Journal of Chiropractic Humanities: A Celebration of 25 Volumes

Abstract

This article reflects on the origins of the Journal of Chiropractic Humanities. The journal was born at a time when the chiropractic profession had few journals but needed a publication to capture evolving philosophical constructs.

Introduction

Each of us has a responsibility to preserve knowledge for the next generation. It is the preservation of this history that will allow continued growth and development of the chiropractic profession. The purpose of this article is to describe my thoughts on the events leading up to the development of the Journal of Chiropractic Humanities (JCH).

In the mid-1960s, I was a student at the National College of Chiropractic (NCC) when a trial was going on in which several doctors of chiropractic had sued the Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners in an effort to gain the right to practice chiropractic in Louisiana (England v Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners¹). The plaintiffs sought “an injunction prohibiting the Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners from enforcing the licensing provisions of the Louisiana Medical Practice Act against them.”¹ Unfortunately, they lost the case that lingered for many years, having started in the mid-1950s. The loss was a huge emotional blow to the profession at the time.

During the England trial, Dr Joseph Janse, President of the NCC, was called to answer for the content of a textbook published by NCC. The original book was published by NCC in 1939, titled Chiropractic Principles and Technic and was authored by Biron et al.² This text, similar to others at the time, included the meric system, which most people at the present day recognize as an outdated model that is not supported by science. The second edition, published in 1947, was authored by Janse et al.³ Although Dr Janse had made contributions to the revised edition in the areas of anatomy, the text also contained clinical recommendations that Dr Janse did not agree with. During the trial, while on the witness stand, Dr Janse was questioned about the contents of the text.

After testifying at the England trial, Dr Janse returned, upset and depressed. Because of my background as a radiological technician before chiropractic college, as a chiropractic student, I worked with Dr Janse on the aspect of radiologic “spinography.” During one of our meetings, he shared his frustration with me. He described that during his testimony, he tried to offer legitimate explanations for chiropractic treatment of various infectious diseases and other conditions based on the correction of the subluxation. He said the courtroom was full of chiropractors who were expecting him to support traditional “chiropractic philosophy.” Out of frustration, he asked me the rhetorical question, “What was I to do?” Then he said something that I have never forgotten. He said, “Never put your name on something you did not write, and never support something with which you do not agree.”

The England trial was lost, and Dr Janse felt that he had failed his colleagues in his efforts during this trial. Over the following years, Dr Janse was driven to make contributions that would improve the quality of chiropractic education and its scientific publications. The creation of the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) in 1978 was one of these efforts.

The chiropractors of Louisiana eventually succeeded in having legislation passed that allowed for the practice of chiropractic medicine in that state. However, our profession was far from finished with the courtroom drama that was seen in the England trial. Subsequent to that trial and in the early 1960s, the American Medical Association (AMA) had formed the Committee on Quackery, which was designed to contain and eliminate the chiropractic profession.⁴ At every turn, doctors of chiropractic were rebuffed in their efforts to serve the needs of the sick and suffering. Finally, in 1976, Chester Wilk, DC, and 4 of his colleagues decided to bring an antitrust lawsuit against the AMA and other medical organizations for restraint of trade against the chiropractic profession.

A trial by jury⁵ concluded in 1979 with another loss not based on restraint of trade, but on the concept that the AMA was a “protector of the public” and thus was compelled to protect patients from the charlatanism of the chiropractic profession. The decision was appealed, and a bench trial was set for 1987.

In 1987, I was called to be the expert witness on behalf of the chiropractic profession in the Wilk v American Medical Association⁶ trial. This was a similar situation to the England trial in that chiropractic was fighting against the political medical establishment. This trial brought the issue of what has been called “chiropractic philosophy” to the forefront. The term “chiropractic philosophy” had been used as a tool to attack chiropractic in the first Wilk trial a decade earlier and had served to produce a negative effect on the trial outcome. In the second Wilk trial, I faced many of the same questions that were raised by the opposition in the first trial, which were all born from the idea that the chiropractic profession was based on unscientific concepts. The argument was that because there was no scientific support, chiropractic could not be a valid and reliable health profession.

