Why Do Some Medical Professionals Dislike Local Surbiton Chiropractors and Their Practices?
Imagine a patient living in Surbiton, Jane, who has been dealing with chronic lower back pain for years. Her GP recommends painkillers and physiotherapy, but the waitlist is long, and relief seems elusive. Desperate, she turns to a local Surbiton chiropractor, sparking a journey that highlights a divide in medical opinions. Chiropractic care tends to stir up strong opinions, especially among those in lab coats. Some doctors view even the best chiropractors with suspicion, sometimes clinging to outdated ideas about the profession. But is this tension still justified? Let’s unpack where these views come from, how things are changing, and what it might take to move forward collaboratively.
Similarities and Differences Between Medical and Chiropractic Professionals
Medical professionals and chiropractors follow different paths regarding education, training, and treatment philosophies. Doctors attend medical school and undergo years of hospital rotations, typically concentrating on the diagnosis and management of disease through medication or surgery.
Chiropractors focus on biomechanics and musculoskeletal health from the start. Their training includes spinal manipulation and holistic care, often considering stress, nutrition, and lifestyle in their work. Despite these differences, both professions share a commitment to rigorous training and excellence in patient care. Many medical professionals and chiropractors alike possess overlapping competencies, such as diagnostic skills and therapeutic techniques, which can foster a strong foundation for mutual respect and collaboration.
Is one path harder than the other?
As a Local Surbiton chiropractor, I acknowledge that both medical and chiropractic training are rigorous, but they are demanding in different ways. Medical students study every body system in depth and learn pharmacology and biochemistry extensively before choosing a speciality. This broad-based education is both challenging and comprehensive.
In contrast, chiropractic training focuses intensely on biomechanics and musculoskeletal health from the beginning. While chiropractic degrees require as many classroom hours as medical degrees do in the early years, they offer a focused approach that addresses specific areas relevant to practice, particularly in spinal manipulation and holistic care.
The main difference is depth versus breadth. Chiropractors know their speciality from the beginning, so they don’t need to study areas they won’t use. This leads to a more focused program that takes less time to complete, with its own advantages.
For example, doctors might receive about 6 weeks of musculoskeletal (MSK) training, while chiropractors focus on it for 4 to 5 years. This is important because about 30% of GP appointments involve MSK problems, especially when patients receive conflicting advice. (Training to become a chiropractor, n.d.)
Common Misconceptions About Chiropractic Care
Some people, including doctors, think chiropractic care isn’t safe or effective. But research shows it is generally safe. Serious problems are very rare when licensed professionals provide care [2]. (Chiropractic Injuries Statistics, 2025) Most patients only experience mild soreness that fades quickly. Overall, evidence shows chiropractic care is low-risk when done correctly.
As for effectiveness, studies support the use of spinal manipulation for lower back pain, neck pain, and headaches. The American College of Physicians [3] and the British Medical Association [4] now recommend it as part of non-drug treatment for these problems. (Qaseem et al., 2017) Incorporating spinal manipulation could also help reduce reliance on opioids and lower imaging costs, providing a clear benefit in both patient health outcomes and healthcare expenses.
The main challenge is setting realistic expectations. Chiropractic care can’t fix years of problems in one visit, just like one run won’t prepare you for a marathon. Often, patients are disappointed because their expectations are too high, not because the care failed. Clear communication helps prevent this.
The best Chiropractors typically begin by conducting a thorough assessment and discussing the patient’s condition in detail. They provide a tailored treatment plan, explaining the expected outcomes and the patient’s required commitment. By outlining what progress might look like over time, good chiropractors help set realistic goals, ensuring patients are informed partners in their care journey.
A Brief History of Scepticism
Chiropractic care started in the late 1800s with D.D. Palmer, who believed spinal adjustments could help the body heal itself. This was a radical idea back then. At one point, chiropractic even claimed religious status because doctors tried to have them arrested for practising medicine without a license. Early chiropractors made bold claims, while mainstream medicine used treatments like cocaine for stomach aches and heroin for coughs.
