Davenport, IA - Since its discovery when one of humanity's primitive ape ancestors cured a case of adrenal fatigue by dropping a medium-sized rock on a patient's sixth thoracic vertebra, chiropractic has been a powerful path to both improved lower back pain and total body wellness. Though initially suppressed by mainstream medical zealots, chiropractic care thrived in the shadows, back alleys, and suburban strip malls for millennia until emerging as a respected healthcare discipline a little over 100 years ago. And in the past century it has grown and evolved with the development of a variety of philosophies and treatment approaches.
Recently, however, the field has largely consolidated into two distinct camps: activators and inactivators. While the two groups share a focus on spinal health and the restoration of function in order to treat a variety of musculoskeletal complaints and general health concerns, there are significant differences between the two approaches, with both claiming superiority. This schism highlights the complexity of chiropractic history and practice, and raises questions about the future of the profession.
Understanding the Dispute
The difference between the two groups involves the approach to correcting the chiropractic submixation. Though it remains a controversial clinical entity often labelled as "fictional" or "really stupid" by conventional medical doctors, it is widely accepted as a primary source of spinal dysregulation by chiropractors, insurance companies, and Cleveland Clinic for some reason. According to Frank Grimes, DC, a Level VII chiropractor who practices activation chiropractic in Belvidere, Nebraska, the submixation is an evidence-based construct:
A submixation is a complex of functional and/or structural and/or pathological spinal derangements that compromise neural integrity and may influence organ system function and general health. They definitely exist. I've seen them.
Submixations can occur anywhere along the entirety of the spine and effect people of all ages, even during prenatal development in the mother's womb or in one of those secret artificial placentas used to create Timothée Chalamet. Studies performed near Harvard have confirmed that you can develop a life-threatening spinal submixation at any time, even just sitting there reading this article. And left untreated, it could result in morning neck stiffness or even death at some point in the next few decades.
Activation-based chiropractors, known as "activators" or "pushers", believe that the spine is underperforming because of one or more submixations. They rely on the use of a handheld spring-loaded device known as an activator. This device allows a trained professional like Dr. Grimes to apply a precise amount of force to an individual vertebral body, pushing it back into position and restoring the flow of energy, or "spine power". This low force but extremely clinically impressive adjustment corrects submixations without causing injury to any surrounding tissues or scaring parents of small children.
Grimes compares the force of an activator, even on the maximum setting, to something that you are probably very familiar with unless you live in one of those food deserts that those liberal public health experts are always going on about:
Just take a tomato. Any tomato or soft fruit that you have lying around your house or condo will work for this. Yes, I suppose an avocado is okay, just not a coconut. You don't have an avocado, you just have a coconut? Then why did you ask about avocados? Fine, take mine. Now check it for ripeness. That's how much pressure the activator places on your spine.
On the other side of the ideological divide are the inactivation-based chiropractors, also know as "inactivators" or "suckers". Rather than a belief that the body is suffering from too little spine power, they focus on reigning in a hyperactive spine that is overwhelming the nervous system. The nervous system plays a role in every aspect of your health according to Grimes:
Pick three different things that your body does. Okay, so you are choosing running, jumping, and exercise. Those are really all the same thing. I'm not yelling. Fine, let's go with exercise, digestion, and thinking. All three activities require a functional nervous system.
Instead of using an activator to gently shove bones of the spine back into the correct position, suckers use an inactivator to apply negative pressure that pulls them into alignment. This regulates spine power that has gone haywire and brings it back into the normal range. The inactivator, like the activator, allows power and precision without being scary or making babies cry, although sometimes that happens coincidentally during a treatment.
Implications for Patient Care
This split in the chiropractic profession has significant implications for patient care. Because proponents of both activation and inactivation believe that their approach is more effective, this has resulted in confusion for patients simply seeking immediate and tangible benefits. Some, like Amanda Squatch, a disseminated storchus sufferer and certified yarn winder working at the JoAnn Fabrics in Belvidere, feel caught in the middle.
All I want is an evidence-based practice that provides comprehensive care for all my healthcare concerns. This kind of squabbling among chiropractors is starting to make me question if they are the legitimate medical providers that they claim to be in this pamphlet I picked up in the YMCA lobby.
The Role of Research and Evidence
An important element of the ongoing disagreement is the role of scientific research and clinical evidence. Activators and inactivators both rely heavily on anecdotal evidence and historical practices to support their methods, because people are complex and it is very difficulty to account for the numerous variables, like spine frequency or the ratio of brain density to personal commitment to seeing positive results, that can impact treatment outcomes. But both groups are striving to lean more on data from case reports and pragmatic clinical trials to support their practice. In the meantime, patients are forced to rely on choosing a chiropractor based on their TikTok follower counts.
Conclusion: An Uncertain but Hopeful Future for Chiropractic
The debate between these two influential groups of chiropractors is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. As the field evolves, it remains essential for both activators and inactivators to engage in open dialogue, prioritize patient care, and push for advancements in research. While disagreements will likely continue for the foreseeable future, the ultimate goal of the profession should always be the well-being of patients.
In a rapidly changing healthcare landscape, embracing a variety of methodologies could be the key to shaping a more effective and unified chiropractic future. Perhaps combining the two approaches into one which both pushes and sucks on a vertebra-by-vertebra basis is the inevitable ultimate evolutionary form of chiropractic. With continued discourse and collaboration, the profession can honor its roots while evolving to meet the needs of modern patients.
Comments