|
|
Re: Arkansas case
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 10, 2005 8:33:00 AM
|
|
|
drbuddy
Posts: 429
Joined: July 30, 2005
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline
|
"Actually it comes from the Life University v. CCE lawsuit where Life argued that CCE was being unfair in demanding differential diagnosis when 2/3 of chiropractors come from straight programs-the straight programs constituting 1/2 of the schools. Your statement that he made it up is not true-he provided a quote to the news story right on chirotalk. I found it within about 30 seconds of searching the site:"
Right, he provided a quote. Who did you say was weak on research? Anyway, he makes a lot of generalizations to get to the 2/3 figure. First, you need to assume that none of the straight schools teach differential diagnosis. That is false. Even Life University taught DDx. How do I know? I was there before I transferred and was taught it while I was there. All of the schools need to teach DDx to be accredited. Life was teaching it, but was missing some components or teaching it in the wrong sequence, which gave them problems with the CCE. There were also other factors involved, so the DDx issue wasnt the sole reason they lost accreditation.
Is he biased? If he is not, he is more of a man that most of us would be. I dont see how he cannot be biased. He graduated from a straigth school, worked for a few quacks for peanuts, was brought in to a mess with the Feds, defaulted on his loan, and now he cant get any more federal education loans to pay for further schooling because it is maxed out. Who wouldnt hate the profession or person that gave them that raw deal? That is the story I was told anyway. I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 10, 2005 4:16:00 PM
|
|
|
lynx
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21, 2005
Status: offline
|
>Even Life University taught DDx. How do I know? I was there before I transferred and was taught it while I was there. All of the schools need to teach DDx to be accredited. Life was teaching it, but was missing some components or teaching it in the wrong sequence, which gave them problems with the CCE. There were also other factors involved, so the DDx issue wasnt the sole reason they lost accreditation.
Well you attended later than AB so perhaps they made the change after he graduated when they were fighting for their life with the CCE due to having lost accreditation for lying about meeting the standards. If you read the complaint and correspondence attached you'll find that Life totally omitted it from when he attended and CCE admits to it. However, just because a school claims to teach a few credits in differential diagnosis does not automatically make them a good program. You have to understand the CCE's requirement for integration of curriculum to see why this is, which requires some knowledge of curriculum design. Straight schools have segregated their curruculums so that they appear to meet the diagnosis standards but then set up internships that omit diagnosis (as was mentioned re: pediatrics) so students get no real experience in it-but lots of experience ripping patients off. Chirotalk has a thread on this in their school's section that examines school curriculums online and shows how this causes students for example to treat kids and the elderly far before having the supposed diagnosis coursework necessary to really diagnose them. This is a hallmark for a phony curriculum. This is the norm for straight chiropractic colleges (60%)
http://chirotalk.proboards3.com/index.cgi?board=all&action=display&thread=1079837827.
Another thing was the fact that Life had a lot of inbreeding (graduates from Life teaching there) and members from Sid Williams Dynamic Essentials practice management company which is anti-diagnosis. So it bears to reason that if they didn't have the will or expertise to teach the subject that even if they threw in a textbook and a few quizzes then they are going to do a very poor job of teaching.
The lack of will is evidenced by the complete absense of curriculum integration at Life. The CCE standards talk about curriculum integration this shows us that the reality are segregated curriculums that fail this requirement so the straight schools do not effectively teach students to diagnose-with the result being disgruntled chiropractic graduates. Think about it, the whole point of a straight school is to use nonstandard diagnosis to overutilize manipulation (which they consider to be ethical). So naturally they will water it down and teach students not to do it.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/11/prweb178574.htm
>Is he biased? If he is not, he is more of a man that most of us would be. I dont see how he cannot be biased. He graduated from a straigth school, worked for a few quacks for peanuts, was brought in to a mess with the Feds, defaulted on his loan, and now he cant get any more federal education loans to pay for further schooling because it is maxed out. Who wouldnt hate the profession or person that gave them that raw deal? That is the story I was told anyway. I could be wrong.
Just because someone gets screwed doesn't mean they are biased. Honestly, there really isn't much evidence around to contradict him and give him reason to change his positions. I haven't seen it. That is why I don't agree with you about him being a biased propaganda monger. Just because someone is wrong about something doesn't mean that everything he writes is false. In fact, so far most of the evidence is in his favor and the points you have made are very minor.
In fact, it strikes me that you are exaggerating this minor point and ignoring the big picture so that you can deflect criticism from the larger issues-an example of using propaganda.
Aren't you Buddy Touchinsky DC who runs the "Chiropractic Uncensored" forum on Yahoo's groups? If so you are hardly the one to discuss bias. You ban people whose opinions you dislike. That is one of the groups AB says he was banned from. And with that policy, your group name is totally misleading.
