You are here: Home / 2011 / Archives for February 2011

Symptoms of Autism That May Be New to You

February 28, 2011 By autism

When my son, Tom, was three years old we were concerned about his development.

Each day, when we picked him up from preschool, we'd ask "how was your day?"  And each day he'd respond "It was fun!"  We'd ask what he had for lunch, and he'd reply "peanut butter and jelly" (even when he'd had a yogurt!)   We'd ask what he wanted to do, and he'd say "watch Thomas the Tank Engine."

Was he talking enough?  Were his sentences complex enough?

To investigate, we took a look at various books about child development.  To our relief, he was talking just as he should: in three-word sentences, using appropriate vocabulary.

What the books didn't tell us, however, was that the sentences should be novel - not just repetitions of scripts learned on television.  The books also didn't mention that a child's use of language should vary from day to day - or that his voice should go up and down melodically.

In short, a simple list of symptoms and milestones just isn't enough to gauge whether a child is really on track developmentally.  Here, then are some newer articles about symptoms of autism -  in more depth, and with links to even more information.  Here, two, is an article that describes symptoms you won't necessarily read about in general articles on autism.

Symptoms of Autism NOT Listed in the Diagnostic Literature

The official symptoms of autism include lack of eye contact, speech delay and repetitive behaviors. So why are parents seeking treatments to help their children sleep, handle sensory overloads, cope with anxiety, digest food, or end seizure disorders?

Repetitive Behaviors in Autism

One of the core symptoms of autism is repetitive behaviors (sometimes called "stereotyped behaviors"). What are these behaviors, and how can they be managed?

Autism Symptoms Related to Social Communication

The symptoms of autism are often most obvious in social situation. Even for verbal people with autism, choosing and using the right words and body language can be very difficult indeed.

Early Symptoms of Autism Include No Babbling or Pointing

Why are "no babbling or pointing by age one" considered to be possible symptoms of autism?

Autism Symptoms and Eye Contact

Lack of eye contact is often a symptom of autism. What exactly is eye contact, and how much is enough?

All About Autistic Speech and Prosody

Prosody is intonation - the melody of speech.  Most people with autism have unusual prosody.  Find out more!

Lack of Play Skills as a Symptom of Autism

So what if your child enjoys playing alone, or building the same tower over and over again?  What's the big deal?  Find out!

What is Face Blindness (Prosopagnosia) in Autism?

Face Blindness (Prosopagnosia) is common among people with autism spectrum disorders. What is face blindness, and what does it mean?

What Is Lack of Joint Attention in Autism?

If you have a child with autism, you may have heard therapists tell you that your child needs to work on something called "joint attention." What is joint attention, and why is it important?

Symptoms of Autism That May Be New to You originally appeared on About.com Autism on Monday, February 28th, 2011 at 17:36:52.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

About the Autism at About.com Blog

February 27, 2011 By autism

Every now and then, I receive strongly-worded comments from readers of this blog that neither agree nor disagree with any point I'm making.  Rather, they are commenting on my approach to blogging.

In response to those individuals, and to the blogosphere in general, I'd like to present a sort of vision statement for the Autism at About.com site, which includes this blog and many other elements.

The Autism at About.com website is a part of the huge About.com site, which in itself is part of the New York Times Company.  About.com includes well over 800 similar sites on topics from acne to zoology.   Each individual topic site is run by an About.com Guide - in this case me - who for various reasons has been selected for the job.  The job, in most cases, is not full time; in my case it's just a relatively small part of a freelance writing business which incorporates many other projects, most unrelated to autism.  You can find out more about me and my background at www.lisarudy.com.

Why am I the About.com Guide to Autism?  It's not because I'm a world-renowned scholar in the field of autism!  In fact, I'm the mother of a child with autism who has done a lot of research, has a lot of solid writing experience, and applied for the job.  I've been the About.com Guide to Autism for just about five years now.

The About.com model focuses most heavily on the creation of "evergreen" articles, and there are hundreds on this autism site on topics ranging from symptoms to treatments, and including pieces on autism research, financial issues, adults on the spectrum, and much more.   All the "evergreen" articles that contain medical information or advice are sourced (by me), reviewed by a qualified medical professional, and edited so that they are appropriate for an HonCode site (HonCode is a sort of "good housekeeping seal" for medical websites).  This blog is not considered "evergreen," and it is not medically reviewed.

