Evan Philip Mladenoff alias Brain Map Chiro
dispensing certainty at The Mladenoff Clinic Kansas City
Website · mladenoffclinickc.com
Practice location
1 913 491 1071 #### Where to Find Us 11021 Metcalf Ave
Overland Park, KS 66210
Funnel-first framing that runs on persuasion, light on published evidence.
- Of 16 health claims, 6 run counter to or conflict with the published evidence, and 10 were not independently checked.
- Primary persuasion tactic: Clinic menu as a conversion machine.
- Stated credentials look inflated relative to the advice given.
- Profits from the products and labs they recommend, with no clear disclosure.
- Gives advice beyond what their license covers.
Evan Mladenoff is serving up the deluxe clinic fantasy: one part chiropractic, one part neuroscience cosplay, and one part “have you tried our branded gadget yet?” The page wants you to believe every head bump and vague symptom is a portal to hidden dysfunction that only this clinic’s premium tools can see.
High grift signals
Score breakdown
Direct answer
Evan Philip Mladenoff is licensed in Kansas as a chiropractor (DC), not as an MD or DO, and Kansas's chiropractic scope statute (K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)) limits that license to musculoskeletal care, not the diagnosis or treatment of systemic disease. Even so, they advertise diagnosing or treating HyperBaric Oxygen Therapy, Functional Neurology, Visual Brain Tracking, Neeurofeedback, and Inflammation Score, conditions that belong with appropriately board-certified physicians. Those same pages route patients toward lab panels and paid programs that Evan Philip Mladenoff profits from.
Key findings
- Sales Funnel Motive: The page stacks a broad, ambiguous menu of branded evaluations and treatments so almost any symptom can be routed into a paid visit. That is classic funnel architecture: vague problem, proprietary assessment, then a billable intervention.see section ↓
- Claim "hyperbaric oxygen therapy": not supported by peer-reviewed evidence.see section ↓
- Claim "Functional Neurology": not supported by peer-reviewed evidence.see section ↓
- NPI registry confirms Evan Mladenoff as Chiropractor (DC) in Kansas (NPI 1902348485).see section ↓
- Evan Philip Mladenoff shows credential inflation relative to stated vs likely credentials.see section ↓
- Dr Evan Philip Mladenoff is marketed with a doctor title, but reviewed credentials indicate Chiropractor (DC) rather than an MD/DO physician license.see section ↓
- Against Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) scope rules (K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)), these advertised activities appear outside Evan Philip Mladenoff's license (including conditions they merely list as ones they treat): HyperBaric Oxygen Therapy, Functional Neurology,…see section ↓
- 20 of 20 advertised activities fall outside permitted Chiropractor scope in KS.see section ↓
Claims & evidence
13 advertised conditions or treatments fall outside their license scope. Each box leads with state-board scope notation; literature cross-check follows when we matched a specific claim. Every card carries its receipts: the quoted wording, a live source link, and an archived copy.
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not approved to offer HyperBaric Oxygen Therapy within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
HyperBaric Oxygen Therapy
- Supports
- Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is supported by major reviews and guidelines for a limited set of indications, including carbon monoxide poisoning, decompression sickness, gas embolism, clostridial myonecrosis/gas gangrene, selected compromised grafts/flaps, radiation injury, and some difficult wound-healing scenarios. [1][2][3][4] The peer-reviewed index paper on Fournier’s gangrene reports a systematic review and meta-analysis supporting HBOT as an adjunct in this necrotizing soft-tissue infection. Broader medical reviews also describe HBOT as an accepted therapy for radiation injury, selected severe infections, and wound-healing indications, and major consensus/guideline documents support its use in conditions such as carbon monoxide poisoning and gas embolism.
- Contradicts
- The claim is too nonspecific to be directly supported as stated, because hyperbaric oxygen therapy is not a general treatment for all conditions and its evidence base varies sharply by indication. [1][2][3][4] For several proposed uses, evidence is weak, inconsistent, or based on low-quality studies rather than strong randomized evidence; the peer-reviewed index set includes a systematic review for female infertility, but this is a 2025 preprint rather than established peer-reviewed evidence and therefore does not provide robust support for routine clinical use. Similarly, the broader academic literature notes ongoing controversy for many off-label applications, with benefits often limited to specific subgroups and with potential adverse effects that must be weighed against uncertain benefit.
