polly1
Novice Poster
Posts: 34
|
Post by polly1 on Dec 17, 2005 19:08:04 GMT 1
I have another question!! How does a pelvic rotation manifest itself with flat work? I have been discussing this with a friend of mine today after what we have been told about our repsective horses. If the pelvis has rotated up (skywards!!) on the left which rein would the horse find it difficult on with particular respect to canter and apparent stiffness on one rein more than the other? Also is there a good book about lameness that would discuss such issues? Thanks.
|
|
carrie
Elementary Poster
Posts: 77
|
Post by carrie on Dec 18, 2005 13:32:03 GMT 1
It would really depend on which side was the shifted area (ie is the near side up or off side down?). I would expect that the near side of the spine would be in contraction (so as to pull the ilium caudally - forward). Therefore you might expect the horse to find right flexion to be more difficult as this would entail the near side thoracolumbar fascial muscle to lengthen. The other issue is that although the pelvis may be rotated and affecting the animal's action, there could well be other areas in spasm. So basically it is quite difficult to generalise about what you would expect to notice in a horse's faltwork in correlation to the problem! I know that my horse finds it very difficult to canter on the right lead when MY pelvis has rotated with the right side forward (because the right seatbone is then back). As for books, the best I have found is 'Lameness' by Peter Grey (? I think he's the author but I've lent it out at the moment!!) It has an excellent chapter on analysing the lame horse, and really looks at the horse as a whole, not the apparently lame limb. I hope that's helped abit!! To be honest, without looking at the horse in question it's quite difficult to judge!
|
|
|
Post by annahindley on Dec 23, 2005 17:59:51 GMT 1
up
|
|
Nicola
Grand Prix Poster
Olympia tickets for ?10 for NSPCC see charity section
Posts: 2,473
|
Post by Nicola on Dec 25, 2005 14:19:55 GMT 1
Hi Anna thank you for your xcellent and lengthy expanations - I am printing them off for my file. I must say I have a mctim Chiro out for my horse on a regular basis and she is excellent, she deals with a pelvis adjustment as you describe Anna and I have not seen her do anything harsh or invasive (or she wouldnt be working on my horse), all movements are quick "thrusts" using angle rather than strength (as I have seen with some back people I am sorry to say ). This person has never lifted my horses legs for any adjustments, she is very precise and her treatment is very quiet. I dont understant this 25 days for mctim? is this a new thing, I ask as I know my chiro had to complete human training before she was allowed to do equine training and from what she has told me her training has been exensive in terms of how long it takes - certainly not 25 days.... Very best wishes, Nicola
|
|
|
Post by galeCH on Dec 26, 2005 12:03:36 GMT 1
Hi, How much of an influence can this form of ttherapy have on soft tissue? I am asking because my horse seems to have a bulky muscle infront of the shoulder blade (from my books it looks like it would be the cervical aspect of the trapezius??) that isn't normally there (i.e. bulky like it is). I want to have her checked out by someone and i know there is a good McTim on the area. Should i go down this route or are there more appropriate therapies for soft tissue problems?
|
|
|
Post by annahindley on Dec 29, 2005 15:50:28 GMT 1
Nicola, yes this is a new thing. For many years the equine chiros trained by McTim had to be human chiros first. Recently (last 5 years I would guess) they started to allow non-qualified people onto the course. This has IMO led to a lowering of standards and a loss of professionalism. The course is for 1 weekend per month for one year, hence app 25 days. The course I completed was not McTim, but was an internationally recognised course (McTim is only a UK thing). This course only allows vets and chiropractors to attend. I know several chiropractors who have done both courses, (all since McTim changed its policy). Without exception they rated the international course as head and shoulders above the McTim. Even the majority of the teaching staff have resigned from there - presumably because of the reduced quality of the syllabus. This does not apply to the "old school" McTims, who I have used with great success over the years. (However, McTim have just lost their license to graduate chiropractors at all, so the human course is also no longer deemed to be an acceptable standard either). If your person is a McTim animal chiro, she will've done this course when it was recognised, and prob when they only let chiros onto the animal course I imagine. These new type of McTims are called spinal therapists (a title that they were stopped from using in human practice due to the confusion it causes - sadly no such legal protection for animals). This title, unlike chiropractor, is not protected and you could quite legally set up tommorrow and call yourself a spinal therapist. The same does not apply to chiropractors. To be honest, IMO these individuals who do the course are being ripped off as they don't know any of this when they hand over a lot of cash to McTim. Another one to watch out for is an american import - chiropractioners - similar story. To check if your therapist is actually a chiropractor, go to www.gcc-uk.org/chiro_search.cfmIf they are not listed, they are not chiropractors. That does not mean they can't help, but you must be aware that the minimum standard required to graduate people using the title "chiropractor" has not been met - standards put in place to assure SAFE and COMPETENT preactice of chiropractic - and yet these people are using chiropractic terms, methods and manipulations. Sorry in advance if I have offended, but this is the situation and I was asked !!! Gale - If you read the section on subluxation theory, you will see that chiropractic very much has an influence on soft tissue. There are however many ways to get to a destination. If you have a personal recommendation, it is a good idea to follwo it if you trust the opinion of the person who made it. Good luck!
