• ijeff@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The few things they do that are effective are better delivered by an evidence-based provider (e.g., physiotherapist, massage therapist) without the pseudoscience.

    • Pandantic [they/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where’s the proof that massage therapy is more evidence-based than chiropractic? Honest question, a cursory search seems to show that it’s not. Also, interesting that my chiropractic and physical therapy visits are covered by my insurance, but massage therapy is not. Wish I could afford it.

      • ijeff@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I should probably specify that it does vary by jurisdiction when it comes to massage therapy. We have registered massage therapists here. Some massage therapists might employ some pseudoscience, but there’s solid evidence on the near-term therapeutic benefits of massage. For chiropractic, it’s pretty much entirely based on pseudoscience.

        If you need to fix a problem, a physical therapist is the way to go. If you want temporary relief, a massage therapist can be helpful. There’s no good reason to see a chiropractor - and it’s unfortunate that insurance providers (including my own) don’t allow those funds to be spent on actual treatments.