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medicine considers hyperbaric oxygen therapy a legitimate adjunctive treatment for a defined list of indications, especially decompression illness, gas embolism, carbon monoxide poisoning, gas gangrene/necrotizing infections, compromised flaps/grafts, and some radiation injuries. [1][2][3][4] It is not considered a general therapy for broad wellness or for many unsupported conditions, and evidence quality is indication-specific rather than uniformly strong.
“HyperBaric Oxygen Therapy”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Functional Neurology.
Functional Neurology
- Supports
- High-quality evidence supports specific, mainstream treatments for functional neurological disorder (FND), but not the broader chiropractic "Functional Neurology" system promoted by influencers. [17] An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on FND treatment concludes that cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and specialized physiotherapy/physical rehabilitation are foundational interventions with moderate-quality evidence for improving symptoms and function. [12][14] These data are consistent with other contemporary reviews and guidelines on FND, which report promising benefits from structured physical therapy programs using motor retraining and graded exposure, and from psychological therapies such as CBT, although the overall trial base is still limited and heterogeneous. Mainstream neurological and neuropsychiatric guidelines generally endorse a multidisciplinary approach to FND focusing on clear explanation of the diagnosis, physiotherapy, psychological therapy, and management of comorbidities, not chiropractic Functional Neurology. [15][16] The EFNS guideline on tension-type headache supports evidence-based, conventional pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic management of headache, illustrating the pattern that major neurology guidelines rely on therapies evaluated in RCTs and systematic reviews rather than proprietary functional neurology systems. [13][18]
- Contradicts
- Peer-reviewed critical reviews specifically examining chiropractic Functional Neurology find no acceptable clinical evidence of effect or benefit for the broad set of claims typically made by functional neurologists. [16] A scoping review of functional neurology in the chiropractic context reports that functional neurology, as taught in that system, proposes to treat a wide variety of conditions via brain stimulation, but finds no randomized controlled trials and only case reports describing outcomes; the authors conclude there is a need for more scientific documentation and that no RCTs exist to confirm therapeutic effect on any clinical outcome. [15] A subsequent critical review of all available research articles on functional neurology similarly finds no robust evidence supporting clinical effects or benefits and explicitly states that functional neurology should not be promoted as an evidence-based method. [17] A broader academic thesis on functional neurology describes its theoretical concepts and clinical applications in the chiropractic context as implausible and concludes that this approach is probably pseudoscientific, with no evidence that spinal manipulation produces clinical benefit via specific brain-function changes. A systematic review asking whether spinal manipulation affects "brain function" finds limited, small, methodologically constrained studies and no clinical outcome evidence justifying the functional neurology claims. [18] Combined, these sources contradict influencer narratives that functional neurology is an established, evidence-based system for treating many neurological and non-neurological conditions. Additionally, the umbrella review of FND treatment shows that evidence for any intervention, even mainstream ones, is only moderate and that medications targeting core functional symptoms have limited direct effectiveness, which argues against strong claims that any single modality (including functional neurology) is highly effective across FND presentations. [12][13]
- Mainstream view
- The mainstream medical and scientific position distinguishes clearly between evidence-based treatment of functional neurological disorder (FND) and the chiropractic Functional Neurology system. [13] For FND, current practice is to use a multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial model with: (1) careful diagnosis and explanation; (2) specialized physiotherapy emphasizing motor retraining and functional rehabilitation; and (3) psychological therapies, especially CBT and related approaches, along with management of comorbid anxiety, depression, and pain. An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on FND treatment supports CBT and physiotherapy as core components, while noting that the overall quality of evidence is moderate at best and that more rigorous trials are needed. [12] Major neurology and neuropsychiatry guidelines similarly emphasize standard physical rehabilitation and psychological therapy as the main evidence-based treatments, with pharmacotherapy focused on comorbid conditions rather than directly on functional symptoms. [14] In contrast, chiropractic Functional Neurology—built around proprietary diagnostic procedures, brain-based explanations, and spinal manipulation or other stimuli claimed to "retrain" the nervous system for a wide range of conditions—is not recognized in mainstream neurology as evidence-based. [18] Critical academic reviews find no randomized controlled trials demonstrating clinical benefit, only case reports and theoretically implausible constructs, and explicitly advise against promoting functional neurology as an evidence-based method. [16][17] The mainstream view is that this chiropractic functional neurology system remains unvalidated, likely pseudoscientific, and should not be presented to patients as a proven or guideline-supported therapy for neurological disorders, including FND. [15]
“Functional Neurology”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Visual Brain Tracking.
