I think they are a very good thing
Surgeons and other doctors do the little things very badly and many of these tasks; rounding on patients, checking bloodwork, drug interactions etc can be done better by them
They are very well trained and for the most part very eager to learn
My sister-in-law is a Cardiac Nurse Practitioner and she seems to love what she does. She tells me that the Cardiologists in her Hospital are very fond of her presence and work provided.
I am trying to push my nephew (presently doing undergrad) to possibly consider a career as either a Physician's Assistant or Nurse Practitioner. I think those two groups (based on my limited interactions with them), seem to have a solid grasp of internal medicine/primary medicine and appear to be easily trainable for much more specialized disciplines (Cardiac, pulmonary, GI etc.). Ideally, he would go to Med School, but the kid lacks the stamina (I think) to stay put for more than 8 years. I think those other tacks (pa, np) take about 6-7 years to obtain their degrees (undergrad + grad), so it might work for him if he can concentrate long enough.
Chiros have no clue what real medicine is or to take care of an actual sick patient, I would wager most would shit their pants if they ever saw a really sick cancer patient but are the first to point their fingers when treatments fail
My take on Chiropractors is that they are sort of like the lite-version of orthopedists, but with no surgical or prescriptive rights/privileges. Generally speaking, I see them similar to that of optometrists in comparison to ophthalmologists (The optometrist being able to perform the basic examinations that the ophthalmologist can, but with the restriction of not being able to perform surgery/invasive procedures or prescribe controlled substances).
I know that an orthopedic surgeon gets well over 14-15 years of training (4 yrs undergrad + 4 years of med school + 5 years of ortho residency + 1-2 years of fellowship in their designated area of specialty like knee, hips or spine etc.) and while the chiropractor might have a little less training than that, I am sure they can provide patients with many good alternatives for their bone, muscle and joint injuries.
I also don't think that any patient would ever go to a chiropractor for any medical issue that isn't directly related to pathological presentation involving bones, joints, ligaments, tendons and/or muscles. I mean, the chiros on board can correct me if I am wrong, but why would a patient go to a chiro for an internal medicine, surgical, cardiac, GI, pulmonary, neurological or even dermatological issue? I think the average consumer is smart enough to differentiate what medical specialists are there for and what Chiropractors can offer to them, as possibly an alternative to orthopedic surgery.
If I am wrong in my assumption that Chiro's only provide care towards injuries or disorders of the skeletal system and associated muscles, joints, and ligaments, please let me know gentlemen. I am not taking sides, just providing my basic view here.
"
1"