"Chiropractic in New Zealand" -- Quotations from the 1979 Royal Commission Report

See pages XXX on how to order.

Early in 1978 a Royal Commission on Inquiry in New Zealand began an investigation into the value of chiropractic. As it turned out it was quite favorable to our profession. One might suppose that if the results of the study had been otherwise, we would have called it unduly prejudiced by organized medicine.

The reasons for our belief that organized medicine corrupts the "unbiased," are many. Several years ago Consumer Reports printed a "study" on chiropractic conducted for the Consumer's Union. For years, I, along with many others, felt that the last word in unbiased consumerism was espoused by that fortress of integrity, the Consumer's Union and their distinguished publication. How wrong I was. The report they came up with was dictated by the AMA, complete with all their stock phrases. It was filled with half truths and outright lies. They were, of course, flooded with letters, not the least of which was quite a lengthy and detailed answer by the ACA. Since they had already decided on their official policy, they printed no constructive replies, only the neanderthalic scribblings of some "old time" chiropractic cretins, which only further emphasized the propriety of their stand to the public. So much for unbiased reporting -- they had been bought.

Still, if truly unbiased, the obvious ones to judge any enterprise are disinterested parties. They have no "ax to grind." This is the reason that we, as a profession, were so delighted with the New Zealand report. No, not just because its conclusions were so favorable to us, (although that's nice) but because of the way it reached those conclusions. The commission spent approximately a year traveling around the world visiting both medical and chiropractic institutions and interviewing many from both disciplines. In other words, they not only heard from both sides -- they listened.

The result was a voluminous report which concluded that chiropractic can relieve symptoms of pain and be effective in general health maintenance, that the chiropractor is well trained in diagnostic procedures, and that his professional training is superior in manual adjustive techniques to that of all other health professionals.

Fortunately, the entire report has been literally boiled down into a 101-page booklet that makes for fascinating reading. Some of the interviews should be read over several times to get the full impact of the intensity of the animosity from some of the others in the health field. It will get your attention.

Fortunately for us, they interviewed some of the finest chiropractic physicians we have and, once this was done, only the right conclusions could be forthcoming.

If you haven't read the report before -- this modestly priced booklet is a must. If you have, it is also a must for it crystallizes the essence and spirit of the proceedings for the edification of all chiropractic physicians and their patients.

RHT