Apparently, the worst pejorative that can be hurled at those who consider chiropractic more than just a mechanical treatment for certain cases neck and pack pain is to call them a “chiroevangalist.” I think this is meant to be a derisive term, suggesting that the chiropractor is mentally deficient, unenlightened or plain stupid by “believing” in or putting stock in certain metaphysical or even whole body effects of the chiropractic adjustment. I guess the thinking goes something like this: if it’s not found in the “literature” (scripture) with the blessing of anointed and properly creditentialed “peers” (disciples), than the chiropractic “intervention” (sacrament) can’t produce the result (miracle) that is claimed. Any suggestion that chiropractic might help one’s general health, improve organic conditions or enhance the body’s healing ability is dismissed as old school dogma, irresponsible wishful thinking and well, unprofessional.
This conveniently ignores thousands (maybe millions) of anecdotal cases in which patients have seen an improvement in their overall health, experienced profound results with chronic organic conditions and recovered from cancer, epilepsy, autoimmune diseases and countless other “non-back pain” complaints. Of course, many patients have not experienced such benefits. And this is what critics have seized upon. “How can you in good conscience say that chiropractic treats asthma, acid reflux or any disease whatsoever?!?”
And of course vitalistic chiropractors would never suggest that chiropractic treats disease. “However, those with a disease who have subluxations often find their body works better when their subluxations are reduced, restoring your body’s self-healing ability. Shall we see how your body responds?”
Is that such a fringe and extreme position?
This often manifests in a battle between the mechanistic, five-sensing chiropractors who rely on “scientific” validation, versus the vitalistic chiropractors who base their practice on the metaphysical, quantum and the so-called “unproven” principles of chiropractic. The mechanists look down their noses at the unfounded beliefs and quaint, one hundred year-old philosophy of the vitalists. And the vitalists simply smile at the quaint, three hundred year-old Newtonian perspective of the mechanists.
Those steeped in the dualistic world of white or black, vanilla or chocolate, yes or no, believe that one view must be right and the other wrong. (And we all know how important it is to be right!) One is modern and progressive, the other childish and simplistic. In this either/or perception of the world, some chiropractors find it difficult to accept that both perspectives are correct. It’s not mechanistic or vitalistic. It’s mechanistic and vitalistic!
Given this, and the desire to cast stones at the “chiroevanglists,” I’m assuming the “chiro” refers to chiropractic. But what is meant by the “evangelist” part? If it means to “announce the good news” about chiropractic that the body is self-regulating and self-healing, for the purpose of winning converts (patients), then count me in. Because in case you haven’t noticed, people begin chiropractic care because of what they feel, not by what they think; by what they believe and certainly not by the articles published in peer reviewed journals!