A Century of Skepticism: How Repetitive Media Narratives Continue to Misrepresent Chiropractic Despite Scientific Progress
Written by: James Demetrious, DC, DABCO
Board-Certified Chiropractic Orthopedist
Founder and CEO, PostGradDC
The recent New York Times article, “Should You Trust Your Health to a Chiropractor?”, highlights both the progress and the ongoing challenges facing the chiropractic profession. While the article acknowledges that chiropractic care is widely utilized, incorporated into major healthcare systems, and recommended within evidence-based guidelines for low back pain, it also perpetuates a familiar narrative that has followed the profession for more than a century.
To its credit, the article recognizes that spinal manipulation is an effective treatment option for low back pain and that serious adverse events are exceedingly rare. It further notes that chiropractic care is increasingly accepted within mainstream healthcare. These are important facts that reflect the profession’s substantial growth and scientific maturation.
Yet despite these acknowledgments, the article frames chiropractic through repeated references to “snake oil,” historical controversies, and allegations of anti-scientific behavior. This pattern is common in media coverage of chiropractic. Positive evidence is often presented, but it is frequently overshadowed by historical stereotypes, controversial anecdotes, and criticism directed at a minority of practitioners.
No healthcare profession should be judged primarily by its origins. Modern medicine is not evaluated through the lens of bloodletting or lobotomies. Likewise, contemporary chiropractic should be evaluated according to its current educational standards, scientific literature, patient outcomes, and safety record.
The article also discusses cervical spinal manipulation and cervical artery dissection. Importantly, it acknowledges that a causal relationship has not been established. This distinction is critical. Current evidence suggests that many patients experiencing an evolving cervical artery dissection develop neck pain and headache before stroke onset and often seek care from chiropractors or medical physicians during this prodromal phase. Association alone does not establish causation. A balanced discussion requires consideration of both risk and susceptibility.
The article also references anti-vaccine views held by some chiropractors. While such opinions may exist among individual practitioners, it is neither fair nor scientifically appropriate to characterize an entire profession based upon the views of a subset of its members. Similar reasoning would not be accepted if applied to medicine, nursing, or any other healthcare discipline.
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of the article is not any single statement, but rather the broader pattern it represents. For decades, chiropractic has been subjected to repetitive negative framing in popular media. Even when evidence supporting chiropractic care is acknowledged, the profession is often portrayed as controversial, suspect, or scientifically questionable. This persistent narrative influences public perception, discourages patients from considering conservative treatment options, and undermines interdisciplinary collaboration.
Healthcare journalism serves the public best when all professions are evaluated using the same standards. Chiropractic should neither be immune from criticism nor subjected to a different level of scrutiny than other healthcare disciplines. Fair reporting requires acknowledgment of both strengths and limitations.
The evidence supports chiropractic care for many neuromusculoskeletal conditions, particularly spinal pain disorders. Millions of patients utilize chiropractic services each year, and chiropractic physicians continue to contribute to research, education, and collaborative healthcare delivery. Patients deserve balanced information that reflects the current state of the evidence rather than recurring narratives rooted in historical prejudice.
The question is no longer whether chiropractic belongs within modern healthcare. The evidence, utilization, and integration of the profession have largely answered that question. The greater challenge is ensuring that public discourse evolves as the profession itself continues to evolve.
PostGradDC offers advanced post-graduate chiropractic continuing education. Our founder, Dr. James Demetrious, is a distinguished board-certified chiropractic orthopedist, educator, author, and editor.
© 2026 – James Demetrious, DC, DABCO. Open Access. Unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction are allowed in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit by citing the original author and source: Demetrious J. A Century of Skepticism: How Repetitive Media Narratives Continue to Misrepresent Chiropractic Despite Scientific Progress. PostGradDC.com; 2026.
