Can Chiropractors really fix Neurological and Myoclonus?

Welcome to the Coping With Epilepsy Forums

Welcome to the Coping With Epilepsy forums - a peer support community for folks dealing (directly or indirectly) with seizure disorders. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Please have a look around and if you like what you see, please consider registering an account and joining the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, access to members only (ie. private) forum nodes and more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

niceguyVZ

New
Messages
109
Reaction score
0
Points
0
These days there's more and more chiropractors that are claiming they can treat neurological things and myoclonus. Can they? or is it a hoax?

like if someone has myoclonus or something due to brain trauma, chiropractors can reverse it and heal you?
 
The evidence is incredibly thin, so probably not. There are very few trials and even those refer to only one patient. This is a typical example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943656/
The study's limitations are cited there, too:

Because this is a case report, it is not possible to generalize this treatment approach to all myoclonic seizure patients. Because of the cyclic nature of JME, we do not know if the improvements seen in this patient are from the SMT or if we are entering a cyclic phase sometimes seen with seizure disorders.22 A JME patient will need lifelong follow-up care for the possibility of reoccurrence of seizure episodes. This follow-up care would enable the patient to be treated if she had entered an absence phase of her seizures or reoccurring episodes begin; current literature states that this is likely.2,22

The chiropractic industry is notorious for its shoddy trials, too. Here, you can see why. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/top-10-chiropractic-studies-of-2013/

To recap, my evaluation of these “10 best studies” showed:

Study 1. Bewilderingly complicated design, clinical relevance of findings not established.

Study 2. Not a study

Study 3. Small study with numerous limitations and evidence of bias; the authors themselves said outcomes could not be attributed to treatment.

Study 4. Negative study misrepresented as positive

Study 5. Small study with evidence of bias; results incompatible with previous studies

Study 6. Small study of joint position sense in normal people, with questionable clinical relevance. Data do not support conclusions.

Study 7. Pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial designed to guarantee it would favor chiropractic

Study 8. Small study with questionable clinical relevance

Study 9. Uncontrolled study

Study 10. Uncontrolled case series; junk science intended to promote the OTZ System, whose owner and founder is the lead author and treating chiropractor.
 
Back
Top Bottom