In addition to articles, the About.com model involves the creation and moderation of a forum; the creation of e-courses and newsletters, the management of a related Facebook page and, of course, blogging.

As you've probably realized by now, this blog is only a small part of what I do for About.com, which is only a small part of what I do for a living.

I enjoy blogging; I enjoy reporting on the autism news, announcing new articles on the About.com site, and asking readers to provide advice to one another on critical issues such as parental depression; selecting treatments; and so forth.  I also enjoy expressing my opinion, commenting on autism-related drama (courtroom and otherwise), creating wholly unscientific opinion polls, and provoking conversation and debate.

Because the autism community is so full of controversy and drama, there's rarely a day when something important, emotional, frightening, exciting, or even silly isn't going on.  As a blogger, I don't feel an obligation to be consistent in my tone - or to be consistently serious, scientific or pontifical.  I don't feel a need to be "right," or to have an absolute opinion on subjects that are constantly evolving.

I do my best to be fair about evidence, and to keep the doors of communication open.  I pride myself on the breadth of people who read my blog and feel free to comment - and much of the time I am thrilled to see that real debate and conversation is possible among people with very different ideas.  Of course, sometimes debate and conversation degenerate into sniping and nastiness...  when that happens, I end the thread and move on.

Some people like my blog.  Some people don't.  Some people comment regularly, and some occasionally drop in with a word or two.  Some people read it, some occasionally glance at it, and some ignore it.    That's exactly as it should be.  Occasionally, someone decides to write an entire blog about how little they like my blog - and while I appreciate the attention, it does take some calming breaths to get past the desire to engage in a pointless, antagonistic pissing match - and move on to topics of greater interest and/or significance.

For those who enjoy my style and approach, thanks for the positive vibes and kind words.  For those who don't, please feel no obligation to read, comment, or pass along my work.

And for those who feel my blog should be as heavily researched, sourced and edited as my evergreen articles - please know that I am not going that route.   I have written and will write hundreds of solid, fully  researched and edited articles, and I hope you will read them.   But this is a blog - a place to announce, question, discuss, debate, and generally share opinions, advice and philosophies.  Blog polls on this site will never be scientific, and comments will not be edited on the basis of opinion or even on the basis of whether I am comfortable with embedded links.

Thanks for your time in reading this; I look forward to your thoughts!

Lisa Jo Rudy

About.com Guide to Autism

About the Autism at About.com Blog originally appeared on About.com Autism on Sunday, February 27th, 2011 at 22:20:59.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Research Tithing

February 27, 2011 By Frank

The Board of Chiro.Org held their annual Board meeting on 2-22-2011 and unanimously approved another $2500 donation to Chiropractic Research. This will be the tenth year in a row that the website has made a research tithe, and to date that contribution totals $21,000.

In the Age of Accountability, insurers may only pay for care that is supported by research. Our intention is to do our part, and to encourage our readers (chiropractors all) to do their part, by putting their money where it will do the most good… into high quality research, which accurately describes the miracles that we see daily in our practices.

This year’s gifts includes a $1250. contribution to the Integrated Chiropractic Outcomes Network, a new Practice-based research project created by Cheryl Hawk, DC, PhD, the Director of Clinical Research at Logan College of Chiropractic.

This year also marks our 8th year in a row supporting the International Chiropractic Pediatric Association’s research projects, always aimed at demonstrating the benefits of chiropractic care for children.

Filed Under: chiropractic, Research

Autism Myth Debunked!

February 26, 2011 By autism

Now that I've got your attention...

I've noticed that recently the autism blogs are full of the phrase "soundly debunked" in reference to one or another theory about autism.  The problem is - everyone seems to have a different idea about which theories are "myths," and which have been "debunked!"

Which "myth" do you feel has been "soundly debunked?"



Autism Myth Debunked! originally appeared on About.com Autism on Saturday, February 26th, 2011 at 22:16:47.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

A New Idea

February 26, 2011 By Frank

A new idea

is first condemned

as ridiculous

and then is dismissed as trivial,

until finally

it becomes

what everybody knows.