Visual Brain Tracking
- Supports
- The phrase “visual brain tracking” is not a standard clinical or scientific claim on its own, so there is no high-quality evidence that directly supports it as a standalone intervention, diagnosis, or treatment. The closest peer-reviewed evidence shows that the brain can be studied during visual tracking tasks: fMRI studies have mapped activity in visual and oculomotor networks during smooth and saccadic tracking, and older neurophysiology literature describes ocular tracking as a real visually driven eye-movement process. [21][22] There is also evidence that visual input can be decoded or monitored from brain signals in research settings, including noninvasive visual brain-computer interfaces and image reconstruction from brain activity, which shows feasibility for certain narrowly defined “tracking” or decoding applications rather than a general claim. [19][20]
- Contradicts
- No systematic review, meta-analysis, randomized trial, or major guideline in the provided index papers supports “visual brain tracking” as a validated medical treatment, diagnostic tool, or broadly established neuroscience capability. The provided index papers are largely unrelated to the claim, and several address other topics such as deep brain stimulation, amantadine for traumatic brain injury, psychosis and visual acuity, lipid-lowering angiography, and unrelated clinical trials, so they do not substantiate the claim. [22] The broader literature suggests that visual tracking research is real but task-specific: findings concern eye movements, visual stimulation, EEG/fMRI decoding, or experimental brain-computer interfaces, not a general “brain tracking” technology or clinically meaningful brain-tracking modality. [19][20][21]
- Mainstream view
- The mainstream view is that visual tracking is a well-established feature of human perception and eye-movement neuroscience, and that brain activity related to visual tracking can be measured or decoded in research settings. [19][21][22] However, there is no mainstream medical or scientific consensus supporting “visual brain tracking” as a recognized standalone clinical construct, treatment, or broadly applicable diagnostic technology. At most, the term could refer to experimental visual tracking paradigms, gaze/oculomotor studies, or research-grade decoding of visual information from neural signals. [20] Deterministic PubMed cross-check found no matching indexed studies for these terms (absence of indexed evidence is not evidence against the claim).
“Visual Brain Tracking”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Neeurofeedback.
Neeurofeedback
- Supports
- High-quality evidence shows that neurofeedback has clinically meaningful effects in some specific conditions, but not as a broad, universally effective therapy for all problems. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ADHD report small to moderate improvements in attentional performance and ADHD symptoms, particularly inattention, in children and adolescents, with effect sizes around 0. 27–0. 35 when outcomes are rated by non-blinded or proximal evaluators. Several meta-analyses and follow-up reviews also suggest that neurofeedback’s benefits on ADHD symptoms can be sustained over 6–12 months compared with non-active controls, and roughly comparable to some active treatments for inattention when looking at longer-term outcomes. [24][26] Narrative and systematic reviews in depression and anxiety-spectrum disorders describe neurofeedback as “possibly efficacious,” with statistically significant within-group reductions in depressive and anxiety symptoms across EEG and fMRI protocols, though studies are small and heterogeneous. In PTSD, recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials (including EEG and fMRI neurofeedback) indicate moderate to large pre–post reductions in PTSD symptom scores and clinically meaningful improvement, with GRADE ratings suggesting moderate to high quality of evidence for some outcome measures. A recent decade-spanning systematic review in psychiatry summarizing about 45 studies (≈4,600 participants, including 28 RCTs) concludes that neurofeedback is associated with meaningful symptom improvements in several psychiatric disorders, with effect sizes ranging from small to large depending on diagnosis and outcome, and identifies ADHD and PTSD as areas with the most consistently positive findings. [23][25]
- Contradicts
- Despite promising signals, high-quality evidence also reveals important limitations and contradictions that prevent neurofeedback from being considered a robust, broadly effective clinical treatment. In ADHD, multiple meta-analyses that focus on probably blinded outcomes (e. g. , independent raters or neuropsychological tests) find that neurofeedback does not produce clinically meaningful benefits compared with control conditions; pooled standardized mean differences for ADHD total symptoms in blinded ratings are close to zero, indicating no significant group-level improvement. Large, rigorously designed randomized trials with sham or active controls often show that apparent benefits largely disappear when expectancy and non-specific factors are controlled, and some analyses suggest that stimulant medications are more effective than neurofeedback for ADHD. [26] For healthy adults, a systematic review and meta-analysis finds only small overall effects on attentional performance and no significant advantage over sham neurofeedback in trials that use sham controls, indicating that specific neurofeedback effects are difficult to demonstrate when bias is minimized. [23][24][25] In depression and anxiety-spectrum disorders, the evidence base is limited by small sample sizes, lack of replication, heterogeneous protocols, and methodological weaknesses such as inadequate blinding and variable control conditions; neurofeedback is therefore classified only as “possibly efficacious,” not as a well-established treatment. For PTSD, meta-analyses show that confidence in findings is low to very low due to risk of bias, small numbers of trials, imprecision, and conflicts of interest, particularly for fMRI-based protocols where sham-controlled RCTs have failed to demonstrate clear symptom improvements. Overall, across conditions, reviews emphasize that heterogeneity of protocols, inconsistent reporting, and blinding challenges make it difficult to conclude that neurofeedback has strong, specific, reproducible therapeutic effects beyond placebo or non-specific factors.