|
|
|
Post by VicsUK on Dec 29, 2005 22:28:46 GMT 1
I thought the McTimoney course was 2 years? I know the McTimoney Corely course is 1 weekend a month for a year which adds up to 200 hours of teaching over the year (8 hours a day) plus the extra work the students are required to do in the mean time. I have just had a quick check on the IVCA course and the basic course is 210 hours and even if you have done the advanced that seems to be another 21 hours. I completed the McTimoney Corely course a couple of years ago and i wasn't disappointed and the current situation of my job title and the politics around it were quite clearly pointed out when i went for the interview for the course. I am one of 'these people' and i happen to be very well educated and have an excellent degree in Equine Science as well as being published in the Equine Veterinary Journal (and others to come next year) as a result of very successful research post graduation. Only 30% of anything submitted to the EVJ ever gets accepted so you can imagine that i would have to have some amount of grey matter to be accepted and published. My back ground is very technical (to be honest less accomplished when it comes to actually riding horses, that is the hobby part) and i converse easily with vets and clients alike and have impressed people with my standards and knowledge. To be quite honest having studied anatomy, physiology, biochemistry etc etc and spent more hours dissecting various parts of horses than i care to remember, i actually found the principles behind this profession fairly straight forward. I admit the actual physical skills are rather difficult to master at first as it was a completely alien concept. However after the hours of practice i put in and the individual teaching we all received i felt confident at the end of the year. My client base and results speak for themselves and as many of my clients compete at very high levels and i trust their judgment (as well as my own) as to whether the treatment has been successful. I appreciate you have put in a great many years of hard work and sacrificed to get where you are but that doesn't mean that others that chose a different route can't be as successful. I am positive that some people from the same course as myself and the McTimoney course are not as good at what they do as others but i am sure that goes for people in the chiropractic profession as well as vets (we have all met a few bad vets!!!!!!!!!!!) as with school teachers or doctors i.e. there is bad in every profession. I took me three attempts to find a good chiropractor to treat me and now i have i will stick with her. I think the best bet for anyone is to go by reputation for anyone you want to call out. If standards are falling then i hope the powers that be will step in to tighten things up but i for one am confident i have been trained well and i hope i continue to improve horses lives!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by annahindley on Dec 30, 2005 2:14:44 GMT 1
VicsUK, if you read my post you will see I am not saying that no-one but a chiropractor can help a horse - far from it. I work in a multi-disciplinary heallthcare setting, with 20 other therapists whom I refer to regularly.
I have no doubt that there are very educated spinal therapists out there, yourself included. However, my point is that there are much less educated people out there too - and it is impossible for the public to distinguish them. Anyone can be educationally accomplished, even through self-directed study; however, I still maintain that a standard should be set by a course, not by the very gifted indivduals on that course. Any education you received outside this course is really irrelevant to this discussion - it is no recommendation that another spinal therapist will know these things.
You are not in the position to compare the courses as you have not completed them both. However, I do know people who have done that, and therefore can make that judgement, and have. The length of the McTim course has changed a couple of times BTW, so may be longer now. It is still open to non-professional people.
I also have my share of grey matter - I was accepted into Oxford University and passed 6 A' levels; I still found that cramming all the learning about chiropractic into a 4 year full time course was demanding. My cohort was also intelligent, (the entry requirements are demanding academically) and yet no-one sailed through this course - the drop out/failure rate was high. Everybody struggled with the sheer volume of information, if not with the complexity of it - but there was plenty to challenge the gifted students too...which makes me wonder how it was possible to really understand everything about chiropractic in such a short space of time. It is rather patronising to dismiss this body of knowledge as "straigh forward". Can you perhaps see that you were given a honed down, uncomplicated version?. Obviously something had to be dropped (like at least 80% of the content, due to time constraints)- or the intake of the McTim-Corley course all very exceptional and in the genius bracket!! You say that you grasped the concepts of this profession easily. I do wonder how much neurology and neuro phys that included. To me, chiropractors are functional nerologists - the most important effect of chiro care is neurological. I understand the profound effect of the adjustment on many of the systems of the body. I do have to wonder if your easy grasp includes an understanding of the philosphy, art and science underpinning what you do - or if it is a grasp of the technicalities such as which way to thrust on a joint. With the best will in the world, I still can't see how your technique can be anywhere near as practiced at graduation as someone who spent 8 hours in a classroom every week for 4 years learning to manipulate effectively. This is why spending 210 hours with other chiropractors, that have had this background, this knowledge, this profound understanding and this technical competence - is, by its nature, not the same as starting from scratch with 200 hours.
