Sweet Dreams Are Made of THC (Or Are They?)

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!

Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!

In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!

As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!

So, no question/request too big or small 😎

❝I’m one of those older folks that have a hard time getting 7 hrs. I know a lot of it my fault…like a few beers at nite…🥰am now trying THC gummies for anxiety, instead of alcohol……less calories 😁how does THC affect our sleep,? Safer than alcohol…..I know your next article 😊😊😊😊❣️😊alot of us older kids do take gummies 😲😲😲thank you❞

Great question! We wrote a little about CBD gummies (not THC) before:

Do CBD Gummies Work?

…and went on to explore THC’s health benefits and risks here:

Cannabis Myths vs Reality

For starters, let’s go ahead and say: you’re right that it’s safer (for most people) than alcohol—but that’s not a strong claim, because alcohol is very bad for pretty much everything, including sleep.

So how does THC measure up when it comes to sleep quality?

Good news: it affects the architecture of sleep in such a way that you will spend longer in deep sleep (delta wave activity), which means you get more restorative and restful sleep!

See also: Alpha, beta, theta: what are brain states and brain waves? And can we control them?

Bad news: it does so at the cost of reducing your REM sleep, which is also necessary for good brain health, and will cause cognitive impairment if you skip too much. Normally, if you are sleep-deprived, the brain will prioritize REM sleep at the cost of other kinds of sleep; it’s that important. However, if you are chemically impaired from getting healthy REM sleep, there’s not much your brain can do to save you from the effects of REM sleep loss.

See: Cannabis, Cannabinoids, and Sleep: a Review of the Literature

This is, by the way, a reason that THC gets prescribed for some sleep disorders, in cases where the initial sleep disruption was because of nightmares, as it will reduce those (along with any other dreams, as collateral damage):

Clinical Management of Sleep and Sleep Disorders With Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Implications to Practicing Psychiatrists

One thing to be careful of if using THC as a sleep aid is that withdrawal may make your symptoms worse than they were to start with:

Updates in the use of cannabis for insomnia

With all that in mind, you might consider (if you haven’t already tried it) seeing whether CBD alone improves your sleep, as while it does also extend time in deep sleep, it doesn’t reduce REM nearly as much as THC does:

The effects of a brand-specific, hemp-derived cannabidiol product on physiological, biochemical, and psychometric outcomes in healthy adults: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial

👆 this study was paid for by the brand being tested, so do be aware of potential publication bias. That’s not to say the study is necessarily corrupt, and indeed it probably wasn’t, but rather, the publication of the results was dependent on the company paying for them (so hypothetically they could have pulled funding from any number of other research groups that didn’t get the results they wanted, leaving this one to be the only one published). That being said, the study is interesting, which is why we’ve linked it, and it’s a good jumping-off-point for finding a lot of related papers, which you can see listed beneath it.

CBD also has other benefits of its own, even without THC:

CBD Oil: What Does The Science Say?

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • Osteoporosis Exercises
  • Why is cancer called cancer? We need to go back to Greco-Roman times for the answer
    Tracing cancer’s roots: From ancient descriptions and treatments to the origins of the word itself, the fight against this persistent disease continues after millennia.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Fat – by Aubrey Gordon

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    There are books aplenty to encourage and help you to lose weight. This isn’t one of those.

    There are also books aplenty to encourage and help you to accept yourself and your body at the weight you are, and forge self-esteem. This isn’t one of those, either—in fact, it starts by assuming you already have that.

    There are fair arguments for body neutrality, and fat acceptance. Very worthy also is the constant fight for bodily sovereignty.

    These are worthy causes, but they’re for the most-part not what our author concerns herself with here. Instead, she cares for a different and very practical goal: fat justice.

    In a world where you may be turned away from medical treatment if you are over a certain size, told to lose half your bodyweight before you can have something you need, she demands better. The battle extends further than healthcare though, and indeed to all areas of life.