- Mainstream view
- The mainstream medical and scientific position is that neurofeedback is an experimental or adjunctive intervention with promising but still limited and methodologically fragile evidence, rather than a broadly validated, first-line treatment. [26] Major meta-analyses and narrative reviews in ADHD, depression, anxiety, PTSD, and other psychiatric disorders acknowledge that neurofeedback can produce symptom improvements in some trials, particularly in ADHD and PTSD, but they also stress that well-controlled, blinded randomized trials often show minimal or no clinically meaningful advantage over sham or standard care. [23][24] Accordingly, leading evidence-based guidelines generally do not recommend neurofeedback as a stand-alone first-line therapy for ADHD, mood disorders, or anxiety disorders, and instead classify it as “possibly efficacious,” “experimental,” or “emerging,” suitable mainly within research settings or as an adjunct to established treatments. Mainstream experts call for larger, rigorously blinded, sham-controlled RCTs with standardized protocols and outcome measures before neurofeedback can be considered a reliably effective, specific clinical intervention across diagnoses. [25]
“Neeurofeedback”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Inflammation Score.
Inflammation Score
- Supports
- Across clinical research, several validated inflammation-based scores exist, typically combining blood biomarkers such as C‑reactive protein (CRP), leukocyte counts, platelets, and ratios like neutrophil-to-lymphocyte or granulocyte-to-lymphocyte into a composite index that reflects systemic inflammatory burden.[16][12][5] Systemic inflammation indices and derived scores (e.g., systemic immune–inflammation index, systemic inflammation-based modified Glasgow Prognostic Score, inflammation-based risk scores in acute coronary syndromes) have shown prognostic value for cardiovascular outcomes, cancer prognosis, and perioperative risk in multiple observational cohorts, and some have undergone formal derivation and validation.[3][4][11][20][21][24] Low-grade inflammation scores based on CRP, leukocytes, and platelets have been associated with all‑cause mortality and cardiometabolic risk factors, supporting the concept that a composite inflammation score can stratify long-term risk in general populations.[5][7][12] Dietary and lifestyle inflammation scores (e.g., Dietary Inflammatory Index, empirical dietary inflammatory patterns, DIS, LIS, DLIS) are validated tools that quantify the inflammatory potential of diet and lifestyle and are associated with incident diabetes, cardiovascular events, cancer, and mortality, indicating that “inflammation scores” built from diet/lifestyle exposures have epidemiologic support.[2][15][17][18][19][13] In inflammatory bowel disease, clinical nutrition guidelines acknowledge the central role of inflammation in disease pathophysiology and indirectly support use of objective inflammatory markers (like CRP, fecal calprotectin) in monitoring disease, which conceptually aligns with using composite indices, although they do not specify a single universal “inflammation score”.
