Dopps Chiropractic plans spa

Dopps Chiropractic plans spa

There are 159 comments on the The Wichita Eagle story from Mar 22, 2007, titled Dopps Chiropractic plans spa. In it, The Wichita Eagle reports that:

One of Wichita's largest chiropractic chains is growing, buying space on North Ridge Road for its first venture into wellness -- and invisible UV-sensitive paint.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Wichita Eagle.

First Prev
of 8
Next Last
james white

Wichita, KS

#1 Apr 3, 2007
I cant wait, dopps has always been a leader in chiropractic in the city and nation for that matter, this will be an amazing place

Since: Mar 07

United States

#2 Apr 5, 2007
There are absolutly NO scientific studies, NOT ONE, that support the notion that regular chiropractic "wellness" care has any positive affects on health. There is not one scientific study that supports the claim, made by chiropractors, that regular chiropractic adjustments improve overall "health", decrease the fequency or intensity of illnesses of any kind, or have any positive affect on the immune system. Not one. They are selling you on unproven assertions in order to make money. Ask for citations to these studies? Publish the citations here. There are none, There are thousands of testimonials and third hand ancedotal examples. these prove nothing.
jim

AOL

#3 Apr 5, 2007
lawman, It's not that there is no evidece it works, there is scientific evidence that it has never improved anybodys health. When it comes to treating pain it is exactly the same as any type of primative charm braclet. Anything in the same social setting works just as well. Batwings, saying Fe Fi FO Fum three times, giving a fake asprin, you name it. Sometmes in the past chiropractors have told me what differance does it make if it is what people want. We are just filling a need. That to me is there best argument. However, after seeing it in action many years now I understand when these quys realize its peoples ignorance that pays the bills they come up with a new scam every week. You simply can't trust anything they say. It is not the cream that rises to the top.
dr denise

Piedmont, KS

#4 Apr 6, 2007
Unfortunately, like many people, lawman and jim are misinformed about chiropractic research. I found the following to help clear some things up.
The subsequent quote is from an article published by non-chiropractic health information web site,“WebMD” regarding Chiropractic lowering blood pressure:
"This procedure has the effect of not one, but two blood-pressure medications given in combination," study leader George Bakris, MD, tells WebMD. "And it seems to be adverse-event free.
This complete article (“Chiropractic Cuts Blood Pressure”) can be found at: http://www.webmd.com/hypertension-high-blood-...
Another inquiry that further validated chiropractic came about in 1987 through an antitrust suit filed by four doctors of chiropractic against the AMA. A federal appellate court judge ruled that the AMA had engaged in a "lengthy, systematic, successful, and unlawful boycott" of chiropractic.
During the legal proceedings, studies comparing chiropractic care to medical care were presented that showed how chiropractors were "twice as effective as medical physicians, for comparable injuries, in returning injured workers to work at every level of injury severity."
Since the court findings and conclusions were released, a growing number of medical practices, hospitals, and health-care organizations in the United States now include the services of chiropractors.(Wilk, et al, vs. American Medical Association (AMA))
In 1993, the Ontario Ministry of Health published the Manga Report, which was a review of literature on the most effective and cost-effective treatments for of low-back pain. After reviewing all available international evidence, the researchers concluded that chiropractic is "greatly superior to medical treatment in terms of scientific validity, safety, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction."
There are numerous articles and studies proving Chiropractic Care and it’s effectiveness in today’s Health Care system. There are several articles that you will find at: http://www.chiropracticresearch.org/Chiroinfo... about specific Chiropractic treatments.
I hope this clears up some confusion about research regarding Chiropractic care. I am not sure how you would ever claim there are no studies regarding Chiropractic if you at all did any research of your own like any intelligent and educated person would do. Please consider being checked by your chiropractor for your personal wellness and it just may improve your cognitive thinking.
dr denise

Piedmont, KS

#5 Apr 6, 2007
Please consider being checked by your chiropractor for your personal wellness and it just may improve your cognitive thinking.

Unfortunately, like many people, lawman and Jim are misinformed about chiropractic research. I found the following to help clear some things up.