    Ultimately, she argues, any society that will disregard the needs of the few because they’re a marginal demographic, is a society that will absolutely fail you if you ever differ from the norm in some way.

    All in all, an important (and for many, perhaps eye-opening) book to read if you are fat, care about fat people, are a person of any size, or care about people in general.

    Pick Up Your Copy of “What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Fat”, on Amazon Today!

    Share This Post

  • Is Chiropractic All It’s Cracked Up To Be?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Is Chiropractic All It’s Cracked Up To Be?

    Yesterday, we asked you for your opinions on chiropractic medicine, and got the above-depicted, below-described set of results:

    • 38% of respondents said it keeps us healthy, and everyone should do it as maintenance
    • 33% of respondents said it can correct some short-term skeletal issues, but that’s all
    • 16% of respondents said that it’s a dangerous pseudoscience and can cause serious harm
    • 13% of respondents said that it’s mostly just a combination of placebo and endorphins

    Respondents also shared personal horror stories of harm done, personal success stories of things cured, and personal “it didn’t seem to do anything for me” stories.

    What does the science say?

    It’s a dangerous pseudoscience and can cause harm: True or False?

    False and True, respectively.

    That is to say, chiropractic in its simplest form that makes the fewest claims, is not a pseudoscience. If somebody physically moves your bones around, your bones will be physically moved. If your bones were indeed misaligned, and the chiropractor is knowledgeable and competent, this will be for the better.

    However, like any form of medicine, it can also cause harm; in chiropractic’s case, because it more often than not involves manipulation of the spine, this can be very serious:

    ❝Twenty six fatalities were published in the medical literature and many more might have remained unpublished.

    The reported pathology usually was a vascular accident involving the dissection of a vertebral artery.

    Conclusion: Numerous deaths have occurred after chiropractic manipulations. The risks of this treatment by far outweigh its benefit.❞

    Source: Deaths after chiropractic: a review of published cases

    From this, we might note two things:

    1. The abstract doesn’t note the initial sample size; we would rather have seen this information expressed as a percentage. Unfortunately, the full paper is not accessible, and nor are many of the papers it cites.
    2. Having a vertebral artery fatally dissected is nevertheless not an inviting prospect, and is certainly a very reasonable cause for concern.

    It’s mostly just a combination of placebo and endorphins: True or False?

    True or False, depending on what you went in for:

    • If you went in for a regular maintenance clunk-and-click, then yes, you will get your clunk-and-click and feel better for it because you had a ritualized* experience and endorphins were released.
    • If you went in for something that was actually wrong with your skeletal alignment, to get it corrected, and this correction was within your chiropractor’s competence, then yes, you will feel better because a genuine fault was corrected.

    *this is not implying any mysticism, by the way. Rather it means simply that placebo effect is strongest when there is a ritual associated with it. In this case it means going to the place, sitting in a pleasant waiting room, being called in, removing your shoes and perhaps some other clothes, getting the full attention of a confident and assured person for a while, this sort of thing.

    With regard to its use to combat specifically spinal pain (i.e., perhaps the most obvious thing to treat by chiropractic spinal manipulation), evidence is slightly in favor, but remains unclear:

    ❝Due to the low quality of evidence, the efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulation compared with a placebo or no treatment remains uncertain. ❞

    Source: Clinical Effectiveness and Efficacy of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation for Spine Pain

    It can correct some short-term skeletal issues, but that’s all: True or False?

    Probably True.

    Why “probably”? The effectiveness of chiropractic treatment for things other than short-term skeletal issues has barely been studied. From this, we may wish to keep an open mind, while also noting that it can hardly claim to be evidence-based—and it’s had hundreds of years to accumulate evidence. In all likelihood, publication bias has meant that studies that were conducted and found inconclusive or negative results were simply not published—but that’s just a hypothesis on our part.

