User talk:Valjean/The references from the article

Article from Journal of Controversial Medicine
In 2002 the Journal of Controversial Medical Claims requested the NACM to submit a paper for publication:


 * Title: NACM and its argument with mainstream chiropractic health care.


 * Journal: Journal of Controversial Medical Claims


 * Authors: Timothy A. Mirtz DC, Preston Long DC, CDE1, Alan Dinehart DC, MD, Ronald L. Slaughter DC, MS, Charles E. DuVall, Jr. DC, MPS, Randy Bryson DC, Fred Kourmadas DC, MS, John Campo DC, CICE

Authors notes

 * The authors wish to point out that at time of acceptance of this paper, references were not included due to length of the paper and from what the editor of the journal termed “limited space.” This editorial concern prompted the reference section to be labeled: references available upon request.


 * The authors wish to point out one quote which was not referenced adequately. The quote “In medical quackery, inventiveness seems to be limitless.” belongs to reference number 34 (Skrabanek, 1988.)


 * The authors wish to inform the reader that after this reference section there are additional references used by the National Assocation for Chiropractic Medicine. Also contained is a chart entitled “Further Confusing Features of the Chiropractic Subluxation” which was not used in the forwarded journal submission but is provided as a key point.


 * These references presented here are those references prior to review of the pre-production galley sheet. Pre-production galley sheets allow for individual corrections to be made.


 * Please note that at this time we are predicting, due to space requirements, that the last two sections of this paper will be omitted.

Supporting references

 * Keating JC. Slow progress. Dynamic Chiropractic. 1993. 11(23):44.


 * Carlton KH. A traveler's guide to philosophy for the chiropractic profession. Philosophical Constructs for the Chiropractic Profession. 1991. 1(1):18-20.


 * Winterstein JF. Philosophy of chiropractic: a contemporary perspective. ACA Journal of Chiropractic. April. 1994: 28-37.


 * Winterstein JF. Philosophy of chiropractic: a contemporary perpective. ACA Journal of Chiropractic. May. 1994: 64-71


 * Shekelle PG, Woolf SH, Eccles M. Grimshaw J. Clinical guidelines: developing guidelines. British Medical Journal. 1999. Feb. 318(7183):593-596.


 * Neely JG, Hartman JM, Wallace MS. Building the powerful 10-minute office visit: Part II: beginning a critical literature review. Laryngoscope. 2001. Jan. 111(1):70-76.


 * Vickers A, Zollman C. ABC of complementary medicine: the manipulative therapies: osteopathy and chiropractic. British Medical Journal. 1999. Oct. 319:1176-1179.


 * Downey BJ, Taylor NF, Niere KR. Manipulative physiotherapists can reliably palpate nominated lumbar spinal levels. Man Ther. 1999. Aug. 4(3):151-156.


 * Assendelft WJ, Bouter KM, Knipschild PG. Complications of spinal manipulation: a comprhensive review of the literature. J Fam Pract. 1996. May. 42(5):475-480.


 * Lefoeuf-Yde C, Rasmussen LR, Klougart N. The risk of over-reporting spinal manipulative therapy-induced injuries: a description of some cases that failed to burden the statistics. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1996. Oct. 19(8):536-538.


 * Nemeth E. Physical medicine in the diagnosis and treatment of functional disorders of the spinal column. Med Pregl. 1999. Aug. 52(6):233-236.)


 * Hart LE. Exercise and soft tissue injury. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1994. Feb. 8(1):137-148.


 * Shekelle, PG, Spine Update: Spinal Manipulation. Spine 1994; 19:858-861)


 * Herzog W. Clinical Biomechanics of Spinal Manipulation. Churchill Livingstone. Philadelphia. 2000.


 * Castleman M. Blended Medicine. Rodale Books. St. Martin’s Press. Emmaus, PA. 2000:95.


 * Redwood D. In Castleman M. Blended Medicine. Rodale Books. St. Martin’s Press. Emmaus, PA. 2000:95.


 * Triano J. The mechanics of spinal manipulation. In: Herzog W. Clinical Biomechanics of Spinal Manipulation. Churchill Livingstone. Philadelphia. 2000:92-95.


 * National Association for Chiropractic Medicine. General Policy Statements. 1996.


 * Jaskoviak P. From the editor: spotlight on chiropractic. The American Chiropractor. 1995. 17(6):4.


 * Paul FA, Buser BR. Osteopathic manipulative treatment applications for the emergency department patient. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 1996. 96(7):403-409.

Chiropractic medicine, spinal manipulation, and the pediatric population

 * Jauregui N, Lincoln T, Mubarak S, Garfin S. Surgically related upper cervical spine canal anatomy in children. Spine. 1993. Oct. 15. 1814):1939-1944.


 * Yousefzadeh DK, El-Khoury GY, Smith WL. Normal sagittal diameter and variation in the pediatric cervical spine. Radiology. 1982. Jul. 144(2):319-325.


 * Kasai T, Ikatat T, Katoh S, Miyake R, Tsubo M. Growth of the cervical spine with special reference to its lordosis and mobility. Spine. 1996. Sep. 15; 21(18):2067-2073.


 * Pfirrmann CWA, Binkert CA, Zanetti M, Boos N, Hodler J. MR morphology of alar ligaments and occipitoatlantoaxial joints: study of 50 asymptomatic subjects. Radiology. 2001. 218:133-137.


