Chiropracters and damaged backs…

I think we’re at angry dolphins.

I’m not sure what conclusions I’m supposed to draw from the cancer anecdote, is what I’m saying. Unless you mean she’s claiming credit for something that perhaps she shouldn’t be.

Been to chiropractors, physios and had good and bad massages.

Id say avoid the chiro, for me it cost a lot and didnt seem to help any more than the problem would go away anyway in the time span of the treatment. The initial evaluation seemed highly bogus to me as well.

The physios I have had were less than half the cost and took a much more wholistic approach to healing the injury…. exersises, stretching, heat treatments and so on. As well as working out why it happened in the first place. Combine that with a descent massage to get the trigger points out of your muscles.

Only imo.

The physios I have had were less than half the cost and took a much more wholistic approach to healing the injury…. exersises, stretching, heat treatments and so on. As well as working out why it happened in the first place. Combine that with a descent massage to get the trigger points out of your muscles.

sounds very like an osteopath, or the ones I have visited anyway.

I’m not sure what conclusions I’m supposed to draw from the cancer anecdote, is what I’m saying. Unless you mean she’s claiming credit for something that perhaps she shouldn’t be

she was chuffed, that’s it.

… ok then.

@Turnerguy

Maybe that was their background, was a while back so can’t remember, but both were marketing themselves as physios.

I have used a chiropractor, but wouldn’t go back to a again. Lots of manipulation of my back and no relief whatsoever.

Don’t have any experience of osteopath, so can’t comment.

Physios in the UK (certainly working in the NHS) go through 4 years of formal training, including assessed regular practical placements. Once qualified they generally are very proactive with in-service training sessions, and research of the latest techniques/treatments.
Also physios tend to specialise in one area of treatment (Sports injury, cardiac rehab, etc). Also from my experience physios tend to try to fix the problem, rather than the symptoms.

Disclaimer – Wife is a physio, but does not treat my injuries as it’s not her area of expertise.

Maybe that was their background, was a while back so can’t remember, but both were marketing themselves as physios.

I think a physio can study manipulation to the same(ish) level as an osteopath – I think the distinction between them can become blurred at that level.

Physios in the UK (certainly working in the NHS) go through 4 years of formal training

So do Chiropractors and Osteopaths. That in and of itself doesn’t prove anything. The difference though is that Physiotherapists are learning treatments based in biology and science, rather than vitalism and nonsense.

I live next door to a chiro place. The couple who run it are both chiros. I have had a bad back on and off for years, they sorted it. My missus works in health regulation, and knows just how shonky many chiros and osteopaths can be, so I went into the treatment with my eyes open, and asked both about the dodginess. They were completely upfront, explained they don’t do all the odd energy centre stuff, but operate on medical principles.
Anyway, went there 3 times, and they sorted out my back, and a dodgy shoulder I’d had for about 3 years.
There may be shysters, I may be a amazingly prone to placebo effects, but it worked for me.
To be clear, I’m trying to suggest that a good chiro can help, I’m not saying all chiros are legit.

Physios in the UK (certainly working in the NHS) go through 4 years of formal training,

I think here is the difference as osteopaths spend 4 years concentrating more on manipulations and maybe massage, whereas physios spend 4 years studying physiotherapy, which doesn’t necessarily cover manipulations to anywhere near the same depth.

Good practitioners then seem to then be passionate about learning more about their subject and so their knowledge and skills bases might then start to converge.

Another anecdote to be criticized :

The ‘shoulder specialist’ specialist physio I went to for my original rotator cuff problem under Bupa provided me no relief and actually sent me back to the doctor. The osteopath helped me a lot with percussive massage etc, and then I finally fixed it with lots of swimming in the Maldives.

They were completely upfront, explained they don’t do all the odd energy centre stuff, but operate on medical principles.

So what do they do then?

We’ve had a couple of these threads before, with actual Chiropractors on them, and neither were able to answer that. “Mixer” Chiropractic mixes classical woo to a greater or lesser extent with other disciplines such as physiotherapy, heat treatments, a nice cup of tea and a chat, and suchlike. But then what you’ve got there isn’t really Chiropractic, it’s Something Else trading under the umbrella of an established profession.

