New book distorts WFC role

NCMIC publishes text positioning group as global authority

A new book written by Mr. David Chapman-Smith, secretary-general of the World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC), and published by NCMIC, deliberately and repeatedly mis-states the role of the WFC in global chiropractic. It presents that organization as the ultimate arbiter of chiropractic education and practice.

The book, titled "The Chiropractic Profession," has infuriated many chiropractic leaders and field doctors, who say it inaccurately inflates the importance of the controversial WFC. Critics also argue that it is an undisguised attempt to discredit the subluxation-based practice guidelines which have threatened the dominance of the Mercy document.

A marketing brochure which accompanies the book includes an open letter from NCMIC President Louis Sportelli, part of the small group that developed Mercy and who also serves as WFC president. He states that the book is "well documented, thoroughly researched and thoughtfully written."

Yet, even a cursory look at the text reveals blatant fallacies about the WFC's place in the chiropractic profession.

Manufactures authority

In his introduction to the WFC -- which he listed first among all international organizations -- Mr. Chapman-Smith declares that it is "the profession's primary forum for developing a consistent basis for legal recognition, education and practice in all world regions."

However, the WFC's bylaws state only that one of the group's goals is "Promoting uniform high standards of chiropractic education, research and practice." It does not contain any provision for the group to recognize or regulate education or practice anywhere in the world.

Furthermore, according to the bylaws, authority for all policy and other major decisions is supposed to be vested in member associations, who meet bi-annually. The last assembly was held in New Zealand in 1999, yet the profession was never informed that member organizations had bestowed that authority on it. No information about the proceedings or decisions of the 1999 meeting are contained on the WFC web site.

The book also fails to note that Chapman-Smith a) was the key person involved in founding the WFC, b) took the position of "Secretary-General" and has held it ever since, and c) runs the group from his office in Canada.

In this book, Chapman-Smith points to common educational standards shared by the Council of Chiropractic Education (CCE) and its international counterparts. These standards, he explains "are monitored by the various CCEs and the World Federation of Chiropractic."

Yet, the WFC has absolutely no legitimate role in developing or setting the standards of any chiropractic educational agency nor is it empowered to "monitor" any educational process.

In a chapter on education and licensure, Chapman-Smith again claims authority which he and his WFC do not possess. He states that 31 colleges worldwide are "recognized by the World Federation of Chiropractic." However, the WFC has no process nor authority to recognize any college or other educational institution, or confer any "recognition" status. This is strictly the domain of the CCE and other accrediting agencies.

Adding to the irony is a statement in that same chapter which claims "there are a number of chiropractic educational programs of lesser and inadequate standard in countries where the chiropractic profession is not regulated and the World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC) and the international chiropractic community have no authority." What he fails to mention is that the WFC has no authority to regulate any educational program in any country.

Still later, Chapman-Smith notes that educational agencies around the world, together with "an International Charter on Education adopted by the WFC provide the basis for uniform minimum standards internationally." The WFC charter contains no language giving it authority of any kind to set or review international academic standards.

There are several other similar statements and inferences in that chapter that would lead a reader to erroneously conclude that the WFC has global authority to regulate, recognize and monitor chiropractic educational institutions.

Ignores diversity

Not all of his mis-information deals with education, however. When providing background on the principles and goals of chiropractic care, Chapman-Smith completely ignores the diversity of the profession and quotes definitions developed by what he calls "two representative authorities in the profession" -- the Association of Chiropractic Colleges and the American Chiropractic Association (ACA).

The ACA definition states: "The chiropractor in the primary health care system is a first-contact gatekeeper for neuromusculoskeletal conditions... Chiropractors provide conservative management of neuromusculoskeletal disorders and related functional manifestations including, but not limited to, back pain, neck pain and headaches."

It also says bluntly that chiropractic alone isn't sufficient: "Optimal patient care can best be achieved when chiropractic is vertically integrated within the health care system. Interdisciplinary collaboration is essential to this purpose."

In the same section, Chapman-Smith also categorically states that subluxations are not structural entities and cannot be detected on x-ray.

Possibly the most blatant example of mis-information in the book comes under a section titled "Real and Unreal Guidelines," contained within the "Scope of Practice" chapter.

Chapman-Smith notes, "In 1998 another chiropractic clinical guideline was distributed in the U.S. by the impressive sounding Council on Chiropractic Practice. This is a small splinter group not representative of the profession. With respect to duration and frequency of care, its guidelines titled Vertebral Subluxation in Chiropractic Practice provides a basis for unlimited chiropractic treatments... provides no numbers or time frames and puts no limits on the judgement of the individual chiropractor." He then adds that the CCP guideline "has been rejected by all major organizations in the chiropractic profession."

