w e l c o m e This is orientation or what I call Chiropractic 101

Almost everyone is here for the same reason If you came as an adult, you may have a problem with your health that interferes with your ability to live your life to the fullest & someone told you I might be able to help. Most people have a vague idea that chiropractic is a way to treat a backache or stiff neck or a headache and while those things often go away under chiropractic care, that is not the best way to use Chiropractic.

If you came to my webpage as an adult (I see mostly children and pregnant mamas), you may have a problem with your health that interferes with your ability to live your life to the fullest & someone told you I might be able to help. Most people have a vague idea that chiropractic is a way to treat a backache or stiff neck or a headache and while those things often go away under chiropractic care, that is not the best way to use Chiropractic.

What you will learn today: What’s the problem? Can Chiropractic help with this problem? What caused it to happen? The benefits of chiropractic for people that have no symptoms.

LIFE Medicare Guidelines state: " Care which seeks to prevent disease, promote health & prolong & enhance the Quality of life is considered "Not Medically Necessary care (MCM2251.3)" Insurance generally follows Medicare Guidelines, however, we do NOT treat ANY conditions here, but we help remove interference within your body's communication network (the nervous system) to help it FUNCTION better. Also, insurance considers my fees to be unreasonably low – most people have copays in the $50-60 range now after meeting $3-7K deductibles. My fees for those not box eligible are $25 for spinal only or $45 for spinal with extremities. We will discuss box eligibility rules at the end of this presentation.

Insurance generally follows Medicare Guidelines, however, we do NOT treat ANY conditions here, but we help remove interference within your body's communication network (the nervous system) to help it FUNCTION better. Also, insurance considers my fees to be unreasonably low – most people have copays in the $50-60 range now after meeting $3-7K deductibles. My fees for those not HONOR BOX eligible are generally below deductible. We will discuss HONOR BOX eligibility rules at the end of this presentation.

Some people say, “I believe in chiropractic” and others say, “I don’t believe in it”. Chiropractic does not require your belief. Frankly, I don’t care if you believe it or not. I do care that you understand it. Chiropractic does not require your belief. Frankly, I don’t care if you believe it or not. I do care that you understand it.

Q: What controls all the functions in your body? LIFE flows from your brain, down the spinal chord through the spinal nerves and to every cell in your body.

The nervous system exits the skull as the spinal cord traveling through the the “Foramen Magnum” Literally every message from the brain to the body must pass through the foramen magnum.

Let’s stop for a second and take a look at the anatomy of the spine Let’s stop for a second and take a look at the anatomy of the spine. These are the primary components: -Vertebra - bones -Discs – shock absorbing squishy cushions -Spinal Cord – nervous tissue extending from the brain -Spinal nerves – nervous tissue exiting the spinal cord This is George (point to him – make him wave & then turn him around.) Spinal nerves – These create and then control all the organs, glands and tissues in the body. What happens when the spine is misaligned? We call that a : VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION.

What is the problem? We call that a : VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION. This is George (point to him – make him wave & then turn him around.) Spinal nerves – These create and then control all the organs, glands and tissues in the body. What happens when the spine is misaligned? We call that a : VERTEBRAL SUBLUXATION.

Q: What if we interfere with the nerve that goes from the brain to the: Neck? Mid Back? Lower Back? To any part of the body?

What if T6 is Subluxated? 10% no symptom 20% no symptom 30% belching 40% bloating 50% nausea/ stomachache 60% heartburn 70% Bleeding 80% dizziness 90+% Cellular Death First tissues will get red, swollen and eventually they will wither up and die (atrophy). What if we leave this bone out of alignment for weeks, months or years?

Q: How Chiropractors find a Subluxation? We can palpate (feel) for them. We can look for them: ROM or posture We can use instruments like an infrared thermal scanner. We can use an adjusting protocol like Activator, SOT, Thompson, etcetera So, we know how to find them, now what causes them?

What causes Subluxations (aka the problem)? STRESS Mental physical chemical

What are some examples you can think of that cause Mental or Emotional stress?

What are some examples you can think of that cause Toxic or Chemical stress?

What are some examples you can think of that cause Physical stress?

How stress leads to Vertebral Subluxations… Let’s get back to that stress issue…  7-14 days

Can ChiropracTIC help with this problem?

