empirically prove it.

My dad couldn't get an MRI from his PCP until he had a chiropractor examine his back first. Weird

ThyCorndog posted...

My dad couldn't get an MRI from his PCP until he had a chiropractor examine his back first. Weird

That's not only ridiculous, you could almost argue that's malpractice. Chiropractors are not qualified legally to give that kind of clearance.

DarkRoast posted...

That's not only ridiculous, you could almost argue that's malpractice. Chiropractors are not qualified legally to give that kind of clearance.

I actually don't know what to say. I feel like I've stumbled on some kind of forbidden lore. Everyone I know with back problems have been referred to chiropractors by their doctors. Seems really strange to me that it's allowed to go on if chiropractic stuff is bullshit

ThyCorndog posted...

I actually don't know what to say. I feel like I've stumbled on some kind of forbidden lore. Everyone I know with back problems have been referred to chiropractors by their doctors. Seems really strange to me that it's allowed to go on if chiropractic stuff is bullshit

Part of the reason is because there was a homeopathic doctor who ran the FDA in the early days, and he basically exempted Homeopathy and Chiropractic from regulatory laws that require proof of efficacy.

Danish healthcare also gives subsidies to chiropractors and make no mention of their claims being dubious garbage on official government sites advertising it as a treatment option.

If you've never had back problems you can't really say chiropractors are a scam, It does help relieve the pain.

apocalyptic_4 posted...

If you've never had back problems you can't really say chiropractors are a scam, It does help relieve the pain.

It'd be great if that's all they did.

DarkRoast posted...

Yeah and there are people who tell you crystal healing works too.

It's when you ask for large, peer-reviewed and randomized studies that things fall apart.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2616395

Findings Of 26 eligible RCTs identified, 15 RCTs (1699 patients) provided moderate-quality evidence that SMT has a statistically significant association with improvements in pain (pooled mean improvement in the 100-mm visual analog pain scale, 9.95 [95% CI, 15.6 to 4.3]). Twelve RCTs (1381 patients) produced moderate-quality evidence that SMT has a statistically significant association with improvements in function (pooled mean effect size, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.71 to 0.07]). Heterogeneity was not explained by type of clinician performing SMT, type of manipulation, study quality, or whether SMT was given alone or as part of a package of therapies. No RCT reported any serious adverse event. Minor transient adverse events such as increased pain, muscle stiffness, and headache were reported 50% to 67% of the time in large case series of patients treated with SMT.

Also, DR, you as me to not talk to you, but that isn't really possible if you come into my topics and say things that aren't fully true.

It's a topic about silly thumbnails, do not turn it into some debate, particularly if you 1. Demand I never talk to you, and 2. Aren't willing to provide the full story.

I wouldn't throw the whole business under a bus, but yeah, because most of the science has not been proven, the field is an easy breeding ground for kon-artists. It's another subject were all the bad examples are more widely known than the good.

joe40001 posted...

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2616395

Findings Of 26 eligible RCTs identified, 15 RCTs (1699 patients) provided moderate-quality evidence that SMT has a statistically significant association with improvements in pain (pooled mean improvement in the 100-mm visual analog pain scale, 9.95 [95% CI, 15.6 to 4.3]). Twelve RCTs (1381 patients) produced moderate-quality evidence that SMT has a statistically significant association with improvements in function (pooled mean effect size, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.71 to 0.07]). Heterogeneity was not explained by type of clinician performing SMT, type of manipulation, study quality, or whether SMT was given alone or as part of a package of therapies. No RCT reported any serious adverse event. Minor transient adverse events such as increased pain, muscle stiffness, and headache were reported 50% to 67% of the time in large case series of patients treated with SMT.

I know you think that sounds impressive, but do you realize how extremely sad that is for an entire profession that has existed for almost 200 years to have 15 decent RCTs show modest evidence that it improves pain and function?

Do I think all chiropractors are bad? No. But I do think the regulatory bodies of Chiropractic turn a blind eye to very seriously dangerous quackery (which would normally results in loss of licensure for a physician). The few chiropractors that stand up to it are generally the only ones who receive any kind of punishment.

And those regulatory bodies actively promote chiropractors calling themselves primary Care providers, when they clearly have no training in non-chiropractic diagnostic medicine. Combined with a frank lack of medical knowledge, they have also been infused with a vitalistic view of Medicine that preaches avoidance of medical therapy whenever possible, and this either directly or indirectly injures patients, but due to the lack of legal repercussions, they are never held to account.

DarkRoast posted...

I know you think that sounds impressive, but do you realize how extremely sad that is for an entire profession that has existed for almost 200 years to have 15 decent RCTs show modest evidence that it improves pain and function?

Do I think all chiropractors are bad? No. But I do think the regulatory bodies of Chiropractic turn a blind eye to very seriously dangerous quackery (which would normally results in loss of licensure for a physician). The few chiropractors that stand up to it are generally the only ones who receive any kind of punishment.

There is less financial incentive to having Chiropractic care go through extensive double blind RCTs, and even so you are acknowledging 15 separate studies that show reduced pain and improved function.

If Chiropractic care was administered by big drug companies for a huge mark-up I'm sure they'd fund tons of studies to further show the efficacy, but because Chiropractic care is outside of mainstream medicine and is relatively inexpensive, it does not shock me that there isn't a lot of money in "Big-Chiro" to fund studies.