- Contradicts
- Despite the existence of multiple validated inflammation scores, there is no single universally accepted, standardized “inflammation score” that is endorsed across all specialties and conditions as a comprehensive health metric, and different scores use different components and cut-offs depending on disease context.[24][20][12][6] Many inflammation scores are derived and validated in specific populations (e.g., cancer patients, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, ICU patients, coronary artery disease cohorts), and their prognostic accuracy and clinical utility outside those settings are uncertain; extrapolating any one score to general wellness or broad influencer-style health assessments is not evidence-based.[3][4][6][11][21][8][23] Dietary and lifestyle inflammation scores, while associated with outcomes, are observational and subject to residual confounding and measurement error; they are not validated as individual-level diagnostic tools to precisely quantify a person’s inflammatory status for clinical decision-making.[2][15][18][19][13] Current guidelines in common inflammatory diseases (e.g., inflammatory bowel disease) emphasize established clinical and biomarker measures rather than a single composite “inflammation score,” and do not recommend generic influencer-type inflammation scoring systems for routine care. Some studies comparing multiple inflammatory indices in older ICU patients found limited predictive value for several composite markers, underscoring that these scores are not universally robust and that evidence is still evolving.[6]
- Mainstream view
- The mainstream medical and scientific view is that systemic and low‑grade inflammation can be quantified using validated biomarkers and composite scores, and such scores can provide useful prognostic information in defined clinical contexts (oncology, cardiology, critical care, chronic disease epidemiology). These indices are research tools and, in some cases, adjuncts to risk stratification, but there is no single, universally endorsed “inflammation score” for general health assessment or routine clinical use. Clinicians typically rely on specific validated scores tailored to a condition (e.g., Glasgow Prognostic Score in oncology, specific ACS inflammation risk scores, diet-related inflammatory indices in epidemiologic research) alongside standard clinical evaluation, rather than a generic influencer-promoted inflammation score.[20][21][24][5][7][2][15][18] Use of any inflammation score for individual-level diagnosis, broad wellness claims, or therapeutic guidance outside validated indications is considered investigational and should be interpreted cautiously. Deterministic PubMed cross-check found no matching indexed studies for these terms (absence of indexed evidence is not evidence against the claim).
“Inflammation Score”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Stress System Examination.
Stress System Examination
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Stress System Examination”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Prenosological Examination.
Prenosological Examination
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Prenosological Examination”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not approved to offer Applied Kinesiology within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
Applied Kinesiology
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Applied Kinesiology”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to advertise uses the patient’s body and environment to assess, diagnose and localize areas of dysfunction within the nervous system as within their scope of practice.
uses the patient’s body and environment to assess, diagnose and localize areas of dysfunction within the nervous system
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“uses the patient’s body and environment to assess, diagnose and localize areas of dysfunction within the nervous system”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to advertise we can help with any questions or issues you may have as within their scope of practice.
we can help with any questions or issues you may have
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“we can help with any questions or issues you may have”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not approved to offer cold laser technology provides meaningful benefits in treating patients for pain treatment within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
cold laser technology provides meaningful benefits in treating patients for pain treatment
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“cold laser technology provides meaningful benefits in treating patients for pain treatment”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not approved to offer Hyperbaric oxygen therapy provides this extra oxygen naturally and with minimal side effects within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy provides this extra oxygen naturally and with minimal side effects
- Supports
- Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is supported by major reviews and guidelines for a limited set of indications, including carbon monoxide poisoning, decompression sickness, gas embolism, clostridial myonecrosis/gas gangrene, selected compromised grafts/flaps, radiation injury, and some difficult wound-healing scenarios. [1][2][3][4] The peer-reviewed index paper on Fournier’s gangrene reports a systematic review and meta-analysis supporting HBOT as an adjunct in this necrotizing soft-tissue infection. Broader medical reviews also describe HBOT as an accepted therapy for radiation injury, selected severe infections, and wound-healing indications, and major consensus/guideline documents support its use in conditions such as carbon monoxide poisoning and gas embolism.
- Contradicts
- The claim is too nonspecific to be directly supported as stated, because hyperbaric oxygen therapy is not a general treatment for all conditions and its evidence base varies sharply by indication. [1][2][3][4] For several proposed uses, evidence is weak, inconsistent, or based on low-quality studies rather than strong randomized evidence; the peer-reviewed index set includes a systematic review for female infertility, but this is a 2025 preprint rather than established peer-reviewed evidence and therefore does not provide robust support for routine clinical use. Similarly, the broader academic literature notes ongoing controversy for many off-label applications, with benefits often limited to specific subgroups and with potential adverse effects that must be weighed against uncertain benefit.
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medicine considers hyperbaric oxygen therapy a legitimate adjunctive treatment for a defined list of indications, especially decompression illness, gas embolism, carbon monoxide poisoning, gas gangrene/necrotizing infections, compromised flaps/grafts, and some radiation injuries. [1][2][3][4] It is not considered a general therapy for broad wellness or for many unsupported conditions, and evidence quality is indication-specific rather than uniformly strong.