Many studies show that chiropractic care reduces lost time in the workplace and that persons under chiropractic care have lower overall annual healthcare costs. Here are just a few samples of those studies. The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low- back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost- effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non- pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632. The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Manga Report is the most comprehensive analysis of low-back pain to date. This report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health showed chiropractic treatment is cost-effective, safe, has a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is more effective than medical treatment for low-back pain. The report recommends management of low-back pain be moved from medical doctors to chiropractors and found that injured workers with low-back pain returned to work much sooner when treated by chiropractors than by medical doctors. The report also notes evidence that patients are much more satisfied with chiropractic management of low-back pain than with medical management. The Manga Report concluded: "There would be highly significant cost savings if more management of low-back pain was transferred from physicians to chiropractors. Users of chiropractic care have significantly lower health care costs, especially inpatient costs, than those who use medical care only." In the AMI Study, a chiropractic network in which DCs performed all patient examinations, treatments, and procedures at their own discretion was constructed. Recommended follow-up visits, choice of appropriate treatment, and ancillary therapies utilized did not require approval from an MD. The original study, which focused on the years 1999-2002, found decreases of: 43% in-hospital admissions per 1,000; 58.4% in hospital days per 1,000; 43.2% in outpatient surgeries and procedures per 1,000; and, 51.8% in pharmaceutical costs. It noted that: "The AMI experience seems to indicate that a non-pharmaceutical/nonsurgical orientation can reduce overall health care costs significantly and yet deliver high quality care." This study was updated in 2007, covering the years 2003-2005. The results of the original study were confirmed, with demonstrated decreases of 60.2% in in-hospital admissions, 59% in hospital days, 62% in outpatient surgeries and procedures, and 85% in pharmaceutical costs. The Stano Study, conducted by Oakland University Economics Professor Dr. Miron Stano, found that, when costs of advanced imaging and referrals to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16% lower than medical care costs. If the study would have included hospitalization or surgical costs, two very expensive medical treatments for low-back pain, or over-the-counter medications, the savings from chiropractic would have been even greater. Additionally, chiropractic patients showed an advantage over medical patients in pain, disability, and satisfaction outcomes. The Nevada Workers’ Compensation Study found loss of work time under chiropractic care is less than 1/3 of the time lost under medical care. The study also found that the average medical cost per patient was 260% higher than the average chiropractic cost. The Texas Chiropractic Workers’ Compensation Report found the average claim for a worker with a low-back injury was $15,884. If a chiropractor provided at least 90% of the care, however, the average cost declined by more than 50%, to $7,632.   The North Carolina Study looked at more than 43,000 workers’ comp. claims over a 19-year period (1975-1994) and found dramatic differences in the average treatment costs between chiropractic patients, medical patients, and patients treated by both. The analysis revealed that the average total cost of an injured worker’s claim managed by a medical doctor was $21,774 more than claims managed by a DC. For chiropractic patients, however, average treatment costs were only $663, roughly 18% of the cost of medical care, and 13% of the cost of combined care. Additionally, injured workers treated by DCs experienced lost work days for an average of 33 days – 143 days less than workers seeing an MD, and more than 200 days less than workers treated by MDs and DCs, and hospital inpatient and outpatient care costs for medical patients were $1,995 and $2,161 more per worker, respectively, than for chiropractic patients. The study concluded: "It seems likely that substantial savings to the workers’ compensation system would be possible if chiropractic services were increased in North Carolina." The Utah Study compared the cost of chiropractic care to the cost of medical care for conditions with identical diagnostic codes and found that cost was almost 10 times higher for medical than for chiropractic claims. Also, the number of work days lost was nearly ten times higher for those who received medical care. The American Journal of Medicine reported on studies that investigated the risks between spinal manipulation and other treatments for the same conditions. For instance, one analysis concluded there was no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were any more effective than spinal manipulation, but the risk of serious complications or death was between 100 and 400 times greater with NSAIDs. In another review, estimates of serious gastrointestinal events from NSAIDs were 1 per 1,000 patients, whereas complications of cervical manipulations were 5-10 per 10 million treatments. Additional studies by noted chiropractic researcher BP Symons, the RAND Corporation and Duke University all found cervical manipulation, when performed by a qualified, licensed DC, is extremely safe and effective. In fact, the Duke study said cervical spinal manipulation "has a very low risk of serious complications," which may be "one of its appeals over drug treatment." However, what if they had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

The chiropractic adjustment is specific for removing subluxations. Mere mobilization of the joint without a specific line of direction is not an adjustment

However, what if all those people in those studies had been under regular chiropractic care already and PREVENTED the back pain or strain injuries?

Q: Why do I get adjusted once EVERY 7-14 DAYS? This is a 1987 study by Dr. Videman which found that after just 7-14 days of immobilization, we can see arthritis forming in a joint. This arthritis can also form after repeated short periods of loss of motion in a joint lasting several days. Once the wearing of the bone has taken place, these changes are not considered to be reversible. Also, one joint that loses motion effects the joints around it. Videman T (1987) Experimental Models of Osteoarthritis. The Role of Immobilization, Clinical Biomechanics, 2:223-229, and the various papers by Videman there referenced  A: To eliminate interference between the brain and the body AND to avoid arthritis.