During my deposition and testimony in court, I was attacked with the same style of questioning that Dr Janse had taken a beating for in 1965, asking if I supported particular philosophical constructs. In reply, I simply stated that I did not agree, that I did not think such concepts were valid based on the current scientific evidence. I had taken the advice that had been given to me 22 years earlier by Dr Janse after he returned from testifying at the England trial: “Do not put your name on something you did not write, and do not agree with anything you cannot support.”

What I discovered during the second Wilk trial was that the issue of the “philosophical” basis of the chiropractic profession was at the foundation of the AMA’s defense argument against chiropractic medicine as a way of claiming the AMA was protecting patients. I faced numerous questions that related directly to the philosophical component of the profession. Questions from the AMA lawyers revolved around the philosophical ideas that many in the chiropractic profession had proffered as a basis for human health and disease as it was understood by the members of the profession. At the center of these constructs was the theory of the effect of the vertebral subluxation, a theoretical entity that was purported by chiropractors to be the very foundation of human health and disease. As I responded to the AMA lawyers’ questions related to this conundrum and the ways in which chiropractic doctors addressed human health and disease, it became clear to me that our profession needed a vehicle that would provide a venue for discussions related to the entire concept of “philosophy of chiropractic.”

After the Wilk v American Medical Association⁶ trial was over, I reflected on the publications of our profession and was happy that we had a vehicle for publication of scientific research articles, but I felt that we lacked any kind of publication necessary for recording the ongoing thought processes expressed by members of the profession related to who we are and why we do what we do for our patients.

In the late 1980s, I had been serving as the president of NCC for several years and was giving more thought to how our institution and its people might better serve a profession that had only 1 scientific publication in Index Medicus (Fig 1). The JMPT, which was initiated by my predecessor, Dr Janse, in 1978, had been thriving and fulfilling its mission. A decade later, the JMPT had recorded many accomplishments relating to early scientific investigation by members of the chiropractic profession. However, there was still a need for a journal dedicated to the body of knowledge and information about the culture, the history, the literature, and the “philosophy” of the profession of chiropractic medicine.

Fig 1.

James Winterstein, DC (1986).

With these thoughts in mind, I approached the Chair of the Board of Trustees of the NCC. Dr Orval Hidde, along with Dr Janse, was one of the most influential members of the profession in the thrust for educational accreditation for chiropractic in the United States. I suggested that NCC should expand its professional publication commitment by initiating 2 additional journals, Philosophical Constructs for the Chiropractic Profession (Fig 2) and Chiropractic Technique.

Fig 2.

Original cover of the journal before it was renamed.

I envisioned that the Philosophical Constructs journal would focus on publishing papers related to our professional tenets and the “philosophy” of chiropractic practice. The journal was to focus on who we were and why we did what we did. It would be a venue for recording how we, as chiropractic physicians, think about our patients and their concerns and the reasons why we care for them as we do. It was to be a vehicle through which learned members of the profession could propound and promote ideas or “constructs” that might lead us toward greater foundational legitimacy.

My thoughts were that it is perfectly acceptable to establish a “philosophic” basis for one’s approach to the treatment of human disease. But tightly bound within that philosophic basis must be the knowledge and related science-supported methods and procedures that can be demonstrated as valid and reliable. Without this aspect, one would simply be promoting an idea that is not grounded in reality. At the same time, however, the philosophical foundation may contain constructs that undergird the doctor and patient relationship, the commitment to the patient first, the commitment to the most conservative care whenever it is possible, the commitment to lifelong learning, and to setting an example for the patients served.

With this in mind, I set about designing and developing this publication with the assistance of our editor at the time, Dr Dana Lawrence. We began the first volume of the journal titled Philosophical Constructs for the Chiropractic Profession, with 10 papers that were presented at the homecoming event at NCC in June of 1991. These 10 papers were presented by the authors and then became part of the written record of the first volume of the journal, which we initially distributed widely to the profession.