- William James

Filed Under: chiropractic

The Mythology Of Evidence-Based Medicine

February 25, 2011 By Frank

SOURCE: The Huffington Post ~ 2-25-2011.

The current healthcare debate has brought up basic questions about how medicine should work. On one hand we have the medical establishment with its enormous cadre of M.D.s, medical schools, big pharma, and incredibly expensive hospital care. On the other we have the semi-condoned field of alternative medicine that attracts millions of patients a year and embraces literally thousands of treatment modalities not taught in medical school.

One side, mainstream medicine, promotes the notion that it alone should be considered “real” medicine, but more and more this claim is being exposed as an officially sanctioned myth. When scientific minds turn to tackling the complex business of healing the sick, they simultaneously warn us that it’s dangerous and foolish to look at integrative medicine, complementary and alternative medicine, or God forbid, indigenous medicine for answers. Because these other modalities are enormously popular, mainstream medicine has made a few grudging concessions to the placebo effect, natural herbal remedies, and acupuncture over the years. But M.D.s are still taught that other approaches are risky and inferior to their own training; they insist, year after year, that all we need are science-based procedures and the huge spectrum of drugs upon which modern medicine depends.

If a pill or surgery won’t do the trick, most patients are sent home to await their fate. There is an implied faith here that if a new drug manufacturer has paid for the research for FDA approval, then it is scientifically proven to be effective. As it turns out, this belief is by no means fully justified.

The British Medical Journal recently undertook an general analysis of common medical treatments to determine which are supported by sufficient reliable evidence. They evaluated around 2,500 treatments, and the results were as follows:

* 13 percent were found to be beneficial

* 23 percent were likely to be beneficial

* Eight percent were as likely to be harmful as beneficial

* Six percent were unlikely to be beneficial

* Four percent were likely to be harmful or ineffective.

This left the largest category, 46 percent, as unknown in their effectiveness. In other words, when you take your sick child to the hospital or clinic, there is only a 36 percent chance that he will receive a treatment that has been scientifically demonstrated to be either beneficial or likely to be beneficial. This is remarkably similar to the results Dr. Brian Berman found in his analysis of completed Cochrane reviews of conventional medical practices. There, 38 percent of treatments were positive and 62 percent were negative or showed “no evidence of effect.”

For those who have been paying attention, this is not news. Back in the late 70′s the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment determined that a mere 10 to 20 percent of the practices and treatment used by physicians are scientifically validated. It’s sobering to compare this number to the chances that a patient will receive benefit due to the placebo effect, which is between 30 percent and 50 percent, according to various studies.

We all marvel at the technological advances in materials and techniques that allow doctors to perform quadruple bypass surgeries and angioplasties without marveling that recent studies indicate that coronary bypass surgery will extend life expectancy in only about three percent of cases. For angioplasty that figure sinks to zero percent. Those numbers might be close to what you could expect from a witch doctor, one difference being that witch doctors don’t submit bills in the tens of thousands of dollars.

It would be one thing if any of these unproven conventional medical treatments were cheap , but they are not. Angioplasty and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) alone cost $100 billion annually. As quoted by President Obama in his drive to bring down medical costs, $700 billion is spent annually on unnecessary tests and procedures in America. As part of this excess, it is estimated that 2.5 million unnecessary surgeries are performed each year.

Then there is the myth that this vast expenditure results in excellent health care, usually touted as the best in the world (most recently by Rush Limbaugh as he emerged from a hospital in Hawaii after suffering chest pain). But this myth has been completely undermined. In 2000 Dr. Barbara Starfield, writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, estimated that between 230,000 and 284,000 deaths occur each year in the US due to iatrogenic causes, or physician error, making this number three in the leading causes of death for all Americans.

In 2005 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that out of the 2.4 billion prescriptions written by doctors annually, 118 million were for antidepressants. It is the number one prescribed medication, whose use has doubled in the last ten years. You would think, therefore, that a remarkable endorsement is being offered for the efficacy of antidepressants. The theory behind standard antidepression medication is that the disease is caused by low levels of key brain chemicals like serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine, and thus by manipulating those imbalanced neurotransmitters, a patient’s depression will be reversed or at least alleviated.

