this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
1630 points (97.1% liked)

You Should Know

33420 readers
947 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"Systematic reviews of controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have found no evidence that chiropractic manipulation is effective, with the possible exception of treatment for back pain.[8] A 2011 critical evaluation of 45 systematic reviews concluded that the data included in the study "fail[ed] to demonstrate convincingly that spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for any condition."[10] Spinal manipulation may be cost-effective for sub-acute or chronic low back pain, but the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.[11] No compelling evidence exists to indicate that maintenance chiropractic care adequately prevents symptoms or diseases.[12]"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bristlecone 66 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I am actually really torn about this one, on one hand I had one episode of back pain that lasted nearly a year, swearing up and down the whole time that chiropractors were basically witch doctors and that I would never go to one. However, when I finally caved and went to one he fixed my issue after two sessions. On the other hand, my more recent back pain was not helped after I saw my chiropractor four times. In addition, I work as a nurse and have now seen at least three patients come in with vertebral dissections, essentially a stroke, that occurred literally right after they had seen a chiropractor for neck pain. Anecdotally, I would say it isn't worth the risk. Had I done physical therapy and used bought a tens unit the first time I'm sure it would have also fixed it without the chiro, but I was lazy

[–] Hindufury 57 points 1 year ago

That's the thing. Chiropractic could be considered a manual treatment which is a therapeutic modality. PTs do manual therapies that are less traumatic and are one component of the musculoskeletal issues that contribute to pain that chiro claims to heal. For most situations of acute back pain they resolve in 4 to 6 weeks so even the ineffective treatments appear to help- it's just like treatments for the common cold.

[–] SacralPlexus 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m a radiologist and I too have seen multiple cases of vertebral artery dissections and stroke immediately following chiropractic manipulation. Absolutely no chance I would ever suggest someone see a chiropractor.

[–] KneeTitts 6 points 1 year ago

This is the entire problem with quackocrackers, they have no ability to diagnose any illness or disease. So people who think they just have a back ache and go to a quackcracker instead of a real dodctor are delaying getting a proper diagnosis, so then if they happen to have something more serious like cancer, they'll essentially be sacrificing their own life by going to quackocracker instead of finding out whats really wrong.

[–] crashoverride 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Someone who knows what they're doing, and knows the limits of what they can do, can benefit certain physical conditions you may have. But they're not doctors. They have no prescribing power. A lot of people go there thinking that they can also prescribe them a medication, which is not the case. But there's no standards for being a chiropractor, so each one is different and some may do little to help you or even hurt you or name you and in some rare cases, kill you

[–] KneeTitts 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not only can they not prescribe anything (because they are play doctors not real ones) but they have no access to the medical equipment (other than xrays which can literally only tell you if you have a broken bone) so they have Zero ability to diagnose whats really wrong with you, or your back, or anything really. Its all guesswork for them and the few people on here who say "quackocracked hepped me!!" is the one time they get it right out of 10 or 20 failures.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Anyone who says that a chiropractor helped them is just validating the placebo effect

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The thing about the placebo effect - it can work, even if you know about the placebo effect. It's pretty powerful.

[–] linearchaos 2 points 1 year ago

It's because what they're doing can sometimes provide temporary relief and when it works, it works fast. An underlying cause has made some inflammation, they stretch things out, relieve some pressure in places that shouldn't have pressure. But they're not fixing anything, just letting your body get back up to barely functioning until the underlying cause rears it's head again. Messed up discs are their bread and butter, but they're just resetting the house of cards you call a back.

Actually fixing the problem is a big, expensive, scary, painful deal and (US) chiros let insurance companies off the hook for a long time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm 100% on board with science and evidence based therapies but I've had a similar experience with back pain. I won't let them manipulate my neck at all though.

[–] B16_BR0TH3R 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd say the science is clear: humans don't understand what makes them sick and they don't understand why they get better. We value our own anectdotal evidence over actual research almost every time, and we keep making the wrong conclusions. I'd go so far as to say that you can't be "on board" with both science and with your own conclusions based on anectdotal evidence. It's one or the other.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Show me in the rules where I'm required to be internally consistent!

[–] joel_feila 2 points 1 year ago

It basically the human wave function. I can be consistant and inconsistent at the same time