Talk:Non-surgical spinal decompression

Merge proposal

I have proposed a merge. See the tag in the article. -- Brangifer (talk) 03:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any disagreement? This article could be rewritten as a "Devices" section between History and Effectiveness. More info needs to be located on the inventors and origin of each device, and the Effectiveness section clarified to reflect which is which. 71.191.171.250 (talk) 11:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV tag

This article does not effectively communicate the controversies behind NSSD. Tntdj (talk) 01:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

non-surgical spinal decompression is a controversial topic. like so many therapies, usually the author of the article is biased in some way. truth is, that's ok as long as there are facts and not just opinions being thrown around.

i am a spinal decompression specialist. i use the drx 9000. this machine has been in the media with controversy mainly because of some bad marketing strategies and a few misguided doctors. the reality is that the drx 9000 is very effective in treating pain associated with disc disorders.

for the past 4 years i have performed over 15,000 treatments using the drx 9000. i've treated 15 year olds with disc bulges to 95 year olds with severe degenerative disc and joint disease. i treat both cervical and lumbar spines using the drx 9000 and drx 9000c. the success i've had treating sciatica, foot numbness, arm pain, hand weakness, severe back and neck pain, etc... have been truly remarkable.

there have been 8 success stories for every 2 failures in my office. many of these patients have had failed surgeries; most have been on rx pain meds, had spinal injections, tried physical therapy and chiropractic. typically the response to these treatments were "no help", sometimes the relief was achieved but for a short time.

i'm not saying that the drx 9000 can help everyone with a disc bulge, herniation or degenerative disc/joint disease. but i can say with authority from much personal experience, that in the hands of a competent doctor, non-surgical spinal decompression is an extremely effective tool in helping people with often debilitating pain associated with disc disorders.

my biggest frustration has been the inability to help more people that could really benefit from this treatment. insurance companies do not reimburse well for this procedure. as a result, it becomes an out of pocket expense for most patients. because the equipment used, marketing costs and staffing is expensive, the cost of the procedures are about $200 a treatment. not everyone can afford this. if insurance companies were more willing to reimburse for this treatment not only would more people have an opportunity to benefit from this effective treatment, but it would reduce health care costs dramatically. medications, therapy and surgical costs for treating these conditions is in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year. research shows that none of these procedures are very effective for long term pain relief and in the case of drugs and surgery, there is a high morbidity rate. if insurance companies would pay for nssd it could potentially save them tens of thousands of dollars per patient.

as a nssd specialist, i get to see patients getting their lives back everyday... and that is a lot of fun and very rewarding. and even though it's not a perfect treatment (nothing is) as a spinal expert for over 12 years i can honestly say, nssd helps the majority of people i see and in most of those cases, nothing else had helped. so no matter what anyone says about "not enough research to prove...", my patients are all the proof i need and i've got lots of them!

hoping to help more people get out of pain, and get back to enjoying the life god blessed us with Decompressiondr (talk) 07:18, 3 April 2010 (UTC) drxdoc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Decompressiondr (talk • contribs) 07:12, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]