    In the case of using chiropractic to treat migraines, a very-related-but-not-skeletal issue, researchers found:

    ❝Pre-specified feasibility criteria were not met, but deficits were remediable. Preliminary data support a definitive trial of MCC+ for migraine.❞

    Translating this: “it didn’t score as well as we hoped, but we can do better. We got some positive results, and would like to do another, bigger, better trial; please fund it”

    Source: Multimodal chiropractic care for migraine: A pilot randomized controlled trial

    Meanwhile, chiropractors’ claims for very unrelated things have been harshly criticized by the scientific community, for example:

    Misinformation, chiropractic, and the COVID-19 pandemic

    About that “short-term” aspect, one of our subscribers put it quite succinctly:

    ❝Often a skeletal correction is required for initial alignment but the surrounding fascia and muscles also need to be treated to mobilize the joint and release deep tissue damage surrounding the area. In combination with other therapies chiropractic support is beneficial.❞

    This is, by the way, very consistent with what was said in the very clinically-dense book we reviewed yesterday, which has a chapter on the short-term benefits and limitations of chiropractic.

    A truism that holds for many musculoskeletal healthcare matters, holds true here too:

    ❝In a battle between muscle and bone, muscle will always win❞

    In other words…

    Chiropractic can definitely help put misaligned bones back where they should be. However, once they’re there, if the cause of their misalignment is not treated, they will just re-misalign themselves shortly after you walking out of your session.

    This is great for chiropractors, if it keeps you coming back for endless appointments, but it does little for your body beyond give you a brief respite.

    So, by all means go to a chiropractor if you feel so inclined (and you do not fear accidental arterial dissection etc), but please also consider going to a physiotherapist, and potentially other medical professions depending on what seems to be wrong, to see about addressing the underlying cause.

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Neurotransmitter Cheatsheet

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Which Neurotransmitter?

    There are a lot of neurotransmitters that are important for good mental health (and, by way of knock-on effects, physical health).

    However, when pop-science headlines refer to them as “feel-good chemicals” (yes but which one?!) or “the love molecule” (yes but which one?!) or other such vague names when referring to a specific neurotransmitter, it’s easy to get them mixed up.

    So today we’re going to do a little disambiguation of some of the main mood-related neurotransmitters (there are many more, but we only have so much room), and what things we can do to help manage them.

    Dopamine

    This one predominantly regulates reward responses, though it’s also necessary for critical path analysis (e.g. planning), language faculties, and motor functions. It makes us feel happy, motivated, and awake.

    To have more:

    • eat foods that are rich in dopamine or its precursors such as tyrosine (bananas and almonds are great)
    • do things that you find rewarding

    Downsides: is instrumental in most addictions, and also too much can result in psychosis. For most people, that level of “too much” isn’t obtainable due to the homeostatic system, however.

    See also: Rebalancing Dopamine (Without “Dopamine Fasting”)

    Serotonin

    This one predominantly helps regulate our circadian rhythm. It also makes us feel happy, calm, and awake.

    To have more:

    • get more sunlight, or if the light must be artificial, then (ideally) full-spectrum light, or (if it’s what’s available) blue light
    • spend time in nature; we are hardwired to feel happy in the environments in which we evolved, which for most of human history was large open grassy expanses with occasional trees (however, for modern purposes, a park or appropriate garden will suffice).

    Downsides: this is what keeps us awake at night if we had too much light before bed, and also too much serotonin can result in (potentially fatal) serotonin syndrome. Most people can’t get that much serotonin due to our homeostatic system, but some drugs can force it upon us.

    See also: Seasonal Affective Disorder Strategies

    Oxytocin

    This one predominantly helps us connect to others on an emotional level. It also makes us feel happy, calm, and relaxed.

    To have more:

    • hug a loved one (or even just think about doing so, if they’re not available)
    • look at pictures/videos of cute puppies, kittens, and the like—this triggers a similar response

    Downsides: negligible. Socially speaking, it can cause us to drop our guard, most for most people most of the time, this is not a problem. It can also reduce sexual desire—it’s in large part responsible for the peaceful lulled state post-orgasm. It’s not responsible for the sleepiness in men though; that’s mostly prolactin.