What are the benefits of chiropracTIC for people with no symptoms?

Improved joint motion and range of motion Decreased inflammation and helps prevent arthritic degeneration Adaptogenic effect on blood pressure & cardiovascular function Better systemic function because our nervous systems work optimally & remember what system controls them all? Nervous system Short labor & delivery (important if you plan to have a baby any time soon)

What are 6 things you can do to keep yourself and your family healthy?

Eat well- eliminate ingredients that are not food from your diet Eat well- eliminate ingredients that are not food from your diet. How many ingredients do the French fries at McDonald’s have? Hydrate Well – ½ body weight in ounces daily Move well- At the end of this presentation, there will be exercises that will help you get to where you can go 2 weeks between adjustments but until you are holding your adjustments and doing the exercises daily, I would recommend that you get adjusted weekly as I do Think well- meditate, prayer, keep a gratitude journal. Stay well Adjusted- get your family’s spine checked once a week. Sleep well – target 7-8 hours each night. If you have sleep issues, ask for your noggin to be checked

People often don’t have babies checked because they “look so healthy and happy”. Why, because you are judging by how they look or seem to feel. But judging by how you feel is like jumping out of the Empire State Building. As you pass each window you look in and say, “OK, so far…” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjgxKcjnimY Stress starts at birth - Birth Trauma….

Larry Webster, D.C. - Chiropractic care must begin at birth - average pull during the birth process today is between 90 and 110 lbs (120 lbs. was shown to cause decapitation by Duncan, M.D.). The spine can be stretched ½” before injury - the spinal cord can be stretched 2 ¼” before injury. “It is still true that the most dangerous journey some people will ever undertake is that from the womb to the outside world.” WHAT DOES THIS MEAN??? All children should be examined for Subluxations and begin chiropractic care immediately because . . . A life of Subluxation prevention is fundamental to a healthy, wholesome, vital, enthusiastic life!

Dr. Gottfried Guttman, a German physician, conducted a study of over 1,000 newborns shortly after birth. He discovered that over 80% of the infants had suffered trauma to their cervical spine, which resulted in vertebral subluxations. Guttman, G. (1987). "Blocked Atlantal Nerve Syndrome in Babies and Infants. Manuelle Medizine, pp. 5-10. https://insightcla.com/subluxation-and-sudden-infant-death-syndrome/ Guttman, G. (1987). "Blocked Atlantal Nerve Syndrome in Babies and Infants. Manuelle Medizine, pp. 5-10.

CHIROPRACTIC WELCOME TO THE WORLD WELCOME TO LIFE www.keithwassung.com People often don’t have babies checked because they “look so healthy and happy”. Why, because you are judging by how they look or seem to feel. But judging by how you feel is like jumping out of the Empire State Building. As you pass each window you look in and say, “OK, so far…” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjgxKcjnimY Stress starts at birth - Birth Trauma: Larry Webster, D.C. - Chiropractic care must begin at birth - average pull during the birth process today is between 90 and 110 lbs (120 lbs. was shown to cause decapitation by Duncan, M.D.). The spine can be stretched ½” before injury - the spinal cord can be stretched 2 ¼” before injury. “It is still true that the most dangerous journey some people will ever undertake is that from the womb to the outside world.” WHAT DOES THIS MEAN??? All children should be examined for Subluxations and begin chiropractic care immediately because . . . A life of Subluxation prevention is fundamental to a healthy, wholesome, vital, enthusiastic life! CHIROPRACTIC www.keithwassung.com

What you have learned today: The problem = subluxation Chiropractic adjustments remove subluxations Stress leads to subluxations An optimally functioning nervous system benefits anyone.

So what is our MISSION? Our Mission: To detect and correct Subluxations This is a subluxation removal station… My whole family is under care.

How do fees work? In Lindale & Mineola, we have the following options: paid by the visit at booking or paid in person at the visit the Honor Box OR pre-paid as packages or membership In Terrell or the DFW airport area, all visits are paid by the visit at booking or pre-paid as package or membership.

HONOR BOX rules in Lindale & Mineola Must have attended this class to use our Honor Box in Lindale or Mineola setting your own fee. This is not a donation or a charity, it is a FEE for services rendered. Average visit cost is $60 for spinal adjustments. HOUSE CALL average fees are much higher. Follow the 3 rules: 1. Pay at each visit. 2. Be regular. 3. Refer others to the office. Use of Honor Box may be canceled if you do not come in at least 2X in any given month without giving us notice.

EXERCISE DEMOS Wobbles C-sp Traction Piriformis Stretches Planks Bridge Pose Doorway Stretches Overheads Post C-sp translation Provide Handout