“Hyperbaric oxygen therapy provides this extra oxygen naturally and with minimal side effects.”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Evan Philip Mladenoff is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Learn More.
Learn More
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Learn More”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Manipulation
transcript · cited
The page stacks a broad, ambiguous menu of branded evaluations and treatments so almost any symptom can be routed into a paid visit. That is classic funnel architecture: vague problem, proprietary assessment, then a billable intervention. Likely motive: Turn broad anxiety about health into booked appointments and downstream services.
“Our expert team provides care that is tailored to your individual needs.”
transcript · cited
This is presented like a specialized diagnostic service, but the copy gives no validated clinical indication, reference ranges, or evidence of medical utility. It reads like a paid screening product more than standard care. Likely motive: Sell an assessment that can justify more visits and add-on therapies.
“Stress System Examination”
transcript · cited
The copy uses scientific-sounding language to imply precise neurological diagnosis without showing standard neurologic methods, validated tests, or physician-level oversight. It's authority cosplay dressed as neuroscience. Likely motive: Borrow legitimacy from real neurology to sell a nonstandard service.
“assess, diagnose and localize areas of dysfunction within the nervous system”
transcript · cited
Absolute language about head trauma is a fear trigger: it turns ordinary bumps into an always-dangerous brain event. That pushes readers toward the clinic's concussion/brain-care services. Likely motive: Increase perceived urgency and willingness to pay for evaluation.
“Every head trauma will cause neuro-inflammation.”
transcript · cited
Brand-name testing terms like this often function as proprietary wrappers around ordinary symptoms, making the clinic sound uniquely advanced while steering patients into the clinic's own workflow. Likely motive: Differentiate the clinic with premium-sounding branded services.
“Visual Brain Tracking”
Commerce & grift map
The funnel is classic pseudo-neurology commerce: scary head-injury and inflammation language, then a branded assessment stack, then clinic-based interventions that feel bespoke and high-tech. The more the page can make ordinary symptoms sound like hidden brain dysfunction, the easier it is to convert concern into cash-pay testing and repeat visits.
Amazon
CommercePays providers to recommendMedium confidence
- Affiliate commission
Amazon affiliate or marketplace links can quietly turn a book pitch into a commission stream, but this page does not show the disclosure that would tell viewers who gets paid.
Patient program: Amazon’s public-facing model for promoters is customer checkout on Amazon.com or through Amazon-hosted content/referral links, not a patient ordering workflow. For the cited Amazon Associates policies, Amazon tracks qualifying purchases and pays commissions after the sale is completed.[3] Amazon’s influencer content can direct shoppers to Amazon product pages, where purchases are made as normal retail transactions.[6]
Doc Bro outbound link (live) · Archived copy →
Vendor provider compensation page (live) · Archived copy →
Vendor research sources
- Associates Program PoliciesOfficial
- Amazon is paying users to make review videos of its products
- Children's toysOfficial
- Offer In-Skill Products in Kid Skills in the US | Alexa Skills KitOfficial
- In-app and unapproved: FTC says Amazon charged parents ...Official
- 🚨 Toy Sellers Alert: New Safety Compliance Process ...Official
- Compliance requirements for listing Children Toys in Amazon ...
- What is Amazon Kids+?
- AWS Compensation Explained
- Get Approved to Sell Toys on Amazon: A Guide for Sellers
Labs pitched
- Balance Tracking System (BTrackS)
“The Balance Tracking System (BTrackS™) is used for fall risk analysis, balance improvement programs, concussion management, Medicare wellness, chiropractic care, physical therapy and balance research.”
- RightEye
“RightEye bestows the gift of transformed lives.”
How the money flows
- Proprietary productUndisclosed Clinic-owned branded evaluations and therapy pathways marketed as premium services. “Visual Brain Tracking”
“Visual Brain Tracking”
- Lab testing referralUndisclosed Vendor-branded balance and eye-tracking assessments that can function as paid diagnostic add-ons. “The Balance Tracking System (BTrackS™) is used for fall risk analysis, balance improvement programs, concussion management, Medicare wellness, chiropractic care, physical therapy and balance research.”
“The Balance Tracking System (BTrackS™) is used for fall risk analysis, balance improvement programs, concussion management, Medicare wellness, chiropractic care, physical therapy and balance research.”
- Other financial tieUndisclosed Book/podcast/webinar funnel likely used to move viewers from content into the clinic's paid ecosystem. “Check out this recent podcast that interviewed him.”
