Subluxation: dogma or science?

Joseph C Keating Jr¹ , Keith H Charlton² , Jaroslaw P Grod³ , Stephen M Perle⁴ , David Sikorski⁵ and James F Winterstein⁶

¹6135 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ, 85012, USA

²School of Medicine, Mayne Medical School, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland 4006, Australia

³Department of Graduate Education and Research, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto ON, M2H 3J1, Canada

⁴Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Chiropractic, University of Bridgeport, 225 Myrtle Ave., Bridgeport, CT 06604, USA

⁵Department of Chiropractic Procedures, Southern California University of Health Sciences, 16200 E. Amber Valley Drive, Whittier, CA 90604, USA

⁶President, National University of Health Sciences, 200 East Roosevelt Road, Lombard, IL 60148, USA

author email corresponding author email

Chiropractic & Osteopathy 2005, 13:17doi:10.1186/1746-1340-13-17


Published:	10 August 2005

Abstract

Subluxation syndrome is a legitimate, potentially testable, theoretical construct for which there is little experimental evidence. Acceptable as hypothesis, the widespread assertion of the clinical meaningfulness of this notion brings ridicule from the scientific and health care communities and confusion within the chiropractic profession. We believe that an evidence-orientation among chiropractors requires that we distinguish between subluxation dogma vs. subluxation as the potential focus of clinical research. We lament efforts to generate unity within the profession through consensus statements concerning subluxation dogma, and believe that cultural authority will continue to elude us so long as we assert dogma as though it were validated clinical theory.