This turns out to be another myth. Prof. Eva Redei of Northwestern University, a leading depression researcher, has discovered that depressed individuals have no depletion of the genes that produce these key neurotransmitters compared to people who are not depressed. This would help explain why an estimated 50 percent of patients don’t respond to antidepressants, and why Dr. Irving Kirsch’s meta-analysis of antidepressants in England showed no significant difference in effectiveness between them and placebos.

You have a right to be shocked by these findings and by the overall picture of a system that benefits far fewer patients than it claims. The sad fact is that a disturbing percentage of the medicine we subject ourselves to isn’t based on hard science, and another percentage is risky or outright harmful. Obviously, every patient deserves medical care that is evidence-based, not just based on an illusory reputation that is promoted in contrast to alternative medicine.

We are not suggesting that Americans adopt any and all alternative practices simply because they are alternative. These, too, must demonstrate their effectiveness through objective testing. But alternative modalities should not be dismissed out of hand in favor of expensive and unnecessary procedures that have been shown to benefit no one absolutely except corporate stockholders.

Filed Under: chiropractic, News

Kids with Autism: Sometimes Better Than Expected

February 25, 2011 By autism

Has your child with autism ever amazed and delighted you by handling a stressful situation far better than you anticipated?

Share your thoughts here, or join the conversation on the Autism at About.com Facebook page!

Kids with Autism: Sometimes Better Than Expected originally appeared on About.com Autism on Friday, February 25th, 2011 at 10:30:44.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Chiropractic Treatment of Workers’ Compensation Claimants in the State of Texas

February 24, 2011 By Frank

SOURCE:   MGT of America, Austin, Texas

In 2002, the Texas Chiropractic Association (TCA) commissioned an independent study to determine the use and effectiveness of chiropractic with regard to workers’ compensation, the results of which were published in February 2003. According to the report, chiropractic care was associated with significantly lower costs and more rapid recovery in treating workers with low-back injuries. They found: Lower back and neck injuries accounted for 38 percent of all claims costs. Chiropractors treated about 30 percent of workers with lower back injuries, but were responsible for only 17.5 percent of the medical costs and 9.1 percent of the total costs. These findings were even more intertesting: The average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. However, if a worker received at least 75 percent of his or her care from a chiropractor, the total cost per claimant decreased by nearly one-fourth to $12,202. If the chiropractor provided at least 90 percent of the care, the average cost declined by more than 50 percent, to $7,632.

Doctors of chiropractic have been licensed to practice in Texas since 1949 and have been a fundamental part of the state’s workers’ compensation system since 1953. Each year, Texas DCs treat tens of thousands of injured workers, but until recently, little data were available comparing the cost-effectiveness and efficacy of chiropractic versus other forms of care available through the workers’ compensation program.

Last year, the Texas Chiropractic Association (TCA) commissioned an independent study to determine the use and effectiveness of chiropractic with regard to workers’ compensation, the results of which were published in February. According to the report, Chiropractic Treatment of Workers’ Compensation Claimants in the State of Texas, chiropractic care was associated with significantly lower costs and more rapid recovery in treating workers with low-back injuries, and is not a contributor to the state’s rising worker’s compensation costs.

The study considered two questions:

1.   Does chiropractic play a significant role in driving the escalating costs in the Texas workers’ compensation system?

2.   Is chiropractic a cost-effective treatment option within the state’s workers’ compensation system?

To answer these questions, the national research/consulting firm MGT of America was hired to review more than 70 articles and published studies on the cost and effectiveness of chiropractic care.

The firm also analyzed data on approximately 900,000 workers’ compensation claims filed from 1996 to 2001.

Among the firm’s findings:

  • Of the nearly 900,000 workers’ compensation claims received from 1996 to 2001, only 14.6 percent of claimants were treated by doctors of chiropractic, and only 8.5 percent of those workers received more than half of their treatment from chiropractors.

  • Chiropractic care accounted for only 12.5 percent of medical fees and 6.9 percent of the total workers’ compensation costs. However, the firm noted that these figures did not include the costs of pharmaceuticals, because insurers are not required to provide such information to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission (TWCC). If those costs were included, the percentage of costs related to chiropractic care would have been even lower.