Nothing could be further from the truth and the description, in fact, more accurately describes the Mercy document.

The CCP guidelines were developed by a large multi-disciplinary panel which actively solicited input from researchers, technique developers, and field doctors. In contrast, the Mercy guideline was written by a hand-picked group of medically oriented doctors who met in secret session and distributed the document to the insurance industry before it was released to the profession.

Further, Mercy was rejected by the International Chiropractors Association, the World Chiropractic Alliance, The Federation of Straight Chiropractic Organizations, The Congress of Chiropractic State Organizations, and many others on the international, national, and state levels. Yet, Chapman-Smith never mentions this, nor does he mention that the profession as a whole has repeatedly indicated a lack of support for Mercy, as shown repeatedly in national surveys.

The CCP guidelines, on the other hand, have been endorsed and adopted by numerous national and state organizations, in the U.S. and Canada.

Money, power motives?

It doesn't seem surprising that Dr. Sportelli and the NCMIC are fervently pushing the book. Sportelli, who has been Chapman-Smith's partner in previous business ventures, has become the most prominent defender of the Mercy document. He has marketed several high-priced seminars and other material to "teach" the guidelines and currently uses them as the underwriting criteria for NCMIC policies.

It also appears to make sense that of the three "testimonials" for the book included in the brochure, just one is from a chiropractor -- Dr. Scott Haldeman -- a D.C.-turned-M.D. and neurologist who helped write the Mercy document. The other "testimonials" are from a layperson who teachers at the University of Chicago Graham School, and a Ph.D., who is a "'future studies' consultant."

The brochure clearly shows that the book is not simply being marketed to chiropractors but to M.D.s, D.O.s, legislators, insurance professionals and attorneys. In fact, D.C.s are encouraged to send copies of the book to these other professionals.

"I find it outrageous that Mr. Chapman-Smith and the NCMIC are deliberately trying to deceive readers into thinking that the WFC and Mercy are the absolute arbiters of all things chiropractic," stated Dr. Terry A. Rondberg, president of the World Chiropractic Alliance. "It seems obvious that this is just another step in their campaign to set themselves up as the pre-eminent authorities for chiropractic worldwide."

Ploy backfires

Recently, Chapman-Smith came under fire for lodging a complaint with a U.N. official, protesting the WCA's recognition as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) with the United Nation's Department of Public Information. The WFC is an NGO affiliated with the World Health Organization and Chapman-Smith -- who uses the imposing title of "Secretary-General" -- appears to feel his group has the sole right to represent chiropractic in the global arena.

Dr. Rondberg also pointed to inaccuracies in a WFC advertisement published in Dynamic Chiropractic on Jan. 1, 2000. In the recruitment ad, the WFC makes the false claim that "all 65 national associations worldwide" are members of the WFC. However, several countries, include Japan and the United States, have associations that are not members.

It also states that the WFC provides "service to the growing needs of chiropractors," yet, as a confederation of chiropractic associations it has never been empowered to provide any services directly to the profession.

"Clearly, Mr. Chapman-Smith has completely overextended his reach in the WFC, taking upon himself authority which he does not have," said Rondberg.

"I cannot believe that the CCE and other educational groups around the world, as well as the colleges themselves, will permit him to seize command of the chiropractic school system like this. If they sit back and do nothing, they will lose their autonomy and authority.

"Worse, if those in positions of legitimate authority do not act -- and act decisively -- to halt this travesty, the education of future chiropractors will be completely under the control of Chapman-Smith, Sportelli, and others like them.

Rondberg concluded, "These are individuals who have declared themselves to be opposed to subluxation-based chiropractic and who will seemingly stop at nothing to destroy our heritage and promise by turning the profession into a pseudo-medical discipline. Too many have sacrificed too much to let this happen."

Action needed

Rondberg strongly urged all doctors who belong to WFC member groups to demand that their organizations withdraw from the WFC.

"Ask yourselves," he said, "whether you want your membership dues to pay for Dr. Lou Sportelli, David Chapman-Smith, and their Mercy allies to determine and command the future of chiropractic education. If not, withdrawal from the WFC seems to be the only reasonable course."

In addition, he encouraged alumni from all colleges who provide financial support to the WFC to protest those payments to Chapman-Smith.

Finally, Rondberg asked doctors to take WFC support into consideration when patronizing a chiropractic company.

"The only way we can stop Chapman-Smith, Sportelli and their WFC agenda is to make sure we -- the profession as a whole -- tell them we will not tolerate it. And stemming the flow of money into the WFC's pockets is the action that will speak loudest to them," he stated.

He added that doctors could help fight the WFC by joining the World Chiropractic Alliance.