Should a person fear spinal manipulation? And apart from those impressive manipulation noises just after you've been told that your spine is 'out' and needs to be put back 'in,' are there any lasting benefits from such manipulations? If that question has possibly entered your head, you wouldn't be the first person to ask.

During my own ten-year battle with back pain in the seventies and eighties, I must have had my spine manipulated hundreds of times mainly by chiropractors and osteopaths. During that time, did I ever find myself in any danger? Truthfully, I cannot say that I did, however I'd be less than transparent if I didn't mention the time when I spent three days in the most intense and almost intolerable pain, that I would be extremely happy never to have to endure again, immediately following a cervical spinal manipulation performed by a seasoned and experienced professional. And during my ten-year period of treatment, did I receive any discernible benefit from those hundreds of spinal manipulations? If I did, it certainly wasn't discernible to me, even considering the fact that I was repeatedly told that I should and would be feeling a whole lot better when my apparently misaligned spine was impressively adjusted and re-aligned by a series of manipulations. But no, despite me spending a sizeable sum of money, I was no better off at all, and to be perfectly honest, I'd have to admit to feeling pretty ripped-off.

Having made that statement, is there a possibility of a significant risk in having the spine aggressively manipulated? Were you to ask that specific question to a high-profile public figure in Australia, no doubt you would get a particularly animated response. This public figure was urgently rushed to hospital after the sheath around the spinal cord had been torn during a manipulation that had horribly gone wrong! Had corrective surgery not been performed, the future as a front-line federal politician would have remained in serious jeopardy. The recipient of spinal manipulation for a number of years following an auto accident, the politician's condition, it must be said had not deteriorated during that time however it had not improved either. The person had been persuaded that regular manipulation was necessary to avoid further degeneration, a conclusion that may have been an acceptable one until a chiropractor happened to be having a bad day, or was momentarily distracted just long enough to get the method 'just not quite right'.

Then of course there was the lady who didn't get to object at all following a manipulation that had unexpectedly misfired; at 28 years of age she died twenty-four hours after another 'safe' procedure also hadn't gone to plan. Over the last 20 years I have heard more horror stories about manipulative therapies that hadn't gone according to plan, leaving the 'patient' not only no better off but in almost intolerable pain that not surprisingly was blamed on other factors. Interesting, isn't it??? This article could so easily take on gigantic proportions by detailing many more of the costly clangers that 'professionals' have inflicted upon their unsuspecting customers, but I would tend to think that if you're reading this article after years of expensive failures, you probably don't need convincing. What is fascinating though is the rationale that is often foisted upon patients to convince them of the need for a lifetime commitment to spinal manipulation.

Perhaps you've heard this comment, "My chiropractor is wonderful, I've been going to him [or her] for years!" Sorry, but am I the only one to wonder after a comment like that, 'well, if he [or she] is so wonderful, why do you need to keep going back there for years???' Either you are being genuinely helped to recover, or sadly you represent little more than cash-flow for the business. 'Ah, but all machinery needs maintenance' they shriek in protest.' OK, so why don't you learn to do the maintenance yourself and avoid remaining dependent upon the ones who charge you every time your dependency needs an urgent fix? If this persuasive rationale for routine maintenance is to hold true, then logically the advocates of this school of thought ought to be sufficiently professional to equip and empower the ones who have paid them considerable amounts of money to, at some point, allow the sufferers to escape from their dependency.

Have I become nothing more than a cynic over these last thirty years, hardened by the disappointments of so many 'professionals' who promised much yet delivered so little, or have I allowed the painful experiences of many others who have poured out their heart-wrenching frustrations concerning the way they had been mistreated, or is it simply that I deeply object to 'professionals' exploiting the vulnerable with promises that in the vast majority of cases they can never deliver? On reflection, I'm convinced it would have to be the last of these three possibilities.

It seems evident that with so many chiropractors already in business, and so many more flooding onto the market each and every year, that many of them, no, not all but many, clutch desperately at a slice of market share when people come walking through their doors hoping to find relief from their pain as fuel for their business-bottom line to be milked for all they are worth in the name of 'good health'.

OK, so is spinal manipulation dangerous? It only takes one single error of movement, one split-second of loss of concentration, one fraction of a moment being distracted, or a flinch of involuntary tension on the part of the patient, and yes, the consequences can indeed be catastrophic. Does this happen a lot? Thankfully, no, but let me ask you, are you willing to knowingly play those odds? And are there any, or many, benefits to be had from such manipulations? If I was totally-up all the complaints I've had to listen to over many years relating to failed back and neck treatments, the overwhelming majority would be directed at spinal manipulations. Again, you be the judge.