B.J. Palmer on Chiropractic Retracing
B.J. Palmer replied to a letter from Joe Doherty asking about the role NCM has played in updating the Retracing theory:
Dear Dr. Palmer: Consort, Alta., Can., Apr. 4, 1931.
I must thank you for your letter of April 6, BJP-AWM . I would like to get some more information from you. We used to hear considerable about Retracing and I have often doubted the truth of such things. The NCM may establish the Yes or No of this, and l desire to know whether it is absolute or bunco. The new NCM with the Hole in One adjustment has no doubt satisfied you along that line.
– JOE DOHERTY, D.C.
My dear Joe: April 18, 1931.
Retracing is as essential and necessary today as it ever has been. However, there is a difference between retracing and “retracing”; between that which is retracing and that which has been used as an alibi for retracing in past years. When the subluxation is adjusted only at such places and times that a subluxation is present, then we get retracing. When a vertebra or vertebrae was or were moved, at such times and places where there was no subluxation, and ill-effects have been noted, we have called that “retracing,” when it was not such. Because we didn’t have the NCM, we did not know when it was real or fictional-true or false.
– B.J .