Should Chiropractic "medicine" be covered by a universal healthcare?

[nick1985]

lol, nick is back, too!

😀

Just in time to bash snake-oil chiros. The planets have aligned.

 

[zinfamous]

you should head over to GA's returned-from-vacation members thread. and the MIKE's neckbeard thread.

...I'm sure you have opinions... :sneaky:

 

[shortylickens]

I think dentistry is more like real medicine. That should get priority over back cracking.

 

[zinfamous]

I think dentistry is more like real medicine. That should get priority over back cracking.

yeah. I was going to mention that while there is no no lack of quacks and charlatans in the field of dentistry, this doesn't invalidate the entire field.

But it is hard to compare the two. There is very real, very serious evidence to support consistent dental care, but not so much of chiropracty.

 

[eits]

Depends on what you're talking about. For low back pain at least, chiropractic manipulation has a statistically significant (though minor) effect on patients, on the level of physical therapy at about the same cost. In that case, I don't see a problem sending a patient to a chiropractor using taxpayer money.

Now if we're talking about treating PMS or ADD, then absolutely not, as there is no reputable scientific evidence that chiropractic manipulation improves these conditions or many others that chiropractors claim.

i agree. there's not much research to support chiropractic care can help things other than joint and back pain and, to a lesser extent, joint health and arthritis prevention. treating pms and add is primarily anecdotal... there's not enough good research on it yet. until there is, chiropractic care for anything other than joint pain, headaches, etc shouldn't be covered by universal healthcare, in my opinion. personally, i believe it can treat add and pms in many cases, but i wouldn't want taxpayers paying for something just because i believe it can help... i'd rather there be enough science to back it up for more people to be comfortable with it.

the problem i see with healthcare in this country is that it's not really healthcare. it's sick care. if it were healthcare, we'd focus on things that make us healthy and keep us healthy. prescribing medications left and right for things and allowing patients to continue living their unhealthy lifestyles is not going to improve health. until we tackle health, prevention, and wellness, we're not going to tackle the healthcare problem in this country.

hell, i think massage therapy and nutritionists should be covered under universal healthcare... i think a gym membership should be covered under universal healthcare. i think denists should be covered by universal healthcare (poor dental hygiene is linked to heart disease). that would greatly decrease how many people see medical doctors for prescriptions and how little time medical doctors have with their patients to devote adequate service to their patients.

so, ultimately, yes, i believe chiropractic care should be covered under universal healthcare, but it should be limited to pain and joint health until a lot more research can show that it's helpful in treating other things, for example pms and add.

 

[eits]

yeah. I was going to mention that while there is no no lack of quacks and charlatans in the field of dentistry, this doesn't invalidate the entire field.

But it is hard to compare the two. There is very real, very serious evidence to support consistent dental care, but not so much of chiropracty.

it's all about prevention of decay and degeneration and promoting health. they both do it, except that one does it with teeth and gums, the other does it with joints of the body.

 

[shortylickens]

Also, we need prostate massage covered.

 

[eits]

Chiros have successfully convinced people that what they do works by performing REAL medical treatments (physical therapy) alongside their bullshit. Just look at how many people (suckers/idiots) in this thread say, "well a chiro fixed my back, so chiro works!1". Newsflash, dipshit: your back was fixed with physical therapy, not chiropractic. Chiropractic DOESN'T work. The science is in, it's conclusive. Stop being stupid.

i see a merge between chiropractic and physical therapy doctors in the not too distant future and i'm completely ok with that. however, the two are separate, yet when combined work better than one or the other alone.

it's kinda like looking through the viewfinder of a microscope and trying to only use a course tuning knob or a fine tuning knob to get the perfect view. it's hard to do and takes more time and sometimes doesn't happen... however, if you use both, you can achieve the goal you're trying to accomplish quicker.

 

[Pliablemoose]

If the government were to offer universal health care, should it include chiropractic "medicine" in the coverage?

