HISTORY OF THE NACM

While a number of chiropractors had worked for many years to reform the chiropractic profession away from a philosophical scope of practice and towards an applied science scope of practice, two factors came together in the early 1980’s to prompt a formalization of these practitioners efforts.

First, the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF) was writing a Position Paper on chiropractic and asked Dr. R. L. Slaughter and the father and son team of Dr. Charles DuVall, Sr. and Jr., to review their work. These Doctors responded to the NCAHF, after review, that the information was accurate, but no remedy was suggested to criticism given nor was any attempt made to show the value of manipulative procedures. The NCAHF responded by inviting these Doctors and others of their choosing, to write this part of their position paper. They did, and this was incorporated into the final paper. These Doctors felt this was a major victory for scientifically oriented reformer chiropractors for a number of reasons.

The final paper, approved and published by NCAHF Board of Directors, February 14, 1985, specifically stated exactly what "A scientific chiropractic will" and "A scientific chiropractor will not:" do. It further made "recommendations" to consumers, insurance carriers and third-party payors, legislators, basic scientists, academicians and educators, attorneys and law enforcement agencies, medical doctors, dentists, and other scientific health care providers and to reformist chiropractors. The value of applied science manipulative procedures was recognized. It was proposed that chiropractic training be incorporated into State supported university colleges leading to a degree in "chiropractic medicine", and to "permit Doctors of Chiropractic Medicine to utilize prescription drugs suitable to the limitations of their practices." Had the chiropractic profession followed these recommendations "chiropractic" today would be a viable "mainstream" health care profession. Instead, the chiropractic profession vehemently attacked the NCAHF and the authors of the paper and continued education and practice based on the disproved/unproved chiropractic hypothesis.

The second factor prompting formalization of the NACM, was the response of the fourteen Board Members of the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) to a presentation made to the Board by Dr. R. L. Slaughter in New Orleans in the mid 1980’s. Dr. Slaughter asked the American Chiropractic Association Directors to work toward the abandonment of philosophy as a basis of practice and to work toward an applied scope of practice. Clearly, no desire existed in this body toward the reformation of the profession from a philosophical base to a scientific base of practice. In conclusion, to the Board, Dr. Slaughter promised that if the ACA would not lead the way to a consumer protected profession a way would be found to do so.

With the assistance of the Senior and Junior Dr. Charles DuVall’s, Doctor Mark Davis and Dr. Anita (Denson) Gilbert, Dr. Slaughter chartered the NACM as a non-profit Corporation in the State of Texas shortly thereafter. The membership of the NACM has, steadfastly, continued to work for the reformation of the chiropractic profession along the lines of the recommendations made by the NCAHF. Membership has assisted the news media, State and Federal government agencies, the insurance industry, the medical profession and the legal profession, when applicable, toward these goals to this day and will continue to do so.

When the NACM was formalized, neither the chiropractic profession nor medical science had investigated the value of manipulative procedures by scientific method of research. Dr. Slaughter was asked by the Food and Drug Administration to chair a workshop in their National Health Fraud Conference with the Dr.’s DuVall, St. Mary’s Hospital, Kansas City, MO., in 1987. During this conference it was pointed out that scientific medicine was as guilty as was the chiropractic profession for the inappropriate use of manipulative procedures because of the lack of research done on these procedures. Since this time a number of peer reviewed, published studies have been made, all outside the chiropractic profession, concluding that manipulative procedures have value in treatment of back pain. These studies include governmental studies of the United States, England, Canada and other European nations. The Rand Study was probably the first study to bring light on this controversial form of treatment. Scientific medicine has met the challenge. The chiropractic profession has not yet met the challenge of limiting these valuable procedures to an applied science scope of practice.

It is the opinion of the NACM that consumer needs are not being met with regard to professional biomechanical evaluation and treatment. Deficits of posture, weight bearing, gait and articular (joint) dysfunction clearly contribute to musculo-skeletal pain; especially with age and "wear and tear" of life. Pain is the primary reason a consumer seeks medical help and joint pain is the majority etiology of this pain. Restoration of function of a damaged joint may contribute greatly to avoidance of deterioration of that and associated joint structures. It is the hope of the NACM that the chiropractic profession will meet this challenge as a science-based profession with legitimate scope of practice parameters.

If you have questions about NACM or you would like for us to contact you, please e-mail us at: ronlslaughter@hotmail.com