writings.”
Dr. Hoffman:
That’s why we had you on Tedd, and I appreciate all of what you’ve done over the years for chiropractors and educating the public as well. This particular show is really all about having a freedom of choice. That’s where I want to continue the conversation. I want to introduce one of my heroes, someone that I’ve known for over 35 years. He’s the proper and appropriate president of Life Chiropractic University, and I love his vision. I love what he’s done for chiropractic, what he's done for chiropractors, and for me personally. I asked Dr. Riekeman to participate today because I don’t think that we have many better voices in our entire profession that are the leaders in healthcare other than Dr. Riekeman. Guy, number one, I want to welcome you, and I want to ask you, from the vaccination issue, talking about freedom of choice and what’s right in terms of this being a chiropractic issue versus a public education issue, how do you see it? What do you want to share with the doctors coming on today? Stu, thank you very much. I appreciate it. I was making notes when you were doing your introduction, and picked up on something you just referred to. I think one thing for chiropractors is this is not … If you’ll accept this appropriately, this is not a chiropractic issue, just like drugs are not a chiropractic issue. Our chiropractic philosophy which is about the nerve system and subluxation, the body’s ability to heal and maintain itself in the environment, that philosophy implies certain attitudes towards issues in our lives. I remember reading an Ian Coulter’s book, that there are 5 conversations going on in healthcare today. The first one, which Tedd referred to, is vitalism versus mechanism. Is the body a machine or is it a self-developing, self-healing, self- maintaining mechanism? The second conversation is naturalism versus artificialism. What’s the best way to birth a child? Do we birth a child naturally or through caesarian section? What’s the best way to gain immunity? Is it through exposure to dirt, dust and [dander 00:09:47], or is it via artificial vaccination? Then the third discussion is holism versus reductionism. Can we understand the person and their health in the context of looking at them as just an eye, nose, ear, or a throat, or do we have to understand them in the larger context of not only their whole body, but how they work in the environment and their relationships? Then the last 2, humanism versus authoritarianism. What rights do patients have in the doctor patient relationship? Do they have the right to privacy? Do they have the right to informed consent? Do they have the right, when they go to see a doctor, no matter what profession the doctor is in, to have the right to know what all sorts of treatments are for various things, and what the side effects are, or does the state have the right to, in an authoritative way, to tell the patient what their options are, and how to dispense those options? Then finally, the last conversation is conservative therapeutics versus high risk interventions. There’s regular, for example low cost, low risk interventions like
Dr. Riekeman:
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online