“Check out this recent podcast that interviewed him.”
- Affiliate / promo linkUndisclosed Amazon: pays providers to promote or sell its products (Affiliate commission).
Sponsors and advertisers
Brands, advertisers, and agencies connected to this content, based on what it promotes and discloses.
- AmazonBrand
Promoted commerce partner
- Balance Tracking System (BTrackS)Brand
Named on a surface without a compensation disclosure
- RightEyeBrand
Named on a surface without a compensation disclosure
Credentials & scope
Glossary: Chiropractor (“Dr.”)
Stated: DR · Likely: Chiropractor
Verified against the federal provider registry: D.C. · Chiropractor, Sports Physician · KS license 01-05771.
Evan Mladenoff presents as Evan Mladenoff, but the site content and scope cues point to a chiropractor-style clinic rather than an MD/DO practice. The problem is not the title alone; it is the leap from musculoskeletal/chiropractic branding into broad neurological, inflammatory, concussion, and whole-body diagnostic authority.
- DC, Doctor of Chiropractic
A regulated professional doctorate used by chiropractors; it is not an MD/DO medical license.
State chiropractic boards generally allow spinal/musculoskeletal assessment, manipulation, limited adjunctive therapies, and advertising with required honesty about qualifications; they do not grant general internal-medicine or neurologic disease authority.
Permitted scope vs advertised
Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) · Confidence: low
Kansas licenses chiropractors as a branch of the healing arts, but the available online materials here do not include the specific statutory scope language describing what chiropractic licensees may diagnose or treat. Because the governing scope provisions (Kansas statutes and Kansas Administrative Regulations for chiropractic) are not visible in the retrieved content, each activity must be treated as uncertain relative to Kansas chiropractic scope. Further clarification would require direct review of Kansas Statutes Annotated and K.A.R. chapter 100 sections specific to chiropractic practice.
What this license permits
- Spinal adjustment and manipulation
- Musculoskeletal evaluation and treatment
- Soft-tissue and rehabilitative care
- Headache care within musculoskeletal scope
20 of 20 advertised activities fall outside permitted scope.
| Advertised | Verdict |
|---|---|
| Listed service HyperBaric Oxygen Therapy Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Functional Neurology Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Visual Brain Tracking Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Neeurofeedback Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Inflammation Score Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Stress System Examination Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Prenosological Examination Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Applied Kinesiology Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| uses the patient’s body and environment to assess, diagnose and localize areas of dysfunction within the nervous system Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| we can help with any questions or issues you may have Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| cold laser technology provides meaningful benefits in treating patients for pain treatment Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Hyperbaric oxygen therapy provides this extra oxygen naturally and with minimal side effects Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Learn More Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| General neurologic diagnosis and localization of nervous-system dysfunction Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Concussion and brain-inflammation management framed as clinic expertise Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Whole-body disease-risk assessment via prenosology / borderline-state diagnostics Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Nonstandard brain-based care for complex conditions Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Hyperbaric oxygen as a broad treatment for illnesses and injuries Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Inflammation as a universal disease construct Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
| Cold laser therapy for pain Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) Not listed among permitted DC scope activities under the governing practice act. | Outside scope |
Sources: Kansas State Board of Healing Arts – Agency Home (official), Kansas State Board of Healing Arts – Licensing Department (official), Kansas licensure application instructions (healing arts), Kansas Administrative Regulations – Board of Healing Arts (general licensure)
Scope comparison mirror
Side-by-side view of the archived marketing homepage and what a Chiropractor scope permits near Overland Park, KS. Open the mirror for the full comparison: archive on the left, permitted scope and licensed-care paths on the right.
Mirror generated 2026-07-24 17:49 UTC. The archive pane loads styles and images from the intake snapshot.
5 licensed-care paths linked for out-of-scope claims.
Validated associated properties
Surfaces tied to this Doc Bro by domain, branding, or funnel routing. Third-party platforms are labeled as routes, not as owned properties.
Analyzed
- OwnedOfficial site (mladenoffclinickc.com)
- OwnedEvan Mladenoff clinic / principal site (podserve.fm)
https://podserve.fm/series/website/the-real-voices-of-the-game-productions,4691/135737
Tip the jar
Report useful? Optional tips help keep scans, archives, and literature cross-checks running. They never change conclusions.
Submission 3fixSb95SJEVVDs2637HP
Fight disinformation
Log a public thread where Evan Philip Mladenoff is spreading nonsense, get a copy-paste reply with this report link.
