“Systematic reviews of controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have found no evidence that chiropractic manipulation is effective, with the possible exception of treatment for back pain.[8] A 2011 critical evaluation of 45 systematic reviews concluded that the data included in the study “fail[ed] to demonstrate convincingly that spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for any condition.”[10] Spinal manipulation may be cost-effective for sub-acute or chronic low back pain, but the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.[11] No compelling evidence exists to indicate that maintenance chiropractic care adequately prevents symptoms or diseases.[12]”
I think your first point, if true, says something important about their recognition of the validity of the practice. The second claim is challenging to prove or disprove. Anecdotally, I can tell you that my current doctor isn’t into any of that stuff but don’t have the academic history of every physician who has ever asked me to turn my head and cough in front of me.
It is true at least amongst the doctors I know. MDs and DOs learn the same curriculum DOs just have the not evidence based tacked on. A lot of DOs also prefer evidence based medicine and there’s not too much for at least half the osteopathic medicine techniques.
Since you probably don’t know osteopathic medicine references the techniques you probably know as chiropractic care. DOs still learn real medicine so don’t go scoffing at them for letters. I watched my DO friends/colleagues go through the same shit as my MD friends/colleagues