    See also: Only One Kind Of Relationship Promotes Longevity This Much!

    Adrenaline

    This one predominantly affects our sympathetic nervous system; it elevates heart rate, blood pressure, and other similar functions. It makes us feel alert, ready for action, and energized.

    To have more:

    • listen to a “power anthem” piece of music. What it is can depend on your musical tastes; whatever gets you riled up in an empowering way.
    • engage in something competitive that you feel strongly about while doing it—or by the same mechanism, a solitary activity where the stakes feel high even if it’s actually quite safe (e.g. watching a thriller or a horror movie, if that’s your thing).

    Downsides: its effects are not sustainable, and (in cases of chronic stress) the body will try to sustain them anyway, which has a deleterious effect. Because adrenaline and cortisol are closely linked, chronically high adrenal action will tend to mean chronically high cortisol also.

    See also: Lower Your Cortisol! (Here’s Why & How)

    Some final words

    You’ll notice that in none of the “how to have more” did we mention drugs. That’s because:

    • a drug-free approach is generally the best thing to try first, at the very least
    • there are simply a lot of drugs to affect each one (or more), and talking about them would require talking about each drug in some detail.

    However, the following may be of interest for some readers:

    Antidepressants: Personalization Is Key!

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Osteoporosis Exercises
  • Shedding Some Obesity Myths

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Let’s shed some obesity myths!

    There are a lot of myths and misconceptions surrounding obesity… And then there are also reactive opposite myths and misconceptions, which can sometimes be just as harmful!

    To tackle them all would take a book, but in classic 10almonds style, we’re going to put a spotlight on some of the ones that might make the biggest difference:

    True or False: Obesity is genetically pre-determined

    False… With caveats.

    Some interesting results have been found from twin studies and adoption studies, showing that genes definitely play some role, but lifestyle is—for most people—the biggest factor:

    In short: genes predispose; they don’t predetermine. But that predisposition alone can make quite a big difference, if it in turn leads to different lifestyle factors.

    But upon seeing those papers centering BMI, let’s consider…

    True or False: BMI is a good, accurate measure of health in the context of bodyweight

    False… Unless you’re a very large group of thin white men of moderate height, which was the demographic the system was built around.

    Bonus information: it was never intended to be used to measure the weight-related health of any individual (not even an individual thin white man of moderate height), but rather, as a tool to look at large-scale demographic trends.

    Basically, as a system, it’s being used in a way it was never made for, and the results of that misappropriation of an epidemiological tool for individual health are predictably unhelpful.

    To do a deep-dive into all the flaws of the BMI system, which are many, we’d need to devote a whole main feature just to that. (Reply to this email if you’d be interested in seeing that!). But for now, we’ll just drop some further reading for anyone interested:

    BMI Flaws, History, And Other Ways To Measure Body Weight And Fat

    True or False: Obesity does not meaningfully impact more general health

    False… In more ways than one (but there are caveats)

    Obesity is highly correlated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, and weight loss, correspondingly, correlates with a reduced risk. See for example:

    Effects of weight loss interventions for adults who are obese on mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

    So what are the caveats?

    Let’s put it this way: owning a horse is highly correlated with increased healthy longevity. And while owning a horse may come with some exercise and relaxation (both of which are good for the health), it’s probably mostly not the horse itself that conveys the health benefits… it’s that someone who has the resources to look after a horse, probably has the resources to look after their own health too.

    So sometimes there can be a reason for a correlation (it’s not a coincidence!) but the causative factor is partially (or in some cases, entirely) something else.

    So how could this play out with obesity?

    There’s a lot of discrimination in healthcare settings, unfortunately! In this case, it often happens that a thin person goes in with a medical problem and gets treated for that, while a fat person can go in with the same medical problem and be told “you should try losing some weight”.

    Top tip if this happens to you… Ask: “what would you advise/prescribe to a thin person with my same symptoms?”

