The College is being accused by experts of endangering the public by allowing some chiropractors to make claims about the treatment of cancer, mental illness, ADHD and autism

An unprecedented public feud between chiropractic factions has sparked charges that the profession’s regulatory body is acting in self-interest rather than protecting the public and should be investigated by the Ontario government.

The College of Chiropractors of Ontario — which oversees the profession — is being accused by chiropractic educational experts of endangering the public by allowing some chiropractors to make claims about the treatment of cancer, mental illness, ADHD and autism. Members of the CCO’s own executive have offered such treatments or speak at conferences espousing them.

Distroscale

The crisis was triggered this fall when the CCO — which regulates the province’s 5,000-plus chiropractors — proposed a bylaw that would exclude members of educational chiropractic colleges from running for election in the six districts that make up the regulatory body. Despite 78 per cent of its members saying they “disagreed” or “strongly disagreed” with the decision in an online survey conducted by the regulator, the CCO pushed the change into law, but allowed for one Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College faculty member to be voted in, at large, for the entire province in a newly created seventh district.

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Critics argue that the regulatory body excluded academic organizations such as the CMCC because its faculty opposes chiropractic beliefs held by powerful members of the regulatory body’s council, and as many as a third of Ontario’s chiropractors.

Dr. Peter Amlinger, who is on the CCO’s executive, and Dr. Clifford Hardick, the organization’s treasurer, are both former presidents of the CCO. They have both made or been linked to anti-vaccination statements and both have claimed that “vertebral subluxations” cause all manner of disease. Hardick has treated children for ADHD.

Both Amlinger and Hardick have expressed the view that chiropractors promote healing by releasing the power of the body’s 'innate intelligence' through their removal of subluxations

While Hardick has not responded to statements that he is opposed to vaccination, Amlinger claims that an anti-vaccination post on his web site was placed without his permission and that an anti-vaccination editorial was posted with his name on it without his knowledge.

Both Amlinger and Hardick have expressed the view that chiropractors promote healing by releasing the power of the body’s “innate intelligence” through their removal of subluxations. This is a vitalistic form of chiropractic that harkens back to the discipline’s founding father, Canadian D.D. Palmer, who believed a healing life force came from God and that the removal of subluxations could allow the body to heal itself.

Today in Ontario, many chiropractors still cling to this belief and claim to treat a litany of maladies — even childhood illnesses such as “birth trauma,” ear infections and autism — with chiropractic adjustments. Some vitalists also believe vaccination is unnecessary.

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Earlier this year, the CMCC signed a position statement rejecting the notion of the “vertebral subluxation” calling it a “vitalistic construct” unsupported by evidence. That position put the largest chiropractic college in Canada in direct opposition to the largest regulatory council in the country.

A study published in the Archives of Physiotherapy recently found that 33 per cent of chiropractic websites in Alberta “presented the theory of vertebral subluxation.” There is no reason to think the number is lower in other provinces, including Ontario.

Amlinger is a frequent speaker at Chiropractic: Pure and Powerful, a vitalistic conference. Last year he was given a lifetime achievement award by Alliance for Chiropractic, a vitalistic chiropractic group which believes, “that every man, woman and child [should have] access to subluxation-based chiropractic.” Clifford Hardick heads MaxLiving, a practice-building consultancy. The company states on its site that “by optimizing nerve supply through spinal correction, the body’s systems can naturally interact and integrate without interference.”

Neither Amlinger nor Hardick responded to The Post’s request for comment.

“This situation highlights the degree to which many chiropractors remain rooted in supernatural beliefs. It also highlights how self-regulation is failing,” says Timothy Caulfield, Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy at the University of Alberta. “Increasingly, I think that governments across Canada need to rethink how alternative medicine is regulated. The system seems to be broken.”

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Ontario NDP health critic France Gélinas agrees and says it’s time for the government to step in.

“I don’t think the CCO is able to carry out its mandate to protect the public and I want the ministry to have a look in order to restore the trust, so that the public feels protected again,” she said.

The CCO did not respond to specific questions the Post posed on this issue.

“The government needs to step in and stepping in could very well mean [bringing in] a supervisor, it can mean appointing a new board, it can mean having them under another college for some time,” Gélinas said. “What cannot continue is everybody sitting and watching this continue to unfold where you have an important profession within Ontario in which a college is not able to protect the public.”

The Ministry of Health declined to answer direct questions about this matter.

Dr. David Wickes, president of CMCC, wrote to his faculty in September saying the CCO’s decision to keep them off the council “is an attempt to gag or punish CMCC, putting the interests of one faction of the profession above the interests of the public.”

The CCO argues that in taking an anti-subluxation position, the CMCC has put itself in a conflict of interest and is biased against the many chiropractors in Ontario who run subluxation-based practices.

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

And, the CCO says that by providing the CMCC with a single seat on council, it reduces the possibility of conflict of interest from the educational college.

But, in a letter to the CCO, Wickes argued it is Amlinger and Hardick who are in a position of conflict of interest.

“I cannot understand why those persons are allowed to serve in elected position on the council,” while CMCC faculty are not allowed, he wrote.

Six leading chiropractic educational experts agree and, in a letter to the CCO said the behaviour of vitalist council members resulted in damaging and embarrassing media coverage and put the profession in peril.

“This onslaught of scrutiny has led some stakeholders to call into question the ability of the CCO to self-regulate.” They say their actions have, “undermined public confidence in the trustworthiness of the profession.”

That sentiment is echoed by Oakville-based chiropractor and town councillor Dr. Natalia Lishchyna, who feels the CCO is discriminating against chiropractors associated with the CMCC.

“I don’t have confidence in the leadership of the CCO right now,” she said.

“Their role is not advocacy,” she said. “It’s to protect the public. What they’re doing is self-interest … They talk about things that are not evidence-based … They’re still living in the past.”