November 2005

The double‑edged sword of donations

by Dr. Terry A. Rondberg

As television's Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) can confirm, asking for donations to support a cause sometimes results in ticklish ethical dilemmas. For example, when San Francisco's PBS station KQED went to the Robert Mondavi Winery to ask for corporate sponsorship of a series on the wine industry, they offered to broadcast a documentary that, they said, "celebrates the life of Robert Gerald Mondavi," and focuses on his efforts to make Mondavi wine "one of the world's most renowned labels."

Since that was tantamount to selling air time and caused quite a bit of criticism, the station decided to go to the American Center for Wine, Food and the Arts for sponsorship instead. However, that strategy became transparent when it was disclosed that Robert Mondavi is the founder and chairman of the organization, which would give financial support to the project only if all the programs in the series were "consistent with the Center's mission and objectives."

As Jim Naureckas pointed out in an article for Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a national media watch group, "There's no doubt that a producer who expressed an interest in investigating Mondavi's labor problems, for example, would have clashed with the center's 'mission and objectives.'"

The KQED project came under intense fire for its willingness to let corporate sponsors dictate the type and content of its programming and eventually the entire project was dropped.

Similar issues are being faced by chiropractic organizations and efforts that rely on corporate donations for their support and, if we're not vigilant, some otherwise good chiropractic projects might end up being destroyed either because of influence peddling or the controversy surrounding them.

A case in point is the exciting "Foundation for Chiropractic Progress" (F4CP) effort that The Chiropractic Journal reported on in September. The initial ads created for the program were innovative and far reaching, urging the public to rethink some of its ideas about chiropractic. The ads pointed out the potential for chiropractic to address a wide variety of physical problems, and be beneficial for people of all ages. There were no lightning bolts coming out of someone's back and no graphics of a guy wincing in pain while grabbing his stiff neck.

Although I would have liked to have seen at least one talk about vertebral subluxations, I generally thought the ads were great and I'd be proud to see them appear in magazines and on billboards.

But a few days ago, I read a press release announcing that NCMIC had pledged to contribute $1 million over a five‑year period to the Foundation. NCMIC president Louis Sportelli, D.C. ‑‑ past Chairman of the Board of Governors of the American Chiropractic Association, and a member of the Mercy Conference Commission ‑‑ said his company gave the money since it was "committed to helping every individual chiropractor grow and prosper."

In the same release, F4CP President/CEO Gene Vano noted that the "campaign is to build upon the already well‑accepted image of chiropractic as doctors who have exceptional expertise in neck pain, back pain and headaches."

That's not what the ads seemed to indicate. In fact, they pointed to the opposite idea: that chiropractors have exceptional expertise in a lot more than just neck pain, back pain and headaches. One ad poster specifically tries to change that perception of chiropractic with the following message:

"Doctors of chiropractic are widely known for their effectiveness in treating structural problems, particularly those involving the spine. It's easy for most people to identify chiropractic procedure with that of the neck, back and spine. But what many people don't realize is that since the spinal column carries the nerves from the brain to all the organs of the body, a dysfunction of the spine could cause any number of other types of health problems felt in other parts of the body.

"Headaches. Stomach problems. Muscular disorders. Loss of energy. Reduced performance. Even allergies, can possibly be affected. When you think of a doctor of chiropractic, think of the attainment and maintenance of good health without the use of drugs or medications. Think of a safe alternative to medication."

Does this press release signal a change in the Foundation's direction as a result of a million dollar "gift" from a company that is known for its emphasis on the "chiropractic for back pain" school of thought?

I'm hoping I just misinterpreted Dr. Veno's statement and what he really meant was that the campaign's goal was to get people to go beyond the outdated and restrictive notion of chiropractors as neck and back pain therapists.

The fact is, we don't need any more reinforcement of the chiropractor as a back doctor. Not in our public relations programs and particularly not in our research efforts. We have to move beyond that image, to continually explore the many other benefits of chiropractic care.

Realizing this, I can see the irony in the FCER's newest teleconference series that began last month. They called it: "Back to the Future ‑‑ New Perspectives in Back Pain Research" although "back to the past" might have been more appropriate. The FCER's idea of the future of chiropractic is more back pain research.

That's why we so desperately need RCS (Research & Clinical Science). It's the only private‑sector research organization in the profession dedicated to proving beyond all doubt that chiropractic care has a positive, long‑term impact on all aspects of health and wellness, including quality of life. Not back pain only. Not headaches. But all aspects of health and wellness. That's why I am such a strong supporter of RCS and why I am a principal investor in the company.

RCS will compile the clinical data we need to PROVE what the Foundation's ads say about chiropractic. It will allow chiropractic, once and for all, to expand its boundaries far past the little "back pain" circle that we've been locked into for so long. That circle will encompass children with asthma, seniors with arthritis, teens with impaired immune systems, adults with chemical dependencies, women with fertility problems, men with depression. It'll also expand to embrace healthy people who want to maintain the highest possible level of wellness. All people of all ages, coming to chiropractors for all reasons.

There are two ways to run and build a chiropractic practice. One is to rely on what Dr. Veno calls the "already well‑accepted image of chiropractic as doctors who have exceptional expertise in neck pain, back pain and headaches." Maybe you'll get another patient or two this week when somebody strains her back or someone else is in an accident and wrenches his neck. Perhaps a local medical doctor will condescend to refer a back pain patient to you for three of four visits.

Or, you can adopt the RCS vision of a wellness practice based on evidenced‑based care, serving a full range of patients who are suffering from the impact of vertebral subluxations. You can be an RCS Authorized Clinical Investigator involved in gathering the vital data needed to perform the most massive and important chiropractic research ever performed, and get to talk with hundreds of research volunteers about how chiropractic can actually contribute to their quality of life!

Which do you think will give you the largest increase in your practice and the most personal and professional satisfaction? Don't settle for being "just" a back‑pain doctor. You ‑‑ and chiropractic ‑‑ are capable of so much more!

To learn more about RCS, call 800‑909‑1354 or 480‑303‑1694, or visit the RCS website at www.rcsprogram.com. Doctors of chiropractic may log on to a special limited‑access area of the site by using the username DC2 and password RESEARCH.