Highest Rated Comments


CptNasty12 karma

[deleted]

CptNasty9 karma

It makes even Saitama's training regime look intense.

CptNasty8 karma

I don't think there's a martial art out there that doesn't rely on misdirection and rhythm on some level.

But within the context of what OP has shown us in video and text, it sounds a lot like classic TMA bs. Talk to me about your actual techniques and how it looks under pressure. Everyone uses misdirection and rhythm.

CptNasty3 karma

Johnny Dangerously is a personal love of mine. That's not a question, but thank you for doing your part in that movie.

CptNasty2 karma

That's now how scientific discourse works. If you were intellectually honest you would spend your own time knowing what the other side says. Purposefully ignoring any information that disagrees with your hypothesis is a form of confirmation bias and is inherently unscientific.

That being said. I find that Chiropractors aren't given enough oversight by any respectable health organization to trust. Combined with a lack of evidence for chiropractic over say, physical therapy and the risk you take by going to an alternative medicine non-doctor I would never recommend a chiropractor. I've gone through several chiropractors and physical therapy sessions overseen by hospitals/doctors and physical therapy has always worked better, faster, and with established results compared to chiropractic.

If you wanted to help people and you are so concerned about being scientific, why didn't you just pursue a career in medical science instead of an unproven alternative medicine?

Edit- I should point out that chiropractors have come to Reddit before, and the threads always go like this. Chiropractor provides their evidence, Reddit provides evidence/articles saying that OP's articles aren't true/misleading and OP ignores them.

You are taking journals and papers that suggest things, or mechanisms, and using them as proof for your practice as a whole while claiming to be scientific while automatically dismissing any evidence that goes against your hypothesis.