Personally I think it shouldn't, if it includes alternative "medicines" like chiropractic care, then it is incline to include things like homeopathy. If people want to waste money seeing a alternative "medicine" doctor they can, but not with tax payer money.

When "universal healthcare" finally happens in this country, regular healthcare will be rationed, there won't be $ for chiro. You'll be damn lucky to get any treatment.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

When "universal healthcare" finally happens in this country, regular healthcare will be rationed, there won't be $ for chiro. You'll be damn lucky to get any treatment.

Don't be silly. UHC will be a pancreas to us all 😛

 

[davmat787]

i see a merge between chiropractic and physical therapy doctors in the not too distant future and i'm completely ok with that. however, the two are separate, yet when combined work better than one or the other alone.

I'm not positive, but isn't the combination you have above essentially what a D.O. (Osteopathic Doctor) is? I know they are full Doctors and can prescribe medications, but they also perform manipulations and physical therapy. Can you tell me what the differences are, from perhaps a philosophical stantpoint, between the kind of moves you perform and those of a D.O.?

Thanks.

 

[zinfamous]

it's all about prevention of decay and degeneration and promoting health. they both do it, except that one does it with teeth and gums, the other does it with joints of the body.

dental hygiene isn't simply about decay. It's about preventing serious issues like staph infection, which have been shown to infect quite frequently through the gums.

In fact, a certain percentage of infarcts (heart attack), have been shown to originate from infections due to poor dental hygiene. sounds crazy, but it's true.

 

[spacelord]

Definitely not coverage for Chiropractic. I don't buy into it. Its a money pit for 90% of the cases... people just think they need to go. I might agree that it may actually help SOME people, just not a majority of those that use it. yeah, it may feel good at the time.. but not worth the money in my opinion.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

dental hygiene isn't simply about decay. It's about preventing serious issues like staph infection, which have been shown to infect quite frequently through the gums.

In fact, a certain percentage of infarcts (heart attack), have been shown to originate from infections due to poor dental hygiene. sounds crazy, but it's true.

Hell of a lot more than that. One of the greatest underlying threats to health is chronic inflammation. The literature is full of nasty tales of what that can bring about.

 

[Paladin3]

Depends on what you're talking about. For low back pain at least, chiropractic manipulation has a statistically significant (though minor) effect on patients, on the level of physical therapy at about the same cost. In that case, I don't see a problem sending a patient to a chiropractor using taxpayer money.

Now if we're talking about treating PMS or ADD, then absolutely not, as there is no reputable scientific evidence that chiropractic manipulation improves these conditions or many others that chiropractors claim.

I agree, but when you have a "profession" that won't even police itself, what chance to the ever have of becoming legit and mainstream enough for public funding? Even the good chiropractors often stick to a code of silence regarding the wacky ones claiming to cure cancer with a minor adjustment.

Edit: and an important point to make is that chiropractic medicine in and of itself doesn't harm. It's when any alternative medicine is used in exclusion of better, scientifically tested and proven treatment that the harm is done.

So we need to ask ourselves if paying someone to treat a serious illness with voodoo medicine is economically viable when it probably won't work. Chiropractic should be funded only for those health issues where mainstream science has proven it is beneficial.

 

[Whisper]

the problem i see with healthcare in this country is that it's not really healthcare. it's sick care. if it were healthcare, we'd focus on things that make us healthy and keep us healthy. prescribing medications left and right for things and allowing patients to continue living their unhealthy lifestyles is not going to improve health. until we tackle health, prevention, and wellness, we're not going to tackle the healthcare problem in this country.

hell, i think massage therapy and nutritionists should be covered under universal healthcare... i think a gym membership should be covered under universal healthcare. i think denists should be covered by universal healthcare (poor dental hygiene is linked to heart disease). that would greatly decrease how many people see medical doctors for prescriptions and how little time medical doctors have with their patients to devote adequate service to their patients.

I heavily agree with this. I believe it's part of the reason that mental health coverage has been beefed up over the years, but there still isn't nearly enough emphasis placed on preventive methods and general health maintenance. Beyond that, there also needs to be more effort placed on educating individuals on how to properly utilize the healthcare system as it exists (e.g., don't treat the ER like it's your primary care physician).