Anyway, this profession is not a set of techniques to be mastered, it is a healthcare philosophy. It is easy to train a technician. I have no doubt that you have satisfied clients and are helping to improve horses lives; as you say, there is good and bad in all professions - and it sounds to me like you are one of the best.
I do think that the use of the word McTimmoney is misleading. A recent judgement of the GCC on a human practicioner ruled that in the public eye, this term was synomonous with chiropractor, and the public were being mislead into believing that their care was being delivered by a chiropractor. That is my beef really, it is the insidious portrayal of spinal therapists as chiropractors. You cannot tell me that it does not cause confusion and that you are not mistaken for a chiropractor - I know that it happens.
I wish you well in all that you do, and hope you can understand why I feel so strongly.
Sorry to all of those people not involved for what must be an extremely boring discussion!!
|
|
Nicola
Grand Prix Poster
Olympia tickets for ?10 for NSPCC see charity section
Posts: 2,473
|
Post by Nicola on Dec 30, 2005 3:41:04 GMT 1
Hi Anna
Thanks for that, I was unaware that things had changed for Mctim training hence my confusion, I was aware of the chiros training that I use for my horse and assumed that it was still the same that applicants to the animal course had to first qualify in human chiropractic - however she has been practising for quite a long time now!
|
|
|
Post by annahindley on Dec 30, 2005 12:17:19 GMT 1
that is exactly my point about confusion!!!
|
|
|
Post by VicsUK on Dec 30, 2005 18:18:13 GMT 1
I do appreciate why you have a problem with the confusion around the two professions especially after the length of training you have had. I think the problem people face with what i do is which category do we come under? I have been called a chiropractor many times and have corrected each person that has done so but it results in the same blank look as i try to explain where i fit in. I think there needs to be a clear and simple distinction made that the public can understand and be able to make an informed decision on who to get to treat their animals. I don't wish to sound patronising when i say i found the principles straightforward but i am afraid it is true. I spent several years studying neurology, biomechanics, biochemistry, anatomy and i have a in-depth understanding of all of them. I found it a wide knowledge bank to draw from when i started training for this profession and i have devoured every text i can find and pestered every professional that will listen so i can continually advance my knowledge. I also have my biochemistry research to draw from which leads me to concerns i have about ischaemic reperfusion injury post treatment (more research needed here) and the effects of cortisol in relation to becoming more prone to injury in the competition horse. I appreciate what you are saying is that is me individually and not a mark of the professional standards of the course i did. I just wish that if the course is to be criticised is that a proper constructive review is done and that the profession is supported a little more by the 'big boys' of the chiropractic world. I am fed up of the critiscms between professionals that IMO lead to more confusion for the public and less confidence in what we do. Clear guidelines and set standards and even a slot for people of my profession to be put in would be the ideal all round. There will still be good and bad in each and all professions but at least we could get on with our jobs without getting irate about what each other are doing. I would love to not have to explain why what i do doesn't make me a chiropractor!!
|
|
|
Post by annahindley on Dec 30, 2005 20:49:01 GMT 1
Again, I apologice to all those not involved, please skip this it must be very boring, but as it ws a dead thread anyway, I don't feel bad about the hijack VicsUK, I appreciate what you are saying, but there will never be a clear distinction between the two professions whilst spinal therapists are using chiropractic techniques, looking like chiropractors and using a title associated in the public eye with chiropractic. If you want to be distinct as a profession - drop the McTimmoney name and the chiropractic techniques, and with it those associations. Indulge me in an allegory if you will.... Imagine if a dental school lost its accreditation, but instead decided they would train "tooth therapists" and thus keep taking on fee-paying students. Would you send your kids to them for a filling? Maybe, these tooth techs have learnt to fill a tooth very competently - that is probably quite easy to learn, its just a manual technique; does that make them dentists? No, because it is the full understanding and rationale that makes a dentist a dentist. Chiropractors are not technicians, they are (like dentists), clinicians. The dental therapist might say "but I can fill a tooth, I am a dentist but for a small legality preventing me from using that name!". Would you agree? Now imagine that a "tooth technician" trained for less than 20% of the time of a recognised dentist. How do you think the dentists will feel about them? You must understand that the dentists may feel threatened by these techs, that they may feel that peole will confuse them, because standing with the drill in someone's mouth, they look like dentists. Now, imagine they had a name that everyone in the public associated with dentistry, and people eally thought they were getting a dentist.... If a school is not good enough to earn the right to give the protected title, there has to be a reason - I don't think that someone of your obvious intelligence can really dispute that. Again, I do not doubt your knowledge base, but I have to say, that I began my training in 1996 - I have had nearly 10 years of being submerged in the world of chiropractic. I have done hours and hours of post-graduate