  • Lower back and neck injuries accounted for 38 percent of all claims costs. Chiropractors treated about 30 percent of workers with lower back injuries, but were responsible for only 17.5 percent of the medical costs and 9.1 percent of the total costs.

  • The average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. However, if a worker received at least 75 percent of his or her care from a chiropractor, the total cost per claimant decreased by nearly one-fourth to $12,202. If the chiropractor provided at least 90 percent of the care, the average cost declined by more than 50 percent, to $7,632.

Based on its analysis, the firm reached two noteworthy conclusions:

1.   Chiropractic’s medical costs are the lowest in the state’s workers’ compensation system.
“The existing body of research indicates that chiropractic is a cost-effective means of treatment for musculoskeletal injuries,” the firm noted. “Chiropractic care is associated with lower medical costs and more rapid recovery in the overwhelming majority of studies concerning chiropractic care and workers’ compensation costs.” Data from the study also clearly linked increased use of chiropractic care with lower costs relative to lower back injuries.

2.   Chiropractic cannot be blamed for the state’s rising workers’ compensation costs.
Based on the evidence, the firm found it “unlikely” that chiropractic could be held responsible for escalating costs: “Our analysis of TWCC claims data demonstrated that chiropractic currently plays a relatively small role in the system as a whole, and therefore could not be a significant factor in driving costs, chiropractic would have to be demonstrated as a vastly more expensive means of treatment, or it would have to comprise a greater share of treatment in this system.”

To get a better grasp of the effectiveness of all forms of care, MGT also recommended that TWCC require insurers to provide all information requested on its workers’ compensation forms – particularly pharmaceutical costs and return-to-work data. Including this information would provide a more complete picture of how patients are treated under the workers’ compensation system, and result in “further decreases in the overall cost to the system.”

The complete TCA/MGT study can be purchased from the TCA at: Texas Chiropractic Association, 815 Brazos, Suite 802, Austin, TX 78701
For more information, call (512) 477-9292.

You may want to review our large collection of similar studies at:
The Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page

Filed Under: chiropractic, Research

Supreme Court Says "No" to Civil Suits Against Vaccine Makers

February 23, 2011 By autism

According to the National Journal, "The Supreme Court today ruled that vaccine companies cannot be sued for design defects, handing the pharmaceutical industry a victory and making it more difficult to bring cases against vaccine manufacturers for allegedly causing autism."

The finding was not unanimous: "Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, saying the decision creates a "regulatory vacuum" where vaccine manufacturers are not required to "adequately take account of scientific and technological advancements when designing or distributing their products."

The case heard by the Supreme Court, brought by Russell and Robalee Bruesewitz, alleged that their daughter Hannah was disabled by a diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine she received as an infant in 1992 manufactured by Lederle Laboratories, now owned by Pfizer Inc.'s Wyeth unit. After the family was denied compensation in the federal vaccine court in 1995, they filed the suit that ultimately reached the Supreme Court, charging that the defective design of the vaccine caused their daughter's disabilities and that the company could be held liable for negligent design under Pennsylvania law.

The court ruled 6-2 to uphold the ruling of the 3rd Circuit appellate court, finding that the federal law preempts all "design-defect claims" made against vaccine manufacturers. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said the statute only holds manufacturers liable for proper manufacturing and labeling, not for the actual design of the drug.

"Provided that there was proper manufacture and warning, any remaining side effects, including those resulting from design defects, are deemed to have been unavoidable. State-law design-defect claims are therefore preempted," wrote Scalia.

Instead of directly suing vaccine companies, parents are required to apply for compensation for vaccine injuries through a specially created "vaccine court."  While the standard of proof of injury is lower in the vaccine court than in a civil court, the vaccine court has never awarded compensation to a family alleging specifically that vaccines were the direct cause of their child's autism.  Several omnibus cases have gone before the vaccine court attempting to prove a direct vaccine-autism connection, but so far the vaccine court has rejected those cases on the basis that the science behind the claims was faulty.

