Chiropractic Patients Need To Know Treatment Risks

If you have received a flu shot, you signed a piece of paper that included, buried in the fine print, a warning like this: I n approximately 5 percent of the cases a permanent or even fatal form of paralysis ...

[Accuracy]

Let's talk about accuracy. This group and those who support them have been very inaccurate in their presentation of this issue and again are using the media to try and distort the facts. The written details of the legisation clearly singles out chiropractors and does not take into account that there is absolutely no evidence a chiropractic manipulation can damage healthy artery's and lead to strokes.

Why not look at the science instead of the media campaigns, the billboards, the policital pressure and sesdational stories? Why not create a law, based on clincal science and strong legal foundations, that extends to all procedures performed by all health care providers. Why is this group opposed to that? Because they want chiropractors singled out for an attack against the profession.

Why single out a procedure that is very safe but specifically exclude other procedures that are much more dangerous and currently not covered by informed consent regulations? What good does it do to try and scare people away from procedures that are very safe but steer them unkowingly toward procedures that are very dangerous? What good is being done for the public here? THAT'S the question chiropractors and legislators alike are struggling with, Rick, and I think you know that.

[All RISE]

Crossing the street and railroad tracks are dangerous procedures as well, many times resulting in death or injury. Informed consent should be provided by local municipalities and AMTRAC to each and every person who chooses to cross a street or a railroad track. That should be a law, Rep. Esty.

Once again the state is being asked to meddle into an area where it has no business. The Center for Disease Control reports 4.7 million dog-on-human accidents or incidents per year. Why are existing regulations in this area either so ineffective or sparingly enforced?

If there were 4.3 million chiropractic accidents per year, you can be assured the state and federal governments would be outlawing the profession altogether. And then there are the ever-prevalent automobile accidents which we do not seem to be able to eliminate, no matter how many laws and restrictions we impose. No matter how many hours of driver's ed we mandate.

Corrupticut, the Unconstitution State, a state in Denial.

[Mr Senator]

Let me get this straight. This Senator Fasano guy wants to write laws about very safe forms of treatment but specifically exclude more dangerous procedures? That doesn't sound so smart to me. Then again who expects these guys to be smart!

His district should be paying very close attention to this type of spiteful legislation and waste of time and energy. What does he think his constituents elected him for? To take out attack ads and crack down on very safe procedures? Not very smart. Really, not very smart policy making. His colleagues should talk to him about embarrassing them and the system.

These guys all look like idiots for cracking down on very safe procedures and excluding more dangerous ones. The public should be outraged.

[Liz HB]

I agree that informed consent is an important issue in health care- but let's not single out the chiropractors! I have had SURGERY without being informed of the risk vs benefit ratio- so let's be clear that this is an issue for any health care provider. Doctors, nurses, chiropractors, physical therapists, acupuncture providers, etc, should make it a practice to explain clearly the risks and benefits of ANY procedure, test, drug, or other treatment, prior to performing it. Legislators should expand the bill, writing it to be more universal and applicable to all professions to protect and inform consumers of their rights.

[Jon]

As pointed out in the column, the legislation was re-written to accomodate all of the chiropractors' concerns - they are not singled out. But they still are opposed. I can't help but wonder why? Don't they want patients to know the tiny risk exists? If not, what type of health care providers are they?

[Greg_Redpine]

I would agree with above, legislation should be mandated to include EVERY SINGLE medical procedure, not just a few.

It seems like they are trying to avoid accidents before they happen, which doesn't make any sense to begin with. Currently, we are putting 300 people on an airplane loaded with jet fuel, having them soar through the air at 400mph, and that's not an accident waiting to happen?

Politics seems to ruin great professions, but that's probably because the drug companies have such a large stake in legislation passed through government. Imagine that!

[Truth be told]

The legislation was absolutely not altered enough to include any other providers or other procedures. That is not an accurate statement.

It was altered to "include" any other providers who are also chiropractors and who happen do chiropractic work.
By including anyone else who also happens to do chiropractic adjustments is not an attempt to include anyone or any other procedures. Like doing a bill for haridressers (or anyone who cuts hair) and calling a broad bill.

The altered bill was still exclusive to the specific chiropractic procedure which is very safe.

Why single out a safe procedure and specifically exclude more dangerous ones? That's the question and you lie so as not to have to answer it.

The legislation does not include any other procedures. That was not an attempt to include anyone except chiropractors. Nice trick, didn't work. They lie. You lie. You know it.

Jon wrote:

As pointed out in the column, the legislation was re-written to accomodate all of the chiropractors' concerns - they are not singled out. But they still are opposed. I can't help but wonder why? Don't they want patients to know the tiny risk exists? If not, what type of health care providers are they?

[Informed Consent]

First, I am a supporter of chiropractic medicine. There is real value and purpose associated with chiropractic and when presented the choice of medicating myself for back pain or seeking out chiropractic, I chose the latter and am certainly glad I did.

Second, why not outline some of the real human tragedies that occur in the operating room, such as, someone who is having what is characterized as a routine procedure, but the knucklehead surgeon nicks the small intestine and 10 days later a certain grandmother is dead of a ravaging infection. Why not go after all surgeons???

My supposition is that these two people who feel they were injured by chiro's must have either great wealth, or powerful friends, or both. I've seen the billboards on buses and I find them offensive.

CT is always ready to legislate. That's a tendency our "Ready, Fire, Aim" legislators ought to reel in.

