The Set Up: The Flexner Report and the Rise of Allopathic Authority
In 1910, the American Medical Association, funded by oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller, commissioned Abraham Flexner to evaluate medical education in the United States. The resulting “Flexner Report” favored pharmaceutical, surgery-based, and other allopathic practices to treat disease over some of the less mainstream therapies of the day such as chiropractic, herbalism, and homeopathy. With the AMA’s influence, the report led to the widespread rejection of holistic health education by aligning medical education with pharmaceutical interests and marginalizing alternative medical practices. The AMA’s efforts were ultimately brought down, however, thanks to the organization’s rich record trail, which provided undeniable evidence of its coordinated campaign against chiropractic care.
The Plan: Formation of the Committee on Quackery
The AMA was concerned about the rise of chiropractic care and both the cultural and financial competition it posed towards more traditional practices. By doing away with chiropractic care, the AMA aimed to safeguard its financial interests in allopathic medicine and preserve its dominance. These goals established the 1962 the chiropractic profession. The committee’s strategy included discrediting chiropractors’ education, disseminating falsehoods about the profession’s beliefs, and ultimately lobbying against their inclusion in legitimate national health initiatives, propagandizing them as “unscientific cultists.”
The Paper Trail: How Records Revealed the AMA’s Campaign Against Chiropractic
To execute its campaign against chiropractic, the AMA heavily relied on creating and distributing various types of documents. These documents allegedly out sweetheart pacts with the pharmaceutical industry, inside deals with Congressional leaders, secret covenants with the Nixon White House, and other political dirty laundry.[2] Internal memoranda outlined strategies to marginalize chiropractors and editorials published in medical journals labeled chiropractic medicine as “quackery.” The AMA shared its anti-chiropractic narratives at medical conferences and warned its attendees that fraternizing with chiropractors–professionally or personally–could cause de-licensure, an attempt to embed its prejudice into “standard practice.”
The AMA also collaborated with columnist Ann Landers, clandestinely sponsored publications such as At Your Own Risk: The Case Against Chiropractic and leveraged pre-publication editorial privileges to shape articles in national outlets like Reader’s Digest and Consumers Report. The AMA further coordinated with state-level medical societies to distribute these materials broadly, amplifying their message to healthcare providers and communities nationwide. Intended only to guide the AMA’s campaign, these same documents later became key evidence of its efforts to eliminate the profession.
The Sore Throat Documents: An Unlikely Alliance
In the 1970s, the Church of Scientology infiltrated the AMA’s headquarters during a feud with the organization. While the Scientologist’s moles were focused on discrediting the AMA, they upon significant evidence of a conspiracy against chiropractors. This evidence, later dubbed the “”[3] documents (a nod to the Watergate informant “Deep Throat”), detailed the AMA’s efforts to contain and eliminate chiropractic care.
“Sore Throat” distributed these documents to multiple chiropractic organizations, encouraging them to use the material to challenge the AMA publicly. Despite the revelation’s importance, many chiropractors were uneasy about associating with Scientology, recognizing that the group’s actions were less about supporting chiropractic medicine and more about undermining the AMA for its own ends.
The chiropractic profession’s eventual legal victory against the AMA was built upon these leaked materials, though subversive nature of the document’s discovery added an awkward layer to the profession’s battle for justice.
The Roadmap to Discovery: Unearthing 26 Boxes of Evidence
In 1976, a lawsuit was filed against the AMA by Chester Wilk and three other chiropractors, alleging unfair practices that harmed competitors. George McAndrews, a successful patent attorney with deep connections to the chiropractic profession, took on the case. McAndrew’s firm, however, had affiliations with prominent medical doctors, prompting his partners to withhold bonuses and secretarial support in protest. Eventually, the pressure pushed McAndrew to exit the firm with only a small, overwhelmed team of four lawyers and one paralegal to continue the litigation.[4]
During the discovery process, the court ordered the AMA to preserve documents, but AMA staff claimed a janitor had destroyed key records after the fact. Undeterred, McAndrews traveled to 42 states to gather evidence from state medical associations–sleeping in his car and eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to save money on the road.[5] McAndrew’s thriftiness paid off, as he located 26 boxes of records. Later, McAndrews referred to the state medical associations as “historians with a death wish” because they “wrote everything down and never threw anything away.”[6]
The AMA’s Reckoning in JAMA: 101 Pages of Accountability
In the first Wilk v. AMA trial in 1981, the chiropractors lost, as the jury ruled in favor of the AMA, but the verdict was later overturned on appeal due to the admission of irrelevant and prejudicial evidence, as well as improper jury instructions when jury members revealed they were secretly told to rule in favor of the AMA. Wilk eventually prevailed in a 1987 bench trial, the judge ruling the AMA had engaged in a “systematic, long-term wrongdoing” against the chiropractic profession, and had committed other “acts of lawlessness” to end the profession.[7] To ensure AMA members and the wider medical community were aware of its misconduct, the AMA was required to share the court’s 101-page ruling in its own medical publication, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The lasting impact has reshaped professional relationships within healthcare, highlighting the importance of accountability and fairness in healthcare competition, and ensuring patients have greater autonomy in choosing their preferred care options.
Records That Matter: Protecting Your Business and Reputation
In any business, effective record-keeping is essential for maintaining operational integrity and ensuring compliance with regulations. Properly managed records streamline decision-making and serve as critical evidence in the event of audits, disputes, or legal proceedings. The importance of maintaining accurate and accessible records cannot be overstated, as they help safeguard the reputation and stability of the organization. However, it is crucial that these records are created, stored, and shared in accordance with the law, upholding ethical standards and avoiding the creation or dissemination of destructive or illegal content. The AMA’s lack of a defensible deletion practice meant incriminating documents were not destroyed, leading to their becoming the backbone of the legal case against them. While that represents justice for chiropractors in this case, not having a defensible deletion strategy is ill advised, and in fact, is part of any mature information governance program. A well-executed information governance strategy not only ensures compliance but also fosters trust, accountability, and the long-term stability of any organization.
[1] “Wilk v. American Medical Ass’n, 671 F. Supp. 1465 (N.D. Ill. 1987).” Justia Law, 25 Sept. 1987
[2] Jonathan Turner. “Chiropractic, Physicians, Scientology All Clash in New True Legal Thriller | Quad Cities.”
[3] Wolinsky, Howard. “‘Sore Throat,’ the Church of Scientology and the 1970s Plot against the American Medical Association.”
[4] Dudek , Mitch. “George McAndrews Waged Legal War on Behalf of Chiropractors.” Suntimes.com, 18 Apr. 2023
[5] Dudek , Mitch. “George McAndrews Waged Legal War on Behalf of Chiropractors.” Suntimes.com, 18 Apr. 2023
[6] Haldeman, Scott, et al. “The McAndrews Leadership Lecture” Journal of Chiropractic Humanities, vol. 22, no. 1, Dec. 2015, pp. 30–46
[7] “Wilk v. American Medical Ass’n, 671 F. Supp. 1465 (N.D. Ill. 1987).” Justia Law, 25 Sept. 1987
Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.