If Wrongberg Is Against It, It Must Be Good!


Any progressive effort to upgrade this profession from its cultish roots and “anything goes” clinical mindset from yesteryear will be met with resistance by those who will not profit from reform. Certainly mega-volume practice gurus will cry about evidence-based guidelines, but the truth is this is a trend that crying over will not stop. Nor will the ranting of Terry Wrongberg, the phony dictator of the sham WCA. The following letter from him illustrates the antiquated mindset and evil intentions of this demagogue.

Enjoy my comments to his sales pitch against the CCGPP guidelines.




Dear Colleague; [Wrongberg is no colleague of mine since he doesn’t practice and he’s a fraud, yellow journalist, sociopath and dictator for life of the phony WCA.]


I recently sent you a letter expressing concerns regarding the CCGPP “Best Practices” initiative.  The response has been tremendous, and I appreciate each and every one of you who took the time to send me your comments. [Yes, all 3 of them.]  Since that first letter, there is some additional information I’d like to share with you, and explain some additional action steps that require your immediate attention. [Can anyone believe anything this man writes? Okay, stop laughing.]


The Executive Director of the Wisconsin Chiropractic Association estimates that with adoption of the CCGPP document the average chiropractor could experience as much as a 30% – 45% reduction in practice revenue. [Okay, just where’s the proof of this?] For some DCs, the results could be far worse. [Yes, for those mega-volume Spines ‘R Us guys who over-utilize everything.] This document stands to exert a detrimental effect on both DCs who treat musculoskeletal disorders such as back pain, [where’s the proof of this?], and those DCs whose practices focus on vertebral subluxation and wellness. [Inasmuch as MCOs don’t pay for “wellness care” anyway, these cash practices ought to be safe, ya folla?] Loss of income is just the tip of the iceberg.  This document will likely be used as an enforcement tool by state boards, managed care groups, and other regulators.  [isn’t that the idea behind guidelines? No longer can any DC do whatever he thinks w/o considering the evidence-based guidelines.]According to an article in Clinical Chiropractic, Dr. Eugene Lewis, CCGPP Chairman, stated at the 2004 FCLB meeting that that the CCGPP documents would be helpful for state boards to determine “overutilization.” [Yes, they need evidence-based research to guide them against these Spines ‘R Us guys.]  See:  Harrison D:  Don’s opinion. [another egomaniacal guru who thinks the profession ought to revolve around him and his CBP.] American Journal of Clinical Chiropractic 2005;15(1).  Available online at


After reviewing the draft document, here are some important observations, and specific practice styles that are in jeopardy. [Only those who practice out of line.] These practices are not in jeopardy for lack of evidence, [Oh, so where’s the evidence, Wrongberg? If he’s suggesting his phony CCP guidelines created by vendors, then he’s sicker than I thought.]  but because they are at variance with the practice style and basic philosophy of evidence-based practice as promoted by CCGPP.  Here are just a few examples:


*DCs who use any form of traction, be it for subluxation correction using CBP protocols, or treatment of back pain using flexion/distraction, decompression, or other methods may be accused of “overutilization,” rendering “unnecessary” care, or practicing something other than “best practices.” [Wrong: traction is not the issue, but over-utilization and prolonged treatment plans are suspect.]


*DCs who address vertebral subluxations in persons who happen to have “low back problems” may find themselves in trouble, even if their practice objective is subluxation correction. [Wrong: another assumption used to frightened DCs—typical of this WCA demagogue to scare folks to stir passions and prejudices.]


*DCs who employ techniques that use x-ray analysis for routine assessment, such as Gonstead, upper cervical, CBP, etc. may be accused of inappropriate use of radiation. [Correct: the full spine days are gone for line drawings on x-rays or for the static detection of VSC. Perhaps these techniques ought to discover the world of motion palpation to avoid the over-use of PFR, ya folla?]


*DCs who base care on objective outcomes, rather than symptoms, such as SEMG, thermal scans, quality-of-life assessments, etc may be accused of deviating from “best practices.” [Okay, stop gasping! Here Wrongberg fights for his girlyman pal, Chris Kent and his Sub Station. So, thermal scans are objective for what?]


*DCs who utilize physical modalities may see severe limitations imposed on their use. [Yes; passive PT has been replaced with active PT nowadays.]


Regardless of your practice style, you are at risk of being injured by the CCGPP initiative. [Wrong: only those who practice antiquated methods from yesteryear, such as full spine PFR on everyone, extended OV for 3 months or longer, passive modalities on every visit, or wellness care for the rest of their lives. But for those progressive DCs who follow ethical guidelines, they have no fear of being injured by the CCGPP.]