You know, I think I’d have a lot more time for the profession if they formally distanced themselves from all the Naturopathy nonsense and called themselves “Lumbarologists” or something instead.

Further reading:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/doctors-sports-physios-chiropractors-experienced-knowledgable-types

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/any-chiropractors-in-the-house

*reported*

*reported*

for what ?

The spam post that was deleted.

Osteo joke

Q How do you tell a chiro from an osteo?
A The chiro is the one driving the porsche.

In essence a chiro will adjust but not treat cause, an osteo will usually carry out soft tissue work first and then manipulate thus you get the release but also massage and soft tissue relief. The problem with just manipulation is that unless the problem is treated and corrected the symptom comes straight back (badoom tish). I prefer an osteo or physio who finishes up with some manipulation.

However sometimes all you need is a little release/mobilisation and that in itself solves the problem.

I have nothing further to add, so here’s a totally unrelated picture.

Thanks.

Both chiropractic and osteopathic treatments are completely bogus. All evidence confirms this. Go if you want to risk injury or even death, and piddle your money away on nothing more effective than cracking your knuckles. Physio if you need to get better.
One small problem: the alternative medicine brigade have infected physiotherapy as well, so be very careful your physio isn’t offering any magical cures like acupuncture, also, comically bogus.
Oh, and just to help with a point from earlier, chiropractors aren’t allowed to call themselves doctors in the UK.

All evidence confirms this

the real problem with osteopathy and acupuncture is that is extremely hard to structure any sort of trial that might satisfy the nah-sayers, as performing placebo manipulations or needle-stabbings is impossible.

As has been pointed out on this forum, physiotherapist study can include the same type of manipulations that osteopaths do, so why would they do that if they were ineffective ?

The problem area is as SixFootTwo pointed out, Chiropractors try to keep you in a never ending, or extended, course of treatment.

Alternative medicine woo

The evidence that acupuncture and chiro/osteo stuff is ineffectual is massive. There have been many hundreds of trials, very few of worth, any
considered good enough to review as meta analysis have shown no effect, none, zero, zilch.
Don’t listen to people who invoke special pleading and pretend they can’t perform under trial conditions.
Physios really shouldn’t be going near manipulations…..:

Spinal manipulation for back pain: who does it best – chiros, physios or osteos?

I have seen an Osteopath who treats pro footballers. He is a genius, fixing myself and a number of other people from work in a couple of sessions each. One chap from work went to see him and was told go to hospital, do not pass go, do not collect £200….

I have also seen 2 NHS physios, a private physio and a chiropractor. None of them were fit to polish his boots 😆 The Chiro was suprisingly not the worst of the four….

I have pulled a muscle in my lower back a few times & have a bit of walking/gait wokiness.
Initial 2 osteo appts. were very helpful & improved the pain & mobility a lot, but the following 4 sessions made no difference.
The Chiro i’ve been to lately following a recurrence of the problem pushed me round a bit and it’s helped a lot. He also concentrates on fixing some fairly obvious (to the touch) soft tissue damage we think I have that contributes to my wokiness.
The Chiro has also given me lots of exercise stretches to help whereas osteo only some basic things to do outside treatment.
So, as in many things in life you get good & bad…

I would say that you shouldn’t be convinced it’s a ruptured disc without having an MRI of the affected area – it may just be a knackered muscle (unless there’s an obvious bulge that is!).

pretend they can’t perform under trial conditions.

so how can you perform a trial where one group are receiving actual manipulations whereas the other group are receiving placebo manipulations ?

Obviously there is the fact that you are being treated by someone, which normally helps recovery – witness why homeopathy can work.

But if it doesn’t work then they are powerful manipulators of the placebo effect judging by the number of times people go to an osteo in big pain and come out ‘fixed’.

The Chiro has also given me lots of exercise stretches to help whereas osteo only some basic things to do outside treatment.

So because the Chiro gave you more exercises to do than the Osteo, that means the Chiro is better, how?

Maybe the Osteo doesn’t think you need extra exercises and given they are supported by research and actual physiology rather than made-up practices I’d be more inclined to go with the Osteo.