Dynamic Chiropractic December 14, 2000, Volume 18, Issue 26 |
Printer Friendly Version E-mail to a Friend |
|
The Search for a Science of Straight Chiropractic: Herbert Marshall Himes, D.C., Ph.C., F.I.C.C.by Joseph C. Keating, Jr., Ph.D. Born in Chicago on 3 September 1910 (Himes, 1980), Herbert Marshall Himes became aware of chiropractic through vaudeville friends who always carried "Palmergrams" (Keating, 1997, p. 148). if (isset($google_rectangle_slot)){ ?> }else{ ?> } ?> On the advice of his chiropractor, he enrolled at the Palmer School of Chiropractic (PSC) just as the Great Depression commenced. He recalls that he and his classmates received "B.J.'s personal supervision" in learning the HIO ("Hole-in-One"), upper cervical technique and neurocalometer use (Himes, 1980). Palmer "made my class into the best togglers there ever were," he recalled, but he and his peers also learned "full-spine adjusting" (Himes, 1980). Himes described his relationship with the PSC's president as "instant love and hate." He earned his D.C. from the Davenport school in 1931 (Dzaman et al., 1980) and established his first practice in Chicago (Himes, 1980). After 14 years of practice in the Windy City, Dr. Himes relocated his family to Waukegan, Illinois. He had married Eva Lois Meyer, daughter of Palmer graduates, in 1940, and they raised two children. [Daugher-in-law Fay and granddaughter Shamin Himes are also chiropractors.] He became seriously ill in 1946 and returned to his alma mater for treatment. As he recuperated, he took up teaching responsibilities, earning the Ph.C. in 1950 (Dzaman et al., 1980). Himes was named head of the PSC's Technique Department in 1953, which he noted was, at that time, "in a shambles" (Himes, 1980). Table: Several papers authored by H.M. Himes, D.C.
Dr. Himes gradually assumed administrative control of the school's training clinics. As a faculty member and administrator, he was much in demand on the lecture circuit, and traveled throughout Canada and the United States on behalf of the PSC (e.g., Chiropractor, 1957; Chiropractors, 1956; Dr. H.M. Himes, 1959; Homewood, 1955; News, 1949; To Address, 1956; Visiting, 1954). Particularly memorable was an address presented at the private clinic in Spartanburg, South Carolina of his friend and former fellow Palmer administrator, Lyle W. Sherman, D.C. (Chiropractor, 1956). It was during this period that he also commenced his literary contributions. As head of the Technique Department, Himes was responsible for re-introducing instruction in full-spine adjusting at the PSC. Following B.J.'s lead, Palmer students disparaged all but upper cervical work, which greatly distressed Dr. Himes. He took his arguments to the "Developer," and persuaded the "Old Man" to broaden the scope of instruction (Himes, 1980). On 4 January 1956, in a "Policy Talk" that is still recalled by old-timers, Himes announced that instruction in full-spine techniques would be reinstituted, with B.J.'s blessing, although practice in the campus clinics would continue to be restricted to upper cervical methods for a while. Himes was keenly aware that this announcement would elicit strong emotions:
...the program begins as a senior class project this quarter, known as a "Clinic Evaluation" or Pit Class. The Pit Class will be a two- hour class demonstration in the technics of: Taking a case history, physical examination, NCGH analysis, palpation, spinography, and adjustment. It will include the ENTIRE SPINE and will be the foundation block for the eventual establishment of proper, standardized patient handling. These technics, so learned, will, when proper facilities have been provided, extend over into the student clinics, so the student may "learn by doing..." Himes was a strong advocate of ever greater practical experience for students, and sought to integrate clinical instruction with research efforts at the "Fountainhead" (Himes, 1960a-c). He also grew increasingly concerned with the scientific basis for instrumentation in chiropractic, a concern shared by fellow Palmer alumnus (Class of '47) Andy R. Petersen, D.C. (Dr. Andy, 1980). In later years the two would collaborate in the marketing of Petersen's spinal-heat-sensing device, the Synchro-Therme. Following B.J.'s demise in 1961, the PSC was renamed Palmer College of Chiropractic (PCC) by its new president, Dave Palmer, D.C. Marshall Himes' career took a new turn in 1962. The Davenport Democrat for 10 August 1962 (p. 3) took notice:
Davenporter New Dean of Chiro School Himes' new position brought him in contact with the political rivals of his alma mater, the National Chiropractic Association (NCA) and its Council on Education (forerunner of today's CCE). As dean of CMCC, he held a seat on the council, commencing in January 1963 (Keating et al., 1998). Himes implemented a number of the council's guidelines within the Canadian school, such as the first granting of formal contracts to faculty members and polishing the curriculum to conform to the council's standards (Canadian, 1963). Although some of CMCC's constituents suspected that Himes was weak in his support of educational upgrading and accreditation by the Council on Education, review of the dean's confidential communications suggests quite the contrary (Himes, 1964c). Dr. Himes was reluctant to require increased pre-professional requirements for admission (e.g., 2 years of liberal arts college), but he strongly encouraged the Board's pursuit of accreditation by the American agency. When the NCA reorganized in 1963-64 as the American Chiropractic Association (ACA), it was Himes who brought the concerns of Canadian members of the ACA to the attention of the ACA's Board of Governors (Himes, 1964a). In particular, Canadians were concerned that their dues would support only American schools, without fair/adequate distribution to CMCC. They were correct in their misgivings. The ACA and its funding agency, the Foundation for Accredited Chiropractic Education (FACE: predecessor of today's FCER) had already decided that since CMCC could have no standing with the U.S. Office of Education (the federal agency which recognized educational accrediting agencies), the ACA would not provide financial support to the Canadian school at the same level that other Council on Education members enjoyed (Schierholz, 1962). Instruction in physiotherapeutics had been a contentious issue among the founders of CMCC in 1943 (Keating & Haldeman, 1995), and continued to cause friction during Dr. Himes' term as dean. The western provinces tended to adhere to a "straight" or "hands-only" orientation to practice, while Ontario and Quebec, among the largest of provinces, were disposed to broad-scope practice. Moreover, Ontario, where the college is located, mandated instruction in physiotherapeutics as a condition for licensure. In 1964 it fell to Marshall Himes to state the CMCC Board's latest reiteration of its commitment to provide instruction in these controversial topics:
We have been asked to publish an official statement of our policy concerning Drugless Therapy. In order to clarify our position, I am quoting below from the minutes (duly ratified) of the Annual meeting a few days ago. If there is one topic for which Herbert Himes' time in Toronto is best remembered, it is the introduction, manufacture and marketing of the "Synchro-Therme," a neurocalometer alternative developed from an earlier device, the "Vasotonometer" (Kyneur & Bolton, 1992), both invented by Himes' friend from Davenport, A.R. Petersen, D.C. (Dr. Andy, 1980). The CMCC had enjoyed some small financial remuneration (Strong, 1964) from the marketing of the "Posturizer" and "Posturometer," which were instruments developed and patented (Canadian, 1965) by the College's "Director of Postural Research," Lyman C. Johnston, D.C. Himes persuaded CMCC's Board of Governors that the Synchro-Therme was a worthy device which could generate even greater, non-tuition revenues for the school. Petersen was invited to Toronto, appointed to the faculty, worked diligently, and produced a successful instrument. With Himes, he authored "Segmental Neuropathy" to accompany the instrument. Unfortunately, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration refused to approve the device (Minutes, 1966), which prevented its importation and leasing in the American states. Resistance to the Synchro-Therme may have arisen within the ranks of the International Chiropractors' Association (ICA) as well. In any case, Himes was incensed by the actions of the ICA's Department of Investigation, established in 1964 to "evaluate instruments - fight quackery" (Interim, undated). After consulting with CMCC's legal counsel, Himes submitted his resignation from the ICA in a widely distributed letter:
Himes continued to promote the Synchro-Therme throughout the profession, and saw the device as a means of encouraging scientific integrity within the profession (Dean, 1965). However, he gradually grew weary of the strenuous demands imposed upon the dean of a struggling institution, and considered the possibility of relocating to Arizona to practice (Himes, 1966). In July 1966, he resigned his position in Toronto, ostensibly to raise money for research (About, 1968), and returned to Illinois to practice. The Synchro-Therme, however, continued to be a topic of investigation at CMCC (e.g., Haldeman, 1970a&b). Dr. Himes' return to private practice did not mark an end to his contributions to the profession. His series of papers, entitled "The challenge of our future," were published in the Digest of Chiropractic Economics in 1968-69 (see Table), and stimulated interest. In many ways they epitomize many of the conceptual accommodations that many chiropractors attempt to make with science. Himes spoke of a philosophy of chiropractic as a "Philosophy of life" (News, 1949), and followed B.J.'s lead in emphasizing the role of Innate Intelligence in creating global unity and peace. His literary contributions reveal a commitment to make vitalism more scientific. He insisted upon the importance of research in understanding the basic science mechanisms underlying the outcomes of chiropractic care, and took painful public stands on matters he deemed fundamental to scientific integrity (e.g., claims for various clinical instruments). On the other hand, Himes did not question the validity of chiropractic methods. He might question the meaningfulness of some particular theory of subluxation (what he preferred to refer to as the "neuropathic involvement"), but never questioned the effectiveness of the adjustive arts in rectifying such neuropathy. Indeed, his uncritical empiricism, based on what he saw as "an overwhelming mass of clinical 'results'" (Himes, 1968a) led him to believe it appropriate for DCs to "assume that ALL techniques have a value in 'getting results'" (Himes, 1968b). He accepted D.D. Palmer's naive notion that "Chiropractic is a science because it comprises a knowledge of facts concerning health and disease...reduced to law and embodied in a system" (Himes, 1968a). Himes was a stickler for terminology, at least in print. He distinguished between "medicine" (generic) vs. "Medicine" (allopathy) and "diagnosis" (as in chiropractic spinal analysis) vs. "Diagnosis" (part of the allopathic art). He emphasized the importance of repeatedly differentiating between his notion of allopathic concepts and those of chiropractic. In private, he criticized CMCC's public relations executive, future college President Donald C. Sutherland, D.C., for "trying to establish our similarity to medicine, rather than our difference" (Himes, 1964c). In public, he chastised the "socio-political movement promoted by Chiropractors who contend that Chiropractic is a part of Medicine" (Himes, 1968a). His was a complex ideology, but he seems to have been rather consistent in his beliefs. He is gone now, but Herbert Marshall Himes left his mark on two chiropractic schools and thousands of students and graduates. In this way he lives on in the hearts of those who respected and admired his passion for the art and science of chiropractic. References:
Joseph Keating Jr., PhD
Post your thoughts in our discussion forum
|
if ($google_skyscraper_slot=="none"){ }elseif($google_skyscraper_slot){ ?> }else{ ?> } ?> |
Dynamic Chiropractic December 14, 2000, Volume 18, Issue 26 |
Printer Friendly Version E-mail to a Friend |
To report inappropriate ads, |