The subsequent quote is from an article published by non-chiropractic health information web site,“WebMD” regarding Chiropractic lowering blood pressure:

"This procedure has the effect of not one, but two blood-pressure medications given in combination," study leader George Bakris, MD, tells WebMD. "And it seems to be adverse-event free.”

This complete article (“Chiropractic Cuts Blood Pressure”) can be found at: http://www.webmd.com/hypertension-high-blood-...
Another inquiry that further validated chiropractic came about in 1987 through an antitrust suit filed by four doctors of chiropractic against the AMA. A federal appellate court judge ruled that the AMA had engaged in a "lengthy, systematic, successful, and unlawful boycott" of chiropractic.
During the legal proceedings, studies comparing chiropractic care to medical care were presented that showed how chiropractors were "twice as effective as medical physicians, for comparable injuries, in returning injured workers to work at every level of injury severity."
Since the court findings and conclusions were released, a growing number of medical practices, hospitals, and health-care organizations in the United States now include the services of chiropractors.(Wilk, et al, vs. American Medical Association (AMA))
In 1993, the Ontario Ministry of Health published the Manga Report, which was a review of literature on the most effective and cost-effective treatments for of low-back pain. After reviewing all available international evidence, the researchers concluded that chiropractic is "greatly superior to medical treatment in terms of scientific validity, safety, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction."
There are numerous articles and studies proving Chiropractic Care and it’s effectiveness in today’s Health Care system. There are several articles that you will find at: http://www.chiropracticresearch.org/Chiroinfo... about specific Chiropractic treatments.
I hope this clears up some confusion about research concerning Chiropractic care. I am not sure how you would ever claim there are no studies regarding Chiropractic if you at all did any research of your own like any intelligent and educated person would do. Please consider being checked by your chiropractor for your personal wellness and it just might help improve your cognitive thinking.
jim

AOL

#6 Apr 6, 2007
Chiropractors live on average 8 years less than the general population. Why has anyone not studied that. The AMA decision also said fortune tellers had the same right. Try as you might you just can't fool all of the people all of the time.
jim

AOL

#7 Apr 7, 2007
Call any hospital and ask to speak to the resident chiropractor. Could it be there is not one? Wonder why.

Since: Mar 07

United States

#8 Apr 9, 2007
Getting an adjustment would only add money to the chiropractors bank book, for the purpose of the spine is ,after all, to support the chiropractor.
dr denise.....
You are just not telling the truth.
The WILK case DID NOT validate chiropractic.
In fact ,this opinion specifically said that it was NOT making an evaluation of the validity of chiropractic. If you read this opinion and stated otherwise, you are not being honest. Read the opinion again. Show me where it says what you say it says? You cannot. WILK was and is only an Sherman anti-trust case. It only said that the AMA had illegally conspired to restrain the trade of chiropractors. It was careful NOT to say what you claim it said "doctor denise".
I recognize that chiropractors can treat lower back pain. So what? So can a PT. That pain reduction might influence lower blood pressure is not a surprize and does nothing to advance the proposition that chiropractic has any validity as a seperate discipline. As soon as the temporary affects of the pain reduction go away, and the pain returns , so will the blood pressure again increase. Where are the permanent improvements?
There are none.
Where is the follow-up study? not done yet?
How does a temporary decrease in blood pressure establish the validity of chiropractic. You are mixing apples and oranages.
My claim was there is not one study that validates the efficacy of the foundation of chiropractic, the subluxation. There is none. You have not cited any such study and the legal case you claim supports chiropractic does not. Below is an exact quote from the Wilk case....."

The plaintiffs clearly want more from the court. They want
a judicial pronouncement that chiropractic is a valid,
efficacious, even scientific health care service.[fn8] I
believe that the answer to that question can only be provided
by a well designed, controlled, scientific study such as the
one urged by the United States Congress' Office of Technology
Assessment in its review of the New Zealand Report. In 1980,
the AMA House of Delegates urged that such a study be done. No
such study has ever been done. In the absence of such a study,
the court is left to decide the issue on the basis of largely
anecdotal evidence. I decline to pronounce chiropractic valid
or invalid on anecdotal evidence."