Acknowledging these missteps on both sides, it’s clear that both fields have evolved significantly. While early chiropractic claims were often unproven, they pushed the boundaries of holistic care, just as mainstream medicine had to move past questionable practices to become more evidence-based. This reflection can foster empathy and highlight the advances both professions have made, moving towards better, science-backed care today.
This clash between holistic and pharmaceutical approaches created a divide that still exists today. In the U.S., the American Medical Association (AMA) went further by actively working to discredit even the best chiropractors throughout the 20th century. (Committee on Quackery, 1963)
A Bitter 10-Year Legal Battle, Wilk v. AMA: A Turning Point & Chiropractic Victory.
The Supreme Court case Wilk v. AMA brought this campaign to light. In 1976, chiropractors sued the AMA for antitrust violations. After ten years, the courts ruled in favour of the chiropractors. Internal memos showed the AMA broke antitrust laws and tried to harm the chiropractic profession without scientific reasons. (Wilk v. American Medical Association, 671 F. Supp. 1465 (N.D. Ill. 1987), 1987) The verdict prompted the AMA to change its policies, but the damage to chiropractic’s reputation persisted. Years of bias and misinformation are hard to undo.
During this long legal battle, modern chiropractic took shape. It became a separate but parallel system to conventional medicine, with its own regulators and a growing focus on evidence-based care and clinical philosophy.
Big Pharma’s Role in the Divide
Another factor is the influence of pharmaceutical companies. Drug makers often fund medical schools and research, which can unintentionally bias the system toward medication-based care. For instance, a 2018 study found that pharmaceutical industry funding was associated with increased prescribing of newer, more expensive medications [6]. (Sharma et al., 2018) Chiropractic, which focuses on natural recovery and non-drug solutions, doesn’t fit this model. As a result, chiropractic often gets less funding, attention, and respect. Some people believe these companies benefit from keeping the divide alive.
Are Things Improving?
In the past twenty years, things have started to change. Despite old tensions, there are positive signs of progress and more cooperation between professions. Younger local GPs and consultants are more open to working with local Surbiton chiropractors, and shared care is becoming more common. Some patients now get referrals to good chiropractors from their GPs, especially when NHS physiotherapy wait times are long.
GPs can refer patients to chiropractors through both NHS and private care systems. Although direct referrals to local Surbiton chiropractors are not commonly available on the NHS, GPs might recommend chiropractic care as an alternative option, encouraging patients to explore private chiropractic services if suitable. In patient-centred care, GPs should provide unbiased referrals based on patients’ preferences.
While NICE guidelines recognise chiropractic and osteopathy for musculoskeletal problems, only physiotherapy has a direct referral route in the NHS [5]. Chiropractic is not included unless patients specifically request it, even though evidence of its effectiveness is growing. (Referral and Treatment Criteria (RATC) policy, 2023)
In the UK, local chiropractors are primary contact practitioners. This means we can assess, diagnose, and manage patients independently, especially those with musculoskeletal issues. However, we do not work in isolation.
We often refer patients for imaging or blood tests through their GP. We also receive referrals from medical professionals who want to avoid overmedicating or quickly get patients into hands-on care. Feedback loops between GPs and good chiropractors enhance patient outcomes by allowing continuous updates on patient progress and treatment effectiveness.
This ongoing communication fosters a more holistic approach to patient care and underscores collaboration rather than one-way dependence. Updates are typically shared through written reports, phone calls, and electronic health records, ensuring that all parties are informed and can adjust treatment plans as needed to achieve optimal patient outcomes.
Many patients don’t realise that GPs should offer manual therapy as the first treatment for acute back pain. Instead, they often receive painkillers and face long waits for physiotherapy.
Are Chiropractors really Doctors?
Another common source of confusion is professional titles, especially whether chiropractors are truly considered doctors.
This question pops up frequently, often with a fair bit of misunderstanding, making it one more point that could lead to contention amongst professions. Yes, chiropractors use the title “Doctor,” but so do many healthcare professionals who aren’t medical doctors, such as dermatologists, psychologists, and optometrists.
