Obviously a fan of Dr. Palmer, he said that Stephenson's principles should be updated in light of what we now know from modern research. My friend said he couldn't think of anyone better qualified to do that updating than me, given that I had written a textbook about modern chiropractic research. I told him that I appreciated his confidence in me, and that I would look into the matter. Later, I took the time to re-read the 1947 revised edition in more detail. Fractures and dislocations are not in the realm of Chiropractic.
Subluxations are the physical representations of the cause of dis-ease.
Innate's opinion is the criterion of abnormal positions, or of normal positions. The first edition of Dr. Stephenson's work appeared in 1927. We have to remember that at that time there was no cineradiography. Important discoveries in spinal reflexes and facilitation were years away, as were a complete knowledge of CNS phenomena like descending inhibition and neuronal pools. Therefore, in the context of what was known at the time, a good argument can be made that despite the protestations of some of Dr. Stephenson's contemporaries to the effect that VSC is a dynamic lesion, as opposed to static one, there was no solid scientific evidence yet available counter to his or Palmer's view.