Question
If you didnt understand my last email its understandable-so what Im doing is trying to tally what all five of you chiropractors have said regarding the posture thing and lifting (especially for deadlifts, weighted sit-ups).  So please respond

Answer
Dear Jeff Thurber,

Thank you for your question about posture.  Have your considered that your communication style may not be winning you fully enthusiastic correspondents?  

Please review my response regarding the different schools of thought in chiropractic, paying particular attention to the information about vertebral subluxation, but also so that you are aware that I am the only member of this panel of chiropractors with expertise in the field of non-therapeutic straight chiropractic.  I bring this to your attention because you are contemplating an apples-to-oranges comparison if you will be trying to blend all the responses into one.  My responses address your question from an entirely different viewpoint.

Now, on to the matter of posture.  In discussing vertebral subluxation earlier, I used the word misalignment.  I am not talking here about 搒?curves or spinal position during lifts, however, and such things are not interchangeable with the term vertebral subluxation.  The misalignment that I address is that of a specific segment of the spine.  Technically speaking, we have to get even a bit more advanced in what is meant by misalignment to make this clear.  The question is, Misaligned with respect to what?  It is possible to describe the body geometrically, reasoning that we are bilaterally symmetrical and concluding that there is a measurable 搈idline?or that our hips and shoulders should be 揵alanced?on a perpendicular line to this proposed 搈idline?or that the body can be presumed to take on a certain geometry in other planes as well, including curves or arcs.  The problem with this thinking is that it assumes we are simply machines and ignores that we are alive, capable of movement, adaptation, growth, etc.  

At any given moment, there is an optimum state for us to carry out life to the best of our abilities.  That optimum state will vary depending upon the circumstances, both within us and of our environment.  There are many examples to illustrate this.  If you carry something heavy with one hand, you must lean away from it, putting something of a curve into the spine, to keep yourself balanced.  Does that mean the body is failing because there is imbalance or a curve, or is it instead being quite successful in adapting you to the situation?  In another example, consider that those who argue for geometric balance or symmetry would be hard-pressed to explain why the carpenter who swings a 28-ounce hammer all day with his right arm only would have certain physical adaptations that favor his right side.  Should the carpenter have some of the tissue removed from his arm, hand and back so that it is equal to that on the left?  Or is he merely adapted to his circumstances?  The point I'm getting at is that there is an individually determined, innately normal position for the body that cannot be described by geometry.  

From the non-therapeutic standpoint, then, the method of the non-therapeutic straight chiropractor is not for the goal of straightening spines, regulating curves or attempting to guess your unique geometry.  Spinal adjustments are made if and when a subluxation is detected ?and only then.  Geometric positioning is not within the realm of non-therapeutic straight chiropractic.  There are no procedures that are used within non-therapeutic straight chiropractic particularly for weight lifters.  

Your questions bring to mind an analogy I had used many years ago.  Imagine you went into a 7-11 store looking to buy a Slurpee.  You ask the clerk where the Slurpee machine is, but instead he tells you, 揝ir, I think you may be interested to know that the lottery machine is printing out winning tickets for everyone today!  You should buy one and claim a huge jackpot!? Would you simply tell him you came in for something else, or would you thank him for telling you about the wonderful, different opportunity he gave you?  I will again encourage you to re-read the information I sent you.  I think you may be missing my point.  You would benefit greatly from being free of vertebral subluxations, even though you first came to this site and me, from among the other panel members, looking for something else.  

Sincerely,
James W. Healey, D.C.