Easy answer: YES
Ok.. sure.. I'm biased. But don't take my word for it. I've linked DOZENS of studies below to reference to decide for yourself.
"My uncle said that you can get a stroke going to the Chiro .."
"Well my doctor said it's 'DANGEROUS'..."
"I dunno man.. I just picture those movie scenes where someones snaps a neck.."
"I think my friend tried it once, and it made the problem worse"
Still boggles my mind how many people are under the assumption that there's this crazy inherent risk of chiropractic adjustments.
Well... I can't say hear it as often as I use to... But when I do, I have to bite my tongue and try my very hardest to not lash out and lecture someone for an hour about how it's one of the safest 'interventions' one could possibly do. Ok, maybe I don't bite my tongue.. but I DO try to keep it under an hour ;)
Medical Journal Publishes Safety of Chiropractic Care
Medical journal publishes research showing the remarkable safety of chiropractic care.
When assessing the safety of any medical intervention, the least biased data will come from malpractice insurance carriers. The following are averages for medical malpractice costs for doctors in the state of Florida.
Internal medicine: $25,000-45,000/year
OBGYN: $110,000 – 200.000/year
Chiropractors: $500 – 3,000/year.
Malpractice insurance carriers do not use myth or bias to determine their premiums. They use raw data based on the likelihood a patient would suffer injury and/or there would be litigation against the doctor. The fact that chiropractors pay a fraction of a fraction of what all medical doctors pay for malpractice is a clear indicator as to it’s safety.
When doing research on health care, safety studies are often considered one of, if not the best place to start. Individuals and families suffering the effects of spinal problems like scoliosis and looking to improve or correct the problem have grave concerns over the efficacy, dangers, and further pains related to medical treatment through surgery, traditional bracing practices, and other conventional medical procedures. As a result, many seek chiropractic care, yet have concerns related to effectiveness and side-effects as well.
The CLEAR institute, founded by Dr. Dennis Woggon, has become world renowned for it’s work in the areas of scoliosis and overall spinal correction. Those that have mastered CLEAR protocols consistently achieve dramatic results. To prove the results do not come with any real associated risk, CLEAR recently performed a study that was published in Scoliosis. The research revealed an incredible safety profile related to the care. (1)
In the study, thirty-six private chiropractic clinics provided care for 189 scoliosis patients over 3198 unique visits. Self-reported data was gathered where patients could list how they felt and any side effects they might have experienced following care. Results showed that 99.9 % of all side effects were classified as mild and all complaints were related to changes in soft tissue.
Scoliosis care requires aggressive rehabilitation and an intense number of adjustments. Care for this level of complicated spinal problem often requires as much as two sessions a day and more than a dozen different types of adjustments. With the kind of adjusting and rehab protocols required to make structural change in someone with scoliosis and the accompanying, often severe complications, these findings are unprecedented and show clearly how remarkably safe chiropractic really is.
Woggon, A.J., Woggon, D.A. (2015). Patient-reported side effects immediately after chiropractic scoliosis treatment: a cross-sectional survey utilizing a practice-based research network. Scoliosis.Oct 5;10:29. doi: 10.1186/s13013-015-0053-8.
Be healthy, do good
Two recent medical studies were done regarding the safety and the safety and effectiveness of a Chiropractic adjustment. Spine Medical Journal October 1, 2007, 32(21):2375-2378. “More than 19,700 patients who underwent more than 50,000 cervical spine adjustments, a team of researchers have concluded that your risk of having a serious adverse event from a Chiropractic adjustment is none.”
The manipulation technique at the focus of this safety study was defined as the application of high-velocity / low-amplitude or mechanically assisted thrust to the cervical spine. Patients were followed, and any adverse symptoms recorded immediately, and up to seven days after treatment. There were no reports of serious adverse events. (*In comparison to medical treatment, the chance of serious adverse events in hospitals is 1.5 million/year with a cost of 3.5 billion dollars, with a 1 out of 1 risk or 100% *July 20, 2006 Washington D.C., National Academies
And of course.. the stroke discussion..
Literally... makes me CRINGE every time I hear this.. but here we gooooo
Chiropractic and stroke: association or causation?
"Conclusion There is lack of compelling evidence that SMT iscausally associated with stroke. Physical triggers,including SMT, can serve as plausible ﬁnal link between the underlying disease and stroke (forinstance, in case of arterial dissection with existingconnective tissue weakness). It appears few of Hill’scriteria for causality appear connected with VAD andchiropractic. There may be some links or associationwith SMT and VAD in untrained practitioners, butthis has not been established with chiropractors. Thequality of evidence suggesting causation between chi-ropractic and VAD is mostly weak. Therefore, causal-ity between chiropractic and vascular accidents hasnot been determined.It is possible that healthcare practitioners are nottaking a thorough history to determine the cause of the VAD after SMT. Healthcare practitioners areprobably missing many clinical facts, because they now only record the patient having SMT. They should enquire about other possible causes or cir-cumstances for VAD. This may include minor neck trauma, a change in chronic neck pain or headache,recent infection or other predisposing lifestyle fac-tors such as smoking, hyperlipidaemia, hyperten-sion, and hyperhomocysteinaemia. Therefore, it isimportant that healthcare practitioners take a thor-ough clinical history to determine the cause of VAD.Systematic prospective studies are needed to assessthe safety of cervical spine SMT with regards to cere-brovascular events. Such studies should also accountfor the education of the practitioner"
Chiropractic care and the risk of vertebrobasilar stroke: results of acase
control study in U.S. commercialand Medicare Advantage populations
We found no significant association between exposure to chiropractic care and the risk of VBA stroke. Weconclude that manipulation is an unlikely cause of VBA stroke. The positive association between PCP visits and VBAstroke is most likely due to patient decisions to seek care for the symptoms (headache and neck pain) of arterialdissection. We further conclude that using chiropractic visits as a measure of exposure to manipulation may result inunreliable estimates of the strength of association with the occurrence of VBA stroke"
The Circle of Docs
1:650 chance of having a stroke getting hair washed at a salon...