This is a quote from the case you cited.
dr denise, did you read the court case you cited? I think not, But you may by going to Wilk vs AMA, at 671 F. Supp 1465 ( N.D Ill 1987) Pherhaps your research into the law is no better than your research into chiropractic. To quote the court in WILK, "there has been no scientific study that pronounces chiropractic valid". that was true in 1987 and it is true today.

Since: Mar 07

United States

#9 Apr 9, 2007
Lets see dr denise, your citation advances the argument and offers ancedotal support for the premise that chiropractors can treat , among many other ills, at least the following:

bed wetting
deafness
ADHD
the immune system
AIDS
cancer
cerebral palsy
acute otitis media
asthma
tourette syndrome
ear infections
infertility
autisim
DNA repair
diabetes
breech births
MS
race horses
dogs
cats
bad breath
sleeplessness
and....
poor social skills
and the list goes on......
Yes, you are most certainly a chiropracTOR
The kind Sid and DD Palmer would be proud of.
jim

AOL

#10 Apr 9, 2007
Walmart stopped paying for chiropractic when its studies showed giving people a pamplet worked just as good as chiropractic for pain. Chiropracters have been taught all techniques work. People get better no matter what. If it is something that really is serious like a ruptured disk chiropractic can do nothing. Chiropractic started out as fraud. Today it is still fraud even for treating pain. They are learning now to be good trainers but that is comming slow if at all to chiro schools. People who invest 100,000 plus in this sham are the real unfourtunate. Everyone in this system is looking for a greater sucker.
Zach From Kansas City

Kansas City, MO

#11 Apr 12, 2007
Hey, I'm on here looking up information on whether to go to chiropractic school. And I see rants from this guy, if it were'nt for chiropractic I would be a complete wreck, it changed my life so much that I am looking into becoming one. So just because you had a bad experience does not mean it sucks, shut up!
jim

AOL

#12 Apr 12, 2007
If you are going to control information well enough to be a successful chiropractor you are going to have to develope better techneques than just telling people to shut up. It's a good start though.

Since: Mar 07

United States

#13 Apr 13, 2007
I have not had a "bad experience". I do represent them, DC's, so I see their lies and schemes in a way you cannot. "shut up" ? Great way to convince people of the correctness of your well thought out position. You will make a great chiropractor. You certainly have the numbleness of mind required for that field.

Since: Mar 07

United States

#14 Apr 13, 2007
dr denise,,,, you have not replied? and the reason is??? Some people have accused me of being of noraml intellect, so why don't you take a crack at this question? I'll play along with you....
Explain to me in simple, or as complex terms as you like,just how would an adjustment affect my cognitaive thinking or my general "wellness".
I look forward to your explanation on what your adjustment can do. Inasmuch as you bill yourself as a "dr", and you suggested I check in with my local chiropractor for a wellness check up and suggested a treatment would affect these subjects, justify your rx , if you can?
jim

AOL

#15 Apr 15, 2007
Dr. Denise has been taught to stay away from negative people and their negative vibs. It seems to effect the old paycheck.

Since: Mar 07

United States

#17 Apr 17, 2007
dr denise,
I have a copy of the "study" you claim proved chiropractic adjustments lowered blood pressure.
First that is not what the study found. That may be the implication in the reveiw you posted, but the study itself makes no such claim.
Second ,It, the study, was limited to adjusting the ATLAS of the subjects only.
Third, funny thing... the "doctor" ( of chiropractic) who did this study is 83 year old, and a chiropractor. He alone did ALL the adjustments. On both the control group and the subject group. When did the 83 year old "doctor", of chiropractic, go to DC school ?(about 60 years ago). I have no idea what his credentials are other than his aged chiro diploma. He may be a fine man and a good Dc, but he is a DC and only a DC, not a research scientist.
Fourth. There was no double or even single blind controls.
Five. There has been no replication of his "work" , just anaylisis of his claimed findings.