For Much More on the Vaccine-Autism Saga and the Vaccine Court:

Supreme Court Says "No" to Civil Suits Against Vaccine Makers originally appeared on About.com Autism on Wednesday, February 23rd, 2011 at 07:09:19.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Research Study: Reading Brain Waves to Assess Risk of Autism

February 22, 2011 By autism

Can an EEG (a test that reads brain waves) determine whether an infant is at risk of autism?

According to a new study, the answer is a big maybe.

A group of researchers at Boston Children's Hospital split infants into "high risk" and "low risk" groups based on whether or not they had a sibling with autism (autism is highly heritable, and 20-50% of siblings will have some level of autism or autism-like symptoms).  Then, they tested the infants' brain waves when the babies were six and nine months old.  While it was tougher to identify girls with autistic siblings, the researchers could identify nine-month-old boys with autistic siblings with 80% accuracy (50% would be equivalent to a coin flip).

This study tells us only  that many siblings of children with autism have EEGs with tiny but recognizable differences that are also found in children with autism.  What we don't know, however is -

  • Do these differences lead to or represent differences that will present as autistic symptoms?
  • Will children who do NOT have these differences develop autistic symptoms?
  • Will all children who DO have these differences develop autistic symptoms?
  • Is there any way to increase the accuracy level of the test?

Says one of the researchers in a US News and World Report article on the study: "If it can eventually be shown that this technique can reliably identify which children will indeed develop autism, then we will have a valuable tool for early detection."

Research Study: Reading Brain Waves to Assess Risk of Autism originally appeared on About.com Autism on Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011 at 09:23:21.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Understanding Cognitive Behavioral Therapy…

February 21, 2011 By add

Dr. Russ Ramsay is an expert in the assessment and treatment of adult ADHD, with a particular interest in adjunctive psychosocial treatments such as cognitive behavioral therapy. Learn more about CBT and the role it can play in a treatment plan for ADHD in this interview with Dr. Ramsay.

READ INTERVIEW

Understanding Cognitive Behavioral Therapy... originally appeared on About.com ADD / ADHD on Monday, February 21st, 2011 at 17:17:22.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Filed Under: Uncategorized

New Podcast Episode: Craig Liebenson On Spinal Rehabilitation

February 19, 2011 By Brett

PodcastHere is another new episode in Dr. Brett Kinsler’s OnTheOtherHand podcast series.  Craig Liebenson, DC literally wrote the book on spinal rehabilitation and is highly regarded among chiropractors, medical physicians and physical therapists alike in the field of spinal rehabilitation around the world. He has studied and taught with Professors Vladimir Janda and Karel Lewit from the Czech Republic – pioneers in functional rehabilitation and manual medicine, as well as many others who have revolutionized the field. Many of them are contributors to his text.

Dr. Liebenson is an Adjunct Professor in the School of Chiropractic, Division of Health Sciences at Murdoch University and a member of the International Association for the Study of Pain and the American Pain Society.  He helped to set up the Los Angeles College of Chiropractic and Scandinavian College of Chiropractic Rehabilitation Diplomate Courses, and he serves as a consultant and lead faculty for the Murdoch University and Anglo-European Chiropractic College M.Sc. programs in Chiropractic Rehabilitation. Dr. Liebenson treats many world-class elite athletes, was an NBA team chiropractor and currently serves as a consultant for the Arizona Diamondbacks MLB baseball team. He remains in private practice specializing in rehabilitation in Los Angeles.

Dr. Liebenson was the first ever chiropractic member of the McKenzie Institute (U.S.) Board of Directors, a frequent lecturer at national and international multidisciplinary meetings, and has published extensively in journals and books on the subjects of rehabilitation and chronic pain the best known being the multidisciplinary text Rehabilitation of the Spine: A Practitioner’s Manual (Lippincott/Williams and Wilkins), popular for over ten years, it is now in its second edition.

This podcast episode features a discussion between Dr. Craig Liebenson and Rochester chiropractor and blogger Dr. Brett Kinsler.

Listen to the podcast interview of Craig Liebenson, DC here or look for OnTheOtherHand on iTunes.