[Dear Rick]

Are you opposed to an over reactive legislature responding to a bunch of attorneys looking to increase malpractice cases with laws that make no sense and apply to only a certain profession? I don't understand why you did no investigation here. Are even more dangerous procedures done every day in medical offices without any informed consent? Yep. Do you care? Apparently not.

[GreekChorus]

Dear Rick wrote:

Are you opposed to an over reactive legislature responding to a bunch of attorneys looking to increase malpractice cases with laws that make no sense and apply to only a certain profession? I don't understand why you did no investigation here. Are even more dangerous procedures done every day in medical offices without any informed consent? Yep. Do you care? Apparently not.

It is virtually impossible to win a malpractice case against a chiropractor because what they do has zero basis in science and thus there is no standard of care.

I myself view chiropractic as absolute quackery; however, I think Mr. Green doesn't get the point. The geniuses in the General Assembly have mandated that health insurers cover chiropractic "treatment" and without that there would be no chiropractors. Health insurers do not like paying for what they, like me, consider worthless services so it is they who are trying to create a public perception that chiropractic is dangerous, hoping to reduce the amount they have to pay for it.

A more interesting column would focus on how telling people they have to buy insurance coverage for services they do not want and will never use in order to subsidize the chiropractic and drug/alcohol counseling industries affects the price of health insurance.

[jimbalaya]

considering chiropractors are quack doctors, there's pretty much an underlying assumption that they could kill you.

[jimbalaya]

pardon me. I should have said "quacks" since they aren't doctors at all.

[tony]

You need to print a retraction. There is no way any flu shot carries a warning like the one you describe. The key to your description is "like this". What the heck does that mean? How many poeple will forego flu shots and lower their overall health status because of your intentional misinformation. You talk about "know"ing the risk. But you dont realize that there's a huge difference between knowledge and information. Knowledge is a subset of information that is reliable, pertinent and statistically credible. Information is just the 23th decinal place on a spreadsheet, an internet search with 2.5 million refernces, gasoline priced to the nearest 9 tenth of a cent and the shtuff in your article.

[Buddy Boy]

Chiropractors think they are Doctors. They are not. their training includes discrediting Doctors advice. they also can mislead a patient. Keep manipulating the back;when medical treatment could actually heal the problem faster and permanently. ( No Maintence.)

[Jesus Martinez]

My heart goes out to these women who are funding this. My heart doesn't go out to the medical profession who is helping them behind the scenes. The simple fact is there are risks with many medical procedures. Do you really single out one group for one procedure? Do you act on emotion when passing laws? The problem for these women now is a respected medical journal printed a large study last year showing you have a slightly higher risk of having a stroke after going to your GP. And the GP doesn't even touch your neck. Why is this so? The research stated people go to the chiropractor or medical doctor with headaches and in the cases where they end up at a hospital after the office visit it was shown they were already having a stroke before visiting their health professional. Headaches are a major symptom of a stroke. So the research debunks chiropractors causing a stroke but it sure is hard to look objectively when someone is in a wheelchair.

[nwtk2007]

It's always a crack up to me when non-chiro's tell others what chiro's learn in school, like discrediting MD's advice. How stupid.

The best evidence against medicine is their own statistics where they have been shown to kill 500 people everyday by mistake, not realted to tough cases either, but by mistakes and errors.

Go to the Department of Health and Human Services web site and search medical errors, the scope of the problem.

It is easy to over look those because they are not in wheel chairs ... they are gone.

[Jason]

GreekChorus wrote:

<quoted text>
It is virtually impossible to win a malpractice case against a chiropractor because what they do has zero basis in science and thus there is no standard of care.
I myself view chiropractic as absolute quackery; however, I think Mr. Green doesn't get the point. The geniuses in the General Assembly have mandated that health insurers cover chiropractic "treatment" and without that there would be no chiropractors. Health insurers do not like paying for what they, like me, consider worthless services so it is they who are trying to create a public perception that chiropractic is dangerous, hoping to reduce the amount they have to pay for it.
A more interesting column would focus on how telling people they have to buy insurance coverage for services they do not want and will never use in order to subsidize the chiropractic and drug/alcohol counseling industries affects the price of health insurance.

To state there is no scientific evidence to support what chiropractors do is not true. Would you like the studies I have that show chiropractic works?

[Jason]

Buddy Boy wrote:

Chiropractors think they are Doctors. They are not. their training includes discrediting Doctors advice. they also can mislead a patient. Keep manipulating the back;when medical treatment could actually heal the problem faster and permanently.( No Maintence.)

As soon as you know how medical treatment heals the problem faster and permanently please let me know. Also let the other doctors in the world know what the treatment is.

[BDC]

Buddy Boy wrote:

Chiropractors think they are Doctors. They are not. their training includes discrediting Doctors advice. they also can mislead a patient. Keep manipulating the back;when medical treatment could actually heal the problem faster and permanently.( No Maintence.)

When did muscle relaxers ever heal anything?

What about the patients that get hooked on them and the pain relievers?

I see the problem First Hand.....What do you ever see?

CONCERNED DC

[BDC]

Buddy Boy wrote:

Chiropractors think they are Doctors. They are not. their training includes discrediting Doctors advice. they also can mislead a patient. Keep manipulating the back;when medical treatment could actually heal the problem faster and permanently.( No Maintence.)

I never once was taught to discredit MD's advice although my training did include refferal for medical problems.
This is past the 19th century, by about 100 years now.