The Nov. 2000 issue of The Chiropractic Journal contained an article concerning a Colorado doctor brought before the state board for failing to provide written informed consent for the use of Network Chiropractic, paraspinal surface EMG and thermal scan therapy.

However, the article pointed out, the Colorado Board of Chiropractic Examiners also overstepped its legislative authority by setting requirements not included in the state's Chiropractic Practice Act. It stated that Daniel Knowles, D.C., of Boulder, "should have performed a blood-pressure exam, a basic neurological exam, and orthopedic testing," in a case involving lightheadedness with low back pain.

Knowles asked The Chiropractic Journal (TCJ) and the World Chiropractic Alliance (WCA) for assistance in arguing that such tests are not relevant to the diagnosis of vertebral subluxation and therefore should not be required of a D.C. whose practice focuses on subluxation.

In response, Terry A. Rondberg, publisher of TCJ and president of the WCA submitted a letter to the board, providing information on subluxation detection and published legal opinions on the right of D.C.s to confine their practice to subluxation correction. He also published the article on the case and mentioned in it a subsequent column.

The exposure apparently bothered the board members, who preferred to have their actions go unnoticed by the profession. In its final "Stipulation and Order" to Knowles, the board inserted a requirement that "Respondent agrees not to discuss the circumstances of this settlement with Terry Rondberg, D.C."

The order, however, is a public record and can be easily obtained through normal administrative procedure. The order focuses on record keeping and contains no requirement for medical tests or other non-chiropractic examinations or diagnoses.

"I've known that the WCA and TCJ can strike fear in the hearts of those who would prefer to work in darkness," Dr. Rondberg noted after seeing a copy of the board order. "But I've never seen a board try to issue what amounts to a gag order to prevent someone from talking to us."

He said he wondered if such an order was even Constitutional. "Someone should remind the Colorado board of the First Amendment that protects both our freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But frankly, the real issue was the requirement for medical tests. Since the board apparently isn't going to pursue that insupportable demand, I'm not going to worry about its petty attempt to escape scrutiny."