January 2006
Discovering the global burden of subluxation
by Dr. Terry A. Rondberg
What impact does
vertebral subluxation have on the world? Does it affect human health and
well‑being? How does it alter the mortality and morbidity rate in various
population groups? Can it be a factor in combating pandemics or raising the
wellness level in developing nations?
These are some of the
questions we, as a profession, must answer if we are to secure a position
for chiropractic in the 21st century health paradigm.
To arrive at the
answers, we'll need to approach the challenge with a massive
information‑gathering effort that can combine the most credible research
protocols with the power of electronic data collection technology.
In many ways, we have
to model the effort on the World Health Organization's "Global Burden of
Disease (GBD) project," which was started in 1993.
Although we always
assume there's a mountain of research to support the medical approach, that
isn't the case. According to the Harvard School of Public Health,
"Historically, there has existed no reliable epidemiological data‑set
sweeping enough to identify priorities for health services and research."
The GBD project ‑‑ sponsored by WHO and the World Bank ‑‑ was launched as a
worldwide collaboration of about 100 researchers.
Based on the data those
100 or so researchers compile, the project "series comprehensively
quantifies the burdens of 486 sequelae of 108 major causes of death and
disability, disaggregated by eight geographic regions and ten age‑sex
groups; risk factors are evaluated and projections to the year 2020 are
made."
Thanks to this
ambitious project, we know more than ever about the state of human health
throughout the world. Scientists have quantified the health impact of
factors as diverse as climate change, obesity and clinical depression and
have even been able to estimate how many years each factor takes off our
life. These "Disability Adjusted Life Years," or DALYs as they're called,
combine the time lived with disability and the time lost due to premature
mortality. One DALY can be thought of as one lost year of 'healthy' life,
WHO explains.
What if the GBD project
included vertebral subluxation as one the criteria it studied? How many
DALYs would subluxations be responsible for? How many more years of healthy
life would be added if we were a subluxation‑free world?
Not surprisingly, the
GBD project did not include subluxations. After all, many of our own
researchers and leaders continue to remind the world there's little proof
that subluxations even exist, let alone have an impact on health.
For instance, an
article written by Donald R. Murphy, DC, and nine of his colleagues in the
Sept. 1, 2005 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic, noted that "the scientific
literature has failed to demonstrate the very existence of the subluxation."
Likewise, in the
January 2004 issue of the "Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics (JMPT) Joseph Keating, PhD stated: "I cannot recall ever
reading a randomized controlled clinical trial in which putative segmental
indicators of subluxation were monitored alongside clinical outcomes
variables such that correlation between subluxation correction and improved
clinical outcomes could be demonstrated."
Sadly, they are at
least partially correct. (I do dispute their claim that there is no proof of
the subluxation's existence or impact on health. There have been a number of
excellent research papers in the Journal of Vertebral Subluxation Research
and other chiropractic journals that provide a firm foundation of evidence.)
Still, they are correct
to say that we lack the kind of research data that would allow us to
quantify the global burden of subluxation and be accepted by the world's
medical and scientific communities.
But we are closer to
that goal than ever before, thanks to RCS (Research & Clinical Science), the
private‑sector project that is engaging in a global data gathering effort to
identify and quantify various factors relating to subluxation and health.
It's hard to believe
that the chiropractic profession could conduct research on the scale of the
World Health Organization or Harvard. Yet, while the GBD included only about
100 researchers, RCS is prepared to train and equip thousands of
chiropractic doctors as field researchers, collecting data from hundreds of
thousands ‑‑ and perhaps even millions ‑‑ of people around the world.
Naturally, RCS doesn't
have funding from the World Bank and can't rely on government grants. If we
wait for that to happen, we'll never get the research we need. Instead, each
doctor involved in the program is asked to pay a fee (as low as $149/month)
to become an Authorized RCS Clinical Investigator. Many doctors have chosen
to become RCS members solely to be part of this monumental research effort
rather than because their practices could grow significantly as a result.
It's hard to understand
why some chiropractic researchers haven't enthusiastically jumped on board
this project. They say we need the hard, scientific proof that subluxations
have a negative impact on health and that chiropractic care can provide
specific benefits. Yet, they continue trying to keep all meaningful research
restricted to their own little exclusive domain, to maintain their elevated
position above the rabble of mere practitioners in the field.
Despite their initial
skepticism, they can no longer have doubts about RCS's legitimacy. Not only
has it earned approval by an independent Institutional Review Board, but it
makes sure every doctor who participates in the program is approved as well.
No other chiropractic research project ever conducted has been as
scrupulous.
Nor can they have
failed to be impressed by the composition of the RCS International
Scientific Advisory Panel, a multi‑disciplinary group of world‑class
scientists with extraordinary credentials and expertise. As a group, their
research papers have been published in hundreds of major scientific journals
through the world, including:
 |
American
Journal of Medical Genetics |
 |
American
Journal of Physical Anthropology |
 |
American
Psychologist |
 |
Archives of
Internal Medicine |
 |
Archives of
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation |
 |
Brain
Research |
 |
Cancer
Journal |
 |
Clinical
Neurology Research |
 |
International
Journal of Integrative Medicine |
 |
International
Journal of Neuropharmacology |
 |
Japanese
Orthopaedic Surgeon Association Journal |
 |
Journal of
Applied Physiology |
 |
Journal of
Applied Social Psychology |
 |
Journal of
Biochemistry |
 |
Journal of
Biomedical Science |
 |
Journal of
Cell Biology |
 |
Journal of
Comp Neurology |
 |
Journal of
Comparative Neurology |
 |
Journal of
Human Evolution |
 |
Journal of
Neurobiology |
 |
Journal of
Neurochemistry |
 |
Journal of
Neuroscience |
 |
Journal of
Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy |
 |
Journal of
Psychiatric Research |
 |
Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research |
 |
Journal of
the American Medical Association |
 |
Molecular
Psychiatry |
 |
Nairobi
Journal of Medicine |
 |
Neurochemistry International |
 |
New African
Journal of Medicine |
 |
Operative
Techniques in Orthopedics |
 |
Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences |
 |
Society for
Neuroscience |