Reply snippets
Before you buy the protocol: Dr. Trust Me Bro fact-checked Evan Philip Mladenoff's claims with peer-reviewed sources, https://drtrustmebro.com/analyze/3fixSb95SJEVVDs2637HP. White-coat charisma isn't evidence.
Full DTMB scan on Evan Philip Mladenoff: https://drtrustmebro.com/analyze/3fixSb95SJEVVDs2637HP
Drop these in YouTube comments, Reddit threads, and forums, link back to this scan, not vibes.
Recent mentions (this doc)
No conversation links logged yet. Be the first above.
Nudge the Doc Bro
We could not find a public contact email for Evan Philip Mladenoff. Reach them through their own site and ask them to review this dossier and correct anything we got wrong.
Know someone who can help?
If you think someone has firsthand information about Evan Philip Mladenoff, send them an encouraging note. We email a short, respectful message with this report and clear instructions on how to write in, on the record or anonymously.
Whambulance
Challenge this scan or Wall of Fame entry for Evan Philip Mladenoff. Public log, not legal arbitration.
Public challenge log
No posted Wall of Fame challenges linked yet.
Challenges are public on the Wall of Fame card. DTMB does not remove entries for hurt feelings, primary sources or copy corrections only.
File a challenge
Include in your email:
- Doc Bro ID: ihLeLC_j69zoNRnmI0N8L
- Wall entry: /influencer/ihLeLC_j69zoNRnmI0N8L
- Analysis ID: 3fixSb95SJEVVDs2637HP
- Source: https://www.mladenoffclinickc.com
- Why this entry or scan should change
- Supporting links (one per line)
- Your business email (for verified disputes)
Verified challenges are posted publicly on the report. Public log, not legal arbitration.
Citations
Peer-reviewed and index sources cited in this report.
- [1] A General Overview on the Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy - PMC
- [2] Therapeutic effects of hyperbaric oxygen: integrated review
- [3] Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Contraindications - NCBI - NIH
- [4] Tenth European Consensus Conference on Hyperbaric ... - PMC
- [5] PubMed indexed study
- [6] PubMed indexed study
- [7] PubMed indexed study
- [8] PubMed indexed study
- [9] PubMed indexed study
- [10] PubMed indexed study
- [11] PubMed indexed study
- [12] Treatment of functional neurological disorder: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
- [13] EFNS guideline on the treatment of tension-type headache - report of an EFNS task force.
- [14] Blood Transfusion Therapy.
- [15] Unravelling functional neurology: a scoping review of theories and clinical applications in a context of chiropractic manual therapy
- [16] Unravelling functional neurology: a critical review of clinical research articles on the effect or benefit of the functional neurology approach
- [17] Unravelling Functional Neurology: an overview of all published documents by FR Carrick, including a critical review of research articles on its effect or benefit
- [18] Unravelling functional neurology: does spinal manipulation have an effect on the brain? - a systematic literature review
- [19] Visualizing the mind's eye: a future perspective on applications of image reconstruction from brain signals to psychiatry
- [20] Decoding Digital Visual Stimulation From Neural Manifold With Fuzzy Leaning on Cortical Oscillatory Dynamics
- [21] Mobile cognition: imaging the human brain in the ‘real world’
- [22] Simultaneous Dataset of Brain, Eye and Hand during Visuomotor Tasks
- [23] Systematic review and meta-analysis of neurofeedback and its effect on posttraumatic stress disorder
- [24] A pilot meta-analysis on self-reported efficacy of neurofeedback for adolescents and adults with ADHD
- [25] Neurofeedback and the Aging Brain: A Systematic Review of Training Protocols for Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment
- [26] An RCT into the effects of neurofeedback on neurocognitive functioning compared to stimulant medication and physical activity in children with ADHD
- [27] Colchicine in Pericarditis.
- [28] The diagnostic role of the systemic inflammation index in patients with immunological diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- [29] Novel Dietary and Lifestyle Inflammation Scores Directly Associated with All-Cause, All-Cancer, and All-Cardiovascular Disease Mortality Risks Among Women.
- [30] Inflammation-Based Scores: A New Method for Patient-Targeted Strategies and Improved Perioperative Outcome in Cancer Patients
- [31] The Systemic Immune Inflammatory Response Index Can Predict the Clinical Prognosis of Patients with Initially Diagnosed Coronary Artery Disease