[Aaron]

I scanned the article and it is very interesting. I think he takes the right approach in saying that often it takes several different approaches from different disiplines to solve a problem. That is the biggest downfall of chiro, prolo practioners. They will basically tell you that PT does not work only prolo can help you or surgury does not work only chiro can help you. I have done prolo many times and truthfully have not gotten the great results promised, does that mean it does not work, no, it just didn't so far in my case. But the dr. told me I should have gotten the prolo in labrum tear and could have avoided surgury; to me this made no sense, if you have a piece of cartilage impinging on hip movement due to it hanging even if you seal the tear the hanging part is still there. My surgury was a 99.9 % success for hip labrum tear and this was were i disagreeed with the regenerexx theory about laburm tears. But i agree it is a good starting point and if it works great, if it does not surgury may be an option. And that is where the medical field is lacking, instead of being a team to help fix someone they are at odds.

The atlas orth. theory seems valid as does many alt. treatments, but there is a website souly devoted to debunking the theory of chiro; here is the catch; it is written by chiro's who felt dupped once they got into chiro school and it was not what they were led to belive and holes began to show up in the theory. Some of these are practicing chiro's.

This will be a debate until time ends, but for those it helps great and those it does not I think it was worth a shot. But like regenerexx, money ( not taking ins) plays a big role.