While rummaging through an obscure bookstore in a small corner of God's Country, I happened on a book entitled "Concerning Osteopathy" by George Webster, D.O. (1910). What a wonderful surprise to find I had stumbled on a piece of healing history!

In my years at Palmer (1951-55), we were taught the osteopathic premise to be false, namely because their manipulative procedures were done to better blood circulation. Of course, ours was the more basic and all-encompassing idea, in that our foundation rested on nerve energy flow and nervous system integrity.

Again, as allopathic physicians treated effects rather than cause, so was the osteopath in error in that blood flow restriction was more an effect than a cause in the manifestation of disease. Sounded good enough to me, so that was that.

As the years have passed and we have seen monumental changes in the practice of chiropractic, certain questions have come to mind that need answers.

The age old question of what is the basic difference between a chiropractor and a medical doctor is still as relevant today as it was when our profession was founded. The first chiropractor set his premise and objectives, stuck by them regardless of the accepted norms of the day, and maintained his approach to his patients' problems by means of a system no one else either applied or believed in who practiced medicine.

Strange that an old book on osteopathy focused very clearly on just what happens when a profession loses its need for existence. Putting aside the very tenets that created its birth, a profession soon dies. What distinguished it from all others was its uniqueness. Many reasons can be given for what causes such a change. However, suffice it to say that the true visionaries in all walks of life are rare.

Let me share with you a few of the wonderful concepts brought to light before the chiropractic profession was even in existence. The following are quotes from Webster's book:

"The two basic theories first propounded by Dr. Still and forming the tenets upon which the osteopathic school rests are: first, the theory of the mechanical lesion as a cause of disease; and second, the theory that the normal chemical body is practically immune."

"Osteopathy is simply this: The law of human life is absolute and I believe that God has placed the remedy for every disease within the material house in which the spirit of life dwells."

"When all parts of the human body are in line, we have perfect health. When they are not, the effect is disease. When all parts are readjusted disease gives place to health." Dr. A.T. Still. (These principles were established in 1874.)

"The recognition of pressure as the cause of continuation of disease and the adoption of manipulative measures for the relief of such pressure are the essential characteristics that differentiate Osteopathy from all other therapeutic systems. Adjustment is the keynote of Osteopathy."

Under "Manner of Treatment" we read: "Find it, fix it and leave it alone," Dr. Still.

In a chapter of "Proofs of Osteopathy," numerous examples of scientific experimentation (i.e. x-ray, animal experiments, dissections, autopsies, clinic records, etc.) point to the efficacy of their beliefs.

The concluding line reads:

"Said evidence supports the theory of Osteopathy that structural abnormalities are a fundamental cause of disease and that the cure of disease is accomplished by the removal of the cause, i.e. by structural adjustment."

This book is replete with the eternal truths of natural healing. In fact, reference is made to what differentiates the osteopathic profession from other schools of healing, namely, being specific in removing the cause and not becoming involved in trying to remedy the effects of that cause. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

The final chapter deals with the future of this profession. How its unique approach to human suffering must be adhered to, how human society will surely benefit by the natural way over the way of drugs.

So what happened? What could ever have happened to reduce a once thriving healing community of 7,000 osteopathic physicians in the U.S. and Canada (when the populations of both countries were much smaller than today) with seven colleges and a research institute in Chicago to virtual non-existence today?

No one of rational mind would believe the old claptrap that the osteopathic profession has all but disappeared because of an ill-founded premise. That is the farthest from the truth. It foundered because the body of its practitioners no longer had the fortitude to fight the temptations of acceptance and stick to the timeless principles that A.T. Still espoused.

It doesn't matter one wit who first discovered and then formulated the natural way to health through structural adjustment, but it sure matters one helluva lot who protects the right of the sick to the application of those principles.

It's obvious the rank and file of the osteopathic profession faltered when standing against the established thinking of the day. They simply surrendered their unique, natural way that would have altered all healing methods to varying degrees, for the most recognized thoughts and practices of their medical brethren. In a simpler context, they couldn't resist (for varied reasons) the practice of medicine. Treat the effects, forget the cause!

Well, good friends, after 30 years of practice, I haven't the slightest doubt the majority of the practicing chiropractors today are doing the opposite of what our founder decreed. Read D.D. Palmer and see how closely allied his thoughts were to Still's. Read and weep for the day of the diagnosing, treating chiropractic physician (more properly labeled by B.J. Palmer as a chiropractoid) has arrived.