 * Ross A, Curnes JT, Greenwood RS. Recurrent vertebrobasilar embolism in an infant with Klippel-Feil anomaly. Pediatr Neurol. 1987. May. 3(3):181-183.


 * Deeg KH, Alderath W, Bettendorf U. Basilar artery insufficiency—a possible cause of sudden infant death? Results of a Doppler ultrasound study of 39 children with apparent life threatening events. Ultraschall Med. 1998. Dec. 19(6):250-258.


 * Pamphlett R, Murray N. Vulnerability of the infant brain stem to ischemia: a possible cause of sudden infant death syndrome. J Child Neurol. 1996. May. 11(3):181-184.


 * Macchi C, Giannelli F, Cecchi F, Gulisano M, Pacini P, Corcos L, Catini C, Brizzi E. The inner diameter of human intracranial vertebral artery by color Doppler method. Ital J Anat Embryol. 1996. Apr. 101(2):81-87.


 * Sze G, Baierl P, Bravo S. Evolution of he infant spinal column: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology. 1991. Dec. 181(3):819-827.


 * Jozwiak M, Pietrzak S, Tobjasz F. The epidemiology and clinical manifestations of hamstring muscle and plantar foot flexor shortening. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1997. Jul. 39(7):481-483.


 * Bass SL. The prepubertal years: a uniquely opportune stage of growth when the skeleton is most responsive to exercise? Sports Med. 2000. Aug. 30(2):73-78.


 * Pollina J, Li V. Tandem spinal cord injuries without radiographic abnormalities in a young child. Pediatr Neurosurg. 1999. May. 30(5):263-266.


 * Kriss VM, Kriss TC. SCIWORA (spinal cord injury without radiographic abnormality) in infants and children. Clin Pediatr Phila. 1996. Mar. 35(3):119-124.


 * Balague F, Troussier B, Salminen JJ. Non-specific low back pain in children and adolescents: risk factors. Eur Spine J. 1999. 8(6):429-438.


 * Rosenblum BR, Rothman AS. Low back pain in children. Mt Sinai J Med. 1991. Mar. 58(2):115-120.


 * Taimela S, Kujala UM, Salminen JJ, Viljanen T. The prevalence of low back pain among children and adolescents: a nationwide cohort-based questionaire survey in Finland. Spine. 1997. May. 22(10): 1132-1136.


 * Phelip X. Why the back of the child? Eur Spine J. 1999. 8(6):426-428.


 * Olsen TL, Anderson RL, Dearwater SR, Kriska AM, Cauley JA, Aaron DJ, LaPorte RE. The epidemiology of low back pain in an adolescent population. Am J Public Health. 1992. Apr. 82(4):606-608.


 * Balague F, Nordin M, Skovron ML, Dutoit G, Yee A, Waldburger M. Non-specific low back pain among school children: a field survey with analysis of some associated factors. J Spinal Disord. 1994. Oct. 7(5): 374-379.


 * Balague F, Skovron ML, Nordin M, Dutoit G, Pol LR, Waldburger M. Low back pain in schoolchildren: a study of familial and psychological factors. Spine. 1995. Jun. 20(11): 1265-1270.


 * Negrini S, Carabalona R, Sibilla P. Backpack as a daily laod for schoolchildren. Lancet. 1999. Dec. 354:9194, 9174.


 * Viry P, Creveuil C, Marcelli C. Non-specific pain in children: a search for associated factors in 14 year old schoolchildren. Rev Rhum Engl Ed. 1999. Jul. 66(7):381-388.


 * Salminen JJ, Erkintalo Tertti MO, Paajanen H. Magnetic resonance imaging findings of lumbar spine in the young: correlation with leisure time physical activity, spinal mobility, and trunk muscle strength in 15 year old pupils with or without low back pain. J Spinal Disord. 1993. Oct. 6(5):386-391.

Table: Further confusing features of "chiropractic subluxation"
[1] Is believed to be present in all individuals regardless of health status, age, race, sex, or creed.

[2] May or may not have a measurable (whether questionable) overt or local neurological dysfunction or effect.

[3] May or may not have an anatomical component (misalignment)

[4] Is believed to be linked to past, present, and future health status including death.

[5] May or may not have a metaphysical component (Innate Intelligence)

[6] Imperative that correction be applied via adjustment (manipulative thrust) with or without cavitation (audible "click")

[7] Only a chiropractor and no one else can determine if "chiropractic subluxation" is present or absent.

[8] Only a chiropractor and no one else can assess if correction of "chiropractic subluxation" has occurred.

[9] Imperative that all people be "checked" for "chiropractic subluxation".

[10] Is believed to be created during birth process (gestational phase) and/or birth delivery and ended when death occurs.

[11] No two subluxations are the same or can be described in any consistent shape, form or fashion.

[12] Subluxation of any spinal area has yet to be systematically categorized, agreed upon, and consistent for any given condition or population for any disease or non-disease state.

[13] Persons may or may not have primary, secondary, or tertiary subluxations in any consistent shape, form, or fashion at any given time.

[14] Any "chiropractic" adjustive method is said to correct "subluxation" even those systems which are diametrically opposite to each other.