education in addition to my first degree. I would estimate that I have an understanding of perhaps 40% of what can be done via chiropractic, if that....AK, SOT, cranial work, activator, network etc etc etc - all the therapies in common use in chiropractic today. Chiropractic in its broadest sense draws on eastern-based medical systems, meridian work, energy work, emotional release work etc etc. The profession is huge, diverse and amazing; like "school medicine", "school chiropractic" is only the tip of the iceburg - it is only after graduation that the "juiciest" bits are available to you. It really is much much more than putting a high speed thrust through a joint - although the title chiropractor does guarantee to the public that you are safe to do that. I hate to say it VicsUK, but this may be a case of not knowing enough about chiropractic to know what you don't know. . I did graduate at the top of my class so I don't think it is just because I am slow ;D! You ask that the course be reviewed and not ignored by the "big boys" of chiropractic. You ARE NOT a graduate of a chiropractic course!!! Why should the big boys of chiropractic be interested? The profession is interested in maintaining high standards of knowlede and education. As I am sure you know, the McTim Corley school has long ago lost its accreditation to graduate chiropractors - does this suggest to you that as an institution its academic standards are high? Of course not, it (and now McTim) have been unable to meet the criteria to graduate chiropractors for humans because they do not meet the international minimum standards for safe and competent practice. Sorry, but if they were great at delivering chiropractic education, they would still presumably be training chiropractors. The profession as a whole have largely protested against the 2 schools because they taught a much simplified, formulaic version of chiro via a part time course. this has been improved over recent years - but has simply not proved to be good enough - hence the GCC (not me, or my personal ill will )have stopped these schools operating. Although there is scant support for animal work in the UK, as a chiropractor, I can tap into the international chiropractic network, and there is alot of support from both Europe and the States. There is a lot of post grad education and CPD in Germany especially. Unfortunately for you, there is little awareness of McTim/McTim Corley outside of Britian and as non-chiropractors, you have no way in. I am interested to hear what you do say to explain why you are not a chiropractor. What do you answer this question? I also would love the professions to be distinct. Maybe I had a bad experience, but I can assure you that I was left a hard PR job to talk around the local equine vets, who were most put out by the ill-infomed "bone out of place" comments and brash diagnoses of a spinal therapist - who they (like everyone else) had assumed was a chiropractor. Your eloquent and articulate answers leave me in no doubt that you would not make such comments, but we know that your education was there BEFORE your training. You truely sound like you have a lot of knowledge about horses, (but perhaps less about chiropractic??? and I would never take that away from you. I do think that that is despite the fact that you completed the course, not because of it. Your research sounds excellent and I would be interested to read it when it is complete.
|
|
|
Post by guestcc on Jan 3, 2006 22:44:56 GMT 1
I have been following this argument with some amusement at the anger shown by various writers. I am a qualified and registered chiropractor paying the £1000. registration fee annually. I have become very disillusioned with the political bickering as above and when asked by clients or horse owners if I am a chiropractor I reply that I prefer to call myself any thing else. I do not want to be lumped in the same group, I only value very high standard of treatment that finds what is going on with the horse/human and then helps to over come the problems. I have heard too many stories of practitioners doing lots of treatments to little gain.
|
|
|
Post by LizzieD on Jan 3, 2006 23:12:41 GMT 1
FAO: Nicola Bebb (sorry to hi-jack thread!)
Hi Nicola, I am trying to find a good chiropractor that covers the Essex area - do you think your chiropracter would cover that area? If so, would you be able to let me know his/her name and contact details?
Many thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Post by Amanda S Yorks on Jan 4, 2006 9:09:59 GMT 1
I don't think Anna comes across as anti-McT, more anti-dumbing down from what I've read.
I use a McT chiropractor, she qualified long before the admission policy changed and is qualified to work on humans also. My mare has a history of sacroiliac problems (the initial injury was meant to end her ridden career, it hasn't but does mean we can't jump more than the odd log out hacking as she can't take the strain). I have her checked over by the McT chiro bi-annually as a precaution and will also call her out at other times if I think it's warranted. My mare has had the leg lift treatment but it's not for problems in the SI area, though can't remember what it was for. For problems in the SI area the treatment varies but usually involves the chiro standing on a box and working from above.
For my mare the problem generally manifests itself as a sort of loose bottomed walk! Sounds weird I know but it's the best way to describe it, when viewed from behind it almost looks like the hindquarters and forehand belong to two different horses. If I let it get beyond this point it usually shows up whilst doing circles & lateral work and eventually manifests itself with a severe intolerance to working in canter. It's only got this bad once though, before I knew my mare well enough to catch the early signs.
I generally follow up any major work, which thankfully is now very rare, with Bowen therapy or a Massage.
|
|