If so, then since you went to Life University yourself for the first couple of terms where there is heavy indoctrination and no real course on how to evaluate research (that is withheld until the last year and is not substantial-1 credit) I would frankly not be surprised to see you act this way.
But if you really want to correct the situation instead of perpetuate it, recognize the problem and demand correction-don't kill the messenger.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 10:38:00 AM
|
|
|
Jeep
Posts: 353
Joined: March 28, 2003
From: USA
Status: offline
|
Allen Botnick was also banned from reHabedge(In addition to at least six other forums and lists of varying professions that I know of except Barrett's Quackwatch). I'll let DrBuddy address the chiropractic uncensored because I do not know for sure if he was banned from that list. Be careful believing everything you read on Botnick's site.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 12:58:00 PM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
Actually, by comparison to the chiroboards I've lurked on, Chirotalk is full of references, links, support for statements, evidence, statements that have been considered from all sides before being made. A large group of chiros, mostly ex-chiros, contribute there, who have perspective on chiropractic that no other boards encourage in the same way chirotalk does. The board is not just Allen Botnick's opinions. It serves to warn prospective students of what they are letting themselves in for, offering a perspective to them that is more authentic that what the chiro school brochures provide. It offers sound advice on how to unload serious debt burden to new and financially shell-shocked chiro graduates. It provides a safe place for chiros to anonomously be "real" instead of rah-rah, to sort out their sense of betrayal and burnout with others who've been there. It is a pro-PT board.
By contrast a certain other chiroboard I've checked out is full of mindless parroting from chiro feel-good publications, a certain preening individual who makes it his online business to slice and dice any and all other professions, and subluxation/innate/adjustor hack types. The tone varies from bravado to paranoia, depending on the thread. The (exceedingly) thin veneer of civility often vanishes completely and virtual temporal arteries stick out of virtual foreheads with the bombast and effort of all the pointless arguing and jousting.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 1:44:00 PM
|
|
|
lynx
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21, 2005
Status: offline
|
>Allen Botnick was also banned from reHabedge(In addition to at least six other forums and lists of varying professions that I know of except Barrett's Quackwatch).
Unless you can name something specific he did this really means nothing except that chiropractic forums don't tolerate criticism well. Chiroweb banned him from cross posting derogatory comments about PTs on Rehabedge. Rehabedge banned him for becoming a focal point for skeptical chiropractic on their site rather than him doing anything wrong.
As for non-skeptical chiro forums, they can't be taken seriously. Lots of people get banned from them. And lots that should be banned never are.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 4:11:00 PM
|
|
|
Jeep
Posts: 353
Joined: March 28, 2003
From: USA
Status: offline
|
Lynx posted to DrBuddy, in defense of Botnick's claims regarding Life and ddx:
"Well you attended later than AB so perhaps they made the change after he graduated..."
Well, Chirortho, a frequent poster here, went to, and graduated from Life before Botnick. As with ALL schools, I am certain that he will agree that there is room for program improvement, and he can probably cite certain curriculum weaknesses he experienced at Life. However, as evidenced from his postings here, it is eminently clear that he has astute differential diagnosis skills.
As for banning practices:
-The reason for Botnick's ban from ReHabedge is something to discuss with the moderator.
-Botnick's site is THE most highly censored site, and bans more posters than any site I frequent(6-7). There is only one theme there, and all that do not precisely adhere to the "theme" are very promptly(1-3 posts) banned.
- I also wish there was a more active moderator at chiroweb. Anyone can post there, virtually NO ONE gets banned, and attracts an infestation of trolls. For some, I suppose, an objective, balanced, chiropractic discussion or any posting reflective of the positive aspects of chiropracic and the majority of solid DCs helping patients daily, may be considered "rah-rah", "bravado" and "propaganda".
As for evidence:
-I find it not only suspicious, but extremely weak, when someone arguing/asserting a position, only posts links/cites/references to themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 6:05:00 PM
|
|
|
lynx
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21, 2005
Status: offline
|
Jeep you need to read the material on the link. You missed the fact that both Life University and the CCE admitted to the DDX problem. You don't have a leg to stand on here.
You are also totally wrong about Chirotalk. The only people who get banned are the ones who maliciously attack others to distract from weak or nonexistent arguments-like the garbage you are positing here.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 6:29:00 PM
|
|
|
Enforcer
Posts: 19
Joined: August 3, 2005
Status: offline
|
Lynx, it is you who is totally wrong about AB and chirotalk. If someone had posted false info like the 2/3 number AB would be quick to attack then ban them. And the 2/3 figure is pure BS. Palmer, often considered a "straight" school, has always taught diagnosis.
