STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF )

CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 77-975

)

DONALD KNAUER, D.C., )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A hearing was held in the above captioned matter, after due notice, at Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on July 22, 1977, before the undersigned Hearing Officer.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Ronald C. LaFace, Esquire For Respondent: Herbert L. Fehner, Esquire

ISSUE PRESENTED

Respondent's alleged violation of subsections 460.13(3)(f) and (g)(1), Florida Statutes.

At the commencement of the hearing, petitioner withdrew Count I of the complaint that alleged a violation of Rule 21D-2.01, F.A.C. and subsection 460.13(3)(g)(1), Florida Statutes.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent was a licensed chiropractor in the state of Florida on December 26, 1976, and is so licensed at the present time. His office is located in North Miami Beach, Florida. (Stipulation, Exhibit 2)

   
   

2. Respondent received his professional education at the Palmer College of Chiropractic in Davenport, Iowa. After graduation, he interned for a period of approximately six months until October, 1976. While at the Palmer College, he studied the Grostek method of diagnosis and treatment that is part of the school curriculum. This method teaches that all of the nerves connected to the spinal cord are affected by bone misalignment in the upper cervical area. This can have adverse affects upon the spine and a person's general health. Diagnosis of this condition is made by the use of x-rays. Once a bone misalignment is determined to exist, the chiropractor uses light pressure or force adjustment to reposition the bone. Finally, x-rays are again taken to see if the desired change has been effected by the treatment. This method is restricted to the cervical area below the base of the skull. Respondent also is a member of the National Upper Cervical Chiropractic Association (NUCCA) that espouses a more

   refined Grostek method involving only a different stance of the chiropractor in making the bone adjustment. That organization conducts continuing education courses, performs research and issues regular monthly bulletins. Although there are several hundred chiropractors in the United States who practice the NUCCA method, at present there are only three in Florida. The Grostek method originated approximately twenty-five years ago. Although the Grostek technique is not used extensively in Florida, it is an accepted method of diagnosis and treatment in the profession. The primary difference in the Grostek and NUCCA techniques and that used by other chiropractors is the manner in which x-rays are utilized. Respondent specializes in the NUCCA method and if he does not discover a bone misalignment in the cervical area, he refers the patient to another chiropractor. (Testimony of Respondent, Dr. Carroll, Exhibits 2, 3)

   
   

3. While at Palmer College, respondent also received lectures on the subject of iridology. This topic deals with the matter of toxic areas in the body and involves the examination of the iris of the eye to determine what area of the body is affected. The chiropractor may recommend a change in diet as a means of removing a particular problem. Iridology is an accepted adjunct to chiropractic treatment and is employed by respondent in his practice on occasion. However, it is entirely separate and apart from the NUCCA method. (Testimony of respondent)

   
   

4. A reporter for the North Dade-South Howard Journal asked the respondent for an interview to explain the NUCCA method. He had been referred to respondent by one of the latter's patients. Respondent granted the interview and the subsequent conversation included matters concerning both NUCCA and iridology. The article was not submitted to respondent for approval prior to publication, and was published in the newspaper on December 26, 1976. It contained misquotes, inaccurate summations of the interview and implied that iridology was a part of the NUCCA method. Although the article referred to a claim of respondent that by detecting toxicity in the body with a small flashlight and a magnifying glass, the need for exploratory surgery in patients could largely be eliminated, respondent denied making such a statement. A witness testified at the hearing that the same reporter grossly misquoted her in an article concerning the benefits of a vegetarian diet. (Testimony of respondent, Galton, Exhibit 1)

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

5. Count II of Petitioner's Administrative Complaint alleges as follows concerning the article published in the North Dade-South Broward Journal:

   
   

   Count II

   
   

   1. Said article quoted Dr. Knauer as making certain claims and statements concerning the science and practice of chiropractic.

      
      

   2. These statements constitute a violation of Section 460.13(3)(f), Florida Statutes.

      
      

      2. Section 460.13(3)(f), provides as follows: "(3) The board, pursuant to the procedure prescribed in this act, shall have the authority to discipline any applicant for license or the holder of a license to

      practice as a chiropractic physician who

      is found guilty by the board of one or more of the following:

      * * *

      (f) Making any untrue, false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, extravagant, or grossly improbable claims or statements concerning the science or practice of chiropractic;"

      
      

6. Although petitioner's complaint does not specify the character of respondent's alleged claims or statements appearing in the newspaper article, its counsel sought to show at the hearing that they were "extravagant" or "grossly improbable." As heretofore found, respondent conceded that he was interviewed for the article, but that he was misquoted in some instances and did not make certain of the other statements appearing therein. As to those statements which substantially reflected his comments during the interview, there was no showing that they were materially incorrect, extravagant, or grossly improbable. Perhaps he should have been more cautious in granting an interview that easily could have been subject, as here, to distortion, but the evidence is insufficient to establish that he violated the statutory provision in question.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Administrative Complaint against respondent be dismissed. Done and Entered this day of August, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida.

THOMAS C. OLDHAM

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

COPIES FURNISHED:

Ronald LaFace, Esquire Post Office Box 1572

Tallahassee, Florida 32304

Herbert L. Fehner, Esquire

300 Marine Plaza

on the Intracoastal

3100 E. Oakland Park Boulevard Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33308

Docket for Case No: 77-000975

Orders for Case No: 77-000975