July 2009

We present the facts ... you decide

by Terry A. Rondberg, DC, Publisher

Last month, residents of Southern California were shocked to learn that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa had had an ongoing affair with a woman named Lu Parker. The fact she's a former beauty pageant winner and television actress, that it was Mr. Villaraigosa's second public affair, or that the first one ended his marriage didn't seem to really bother people. What made the situation so unacceptable was the fact that Ms. Parker was a news reporter for a local television station.

How could she possibly report fairly and accurately on city affairs (if you'll excuse the pun) if she had a relationship with one of its top leaders? What if she discovered some wrongdoing at city hall? Would she cover it up or put journalistic ethics ahead of personal feelings?

This is an extremely difficult position to be in and one that all reporters have to wrestle with throughout their careers. They must not allow the relationships they've formed with others -- personal or professional -- to influence the way they report the news. That rule applies to friends and colleagues as well as romantic partners.

Over the course of the past two decades, I've made great friends of numerous doctors, including many who are considered top leaders and are highly respected in the profession. I've supported and endorsed their work, publicized their activities, and even gone into business with a few of them.

That puts me in an awkward position. What happens if one of them does something illegal, unprofessional or unethical? Should I turn a blind eye to the situation and refuse to report the news? Or should I do what I am obligated to do in my role as founder and CEO of the World Chiropractic Alliance and publisher of The Chiropractic Journal and investigate the activity and present the facts to the rest of the profession? The WCA has been the "watchdog" organization since its inception and has reported on actions by the World Federation of Chiropractic, American Chiropractic Association, and many other organizations, companies and individuals. Why should anyone -- even a high-profile and well-liked leader get a "pass" when it comes to possible wrongdoing?

This is the decision I had to make regarding the complaints against Chiropractic Leadership Alliance (CLA) and its president Patrick Gentempo, DC. For years, he and I were friends and close business associates. He chose The Chiropractic Journal for his advertising and got a great response from it, as well as from the many supportive articles we published about him and his CLA's Subluxation Station. He served on the board of the World Chiropractic Alliance and was given the WCA's "Chiropractor of the Year" award.

When rumors began surfacing last year that some of the marketing claims for the Subluxation Station were either exaggerated or downright false, I found it hard to believe. But before long, the evidence was overwhelming. CLA's ad campaigns continued to say and/or imply that the Subluxation Station was affiliated with or endorsed by NASA and certified by the Space Foundation, an organization CLA kept saying was "co-founded by NASA." CLA also claimed that its chief engineer, Lee Brody, had directed NASA-funded research for the NeuroMuscular Research Center at Boston University.

The World Chiropractic Alliance worked closely with David Marcarian, founder of Precision Biometrics, to uncover the truth. Mr. Marcarian is a former NASA sEMG researcher and was awarded a $450,000 NIH grant to develop the MyoVision G Wirefree PhysioMonitoring System. Together, we unearthed some disturbing facts, among them:

1. NASA had absolutely nothing to do with the Subluxation Station (after looking into the complaints, NASA itself refused to classify the device as a "spin off" of space technology).

2. The Space Foundation is a private, for-profit company that has no official ties with NASA.

3. CLA paid for the Space Foundation "certification," which promotes certification as an effective marketing strategy and even sells "exclusivity" rights (for an additional fee).

4. Lee Brody never worked on any NASA-sponsored projects and never directed any grant-funded project (according to Dr. Carlo De Luca, director of the Boston University NeuroMuscular Research Center).

5. The FDA status CLA mentions in its ads means little. The registration obtained by the Subluxation Station -- a 510(k) registration -- does NOT mean that the device has been tested and/or found to be either safe or effective. A 501(k) "approval" simply means that a device demonstrates a "substantial equivalence" to a device marketed before 1976, when the Medical Device Amendment was passed.

These are the facts. Everything has been documented and is available on the World Chiropractic Alliance website (www.worldchiropracticalliance.org). There can be no refuting this evidence.

Still, I felt it necessary and fair to ask Dr. Gentempo for his side of the story. I e-mailed him a series of questions so he could explain or deny the allegations. His response, in part, was: "As far as a response to these illegitimate questions -- the accusations and details are ‘extremely flawed and inaccurate.’ To give you a factual line by line response refuting these would pretend that this is a legitimate inquiry as compared to the vendetta we both know it is. ... In the end, I have 100% confidence in my client base, the leadership of this profession, and other industry publishers. They are very loyal supporters. Rest assured though, if you libel or defame me, Christopher, or my companies with the lies I know you want to publish, I will use ALL legal means available to me to hold you personally and your businesses to account."

Despite his threats, I felt compelled to go public with the facts. One reason was that too many field doctors could find themselves facing disciplinary action because they are repeating these questionable claims in their own ads and on their websites. If these doctors aren't concerned, that's fine with me. But they have the right to know about the situation and they aren't being told about it by CLA.

I've had eight doctors send me angry e-mails in the wake of the public disclosures by the WCA. But in almost every case they admitted they had not read the actual documentation, but had reacted automatically to the news. Some divulged that they had been contacted by Dr. Gentempo and told to "express their outrage."

Once they reviewed the factual evidence, they realized that there were grounds for the complaints and that the WCA and the Journal were acting in a responsible manner. One doctor wrote: "Your response captures my interest and we will do further diligence. Know that we have suspended any comment to our clients and will continue to do so as this plays out to give you and CLA equal appreciation. Overall, we’re just so tired of things like this dividing the profession and admittedly reacted by knee-jerk."

So, before you start thinking -- and saying -- how awful it is that the Journal and the WCA dare to accuse CLA of doing something wrong, I ask that you go to the WCA website (www.worldchiropracticalliance.org) and read the documentation yourself.

Our responsibility is to present the facts. You have to make the decision. Neither job is an easy one. But to refuse to do it would be burying our heads in the sands of ignorance and bias. Chiropractic is too important for us to do that.