You can find more information like this at the:

Chiropractic Rehabilitation Diplomate Information Page, which among other things contains:

100 Rehabilitation Articles by Craig Liebenson, D.C. and another:

73 Rehabilitation Articles by Kim Christensen,DC, DACRB,CCSP,CSCS

Filed Under: chiropractic

Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research Receives $7.4 million Military Readiness Grant

February 18, 2011 By Frank

Scientists at the Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research (PCCR), the RAND Corporation and the Samueli Institute have been awarded a $7.4 million grant by the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. The grant will fund a four-year research project to assess chiropractic treatment for military readiness in active duty personnel. This is the largest single award for a chiropractic research project in the history of the profession and will be used to conduct the largest clinical trial evaluating chiropractic to date.

Ian Coulter, Ph.D., the Samueli Institute Chair in Policy for Integrative Medicine at RAND Corporation, is the research project’s principal investigator. Co-principal investigator and Palmer College of Chiropractic’s Vice Chancellor for Research and Health Policy Christine Goertz, D.C., Ph.D., will oversee the design and implementation of the three clinical trials funded by this award. The Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research will receive approximately $5.1 million in order to accomplish this task. Samueli Institute Vice President for Military Medical Research Joan Walter, J.D., also is a co-principal investigator for this project.

Because musculoskeletal injuries are among the most commonly occurring injuries in military personnel and may reduce levels of performance and readiness, the study will assess the efficacy of chiropractic treatment for active duty military personnel in a number of areas.

Through three clinical trials, the study will assess chiropractic’s effectiveness in:

  • relieving low back pain and improving function in active duty service members;

  • evaluating the effects of chiropractic treatment on reflexes and reaction times for Special Operations forces;

  • determining the effect of chiropractic treatment on strength, balance and injury prevention for members of the Armed Forces with combat specialties; and

  • assessing the impact of a chiropractic intervention on smoking cessation in military service members.

The Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research, headquartered on the Palmer College of Chiropractic campus in Davenport, Iowa, is the largest institutional chiropractic research effort in the world, promoting excellence and leadership in scientific research. The PCCR has the largest budget for research in a chiropractic college, receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health, National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration, and now the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. Since 2000, these grant awards have totaled approximately $35 million.

Filed Under: chiropractic, News, Research

I found this video on Mercola.com. Are we safe? Who should make our decisions?

February 18, 2011 By admin Leave a Comment

Dr. Maurice Hilleman made astounding revelations in an interview that was cut from The Health Century — the admission that Merck drug company vaccines had been injecting dangerous viruses into people worldwide.

Bear in mind that Dr. Hilleman was the developer of Merck’s vaccine program. He developed over three dozen vaccines, more than any other scientist in history. He was a member of the U.S. National Academy of Science, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. He received a special lifetime achievement award from the World Health Organization. Hilleman was one of the early vaccine pioneers to warn about the possibility that simian viruses might contaminate vaccines.

Filed Under: chiropractic

Majority of Alabama Chiropractors Favor Limited Prescription Rights

February 18, 2011 By John

Source Chiropractic Economics

The Alabama State Chiropractic Association (ASCA) conducted a survey of member practitioners in 2010 regarding the scope of practice in Alabama. Overall, results indicated that a majority of surveyed chiropractors are in favor of the inclusion of injectable vitamins and nutrients and prescriptive rights in the scope of practice…

Within the group of 255 respondents, 63 percent percent agreed or strongly agreed that chiropractic is a drugless alternative to allopathic medical care, and the same proportion of respondents felt that chiropractic is the detection and correction of subluxations. Seventy-six percent agreed that subluxation is an important cause of disease and correction can restore health.

However, 41 percent responded that the chiropractic profession should abandon the term subluxation and focus on a broader scope of practice in general. A majority were also in favor of chiropractors utilizing injectable vitamins and nutrients (58 percent), as well as prescriptions of certain drugs (60 percent).

Survey respondents also believed that expanding the scope of practice in Alabama would both increase membership to the ASCA, as well as the number of patients seeking chiropractic care. Seventy-eight percent of the ASCA membership responded to this survey, which indicates that the outcome is a good representation of the climate of the chiropractic profession statewide.

Read the ASCA Survey Results

Read the Current Alabama Chiropractic Scope of Practice

Filed Under: chiropractic, News
« Older Posts