I gotta say guys, I'm with the doc on this one. While I'm no osteopath or chiropractor, my 16 years as a paramedic and another 10 as a respiratory therapist have at least enabled me to spot bullshit when it comes to medicine. Everything I've read from him is consistent with the chronic-phase treatment I've seen in HUNDREDS (maybe thousands) of orthopedic patients (and in the treatment my own chiropractor uses for me.). The fact that he asked EXACTLY the right questions was my first clue. The history is an immensely important part of the diagnostic process; in some cases even more so than the physical exam. There is a reason medical students spend a ridiculous amount of time learning to take a history properly. Physical symptoms are often vague and/or applicable to a wide range of problems. The history narrows the differential considerably. He's limited by the inability to perform the physical exam and said as much. I can't diagnose lung disease from a history alone but I can narrow it WAAAAY down -- much more so than someone without the education and clinical experience I have. I can also dispel a lot of misinformation about your lung disease and its treatment just by listening and talking to you. That's all he did. He also offered to work with Andy to find a chiropractor who CAN perform a physical exam and who is also going to ask those same questions (for the same reasons).
My second clue to him being legit was the consideration of contraindications to treatment. Bullshitters rarely if ever acknowledge that their advice or treatment have limitations. Every therapy has indications, contraindications, methods/techniques, and treatment goals. You have to use the right method, for the right reason, to achieve the right outcome.
- He considered the indications for heat vs cold therapy (acute phase vs chronic-phase -- incidentally, the pain that comes on top of an existing injury that you get after training is called acute-on-chronic. The acute inflammation caused by AGGRAVATING the injury responds to ice and anti-inflammatories. The chronic condition does not. That has to do with the cellular process of disease and the way the body repairs damage.).
- He considered the contraindications to therapy (diabetes, clotting disorders, etc.).
- He described the method in detail (wet vs dry, time of application, etc).
- He considered the goal of treatment (optimize circulation to the area to relax muscle spasms and speed healing).
- And he considered the limitations of therapy by noting that he could not offer a more complete diagnosis without an exam but, again, offered to find someone near Andy who could.
Additionally, his plan of care did not stop at "slap a hot pack on there and stretch"; he offered to help Andy find a practitioner near him that can help him establish a more precise diagnosis and provide a long-term treatment plan and do so within his means. That's what the profession of medicine is SUPPOSED to be about! Sorry fellas, but the doc is right.
My second clue to him being legit was the consideration of contraindications to treatment. Bullshitters rarely if ever acknowledge that their advice or treatment have limitations. Every therapy has indications, contraindications, methods/techniques, and treatment goals. You have to use the right method, for the right reason, to achieve the right outcome.
- He considered the indications for heat vs cold therapy (acute phase vs chronic-phase -- incidentally, the pain that comes on top of an existing injury that you get after training is called acute-on-chronic. The acute inflammation caused by AGGRAVATING the injury responds to ice and anti-inflammatories. The chronic condition does not. That has to do with the cellular process of disease and the way the body repairs damage.).
- He considered the contraindications to therapy (diabetes, clotting disorders, etc.).
- He described the method in detail (wet vs dry, time of application, etc).
- He considered the goal of treatment (optimize circulation to the area to relax muscle spasms and speed healing).
- And he considered the limitations of therapy by noting that he could not offer a more complete diagnosis without an exam but, again, offered to find someone near Andy who could.
Additionally, his plan of care did not stop at "slap a hot pack on there and stretch"; he offered to help Andy find a practitioner near him that can help him establish a more precise diagnosis and provide a long-term treatment plan and do so within his means. That's what the profession of medicine is SUPPOSED to be about! Sorry fellas, but the doc is right.