As for chiropractic treatment having much influence on ADHD, I'm heavily skeptical of this, especially given that so little consensus can be reached regarding various aspects of the condition by psychologists and psychiatrists, who've been researching it for the past 100 years. Not to say that you need to understand why or how a treatment works in order for it to actually have an effect (look at pretty much all psychopharmacological medications), but when there are still issues in terms of diagnosis itself, it's hard to determine what it is that you're actually treating.

 

[Nik]

Physical therapy, yes.

A glorified massage? No.

 

[0roo0roo]

 

[mmntech]

I'd say the vast majority of visits to a chiropractor are unnecessary. Some proceedures can actually do more harm than good. Theres a lot of dubious claims about the benfits. Ontario doesn't cover it. Nor do they cover dental or eye exams, or any other "therapeutic" medicine. If you want it, you've gotta pay. That's why you still need health insurance. Universal healthcare only covers surgery, diagnostics, and visits to your GP. Drugs and everything else are extra and require separate insurance over and above the government mandated plan.

 

[eits]

dental hygiene isn't simply about decay. It's about preventing serious issues like staph infection, which have been shown to infect quite frequently through the gums.

In fact, a certain percentage of infarcts (heart attack), have been shown to originate from infections due to poor dental hygiene. sounds crazy, but it's true.

True. I believe k already touched on that in a previous post I made in this thread. However, that's a relatively new discovery. Dentistry has always been about hygiene and preventing tooth and gum decay.

 

[eits]

Hell of a lot more than that. One of the greatest underlying threats to health is chronic inflammation. The literature is full of nasty tales of what that can bring about.

Yup

 

[eits]

Too many good questions and comments for me to give my attention to on my smartphone. I will respond when I get back to my computer.

 

[davmat787]

Too many good questions and comments for me to give my attention to on my smartphone. I will respond when I get back to my computer.

Thx, would like to get your opinion on differences between chiro and D.O's as I asked in a previous post in this thread if you want and have time later.

 

[MovingTarget]

I'd say yes, as I have had to visit a Chiro after an car accident a few years back. The regular doc proscribed muscle relaxers to help with the pain/stiffness/discomfort, but they didn't help. I wasn't even able to get a full night's rest for quite a while because of it. One trip to the chiropractor was all it took to get me back on my feet.

Thats just my personal experience. I also have relatives with issues like ruptured discs or pinched nerves. Aside from chiropractic, their only option is major invasive surgery which oftentimes causes more problems than it fixes. Back pain is nothing to mess around with...it can be incredibly debilitating. Chiropractic is invaluable for treating many of these types of issues.

 

[Bateluer]

I have something meaningful to add to this now. I've been seeing a chiropractor to maintain a healthy back and try resolve some of the inflammation and inflexibility I have. Its been beneficial, I think.

My insurance company began working with a firm specifically with chiropractic care. It seems like a layer of paperwork to me, but its mainly designed to eliminate patients from seeing chiropractors entirely. My chiropractor's office sends paperwork to my insurance company, who forwards it to the partner firm, who mails me requests for more information about the nature of my treatment, etc. Information that needs to be sent to them with signatures from my chiropractor. They then forward the paperwork back to the insurance company, who 'reviews' and approves it, then forwards it back to the partner firm, with a check payable to me. So, I get a check in the mail from the partner firm with the markings of the insurance company on it, with no documentation on what I'm supposed to do with it. Since I've been paying a large chunk of this treatment out of my pocket, I at first thought it might have been a reimbursement check. However, it is not. Its supposed to go to the chiropractor's office. If you cash the check yourself, then the chiropractor doesn't get paid and the insurance company can simply say 'We sent payment' and wipe their hands of it, also, they begin denying claims then because since you didn't pay the check to the chiropractor's office, you're obviously committing fraud and not getting any meaningful treatment.

Interesting, isn't it.