Back in college, when we were learning all about all those electric physiotherapy modalities, it used to conjure up the voice of one of my electronics instructors from the past saying, "The best policy is to avoid all electric shocks, because they may have negative effects on nerves that don't show up until years later."
A DC who had ties in the still extant USSR came to CCC-LA to present a microcurrent device from Russia, that produced biological currents. Similar to currents produced by the body. The device was touted for increasing healing time for wounds, as well relieving MS, and whatnot. It hadn't been approved (or disapproved) so anyone could by one and use it as long as no claims were made about what it could do.
Shortly thereafter the use of any biological current machines was disapproved. Which really stuck with my conspiracy sensitive mind. The Wilks case was decided back then, and they had passed the bucket around to us students to chip in for the legal fund. Conspiracy was a proven fact. How many more might there be?
It seems logical that if electric currents occur naturally in the body, and their activity is linked to tissue health, then any treatment to increase health by optimizing these currents would have to have voltages and frequencies in the same range as those found in the body. A million times less than myo-stimulator jolts! Why would they make biocurrents illegal in that climate?
A few years ago I saw a lecture from a researcher who studies the electric properties of cartilage. And finds indeed that connective tissue is conductive and its conductivity changes depending on the amount of tension. The changes in tendon tension send electric signals that alter neuronal action potentials. Ergo an unexplored feedback communication pathway.
Also in recent years I learned about sonoluminescence being caused by electrons being stripped when cavitation occurs in water.
Add to that a fairly new invention that is based on a nozzle whose shape causes cavitation in liquid biomass, like algae. After the electrons get stripped from the carbohydrates, the molecules reorganize into a lower energy state, that happens to be hydrocarbons. Making gasoline, jet, or diesel fuel from the fastest growing lifeforms on earth, and sunshine.
Which bring us to joint electronics.
1. Could a caustic electromagnetic environment lead to decreased connective tissue elasticity and hence, subluxation?
2. Might some sort of biocurrent device be effective at reducing tension in joint cartilages, ligaments, and tendons, rendering subluxations adjustable with less force, even less pain?
3. Might joint cavitation involve sonoluminesence, that neutralizes ambient tissue charge by stripping electrons, thus normalizing tension?
4. Could intra-articular sonoluminescence also convert mucopolysaccharides or other present carbohydrates (in joint fluid), into glycerides or hydrocarbons, thus enhancing joint lubrication? Even reducing inflammation?
I know it's a stretch, but what do you think?
The battle line here in Europe is drawn. Take notice! What the
competition has been unable to do with science, it seeks here and now to
accomplish with vocabulary.
A colleague writes:
"It is
suggested that ‘subluxation’ be replaced by Joint Dysfunction, or Joint
Dysfunction Complex, or even Biomechanical Joint Lesion. ...‘Subluxation’
takes too long to explain and has a lot of baggage. The other proposed terms
MEAN THE SAME but are much easier to explain."
I understand the significance of establishing medico-legal terms.
It isn't easy. But the phrases being proposed to replace 'subluxation' actually are brief,
easy to understand, explanations of the meaning of subluxation. The only
baggage the word has, comes from a century of misrepresentation and
disinformation big pharma and AMA have dumped on us.
Whenever
science takes another leap and more proof backing up
VSC becomes obtainable and available, we get a whole new onslaught. Using word games in an attempt to get us to throw the
baby out with the bathwater. The phenomenon we treat deserves a name,
rather than a phrase description. The name 'subluxation' legally stakes
out our territory.
When DCs eventually merge with MDs,
those hybrid practitioners need to be DCs first, and only resort to
petro-pharmaceuticals and surgery when absolutely necessary. The current
trend, as evidenced by this renewed attack on our terminology, is a sign of
the opposition's weakness in the face of new research breakthroughs that
prove we have been right all along, and they have been overpriced, unsafe, and ineffective, ...and worse!
What
we want to fight for is recognition that a lifetime of covered
chiropractic maintenance and prevention care saves the system money. I
sincerely believe it does. And mounting evidence supports that. We do not want to
be reduced to specialists treating pain. Specialists are not primary
care providers. You need an MD script to get to see one. That would be a
HUGE, unwarranted, step backwards for us.
The scientific community is well equipped to adopt new terms with legally recognized definitions.
When
we now do have a rapidly growing body of scientific EVIDENCE backing us up, it
would be foolish to let them castrate the profession with semantics.
Maybe a good place to start is getting microsoft to add subluxation into their spell checker! ;)
You
can make a difference by helping us gather sound research here in the
forum so it is readily available to policy makers! Who are currently, or
most likely will be, suffering needlessly, otherwise. Your thoughts on this matter, also matter!