Where did CCGPP come from?  COCSA, the Congress of Chiropractic State Associations.  COCSA has done some great things for chiropractic, such as the “Straighten Up America” program.  However, it has also inadvertently hurt the profession.  Nearly 14 years have passed  since the folks at the Congress of Chiropractic State Associations (COCSA) engineered the Mercy debacle. [Gimme a break, Wrongberg. Only you Evil Vendors complain about Mercy, and your phony CCP guidelines are laughable, ya folla?] Now, some of the same individuals who brought you Mercy are re-framing their efforts under the new moniker “best practices.” 

Those who have not been around long enough to remember the devastating effects of Mercy may readily follow the pied pipers of CCGPP, and those who recall Mercy might believe that the old dogs have learned new tricks.  Don’t be fooled by the name change to “best practices.”  The game is the same-an attempt to force you to change your practice style, despite the clinical benefits realized by individual patients. [Isn’t it sad to hear the ranting of an outdated chirovangelist and evil vendor? Wrongberg is stuck in the 19th century with Big $id, Rev. Reggie and other relics of pre-scientific chiropractic. Sad, indeed.]


Furthermore, there are conflict of interest issues. [Oh my god! Of all people, for Wrongberg to cast aspersions like this is incredible. Logon to Conflicts in ChiropracTIC Leadership @ ]An article in the online journal Chiropractic & Osteopathy should be required reading for every chiropractor. [Great idea, TR!]  If you are unfamiliar with this publication, visit  The eight authors of “Chiropractic as Spine Care: A Model for the Profession” have mapped their vision of your future. [Perhaps one of the most lucid account of this profession, but annoying to chirovangelists.]  Before discussing the paper, let’s look at the affiliations of the eight authors.  Three are academics at chiropractic colleges. [Is that a bad thing?] One is the Commission Chair of the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters (CCGPP), Dr. John J. Triano. [Yes; a true chiro intellectual who is disgusted with the WCA phonies] The other four are associated with American Specialty Health. [While this may seem odd since ASHN is another evil MCO, their ideas are sound.] 


See what the authors of “Chiropractic as Spine Care,” including CCGPP Commission Chair Dr. Triano, have to say about subluxation-based healthcare:  “A number of models are impractical, implausible, or even indefensible from a purely scientific point of view (e.g. subluxation-based healthcare).” [Yes, that’s all too true.] As to preventive care, it is dismissed as “unproven and unlikely to be true.” [Weekly SMT for a lifetime is very unproven and unlikely to be needed by most.]  They further state, “[U]ntil we can demonstrate that we are effective where others are not, the proposition of chiropractic as the ‘wellness profession’ is not defensible.” [Yes, that’s true.] The authors claim that, “The vast majority of human health problems that require an intervention do not fall within the chiropractic therapeutic spectrum.”  [I wonder if TR even knows what this means? In fact, how many heart attacks are caused by VSC? How many cancers? How many cases of diabetes have been helped by SMT?]


This article is over 50 pages long, and it would take at least as many pages to adequately address the misconceptions, misinformation, leaps of faith, and contradictions contained therein. [Okay, so where’s your rebuttal, Wrongberg? Or are we just to accept your allegation as true?]  CCGPP will likely disclaim this article, dismissing it as the personal opinions of the authors. [Yes, and the ranting of a well known Evil Vendor and sociopath who will write anything to foment discord.]  It could be bad for business. [Yes, very bad for Wrongberg’s business, ya folla?] Yet if it expresses the opinions of the CCGPP Commission Chair, who vets the evidence, the profession has cause for concern. [Only those $idiots in the WCA who practice by unethical means.]

The position of the “Spine Care” authors is completely at odds with the mainstream of the chiropractic profession and represents the most radical medical fringe elements. [Another embellishment: indeed, for Wrongberg to position himself as the voice of the maninstream is truly nuts.] ,According to a 2003 study on “How Chiropractors Think and Practice: The Survey of North American Chiropractors,” published by the Institute for Social Research at Ohio Northern University, “For all practical purposes, there is no debate on the vertebral subluxation complex. Nearly 90% want to retain the VSC as a term. [But where’s the scientific evidence behind this vague term?] Similarly, almost 90% do not want the adjustment limited to musculoskeletal conditions. [Sadly, there’s a lesson here for all to learn in EBC—to practice within the evidence.] The profession ‑‑ as a whole ‑‑ presents a united front regarding the subluxation and the adjustment.” [Not so fast—there’s a huge front of DCs promoting Progress and Reform who want to integrate with mainstream healthcare, who want to end the cultism, and who want the ethical reform within this profession. But that means relics like Wrongberg will be gone with the wind, ya folla?]


