Boosting Your Immune System With Chiropractic


“Chiropractic care was first linked to improved immunity during the deadly flu epidemic of 1917 and 1918. The funny thing was: Chiropractic patients fared better than the general population. This observation spurred a study of the field. The data reported that flu victims under chiropractic care had an estimated .25 percent death rate, a lot less than the normal rate of 5 percent among flu victims who did not receive chiropractic care.”  This equates to Chiropractic patients having a 20 fold (20 times better) result. (3)

  • In his 3 year study, Dr. Pero found that the 107 chiropractic patients had a 200% greater immune competence than people who had not received chiropractic care, and in fact a 400% greater immune competence than other people who had cancer or other serious disease. Further he found that the immune system superiority of those under chiropractic care, did not diminish with age. Dr. Pero commented, “I have never seen a group other than this chiropractic group experience a 200% increase over the normal patients. This is why it is so dramatically important.”
  • Specifically the study demonstrated that the cells responsible for engulfing and destroying viruses, bacteria, parasites and cancer cells are anywhere from 2 times to 4 times more active in people who get regular chiropractic care. Scientifically the study demonstrated that the “phagocytic respiratory burst of polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN) and monocytes were enhanced in people that had been adjusted by chiropractors.” Later it was commented by other parties that the study should have taken into account the diet of the patients.

“Chiropractic adjustments increased immune cell counts 48% in AIDS patients. At the same time for the control group who did not receive any chiropractic care the immune cell counts actually fell 8%. So the patients receiving the Chiropractic care were very much better off for it” (4)

Another study looked at certain immune system cells, and found that they were stronger in several ways after patients had had their spines adjusted. Those same differences did not show up in patients who’d been “sham treated” (physically manipulated but not adjusted), nor in those who just had their soft-tissues worked on. (5)



  2. P. C. Brennan et Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 14 (1991): 399-408.