    Other things may be more systemic, for example:

    When a thin person goes to get their blood pressure taken, and that goes smoothly, while a fat person goes to get their blood pressure taken, and there’s not a blood pressure cuff to fit them, is the problem the size of the person or the size of the cuff? It all depends on perspective, in a world built around thin people.

    That’s a trivial-seeming example, but the same principle has far-reaching (and harmful) implications in healthcare in general, e.g:

    • Surgeons being untrained (and/or unwilling) to operate on fat people
    • Getting a one-size-fits-all dose that was calculated using average weight, and now doesn’t work
    • MRI machines are famously claustrophobia-inducing for thin people; now try not fitting in it in the first place

    …and so forth. So oftentimes, obesity will be correlated with a poor healthcare outcome, where the problem is not actually the obesity itself, but rather the system having been set up with thin people in mind.

    It would be like saying “Having O- blood type results in higher risks when receiving blood transfusions”, while omitting to add “…because we didn’t stock O- blood”.

    True or False: to reduce obesity, just eat less and move more!

    False… Mostly.

    Moving more is almost always good for most people. When it comes to diet, quality is much more important than quantity. But these factors alone are only part of the picture!

    But beyond diet and exercise, there are many other implicated factors in weight gain, weight maintenance, and weight loss, including but not limited to:

    • Disrupted sleep
    • Chronic stress
    • Chronic pain
    • Hormonal imbalances
    • Physical disabilities that preclude a lot of exercise
    • Mental health issues that add (and compound) extra levels of challenge
    • Medications that throw all kinds of spanners into the works with their side effects

    …and even just those first two things, diet and exercise, are not always so correlated to weight as one might think—studies have found that the difference for exercise especially is often marginal:

    Read: Widespread misconceptions about obesity ← academic article in the Journal of the College of Family Physicians of Canada

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • America’s Health System Isn’t Ready for the Surge of Seniors With Disabilities

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    The number of older adults with disabilities — difficulty with walking, seeing, hearing, memory, cognition, or performing daily tasks such as bathing or using the bathroom — will soar in the decades ahead, as baby boomers enter their 70s, 80s, and 90s.

    But the health care system isn’t ready to address their needs.

    That became painfully obvious during the covid-19 pandemic, when older adults with disabilities had trouble getting treatments and hundreds of thousands died. Now, the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health are targeting some failures that led to those problems.

    One initiative strengthens access to medical treatments, equipment, and web-based programs for people with disabilities. The other recognizes that people with disabilities, including older adults, are a separate population with special health concerns that need more research and attention.

    Lisa Iezzoni, 69, a professor at Harvard Medical School who has lived with multiple sclerosis since her early 20s and is widely considered the godmother of research on disability, called the developments “an important attempt to make health care more equitable for people with disabilities.”

    “For too long, medical providers have failed to address change in society, changes in technology, and changes in the kind of assistance that people need,” she said.

    Among Iezzoni’s notable findings published in recent years:

    Most doctors are biased. In survey results published in 2021, 82% of physicians admitted they believed people with significant disabilities have a worse quality of life than those without impairments. Only 57% said they welcomed disabled patients.

    “It’s shocking that so many physicians say they don’t want to care for these patients,” said Eric Campbell, a co-author of the study and professor of medicine at the University of Colorado.

    While the findings apply to disabled people of all ages, a larger proportion of older adults live with disabilities than younger age groups. About one-third of people 65 and older — nearly 19 million seniors — have a disability, according to the Institute on Disability at the University of New Hampshire.

    Doctors don’t understand their responsibilities. In 2022, Iezzoni, Campbell, and colleagues reported that 36% of physicians had little to no knowledge of their responsibilities under the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act, indicating a concerning lack of training. The ADA requires medical practices to provide equal access to people with disabilities and accommodate disability-related needs.

