April 2006, Vol. 16, No. 2
Table of Contents
CCE Recognition by USDE Set to Expire • CCE Response Spurs Follow-up Complaint • Differentiating Neuromuscular from Musculoligamentous Subluxation • Chiropractic Pioneer Passes Away • Early Life Infections Improve the Function of the Immune System • European Spine Journal Publishes PosturePrint® Study • ICA Defending Chiropractic from PT's • Immunization • Letters to the Editor • Life University Teaches CBP® as an Elective • The Ineffectiveness of Over Accommodating • Parker College and Seminars Begin Celebration Preparations • PosturePrint® Used to Determine Stability of Upright Posture • CBP® Hits 91 Publications • Thanks for Helping Your Local HMO Grow! • The Perfect Chiropractic Storm • Three Keys to Practice Success • Building Wealth Securely: Maintenance, Not Pain Relief •
back to front page
Letters to the Editor
Dear AJCC,
I have added this dialogue to my library. Or, honestly, on Dr. Harrison’s half. Frankly, while Dr. Triano may imagine himself a scientist, he left a paper trail that nakedly contradicts him.
He exposes in himself the most important trait that a liberal education is supposed to cure: A person unable to upgrade an opinion when strong evidence contradicts it.
I am alarmed that anyone so demonstrably unable to learn how badly human beings are hurt by spinal distortion is regarded as an authority by chiropractic disciplinary boards. This kind of whimsy in power is no joke. I am deeply grateful to Dr. Harrison for outlining the facts that chiropractors need in order to protect the public.
Hoping for a better future,
Dr. David Walls-Kaufman
Washington, DC
Dear Dr. Walls-Kaufman:
Thank you for expressing your observations on this issue. While we applaud Dr. Triano for publishing in the Index Medicus, we are appalled by his cutting of his fellow DCs’ claims as an IME for State Farm. There is no place for respect for a person who stabs his fellow colleagues in the back and refuses care needed by our suffering citizens. It is my opinion that all IME, who consistently cut claims, should be subjected to class action lawsuits and be ostracized by our profession. The fact that Dr. Triano is in charge of practice guidelines is a situation that all DCs should question.
Sincerely,
Don Harrison, PhD, DC, MSE
Dear Dr. Don:
Thank you for publishing my opinion: Triano is a Chiropractic IME Pariah. I had waited nearly 12 years to reap my vengeance and revenge in Triano’s desultory negative criticism of my treatment in my article in AJCC (Jan 2006). By the way you misspelled what I wrote: Cassius Honginus, not Horgenus, stabbed Caesar. It has been said that “to save one life during your lifetime indicates that you have fulfilled your obligation, role, and destiny to Mankind and God.” During my 54 years in the chiropractic profession, I have been privileged to relieve the suffering and to have extended the lives of tens of thousands of patients, and probably saved the lives of thousands. Your commendable and exemplary work in CBP® Technique has created such men as: Dr. Deed Harrison, Dr. Paul Oakley, Dr. Jason Haas, Dr. Joe Betz, Dr. Joe Ferrantelli, and Dr. Joshua Lander. These men are the fruits of your lifetime in Chiropractic and their work will continue after you and I pass on. You should be proud of your chiropractic technique, research, and protocols because these have fulfilled your obligation to Mankind and God. This is due to the followers, who use your work, as they are relieving the suffering and extending the lives of their combined patients.
Sincerely,
Charles N. Cooper, DC
Baltimore, MD.
Dear Dr. Cooper:
Yes, I am proud of those doctors. Your kind words are appreciated. It amazes me that we, in CBP®, receive such negative reactions from the ACA powers in our great profession. While people like you notice and commend us on our labors in research, others try their best to find one little thing to criticize. It saddens me that these ACA powers are writing protocols that cut chiropractic benefits at a time when patients have far less coverage than ever (since 1980).