It was shortly after the first several volumes were published that Dr Joseph Keating, Jr, my friend and colleague, suggested that perhaps there might be a better title for this journal. He suggested Journal of Chiropractic Humanities (Fig 3). The term “humanities” relates to “learning or literature concerned with human culture, especially literature, history, art, music, and philosophy.”⁷ I agreed with his perspective, and we changed the name of this journal.

Fig 3.

An early cover of the Journal of Chiropractic Humanities.

Initially, I received a number of negative comments about the journal from members of the profession. These individuals said that chiropractic “philosophy” had long since been completely and definitively developed and that I was an upstart to question such well-defined and “known” parameters. However, there were others in the profession who were very interested in the mission of the journal. The journal has continued to receive articles that meet the criteria for continued publication to become a reality.

Since the first volume, 24 additional volumes have been published, and a perusal of the article titles reveals that, in many ways, this journal has met and exceeded its original purpose—to provide a venue for publication of papers related to our tenets about who we are, why we do what we do, and how we think about our patients and their concerns.

From the beginning, the National University of Health Sciences has made the JCH available to all who have an interest in reading its pages. By making it available to everyone in the profession, we aim to stimulate others and enrich their minds and also contribute by writing articles that could be submitted for publication. The journal is currently published in both print and as a digital volume and is available for all to read. So now, 25 volumes later, my personal thanks goes to all who have taken the time and made the effort to contribute in a scholarly way to the recording of the body of literature related to the chiropractic humanities. I salute you!

In 2004, we were blessed to have Claire Johnson, DC, MSEd, PhD, become our editor-in-chief and Bart Green DC, MSEd, PhD, become the associate editor of the JCH. They rejuvenated the journal, elevated its quality, and facilitated its inclusion in PubMed.⁸ As a result of their commitment to the National journals, the chiropractic profession enjoys the benefits of having peer-reviewed, indexed journals that provide venues for the humanities, science, and practice. My personal thanks goes to our dedicated editors and to all of you who have seen fit to engage in these journals by reading them and through your submissions of relevant papers for publication.

About the Author: James Winterstein

Dr James Winterstein is a 1968 graduate of the National University of Health Sciences (Fig 4). He completed his residency in diagnostic imaging in 1970 and became a diplomate of the American Chiropractic Board of Radiology in May of 1970. He is most known for serving as the president of the National University of Health Sciences, which he did for 27 years. Dr Winterstein has served the chiropractic profession in various positions, including as president of the American Chiropractic College of Radiology, president of the Council on Chiropractic Education, secretary of the Association of Chiropractic Colleges, and secretary of the American Academy of Chiropractic Physicians. Dr Winterstein was a member of the Board of Directors of the Federation of Illinois Independent Colleges and Universities for 27 years and currently serves as a board member for Advanced Medicine Integrated, Inc. He became President Emeritus of National University of Health Sciences on June 21, 2013. A participant in many professional venues and a prolific author, Dr Winterstein has 4 children, 9 grandchildren, and 19 great grandchildren.

Fig 4.

James Winterstein, DC (2012).

Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest

No funding sources or conflicts of interest were reported for this study.

Contributorship Information

• Concept development (provided idea for the research): J.W.

• Design (planned the methods to generate the results): J.W.

• Supervision (provided oversight, responsible for organization and implementation, writing of the manuscript): J.W.

• Data collection/processing (responsible for experiments, patient management, organization, or reporting data): J.W.

• Analysis/interpretation (responsible for statistical analysis, evaluation, and presentation of the results): J.W.

• Literature search (performed the literature search): J.W.

• Writing (responsible for writing a substantive part of the manuscript): J.W.

• Critical review (revised manuscript for intellectual content, this does not relate to spelling and grammar checking): J.W.