The Chiropractic Vertebral Subluxation Part 7: Technics and Models From 1962 to 1980
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss the history of chiropractic vertebral subluxation (CVS) theories and models between 1962 and 1980. This period was marked by several innovative texts from Weiant, Homewood, and Harper, and Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College’s Segmental Neuropathy. Technique developers during this period increased the complexity of models from upper cervical to full spine. The textbooks built upon previous theories, the scientific literature, work by Speransky, and instrumentation research. The texts influenced decades of research and theory. Weiant’s book surveyed the medical and scientific literature on CVS. Harper integrated modern neurophysiology with D. D. Palmer’s theories integrated with other chiropractic models based on research such as Weiant’s photoelectric instrumentation. Homewood’s book integrated Selye, Speransky, Verner, and several other models, which led to his neurodynamic model of CVS. Segmental Neuropathy was a completely new innovation of chiropractic theory with neurophysiology. Collaboration among authors developed into several new models. Chiropractic vertebral subluxation was viewed as a global neurological phenomenon and a neurodystrophic process. Technique models from Goodheart, Nimmo, Toftness, Ward, Gonstead, Grostic, Gregory, and Pierce laid the foundation for modern practices. The CVS theories during this period were complex and almost unrecognizable from previous theories. The inclusion of every major theory laid the foundation for this period’s wide set of models, research, and methods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".