Sincerely,
Don Harrison, PhD, DC, MSE
To the Editor:
Dear Editor:
I read Dr. Cooper’s letter which was a reference to Dr. John Triano, and it reminded me of a similar experience with this doctor. Dr. Triano enjoys a significant amount of chiropractic media coverage, and it is likely well deserved. However, some time ago I was advised by a State Farm adjuster that he was an advisor relative to medical claim submission by D.C.s. It is unfortunately a fact that those D.C.s, who have undertaken such a position, have been consistently referred to as medical “whores.” Being in such a position clearly does not look good, and Dr. Triano should be aware of the stigma attached to such work. Being in bed with State Farm clearly implies being in bed with the Devil.
He was involved in a number of my cases in which State Farm was primary, and he consistently opined that Temperature Gradient testing was an invalid or unproven examination procedure, not worthy of reimbursement. No less of an authority as Turek (Essential of Orthopedics) states that greater than 1/2 degree difference in skin surface temperature, dermatome to dermatome, is pathognomonic of some pathology.
My curriculum vitae includes presenting seminars for 15 years to a variety of practitioners, wherein Doppler, Plethysmography and Temperature Gradient Testing were explained and demonstrated- most for State Board CE credits. During that tenure, I personally examined or reported on the examination findings of in excess of 25,000 patients. An article submitted to Chiropractic Economics (1994. “Temperature Gradient Studies- Is this a Disc Management Breakthrough?”) reported on some of my findings, including a constant finding of disc herniation, concomitant with 3.4 degrees difference from one dermatome to its opposite. Improvement of this temperature difference to normal values was consistent with improvement of the patient’s health status.
In testifying at the Halstead trial in West Virginia, my comment included that in a “perfect world, all chiropractic patients would have temperature gradient exams completed on every visit.” Recent testimony in California, was prohibited at the last moment, but I would have repeated the same contention. Dr. Triano’s opinion on such examinations allowed State Farm to be contentious in the matter of paying for my services.
The “IME” D.C. in the California case stated that Temperature Gradient assessments were unproven and invalid and excessive, and in further proof of his idiocy included the statement that an Activator adjustment was ‘valueless’, and only produced an ineffectual “thump” to the patient. An honest assessment of the case is one thing; however, they seem to be few and far between. Dr. Triano should be aware of the stigma that may be attached in such a position.
My nine-page vitae also includes authorship of 12 textbooks, one of which was a best seller to the medical profession, multiple published articles, post-graduate faculty in three chairs at chiropractic colleges, hospital privileges, and current educator and consultant to a major mineral assessment company. I realize that my vitae and $1.75 might buy a cup of coffee, but to be denied sufficient status for reimbursement of a bill, out of hand, is difficult to swallow.
Recusing himself from such ties would be appropriate. Fighting Big Pharma and the medical establishment is difficult enough, and even more of a trial when our own people appear to be in compliance with their dictates.
Yours very truly,
William Risley, D.C.
PCC 1961
Dear Dr. Risley:
Your letter points out more of Dr. Triano’s “Compliance” with State Farm Insurance company. We at AJCC believe that his ties with insurance companies has created a huge “Financial Conflict Interest” when he is in charge of Chiropractic Practice Guidelines (or Best Practices, however they try to disguise them). The fact that he is the head of the new ACA/FCLB ccgpp guidelines indicates to us that these guidelines are invalid. A person getting paid to cut claims should not be leading guidelines that restrict care and increase his employer’s pocket book.
Sincerely,
Don Harrison, PhD, DC, MSE
Erratum
In the last issue of the AJCC January 2006, Vol. 16, No. 1, the article Counter Point — Round III by Deed E. Harrison, DC contained an error regarding the ACC-RAC conference procedures for IRB requirements for research using human subjects. The article should have stated “The ACC-RAC conference requires an IRB for prospective studies utilizing human subjects. However, they do not review and approve all IRBs, but they reserve the right to do this. Regarding the CBP® submission, they checked to see if we indded had an IRB, but they did not approve nor disapprove of its quality. The rest of the article’s statements are factual and accurate.