Who is CCGPP accountable to? [Who is Wrongberg accountable to? No one as the self-appointed dictator of the phony WCA and as editor/publisher of the biggest yellow rag this profession has ever known.]


Hold on to your hat. [Here comes Wrongberg’s hot wind.] The short answer is “no one.”  [The pot calling the kettle black, ya folla?] The truth is skillfully buried in a list of questions and answers on the CCGPP web site.  Check it out for yourself at:



“Q: Will COCSA or some other group “sign off” on this?

A: No, COCSA and all of the other organizations to whom CCGPP members report have already appointed the existing representatives to find the resources to write and publish this document.” [That’s called representative government, Wrongberg, an issue unfamiliar to you as a phony dictator.]



What you need to do NOW:


We CAN stop this, but it will take a concerted effort by all factions within the profession to do so.  [That ain’t gonna happen.] Here’s what you need to do:


1.  If you haven’t done so, go to the CCGPP web site and complete their survey.  Most DCs will not bother to do so.  Let CCGPP know how you feel.  Go to:


2.  Let your state and national associations know how you feel.  Ask that they withhold support of this document. [That ain’t gonna happen either since most state associations are not filled with $idiots or WCA sycophants.]


3.  Let your COCSA representative know how you stand.  Tell them to stop this debacle. [Congratulate him/her on this effort.]


4.  Support the Council on Chiropractic Practice.  [Okay, stop pucking!]



Evidence-Based Guidelines-A Rational Choice.


Attempting a line-by-line critique of a document like CCGPP has produced ignores the fact that the fundamental premise is flawed and inappropriate for chiropractic practice.  [Coming from this WCA sociopath, this is far out.] Instead of focusing on a body part or disease, chiropractic is concerned with the role of the nervous system in the human experience. [Just where is this written? Another embellishment by an Evil Vendor to demonize his financial and political opponents.] It respects the uniqueness of each patient, the approach and skills of thre doctor, and bases success on objective outcomes. [Such as the Sub Station? Okay, stop gagging.]


The Council on Chiropractic Practice (CCP) has produced two editions of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.  [that endorse every product of the evil vendors.] These guidelines have been accepted for inclusion in the National Guideline Clearinghouse,  [wrong: any group can post its guidelines, but it does not mean it is supported by any govt agency.] sponsored by the U.S. Agency for Health Care Research & Quality and in partnership with the American Medical Association and the American Association of Health Plans. [The AHCPR has twice denounced Wrongberg for his statements that it supported his CCP and WCA. Logon to  to read more: here’s one excerpt:]

“Unfortunately, the two misleading articles have caused a certain amount of concern within the AHCPR regarding the chiropractic profession as a whole, Dr. King explains: “A number of people have asked if we are assisting this group (WCA) in their development of guidelines. That’s not true. We don’t have any intention of supporting them or giving them guidance or leadership. I don’t think this is helpful.”


 These guidelines have been selected for inclusion in ECRI’s Healthcare Standards: Official Directory.  ECRI is the organization that maintains the World Health Organization’s official healthcare standards and guidelines archive. [You can’t believe anything Wrongberg writes.]


The CCP Guidelines acknowledge that what matters is how chiropractic care, applied to an individual, improves function and quality-of-life.  These guidelines have been used to defend chiropractors hundreds of times in courts of law and before regulatory agencies.  [Where’s the proof of this?] These guidelines are designed to empower DCs with information that will enable them to objectively chart the effects of their care, regardless of which techniques and methods are used.  Be of all, the CCP is responsive to the needs of field doctors. [more likely responsive to the needs of Evil Vendors, ya folla?]


To learn more about CCP and how it differs from CCGPP, visit

I think you will like what you see.  That’s why I’m asking that you support CCP. [Yes, give Wrongberg more of your money so he can chant the Money Hum.]


It has been said that “There is no right way to do a wrong thing.” [Then why hasn’t the WCA folded yet?] The CCGPP “best practices” project is fatally flawed. [As if the WCA isn’t?}  It cannot be “tweaked” and made acceptable through revision. [Yes, death to the WCA now!]  It is time to stop the process before it gains any more momentum. [ditto; death to the sociopaths in the WCA.]


Regardless of your political affiliation or practice style, take action immediately to protect your ability to render care based upon the unique characteristics of you, your patient, and your technique.  Protect clinical freedom for you, and freedom of choice for your patients. [Isn’t this too ironic? The most hated dictator since Big $id now tries to rally the troops with his call for freedom? How about freedom from Wrongberg and the WCA fools?}







Terry A. Rondberg, DC

President, World Chiropractic Alliance

[Dictator for life of the phony WCA]


To read more of this fool, logon to and laugh at his many efforts to rip off this profession with his constant demagoguery.









To unsubscribe,
Click HereRight-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.