The title reflects a certain level of education and clinical qualifications, not necessarily a Doctor of Medicine degree. To clarify, think of the “Doctor of Chiropractic” as being akin to a Veterinary Doctor or Doctor of Dentistry, where all denote professional-degree credentials within healthcare that aren’t necessarily a medical doctorate, and certainly don’t mean everyone with the title should be providing general medical advice or performing procedures that only MDs are licensed to do.
Historically, “doctor” referred to those with a doctorate. In healthcare, neither GPs nor chiropractors need a PhD; both hold professional degrees. GPs complete rotations after medical school, while chiropractors train for five years in musculoskeletal health, diagnostics, radiology, and manual therapy. Both are legally called Doctors in the UK.
In Surbiton, as with the rest of the UK, registered chiropractors are regulated by the General Chiropractic Council (GCC). The title “Doctor of Chiropractic” is protected by law and can only be used by those with proper training and licensing. (Chiropractors Act 1994, 1994) Chiropractors must clearly explain this title on all materials, such as websites, to avoid confusion, often abbreviating the term to DC, as a medical doctor would use MD to clarify their status.
In summary, your local Surbiton Chiropractor is recognised as a doctor, though not as a Medical Doctor (MD). They are primary healthcare professionals in the UK with significant training and regulation. The main point is that both groups have legitimate, protected titles, so the debate is mostly about semantics.
Conclusion: Building Bridges, Not Barriers
Medical professionals and chiropractors have historically criticised each other’s fields. However, these critiques can be transformed into opportunities for shared quality improvements. Medical professionals might aim to build familiarity and understanding of chiropractic care, address outdated assumptions, and enhance patient referral choices.
Concurrently, the best chiropractors can work to align more closely with medical practices to better support comprehensive, evidence-based patient care, especially in areas such as physiotherapy and transitional care between conservative and surgical treatments. Collaborating on these shared goals can foster a stronger partnership and ultimately enhance patient well-being.
[1]: Versus Arthritis. (2017). The State of Musculoskeletal Health in the UK.
Available at: https://www.versusarthritis.org/media/12394/state-of-musculoskeletal-health-2017.pdf
[2] Gouveia, L. O., Castanho, P., & Ferreira, J. J. (2009). Safety of chiropractic interventions: a systematic review. Spine, 34(11), E405–E413.
🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a3aa6c
[3] Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, McLean RM, Forciea MA. (2017). Noninvasive Treatments for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 166(7), 514–530.
🔗 https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-2367
[4] British Medical Association (BMA) guidance supports non-pharmacological interventions like manual therapy for MSK conditions.
🔗 https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/gp-practices/funding-and-contracts/referral-guidance-for-gps
[5] National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management (NG59).
🔗 https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng59
References
(n.d.). Training to become a chiropractor. rcc-uk.org. https://rcc-uk.org/training-to-become-a-chiropractor/
(2025). Chiropractic Injuries Statistics. ZipDo Education Reports 2025. https://zipdo.co/chiropractic-injuries-statistics/
Qaseem, Wilt, A., McLean, T. J., Forciea, R. M. & Ann, M. (2017). Noninvasive Treatments for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 166, Issue 7, pp. 514-530. https://www.acponline.org/acp-newsroom/american-college-of-physicians-issues-guideline-for-treating-nonradicular-low-back-pain
(1963). Committee on Quackery. American Medical Association. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_chiropractic
(1987). Wilk v. American Medical Association, 671 F. Supp. 1465 (N.D. Ill. 1987). United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/671/1465/2595129/
Sharma, R. & al., e. (2018). Association between industry payments and prescribing costly medications: an observational study using open payments and Medicare Part D data. BMC Health Services Research 18. https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-018-3043-8
(2023). Referral and Treatment Criteria (RATC) policy. Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board. https://www.kentandmedway.icb.nhs.uk/download_file/5234/256
(1994). Chiropractors Act 1994. Chiropractors Act 1994. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/17/pdfs/ukpga_19940017_en.pdf