“Does the Chiropractic of Modernized Chiropractic Still Live?”

In his tireless effort to bring Gonstead Chiropractic back into the limelight, our Director of Research has once again gotten our name in a place that matters!  I am referring to his latest article in Chiropractic History, where he compares the original tenants of chiropractic to what Gonstead Chiropractic is.  Read his synopsis – then go join the Association for the History of Chiropractic so you can enjoy all of our history!  Jeanne Taylor, D.C.-GCSS Executive Director
________________________________________
Roger R. Coleman, D.C.― GCSS Director of Research

The latest issue of the journal Chiropractic History contains  our article, “Does the Chiropractic of Modernized Chiropractic Still Live?” Now in the past, we’ve published a lot of articles and all of them had a particular purpose. But, the purpose of this article was a little different. You see, this article had as one of its goals, to compare and contrast the Gonstead Method as presented in the Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic to the chiropractic detailed in chiropractic’s first book, Modernized Chiropractic, published in 1906. To that end we compared the areas of A Correct Philosophy, A Well Developed Technique, A Dependable System of Diagnosis and a Reliable and Extensive System of Correction as found in Modernized Chiropractic to the same areas of discussion in the Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic. We had access to the rare original volumes of the two volume set of Modernized Chiropractic, but of course, we did not have access to the authors of Modernized Chiropractic.  However, we did have Dr. Mark Lopes, who has previously written in the journal of Chiropractic History and was the Associate Editor on the Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic. This gave us an unique opportunity in that we could present the position expressed in Modernized Chiropractic and compare it to the manner in which it was presented in the Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic and finally ask Dr. Lopes why the Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic addressed these subjects in the manner they did.
This literary device was very different and extremely effective and added a unique prospective to the project. We also had access to someone who works with the Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic on an ongoing basis, Dr. Lydia Dever. In addition to being the current president of the GCSS, Dr. Dever is also Chiropractic Science Division Chair at Life University.  Her insights and writing were invaluable to the project as she condensed large sections of Textbook of Clinical Chiropractic into concise, crisp and to the point sections that stood out in sharp contrast to the often flowery and bombastic linguistic style of presentation used in Modernized Chiropractic. We also had Professor Kenneth Wolf, whose expertise in the field of history never fails to improve the professionalism of any article. Put all these ingredients together, add the usual tanker full of obsessive compulsion and simmer for hundreds of hours. The end result is that we show that the Gonstead method is the natural successor to the chiropractic established by the first chiropractors with the addition of new science and technique. The authors of chiropractic’s first book would be proud of the Gonstead method and recognize it as the improved model of their beginnings and that the modern Gonstead clinician understands the tenants of philosophy described in Modernized Chiropractic.
You should be very proud of this effort but these things do not take place in a vacuum. Without your support, none of this would be possible. Never underestimate your role in this program. The GCSS Board of Directors also deserves recognition. The board has allowed us to work our plan and proceed in a step by step methodical manner to research, describe and bring forth the best in the philosophy, art and science of chiropractic. But this article has more. Some of you have been disappointed that we have not spent more time discussing chiropractic philosophy. This article has as one of its major points, the discussion of  chiropractic philosophy. I once wrote, “What is science without a soul.” Well, it’s pretty hard to get much “soul” into a modern scientific journal but this history article has a lot of the soul of chiropractic. Finally, I want to thank Dr. Jeanne Taylor. Every couple of weeks I call her and bore her to death about the things we are doing. I can marvel for hours about the implications of changes produced by different vectors of force or angles of divergence but for those who have a life it is “cruel and unusual punishment” to listen to me wax on about some esoteric subject. Without her encouragement and Dr. Lopes’ constant work, this job would be so much harder.
So what does the near future hold? I am fond of saying that these articles always turn out to be a lot more complicated than you think they will be when you started them. But, I thought I had finally found one that would be easy. I was wrong. Right now Dr. Lopes and his son Derek are showing me that the simple project I started, is actually very complex and Derek is crunching numbers for another article. Dr. Dever, or as I like to call her, “the canary in the coal mine”, is slated to start the outline of the book we discussed at The Meeting of the Minds seminar. And, Dr. Jeanne Taylor is going to be dragged into that effort. Of course, there are a number of other projects far along in their own processes and future projects that are merely dreams.
As we established in our recent history article you have assumed the mantle of chiropractic which was passed down from the early chiropractors. “With great power comes great responsibility.”