of personal health, seems to carry little weight with the funding agencies. Our society is either paralyzed by the fear of letting up on the allopathic system, and allowing other approaches to take hold, or it has become very complacent as a result of the political support of this dominance by the medical associations. But let’s examine this situation fur-ther. Our current Medicare system weighs heavily in favour of pharmaceutical in-terventions even in areas where evidence points to other viable solutions. In fact, whereas there are strong policies and com-mittments in all political parties to keep Medicare away from private, for-profit medical companies, governments pro-vide nearly unlimited financing to private, for-profit pharmaceutical companies. It is well known that, in turn, these companies – despite making some positive contribu-tions to medical knowledge – have strong, but sometimes dubious, fiscal relation-ships with medical professionials. And so, a loop has formed, locking our society into a predicament where there is, in fact, little or no support for other ide-ologies that relate well to actual health care, health maintenance and restoration of health as opposed to medical/pharmaceu-tical based disease care and the relieving of symptoms that, perhaps, could have been prevented. Albert Einstein is quoted as defining insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting differ-ent results. As we head into our next era of health care – either via a federal accord or under the auspices of the provinces – don’t we want to avoid spinning our wheels to the detriment of our collective health? Oh, and one more thing: most doctors work on a fee-for-service basis and as such constitute very much a for-profit industry – one that is paid for through our taxes via political support. states that “the medical establishment has become a major threat to health” and goes on to prove this point conclusively. In 1987, Geoffrey York published The High Price of Health, A Patients Guide to the Hazards of Medical Politics, in which he shows clearly that “Medicare is not work-ing: Canadians are using medical services at a rapidly increasing rate, the health costs are spiraling out of control, and we aren’t getting any healthier. What is wrong?” York explores in concrete and validated terms that the cause of the problem is the dominant medical establishment. In 2005, Dr. Don Nixdorf (a well-known Canadian DC) co-wrote a book with Gary Bannerman called Squandering Billions. The book demonstrated “that the absolute power of medical doctors, phar-maceutical companies, health bureaucrats and hospital administrators, enshrines mediocrity at the expense of patients.” The book goes on to demonstrate, “Evi-dence shows conclusively that expanded use of community health centres, nurse practitioners, doctors of chiropractic and others can be more effective and less ex-pensive within their area of expertise.” A quote from Pran Manga, PhD, MPhil, a noted authority on health ideology, makes the point: “The management of our health care system is so inefficient that we not only fail to put patients in the hands of those professionals most qualified to give the best treatment, we actually ensure that the most expensive and least qualified per-son provides the care . . . the structure of health management in Canada makes the squandering of billions unavoidable.” health care system and how to achieve this.” (Source: Health Care Transformation in Canada: Canadian Medical Association: Voices in Action: Report on the National Dialogue on Health Care Transformation) It is interesting to note that the CMA did not study Asian jurisdictions that employ different approaches to health care along with allopathic methodology. Furthermore, while this may be a valu-able survey, it is managed by the CMA. In other words, the very organization re-sponsible for the chaotic situation of our health care was the sole agent mandated to lead a study in order to find the solu-tion to the problems that its own ideology has created. What is wrong with that pic-ture? Do we not see the limitations in this? In order for the health-care system to really transform, it will have to let go of its absolute adherence to the current medical model of disease care and begin to look at this problem from another par-adigm. This ideally would mean fully in-cluding those other disciplines that offer more efficient and cost-effective health care that actually produce an improve-ment in the health of Canadians. This will never be achieved by continuing only the expansion of the disease-care focus in our health-care system, while leaving true health care unattended. WHERE ARE YOU GETTING ALL THIS? If you question my description of the sit-uation, the many pitfalls of the medical model have been the subject of studies and books for many years. The author would like to provide you, the reader, with a brief overview of a few of these sources to illustrate that this problem has existed for many years and that what we are facing is, in fact, not new! In his well-researched book published in 1975 and entitled Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health, Ivan Illich www.canadianchiropractor.ca WHAT ARE THEY DOING ABOUT IT? In August of 2010 the Canadian Medi-cal Association (CMA) launched a dis-cussion on the future of Medicare with the release of Health care transformation in Canada: Change that works. Care that lasts. The CMA said, “Based on extensive research, including a study of health care in five European jurisdictions, this docu-ment prescribes ways to bring about a health care system that puts patients first and provides Canadians better value for their money.” Then the CMA embarked on a “national public debate,” online and in co-operation with a number of promi-nent Canadian current affairs publica-tions, with the goal of “engaging as many people as possible in an open discus-sion of what Canadians envision for our WHAT SHOULD WE DO ABOUT IT? As a profession offering an alternative methodology that is based on solid ideol-ogy and science, we are acutely aware of the many failures of our current health-care system. Furthermore, we know how we, ourselves, can help mitigate some of them. Our profession has, to some extent, been built on medical failures as well as on the outstanding health successes that chi-ropractic care can provide. So, as health-care practitioners who are knowledgeable of the situation, and who possess some real solutions, I would say we have a pro-fessional duty, if not a moral obligation, to get actively involved in this process of bringing real transformative change to our current health-care system and programs. The chiropractic profession, and our patients, need to get intimately involved in redefining and transforming our health-care system. We need to encourage and facilitate our patients and friends to speak up and make sure that they are heard in order to create a political force for trans-formation of our health-care system away CANADIAN CHIROPRACTOR | FEBRUARY 2012 • 9
Chiropractic + Naturopathic Doctor February 2012: Page 9
