RSS RSS

Think Twice Before Taking Advil for Injuries

By admin, May 30, 2007 4:32 pm

NSAIDS not effective for soft tissue injuries
NSAIDs Hamper Ligament and Tendon Healing

Commonly used NSAIDS, Ibuprofen, Advil, Motrin, Naproxen, Aleve, Naprosyn, Celebrex.

The following statement comes from a well-known sports medicine book that has gone through five printings. “In spite of the widespread use of NSAIDs there is no convincing evidence as to their effectiveness in the treatment of acute soft tissue injuries.” (Bruckner, P. Clinical Sports Medicine. New York City, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1995, pp. 105-109.)

This is a true statement, but definitely not strong enough. More appropriate would be something like, –In spite of the widespread use of NSAIDs there is substantial evidence that they hamper soft tissue healing.–

NSAIDs have been shown to delay and hamper the healing in all the soft tissues, including muscles, ligaments, tendons, and cartilage. Anti-inflammatories can delay healing and delay it significantly, even in muscles with their tremendous blood supply. In one study on muscle strains, Piroxicam essentially wiped out the entire inflammatory proliferative phase of healing (days 0-4). At day two there were essentially no macrophages (cells that clean up the area) in the area and by day four after the muscle strain, there was very little muscle regeneration compared to the normal healing process. The muscle strength at this time was only about 40 percent of normal.(Greene, J. Cost-conscious prescribing of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for adults with arthritis. Archives of Internal Medicine. 1992; 152:1995-2002.)

The authors concluded that NSAIDs might delay muscle regeneration, when their study did in fact show delayed muscle healing. But you know politics…

Another study confirmed the above by showing that at day 28 after injury the muscle regenerative process was still delayed. The muscles of the group treated with Flurbiprofen (NSAID) were significantly weaker. The muscle fibers were shown under the microscope to have incomplete healing because of the medication. (Almekinders, L. An in vitro investigation into the effects of repetitive motion and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication on human tendon fibroblasts. American Journal of Sports Medicine. 1995; 23:119-123.)

The key question regarding the healing of sports injury is, “What exactly does any therapy do to the fibroblastic cells that actually grow the ligament and tendon tissue?” Treatments that stimulate fibroblast proliferation will cause ligament and tendon repair and will help the athlete heal (such as Graston Technique see my website or www.grastontechnique.com). Therapies that kill or hamper fibroblastic growth will be detrimental to the athlete.

It is clear that NSAIDs inhibit the fibroblastic growth process and thus diminish an athlete’s chance of healing. NSAIDs are used because they decrease pain, but they do so at the expense of hurting the healing of the injured soft tissue.

Do you see the difference between pain relief and healing? The athlete needs healed tissue. Up until the present, too many studies were advocating NSAID use when it came to ligament injuries, because they were such great pain-relievers, when in fact they were and are stopping the healing mechanisms of the body. Any technique or medication that stops the normal inflammatory process that helps heal the body must have a long-term detrimental effect on the body.

Town of Allopath

By admin, May 28, 2007 11:30 am

This short video clip is a very interesting parody of our healthcare system in the U.S. today. Prevention of and correction of the CAUSE of disease is the key. Chiropractic addresses the cause of pain rather than just treating symptoms.

mercola.com/townofallopath/townofallopath.htm

Chiropractors as Portal of Entry Providers

By admin, May 26, 2007 4:41 pm

This study really sums up the effectiveness of chiropractic care in general. Read it here- http://www.genengnews.com/news/bnitem.aspx?name=18004552. The short story is that an HMO in the Midwest decided to make 75% of it’s portal of entry practitioners chiropractors. I’m sure everyone must have thought, what do those crazy bone crackers know about anything but the spine, well a lot as it turns out.

Chiropractors have a much greater amount of training in musculoskeletal medicine than M.D.’s (and we are trained to recognize many other conditions that need to be referred out.) Keep in mind that approx 85% of people present to their MD with musculoskeletal conditions.