I have been banned by AB several times and I personally know Allen lies. Hope this isn't too harsh but it is absolutely true.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 6:40:00 PM
|
|
|
Jeep
Posts: 353
Joined: March 28, 2003
From: USA
Status: offline
|
Chirortho has also been banned from Botnick's site.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 6:47:00 PM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
I think Botnick is far too lenient and takes way too long to ban people. Both the above named deserved banning judging by the hard time they both gave him and the board, and the insults that flew on that board from them both as it was starting up (from Greg, who has cleaned up a lot in the last year) and later from "Enforcer." Whose name sounds like a wrestling type name.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 7:18:00 PM
|
|
|
Enforcer
Posts: 19
Joined: August 3, 2005
Status: offline
|
Gee Diane, I don't believe I ever attacked Allen or insulted anyone. However, since you are apparently omnicient, why don't you dig up those imaginary old posts of mine and show them to me. Or, if you cannot do this, perhaps speak only of what you know .... in other words, say very little.
I await your backing those statements about me.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 20, 2005 9:30:00 PM
|
|
|
Randy Dixon
Posts: 744
Joined: August 6, 2004
Status: offline
|
Do we really need to have talk about who banned who on another forum here?
Take the gossip offline.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 2:18:00 AM
|
|
|
lynx
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21, 2005
Status: offline
|
Enforcer, it sounds like you deserve to be banned since you cherry pick your data. I read the news story where Life University itself provided the 2/3 number in the CCE lawsuit. CCE did not contest the figure-which surely would have been done if it were false. There is no point denying the obvious. Refusing to allow individuals to spread misinformation is good policy in my opinion. Otherwise you could mislead a lot of people with your nonsense. Really, you exclude the link and associated thread acting like it isn't even there. Why didn't you read it?
As for Chiroortho he later apologized to the Chirotalk staff and was reinstated. He is not banned. He just does not participate actively.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 11:54:00 AM
|
|
|
Enforcer
Posts: 19
Joined: August 3, 2005
Status: offline
|
"Life University itself provided the 2/3 number in the CCE lawsuit. CCE did not contest the figure-which surely would have been done if it were false."
By the way, your link doesn't work for me. If you intend for people to read it make sure it works.
The 2/3 figure is inaccurate. Life conveniently came up with it. Do you believe everything said by Life and CCE as gospel? Allen surely doesn't believe them but quotes them when it serves his purpose. As I stated earlier Allen is a liar, but I know you wouldn't want to be bothered by the facts since your biased little mind is already made up by your mentors. What a sheep!
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 2:34:00 PM
|
|
|
lynx
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21, 2005
Status: offline
|
>The 2/3 figure is inaccurate.
Based on what, your woman's intuition?
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 2:52:00 PM
|
|
|
Enforcer
Posts: 19
Joined: August 3, 2005
Status: offline
|
Based on the number of chiropractic colleges, what they teach, their matriculation numbers, their years of existence. The colleges whose practitioners don't diagnose is very small.
Go look up their curricula .... or just make snide remarks and continue brownnosing AB.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 3:31:00 PM
|
|
|
Synergy
Posts: 592
Joined: March 11, 2004
From: Texas
Status: offline
|
[QUOTE]Do we really need to have talk about who banned who on another forum here?
Take the gossip offline.[/QUOTE]Randy,
Ditto.
_____________________________
Chris Adams, PT, MPT
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 3:37:00 PM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
Ditto Randy also. Lynx, please don't waste any more valuable typing energy on this thread trying to defend someone from another forum. It is futile when there's someone like enforcer trying to enforce something he has absolutely no business complaining about on a PT forum, over neither of which he has no enforcement authority, thrashing around... my advice for what it's worth; let him thrash himself back to sleep.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 4:07:00 PM
|
|
|
lynx
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21, 2005
Status: offline
|
>Based on the number of chiropractic colleges, what they teach, their matriculation numbers, their years of existence. The colleges whose practitioners don't diagnose is very small.
Tell that to Joanne M. Gallagher. http://www.chirobase.org/16Victims/gallagher.html
I'm sure Sherman College of Chiropractic "teaches" diagnosis too...right between the MDs are hellspawn and subluxation "diagnosis" lectures.
The 2/3 number is accurate and confirmed by my personal experience with many DCs. The quality of their premature diagnoses is pathetic. In fact, in several states they aren't even allowed to diagnose conditions other than subluxation.
Ok Diane, I can take a hint. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Arkansas case - August 21, 2005 4:18:00 PM
|
|
|
chiroortho
Posts: 655
Joined: February 18, 2004
Status: offline
|
I will agree with Diane here, in that I did deserve to be banned from chirotalk for some less than professional exchanges. I regret that, and have learned from it. Although I might still be able to technically post there, out of courtesy I do not.
On a different note, I rather like Enforcer's screen name, and am considering changing my own to 'The Dingo Warrior', or 'Fine Hunk of Humanity'. :)
_____________________________
Greg Priest, DC, DABCO
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
0.109
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Open Forum >> Re: Arkansas case 