From the man himself... Lots of good resources!
Misdiagnosis of Cervicocephalic Artery Dissection in the Emergency Department
A risk-benefit assessment strategy to exclude cervical artery dissection in spinal manual-therapy: a comprehensive review
Cervical artery dissection refers to a tear in the internal carotid or the vertebral artery that results in an intramural haematoma and/or an aneurysmal dilatation. Although cervical artery dissection is thought to occur spontaneously, physical trauma to the neck, especially hyperextension and rotation, has been reported as a trigger. Headache and/or neck pain is the most common initial symptom of cervical artery dissection. Other symptoms include Horner's syndrome and lower cranial nerve palsy. Both headache and/or neck pain are common symptoms and leading causes of disability, while cervical artery dissection is rare. Patients often consult their general practitioner for headache and/or neck pain, and because manual-therapy interventions can alleviate headache and/or neck pain, many patients seek manual therapists, such as chiropractors and physiotherapists. Cervical mobilization and manipulation are two interventions that manual therapists use. Both interventions have been suspected of being able to trigger cervical artery dissection as an adverse event. The aim of this review is to provide an updated step-by-step risk-benefit assessment strategy regarding manual therapy and to provide tools for clinicians to exclude cervical artery dissection. Key messages Cervical mobilization and/or manipulation have been suspected to be able to trigger cervical artery dissection (CAD). However, these assumptions are based on case studies which are unable to established direct causality. The concern relates to the chicken and the egg discussion, i.e. whether the CAD symptoms lead the patient to seek cervical manual-therapy or whether the cervical manual-therapy provoked CAD along with the non-CAD presenting complaint. Thus, instead of proving a nearly impossible causality hypothesis, this study provide clinicians with an updated step-by-step risk-benefit assessment strategy tool to (a) facilitate clinicians understanding of CAD, (b) appraise the risk and applicability of cervical manual-therapy, and (c) provide clinicians with adequate tools to better detect and exclude CAD in clinical settings.
Emerg Med Pract . 2016 Jul;18(7):1-24. Epub 2016 Jul 1. Cervical artery dissection: early recognition and stroke prevention https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27315017/
Is Cervical Spinal Manipulation Dangerous?
It appears that the risk of cerebrovascular accidents after cervical manipulation is low,considering the enormous number of treatments given each year, and very much lower than the risk of serious complications associated with generally accepted surgery. Provided there is a solid indication forcervical manipulation, we believe that the risk involved is acceptably low and that the fear of seriouscomplications is greatly exaggerated. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2003;26:48-52) academia.edu/19013978/Is_cervical_spinal_manipulation_dangerous?email_work_card=title
To Study Vertebral Artery Blood Flow Velocity DuringCervical C1-C2 Manual Traction -Mulligan
This technique had no mechanical effect on vertebral artery rather ithas an impact on hemodynamic status of artery and are of great value in increasing theknowledge of the possible treatment protocol related to the blood flow changes with themovements of cervical spine
Is chiropractic safe?
1972 – One death in several tens of million adjustments.1 1978 – One in 10,000,000 neck adjustments.2 1981 – One in a 1,000,000 neck adjustments.3 1983 – Two to three per 1,000,000 adjustments.4 1985 – One in 400,000 neck adjustments.5 1993 – One in 3,846,153 neck adjustments.6 1995 – One in 2,000,000 neck adjustments.7 1996 – One in 900,000 neck adjustments.8
The most recent in-depth review of the relationship between stroke and chiropractic care, was published in the February 15, 2008 issue of Spine Journal. It looked at 10 years of hospital records, involving 100 million person-years. The verdict? There was no evidence of an increase in vertebral artery dissection risk with chiropractic, compared with medical management. Based on this review, stroke, particularly vertebrobasilar dissection, should be considered a random and unpredictable complication of any neck movement, including cervical manipulation. In other words, cases of serious injury are practically nonexistent. By comparison, it makes the deaths caused by over-the-counter-pain-relievers to be considerably more troubling! Although reports vary, annual deaths in the United States attributable to NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs such as aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen and tiaprofenic acid) range from 3,200 to higher than 16,500 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations.9"
:::::The beginning of the shit show:::::
The Flexner Report ― 100 Years Later