Bottom line is this excerpt from the study which is very telling-

“Results of the study demonstrate clinical and cost utilization decreases based on 70,274 member-months over a seven-year period. Differences in utilization include: 60.2 percent decrease in-hospital admissions, 59.0 percent decrease in hospital days, 62.0 percent decrease outpatient surgeries and procedures and 85 percent decrease in pharmaceutical costs when compared with conventional medicine IPA performance for the same HMO product in the same geography and time frame.”

A 62% decrease in surgery! 85% less drug costs! Wow.

What? Many Drugs Are Not Safe? Didn’t We Learn From Vioxx?!

By admin, May 23, 2007 9:24 pm

Millions of people think drugs are a safe alternative to chiropractic. Are drugs really a safe alternative? How is it possible with the FDA’s oversight that they are killing thousands of people every day? Read this article to find out. The last statement is very telling which is completely missed by the allopathic system.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/1500AP_Risky_Drugs_Analysis.html

“Many drugs fix one problem and bring on others. Getting enough exercise and eating a healthy diet remain safe and, in many cases, better alternatives to popping a pill.”

Case in point for safe and natural chiropractic care!!!

A Few of My Favorite Chiropractic Studies

By admin, May 21, 2007 8:12 pm

Chiropractic “Only Proven Effective Treatment” for Chronic Whiplash
A study published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Medicine not only points out the superiority of chiropractic care for chronic whiplash
patients, but also examines which chronic whiplash patients responded best to chiropractic care.
In their discussion, the authors made these observations:
“Woodward found improvement in chronic symptoms in 26 of 28 patients (93%) following chiropractic treatment. Our results confirm
the efficacy of chiropractic, with 69 of our 93 patients (74%) improving following treatment.”
“The results from this study provide further evidence that chiropractic is an effective treatment for chronic whiplash symptoms.”
Khan S., Cook J., Gargan M., Bannister G., “A Symptomatic Classification of Whiplash Injury and the Implications for Treatment”, Jour-
nal of Orthopaedic Medicine 1999; 21(1); 22-25.

US Medical Study – DCs Emphasize Diagnosis, Education
Another study reported in the October 1988 Western Journal of Medicine investigated the attitudes and approaches both DCs and MDs
have toward back pain patients and their treatment. The researchers found that MDs are apparently less than confident in their low back
training and that MDs are less confident in preventing chronic back pain. Here are their responses to the training and prevention ques-
tions:
“Feel poorly trained in low back pain “
42% of MDs agree
15% of DCs agree

“Doctors (MD or DC) can do a lot to prevent patients with acute back pain from developing chronic back pain”
57% of MDs agree
98% of DCs agree
“Managing Low Back Pain Care – A Comparison of the Beliefs and Behaviors of Family Physicians and Chiropractors,” Cherkin et al.
Western Journal of Medicine, October 1988; 149, 475-480.

Non-Surgical Decompression

By admin, May 20, 2007 6:27 pm

Many patients have asked me about treatment of lower back pain with decompression after recieving a flashy piece in the mail. The article below from Chiropractic and Osteopathy Journal addresses this.

Non-surgical spinal decompression therapy: does the scientific literature support efficacy claims made in the advertising media?
Dwain M Daniel

Chiropractic & Osteopathy 2007, 15:7 doi:10.1186/1746-1340-15-7

Published 18 May 2007

Abstract (provisional)

The complete article is available as a provisional PDF. The fully formatted PDF and HTML versions are in production.

Background

Traction therapy has been utilized in the treatment of low back pain for decades. The most recent incarnation of traction therapy is non-surgical spinal decompression therapy which can cost over $100,000. This form of therapy has been heavily marketed to manual therapy professions and subsequently to the consumer. The purpose of this paper is to initiate a debate pertaining to the relationship between marketing claims and the scientific literature on non-surgical spinal decompression.

Discussion

Only one small randomized controlled trial and several lower level efficacy studies have been performed on spinal decompression therapy. In general the quality of these studies is questionable. Many of the studies were performed using the VAX-D(R) unit which places the patient in a prone position. Often companies utilize this research for their marketing although their units place the patient in the supine position.

Summary

Only limited evidence is available to warrant the routine use of non-surgical spinal decompression, particularly when many other well investigated, less expensive alternatives are available.

Persephone Theme by Themocracy