You and I agree that it mixes too easily with pseudo-science, and I think we both agree it should be evidence based. My only push back to you was your claim that it was comparable to crystal healing (it isn't, as far as I know there is 0 evidence to crystal healing) and that it "falls apart" when you look for large-scale peer reviewed studies (this is not true as I have shown).

So, that claim you made is false.

Look joe arguing for pseudoscience again, must be a day ending in Y

joe40001 posted...

There is less financial incentive to having Chiropractic care go through extensive double blind RCTs, and even so you are acknowledging 15 separate studies that show reduced pain and improved function.

If Chiropractic care was administered by big drug companies for a huge mark-up I'm sure they'd fund tons of studies to further show the efficacy, but because Chiropractic care is outside of mainstream medicine and is relatively inexpensive, it does not shock me that there isn't a lot of money in "Big-Chiro" to fund studies.

You and I agree that it mixes too easily with pseudo-science, and I think we both agree it should be evidence based. My only push back to you was your claim that it was comparable to crystal healing (it isn't, as far as I know there is 0 evidence to crystal healing) and that it "falls apart" when you look for large-scale peer reviewed studies (this is not true as I have shown).

So, that claim you made is false.

The lack of evidence of efficacy speaks for itself. It's not due to a lack of studies themselves. It's due to a lack of willingness for chiropractors to subject their practice to the rigors of evidence-based medicine. It's why they live in the land of testimonials, YouTube videos and supplements. Chiropractic has had 200 years prove that it works, and that the vertebral subluxation, which forms the centerpoint of all of their medical theories, actually exists in the manner that they believe. The last time Chiropractic subluxations were studied, the only conclusion was that Chiropractic has almost no standardized methodology for diagnosing a subluxation, and when Chiropractors were given X-Rays, none of them could agree on which contained such subluxations.

You seem to have convinced yourself that chiropractors exist solely to relieve back pain, but the reality is that chiropractic as a profession started playing pretend doctor about 100 years ago, and have only gotten worse in that time. And the real crime is that because there's no regulatory oversight of chiropractors, injuries such as vertebral artery dissection are never counted, because they aren't tracked.

Legitimate "chiropractors" are called physiotherapists. Until there's some kind of legal definition that means you actually need to have training in safe techniques that are proven to work, there's no point in using a chiropractor. "Some studies show it reduces back pain!". Good, then use those studies to make it a rigorous proven medical practice, instead of weird pretend doctor lore where they can pick and choose which techniques they like.

On topic though, yes. There's lots of weird massage and chiropractor videos on youtube. There's a whole slew of them where they specify the genders of the chiropractor/therapist and client for some god forsaken reason. I don't want to think about why they include that info.

DarkRoast posted...

It'd be great if that's all they did.

Tbh, I haven't been to one myself, but the one my mother goes to on occasion doesn't have that pseudo-science crap. She just helps re-align the spine and that's it.

3 words: vertebral artery dissection

FurryPhilosifer posted...

Legitimate "chiropractors" are called physiotherapists. Until there's some kind of legal definition that means you actually need to have training in safe techniques that are proven to work, there's no point in using a chiropractor. "Some studies show it reduces back pain!". Good, then use those studies to make it a rigorous proven medical practice, instead of weird pretend doctor lore where they can pick and choose which techniques they like.

On topic though, yes. There's lots of weird massage and chiropractor videos on youtube. There's a whole slew of them where they specify the genders of the chiropractor/therapist and client for some god forsaken reason. I don't want to think about why they include that info.

The problem is that chiropractors hide behind the belief that all they do is treat back pain, which has thus allowed them to avoid the scrutiny they deserve. In reality, a large percentage of them insist that they are at least as good as medical doctors for primary care issues, and most of them claim they're much better.

Chiropractors always helped me out, so I don't get the hate for them. I've had back pain completely eliminated after a month or so, so I guess it's personal experiences.

DarkRoast posted...

The lack of evidence of efficacy speaks for itself. It's not due to a lack of studies themselves.

This is purely a subjective claim. The studies that are there point to efficacy in pain relief and improved function. You attribute the lack of more studies to a lack of willingness for chiropractors to submit to studies, but who is going to fund these studies? And when has their been this big fully funded study that every chiropractor turned down? Also, if chiropractors refused to be studied why did you yourself acknowledge 15 separate RCTs studies of their efficacy?

They have been studied, it would be better if they were studied more and their practice was a bit more standardized, but there's no money in it.

Look, we get it. You really don't like chiropractors. That's fine, I'm not a stan of them either, they have their issues.

But like I just said though:
You and I agree that it mixes too easily with pseudo-science, and I think we both agree it should be evidence based. My only push back to you was your claim that it was comparable to crystal healing (it isn't, as far as I know there is 0 evidence to crystal healing) and that it "falls apart" when you look for large-scale peer reviewed studies (this is not true as I have shown).

So, that claim you made is false. It is not comparable to crystal healing, and there are studies.

My shoulders were heinously misaligned, had chronic shoulder and back problems. 2 weeks in chiropractics solved all that shit for me for the rest of my life. But the doctor wasn't like some guru shit. He had several PHDs and told me a bunch of practical exercises to help me keep alignment.

I don't really see how that would be pseudoscience tbh. But if they start using like herb messages and shit, I'd be a bit skeptical. But he used one of those zappy things and those things that are used to exercise backs. Worked wonders.