    Among the practical consequences: Few clinics have height-adjustable tables or mechanical lifts that enable people who are frail or use wheelchairs to receive thorough medical examinations. Only a small number have scales to weigh patients in wheelchairs. And most diagnostic imaging equipment can’t be used by people with serious mobility limitations.

    Iezzoni has experienced these issues directly. She relies on a wheelchair and can’t transfer to a fixed-height exam table. She told me she hasn’t been weighed in years.

    Among the medical consequences: People with disabilities receive less preventive care and suffer from poorer health than other people, as well as more coexisting medical conditions. Physicians too often rely on incomplete information in making recommendations. There are more barriers to treatment and patients are less satisfied with the care they do get.

    Egregiously, during the pandemic, when crisis standards of care were developed, people with disabilities and older adults were deemed low priorities. These standards were meant to ration care, when necessary, given shortages of respirators and other potentially lifesaving interventions.

    There’s no starker example of the deleterious confluence of bias against seniors and people with disabilities. Unfortunately, older adults with disabilities routinely encounter these twinned types of discrimination when seeking medical care.

    Such discrimination would be explicitly banned under a rule proposed by HHS in September. For the first time in 50 years, it would update Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a landmark statute that helped establish civil rights for people with disabilities.

    The new rule sets specific, enforceable standards for accessible equipment, including exam tables, scales, and diagnostic equipment. And it requires that electronic medical records, medical apps, and websites be made usable for people with various impairments and prohibits treatment policies based on stereotypes about people with disabilities, such as covid-era crisis standards of care.

    “This will make a really big difference to disabled people of all ages, especially older adults,” said Alison Barkoff, who heads the HHS Administration for Community Living. She expects the rule to be finalized this year, with provisions related to medical equipment going into effect in 2026. Medical providers will bear extra costs associated with compliance.

    Also in September, NIH designated people with disabilities as a population with health disparities that deserves further attention. This makes a new funding stream available and “should spur data collection that allows us to look with greater precision at the barriers and structural issues that have held people with disabilities back,” said Bonnielin Swenor, director of the Johns Hopkins University Disability Health Research Center.

    One important barrier for older adults: Unlike younger adults with disabilities, many seniors with impairments don’t identify themselves as disabled.

    “Before my mom died in October 2019, she became blind from macular degeneration and deaf from hereditary hearing loss. But she would never say she was disabled,” Iezzoni said.

    Similarly, older adults who can’t walk after a stroke or because of severe osteoarthritis generally think of themselves as having a medical condition, not a disability.

    Meanwhile, seniors haven’t been well integrated into the disability rights movement, which has been led by young and middle-aged adults. They typically don’t join disability-oriented communities that offer support from people with similar experiences. And they don’t ask for accommodations they might be entitled to under the ADA or the 1973 Rehabilitation Act.

    Many seniors don’t even realize they have rights under these laws, Swenor said. “We need to think more inclusively about people with disabilities and ensure that older adults are fully included at this really important moment of change.”

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Chiropractors have been banned again from manipulating babies’ spines. Here’s what the evidence actually says

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Chiropractors in Australia will not be able to perform spinal manipulation on children under the age of two once more, following health concerns from doctors and politicians.

    But what is the spinal treatment at the centre of the controversy? Does it work? Is there evidence of harm?

    We’re a team of researchers who specialise in evidence-based musculoskeletal health. I (Matt) am a registered chiropractor, Joshua is a registered physiotherapist and Giovanni trained as a physiotherapist.

    Here’s what the evidence says.

    Dmitry Naumov/Shutterstock

    Remind me, how did this all come about?

    A Melbourne-based chiropractor posted a video on social media in 2018 using a spring-loaded device (known as the Activator) to manipulate the spine of a two-week-old baby suspended upside down by the ankles.

    The video sparked widespread concerns among the public, medical associations and politicians. It prompted a ban on the procedure in young children. The Victorian health minister commissioned Safer Care Victoria to conduct an independent review of spinal manipulation techniques on children.