This study is seriously flawed. It was not a study in the scientific sense of that term. The premise sounds reasonable, even worthy of reveiw. But this one report of findings....(that is what the factual basis for the conclusions really was a chiropractic ROF), does not provide a foundation for your claims. Indeed, this study was limited to the Atlas only,and employed standards that the author made up.. for example , the 83 year old chiropractor who did ALL the adjustments,(yes he alone did the adjustments on both the subject and the control group) found that as little as a 1mm change in the Atlas after his low velocity thrust was clinically significant.1mm. sure. Yet he failed to detail how he performed the before and after measurements. His methods are not subject to "peer reveiw". Peer Review is just one of the multiple Sine Quo Non ( "without which not", for those who never took latin) factors missing from this series of observations, from one observer, that has not been replicated before, or after. This is not a adequate foundation for anything other than saying " this is a start". Again, it is a plausable theory. But to claim that this study validates chiropractic is just plain foolish. It is a bit like saying you have proven the theory of evolution because : "I found one bone, and the bone may , or may not ,have been a fossil, it sure looks like one a fossil I mean, and I am not sure what kind of animal it came from, but it sure looks old,--- see evolution is proved ".
It does not work that way my dear dr. Did you not read the original study, or did you just read the reveiw? You have is often the case with chiropractic advocates taken an interesting series of observations that maybe indicate that study in this area might be worth while and leaped to the conclusion that it proves everything you want it to prove, without any logical limitations . The study may be what passes for science in the chiropractic paradigm, but no other disciple will accept that claim.

Since: Mar 07

United States

#18 Apr 17, 2007
dr denise,
I am still waiting for your explanation of how anything chiropractic can affect overal health and "wellness"!
The fact is, nothing chiropractic can do can affect my health, my immune system, or my relative "wellness".
When you explain this one, you can then move on with an explanation of how an adjustment can affect cognitive function.
I do not suppose I should hold my breath while you bury me in citations in support of your assertions, or will an adjustment help me hold my breath as well?
Waiting..........
jim

AOL

#19 Apr 17, 2007
When you remove BS from chiropractic it is just a vapor. A circus tent revival with a real mean streak. A crimminals pay dirt.
Lliam

Frederick, MD

#20 Apr 17, 2007
Obviously Jim & Lawman are having fun casting stones. Actually Lawman while you can question & challenge chiropractic's evidence for wellness, you cannot state that it cannot help your "wellness." There is no negative evidence on the subject. It may, or it may not promote wellness. I agree that there are no quality studies that strongly support it. Just like there are no quality studies to indicate that physical therapy, medicine, surgery, or injections are any better than reading a book on back pain.
Btw, Jim there are no scientific studies that show that chiropractors die eight years younger than the rest of us. You may be referencing a review of obituaries in an article, that article has nothing to do with science & was written by a chiropractor to illustrate the point that most chiropractors would agree with you on the lack of evidence for wellness. That may explain why 95% of all chiropractic patients are treated for musculoskeletal conditions, not wellness.
Does medicine or physical therapy have scientific evidence that they promote wellness? Do you have evidence that rheumatologists' cure rheumatoid arthritis, or that neurologists have more than a 5% success rate in treating neurological conditions?
BTW, Jim's last comment is very vague and negative. Be more specific if you would like to engage in discussion. If you are trying to spread your dogma you are doing a good job.
Lawman--I agree that the study cited by Dr Denise is not quality evidence.
Lliam
jim

AOL

#21 Apr 17, 2007
What do you know of any of it. Have you been to chiro school and graduated by adjusting all your famaily members. Are you speaking from this clinical experience? How specific do you want to get? Some doctors cant cure this and neither can I so whats the difference? Casting Stones? Are you pretending to read the Bible or something. I was born at night but not last night.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Nutrition Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Free meals available to all Livingston Parish p... Wed uchrisbrownq 1
News Defeat insomnia and sleep easy with these top f... (Oct '13) Jul 14 socialchris 7
News Why do I often crave eating clay? (Jan '09) Jul 5 Anthony 9,259
News Welfare cheats need not apply Jul 1 Our welfare state 11
News Nation-Now 40 mins ago 6:50 a.m.Tennessee bill:... (Jan '17) Jul 1 Fat mama 3
News Millions on food stamps at risk under Trump's c... Jun '17 Trump forever 3
News Food stamp cuts would hit Wabash Valley hard Jun '17 Dan 61
More from around the web