I'm on my phone ATM in he hospital so can't type a long message, I'm a 4th year Med student going into residency in a few months, you can message me if you want, I can throw in my 2 cents, I'll look tonight.

No offense, but that's automatically bullshit:





They do completely different things. I've worked with both before and I have seen incompetent physios and incompetent chiros, just as I have seen really great professionals in both fields. Professionals in a given field are not all created equal. When I say "they do completely different things" I just mean the chiros are stronger on all modalities when it comes to the spine. You could have said that an osteo is just as strong as a chiro relative to the spine, but they work at different ranges of leverage--the chiro is again much stronger.

step 1/2ck scores?

This post was edited by LolV on Mar 8 2017 02:12pm

you will never see a chiropractic residency that lasts 3-7 years
you cannot compare the two

chiros don't tend to add specialization to their existing specialization, so they wouldn't fit the model for long-term residency--nor do they see the range of conditions MDs do, nor do they have any likelihood of working in hospital settings

but chiros often extend their education quite a bit -- just not via residency

i don't get why so many people are convinced that MDs are the answer to every medical issue while at the same time claiming that chiros are buffoons

i've met several terrible MDs and several great chiros. it's not that i haven't also met several great MDs and several terrible chiros. i see them on equal footing in different occupations

Chiros deal with the spine.
MD's deal with everything, every issue, every patient complaint, every test, and therapy.
MD's are the answer to ever medical issue lol...
for example a pain or pinched nerve in the spine giving rise to parasthesias can be a wide array of things,

a chiro would diagnose it based on the spine itself assuming it's a herniated disc probably do some image studies if they even do that sort of thing and misdiagnose a possible tumor that's metastasized or Pott's disease/TB of the spine wheras a MD/DO would run other tests for serum/blood markers to rule out the differentials one by one.

When it comes to a symptom one is better off going to a MD/DO who will rule out ALL but one of the causes instead of going to a quack who will focus on one of the causes (the one they see the most often), plus the amount of times chiros have been liable for giving lethal medical advice makes it obvious one should never go to a chiro for a potentially seemingly harmless symptom.

At the end of the day doctors are simply just better at everything. Doctors don't go through tough grueling medical school and more years of residency in general medicine before picking a specialty for nothing. People will always go to doctors before seeing a chiro.

i've eaten some great oranges and some bad ones too. don't mean that they're all shit.

This post was edited by LolV on Mar 8 2017 02:37pm

im just saying, if you want to compare the "class hours" between chiropractors and MDs
make sure you add the hours from the 3-7 years of residency MDs are required to do.

You're not seeing the role of the chiro in its proper light. You refer to them as quacks. So what do you have to say about my current chiro, who was able to quickly resolve my slipped disc--when my physician actually fumbled the diagnosis and told me nothing could be done about it? What would you say about my physician? Interestingly enough, he's easily one of the most knowledgeable and intelligent physicians I know.

Moreover, when that same physician said he couldn't tell if I had scoliosis when I reported it, my current chiro (and the one I used before him) noticed it on day one? And yes, scans have revealed scoliosis. Yet you claim that MDs are better at everything.

The fact of the matter is that many MDs are nearly or fully incompetent. They aren't alone as far as medical professionals go, but the ones who are incompetent don't seem to create a bad reputation for the profession. Yet you label chiros as quacks in general with absolutely no supporting evidence. Also, as diagnosticians, it's not like MDs always get it right. Far from it. A good MD will usually get it right--no doubt--but I've heard countless stories of failed referrals, failed diagnoses, and so on.

If not all oranges are shit, I hope you're willing to admit that if this abstracts to physicians, it also abstracts to chiropractors.

It seems to be a common belief among chiropractors that vaccines are bad which is why I see them as quacks. I don't know much about what they do besides that and cracking backs.

i dont feel like arguing but..seriously REW?

classwork means nothing in clinical profession...it's simply needed to make sure everyone has an equal playing field when utilizing basic sciences to make diagnoses...clinical hours (rotations + residency) is what makes a medical professional adequate/good/great..and chiropractors are severely lacking (not to say that I don't think there are great chiropractors out there though)...plus the systemic nature of many SC problems, requires solid understanding of pathophysio (probably the most critical thinking oriented aspect of classwork --> based on entrance exams which professional do you think excels more at critical thinking?) (and honestly just scrolled up and noticed that path and physio are one of the places docs have significantly more class hours --> however i won't use this to further my argument as i said previously...classwork/hours is irrelevant to being a competent medical professional.)

This post was edited by Bubbler on Mar 8 2017 11:15pm