    Recently, the Chiropractic Board of Australia reinstated chiropractors’ authorisation to perform spinal manipulation on babies under two years old. But this week, it backflipped, following heavy criticism from medical associations and politicians.

    What is spinal manipulation?

    Spinal manipulation is a treatment used by chiropractors and other health professionals such as doctors, osteopaths and physiotherapists.

    It is an umbrella term that includes popular “back cracking” techniques.

    It also includes more gentle forms of treatment, such as massage or joint mobilisations. These involve applying pressure to joints without generating a “cracking” sound.

    Does spinal manipulation in babies work?

    Several international guidelines for health-care professionals recommend spinal manipulation to treat adults with conditions such as back pain and headache as there is an abundance of evidence on the topic. For example, spinal manipulation for back pain is supported by data from nearly 10,000 adults.

    For children, it’s a different story. Safer Care Victoria’s 2019 review of spinal manipulation found very few studies testing whether this treatment was safe and effective in children.

    Studies were generally small and were of poor quality. Some of those small, poor-quality studies, suggest spinal manipulation provides a very small benefit for back pain, colic and potentially bedwetting – some common reasons for parents to take their child to see a chiropractor. But overall, the review found the overall body of evidence was very poor.

    Baby clutching ear, crying
    Spinal manipulation doesn’t seem to help young children with an ear infection. MIA Studio/Shutterstock

    However, for most other children’s conditions chiropractors treat – such as headache, asthma, otitis media (a type of ear infection), cerebral palsy, hyperactivity and torticollis (“twisted neck”) – there did not appear to be a benefit.

    The number of studies investigating the effectiveness of spinal manipulation on babies under two years of age was even smaller.

    There was one high-quality study and two small, poor quality studies. These did not show an appreciable benefit of spinal manipulation on colic, otitis media with effusion (known as glue ear) or twisted neck in babies.

    Is spinal manipulation on babies safe?

    In terms of safety, most studies in the review found serious complications were extremely rare. The review noted one baby or child dying (a report from Germany in 2001 after spinal manipulation by a physiotherapist). The most common complications were mild in nature such as increased crying and soreness.

    However, because studies were very small, they cannot tell us anything about the safety of spinal manipulation in a reliable way. Studies that are designed to properly investigate if a treatment is safe typically include thousands of patients. And these studies have not yet been done.

    Why do people see chiropractors?

    Safer Care Victoria also conducted surveys with more than 20,000 people living in Australia who had taken their children under 12 years old to a chiropractor in the past ten years.

    Nearly three-quarters said that was for treatment of a child aged two years or younger.

    Nearly all people surveyed reported a positive experience when they took their child to a chiropractor and reported that their child’s condition improved with chiropractic care. Only a small number of people (0.3%) reported a negative experience, and this was mostly related to cost of treatment, lack of improvement in their child’s condition, excessive use of x-rays, and perceived pressure to avoid medications.

    Many of the respondents had also consulted their GP or maternity/child health nurse.

    What now for spinal manipulation in children?

    At the request of state and federal ministers, the Chiropractic Board of Australia confirmed that spinal manipulation on babies under two years old will continue to be banned until it discusses the issue further with health ministers.

    Many chiropractors believe this is unfair, especially considering the strong consumer support for chiropractic care outlined in the Safer Care Victoria report, and the rarity of serious reported harms in children.

    Others believe that in the absence of evidence of benefit and uncertainty around whether spinal manipulation is safe in children and babies, the precautionary principle should apply and children and babies should not receive spinal manipulation.

    Ultimately, high quality research is urgently needed to better understand whether spinal manipulation is beneficial for the range of conditions chiropractors provide it for, and whether the benefit outweighs the extremely small chance of a serious complication.

    This will help parents make an informed choice about health care for their child.

    Matt Fernandez, Senior lecturer and researcher in chiropractic, CQUniversity Australia; Giovanni E. Ferreira, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, Institute of Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney, and Joshua Zadro, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: