Teresa Marie Volner alias The Glucose Chiro
Website · totalcarechiro.com
Practice location
6308 College Blvd
Overland Park, KS 66211
Funnel-first framing that runs on persuasion, light on published evidence.
- Of 17 health claims, 6 run counter to or conflict with the published evidence, and 11 were not independently checked.
- Primary persuasion tactic: Blood sugar panic sells packages.
- 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.
Tess Volner has built the full kaleidoscope: chiropractic spine care on one side, metabolic optimization on the other, and a shiny glucose biosensor in the middle to make it all feel science-forward. Add supplements, DNA testing, HBOT, and a free blueprint call, and you’ve got the classic integrative wellness bazaar where the diagnosis is broad, the answers are branded, and the checkout button is always nearby.
High grift signals
Score breakdown
Direct answer
Teresa Marie Volner is licensed in Kansas as a chiropractor (DC), not as an MD or DO, and Kansas's chiropractic scope statute (K.S.A. 65-2837b / KSBHA chiropractic scope materials) limits that license to musculoskeletal care, not the diagnosis or treatment of systemic disease. Even so, they advertise diagnosing or treating Diabetes and metabolic Wellness, Winners in Diabetes®, Functional Medicine, Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing, and Safe Supplement Protocols, conditions that belong with appropriately board-certified physicians. Those same pages route patients toward supplements, lab panels, and paid programs that Teresa Marie Volner profits from.
Key findings
- Fear Mongering: This frames everyday glucose variation as a broad wellness threat and uses it to justify ongoing monitoring and intervention.see section ↓
- Claim "functional medicine": mixed in the medical literature.see section ↓
- Claim "Diabetes and metabolic Wellness": mixed in the medical literature.see section ↓
- NPI registry confirms Teresa Volner as Chiropractor (DC) in Kansas (NPI 1871717009).see section ↓
- Teresa Marie Volner shows credential inflation relative to stated vs likely credentials.see section ↓
- Dr Teresa Marie Volner 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. 65-2837b / KSBHA chiropractic scope materials), these advertised activities appear outside Teresa Marie Volner's license (including conditions they merely list as ones they treat): Diabetes and metabolic Wellness, About…see section ↓
- 15 of 17 advertised activities fall outside permitted Chiropractor scope in KS.see section ↓
Claims & evidence
11 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.
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Diabetes and metabolic Wellness.
Diabetes and metabolic Wellness
- Supports
- The influencer claim is too vague (“Diabetes and metabolic wellness”) to match directly to a specific intervention or mechanism, but high‑quality evidence shows that diabetes risk and broader metabolic health can be substantially improved by both pharmacologic and lifestyle strategies, which broadly aligns with a generic “metabolic wellness” framing if interpreted as improving glycemic control, weight, and cardiometabolic risk in people with or at risk of type 2 diabetes.[7] Systematic reviews and meta‑analyses of dopamine agonists (bromocriptine, cabergoline) in adults with type 2 diabetes show clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, and triglycerides compared with placebo, supporting that central dopaminergic modulation can improve metabolic variables in T2D patients.[7] Additional pooled analyses of dopamine‑2 agonists report large effect sizes for lowering HbA1c (≈1.4% absolute reduction) and fasting blood glucose (≈37 mg/dL) without major safety signals, further supporting a role for these drugs in improving glycemic control as part of a broader metabolic management strategy in T2D.[11] Large, long‑term randomized lifestyle‑intervention trials and meta‑analyses demonstrate that structured programs combining diet change, physical activity (including walking), and weight loss reduce progression from prediabetes to type 2 diabetes by roughly 25–50% and yield sustained improvements in glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes, which is directly supportive of “metabolic wellness” as a meaningful, evidence‑backed target.[8][9][13][14][3]
- Contradicts
- Because the influencer’s statement is generic and does not specify a particular product, protocol, or mechanism, it is impossible to determine whether their specific recommendation is supported; evidence cannot be assumed to apply to unspecified supplements, biohacks, or untested protocols simply because they invoke “metabolic wellness.” The systematic review of dopamine agonists notes that the certainty of evidence is low to moderate, with substantial heterogeneity and limited serious adverse event reporting, indicating that confidence in long‑term benefit and safety is not high enough to promote these drugs as a broad “wellness” solution outside standard diabetic care.[7][15] Some pharmacologic diabetes‑prevention and glucose‑lowering interventions show benefits only while the medication is taken; once discontinued, the risk reduction is not sustained, which contradicts any implication that short courses of medication or quick fixes lead to durable “metabolic wellness.”[13] Even for lifestyle interventions, effect sizes vary by setting and adherence, and benefits wane over time, so claims of easy, permanent “metabolic wellness” or reversal of diabetes without ongoing behavior change are not supported by current evidence.[9][13][14]
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medical and scientific consensus is that type 2 diabetes and broader metabolic health are best addressed through a combination of sustained lifestyle modification (diet quality, physical activity, weight management), evidence‑based pharmacologic therapy when indicated, and regular monitoring of glycemic and cardiometabolic parameters, rather than vague “metabolic wellness” programs with unvalidated components.[8][9][13][14] Dopamine agonists such as bromocriptine‑QR are recognized as one of several approved glucose‑lowering options for type 2 diabetes, with data showing modest improvements in glycemic control and possibly cardio‑metabolic parameters, but they are not considered first‑line therapy and are used within guideline‑directed care alongside metformin, lifestyle measures, and other agents.[7][11][15] For diabetes prevention, mainstream guidelines emphasize intensive lifestyle intervention (dietary changes, increased physical activity, weight loss) as the cornerstone, with selected pharmacologic agents used in high‑risk individuals, and they frame “metabolic wellness” in concrete, measurable terms (HbA1c, fasting glucose, weight, blood pressure, lipids) rather than as a marketing concept.[8][9][13][14]
“Diabetes and metabolic Wellness”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b / KSBHA chiropractic scope materials
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure About Us Winners in Diabetes® Contact Us.
About Us Winners in Diabetes® Contact Us
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“About Us Winners in Diabetes® Contact Us”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Winners in Diabetes®.
Winners in Diabetes®
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Winners in Diabetes®”
Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act)
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Functional medicine for diabetes and metabolic wellness.
Functional medicine for diabetes and metabolic wellness
- Supports
- The influencer claim is too vague (“Diabetes and metabolic wellness”) to match directly to a specific intervention or mechanism, but high‑quality evidence shows that diabetes risk and broader metabolic health can be substantially improved by both pharmacologic and lifestyle strategies, which broadly aligns with a generic “metabolic wellness” framing if interpreted as improving glycemic control, weight, and cardiometabolic risk in people with or at risk of type 2 diabetes.[7] Systematic reviews and meta‑analyses of dopamine agonists (bromocriptine, cabergoline) in adults with type 2 diabetes show clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, and triglycerides compared with placebo, supporting that central dopaminergic modulation can improve metabolic variables in T2D patients.[7] Additional pooled analyses of dopamine‑2 agonists report large effect sizes for lowering HbA1c (≈1.4% absolute reduction) and fasting blood glucose (≈37 mg/dL) without major safety signals, further supporting a role for these drugs in improving glycemic control as part of a broader metabolic management strategy in T2D.[11] Large, long‑term randomized lifestyle‑intervention trials and meta‑analyses demonstrate that structured programs combining diet change, physical activity (including walking), and weight loss reduce progression from prediabetes to type 2 diabetes by roughly 25–50% and yield sustained improvements in glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes, which is directly supportive of “metabolic wellness” as a meaningful, evidence‑backed target.[8][9][13][14][3]
- Contradicts
- Because the influencer’s statement is generic and does not specify a particular product, protocol, or mechanism, it is impossible to determine whether their specific recommendation is supported; evidence cannot be assumed to apply to unspecified supplements, biohacks, or untested protocols simply because they invoke “metabolic wellness.” The systematic review of dopamine agonists notes that the certainty of evidence is low to moderate, with substantial heterogeneity and limited serious adverse event reporting, indicating that confidence in long‑term benefit and safety is not high enough to promote these drugs as a broad “wellness” solution outside standard diabetic care.[7][15] Some pharmacologic diabetes‑prevention and glucose‑lowering interventions show benefits only while the medication is taken; once discontinued, the risk reduction is not sustained, which contradicts any implication that short courses of medication or quick fixes lead to durable “metabolic wellness.”[13] Even for lifestyle interventions, effect sizes vary by setting and adherence, and benefits wane over time, so claims of easy, permanent “metabolic wellness” or reversal of diabetes without ongoing behavior change are not supported by current evidence.[9][13][14]
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medical and scientific consensus is that type 2 diabetes and broader metabolic health are best addressed through a combination of sustained lifestyle modification (diet quality, physical activity, weight management), evidence‑based pharmacologic therapy when indicated, and regular monitoring of glycemic and cardiometabolic parameters, rather than vague “metabolic wellness” programs with unvalidated components.[8][9][13][14] Dopamine agonists such as bromocriptine‑QR are recognized as one of several approved glucose‑lowering options for type 2 diabetes, with data showing modest improvements in glycemic control and possibly cardio‑metabolic parameters, but they are not considered first‑line therapy and are used within guideline‑directed care alongside metformin, lifestyle measures, and other agents.[7][11][15] For diabetes prevention, mainstream guidelines emphasize intensive lifestyle intervention (dietary changes, increased physical activity, weight loss) as the cornerstone, with selected pharmacologic agents used in high‑risk individuals, and they frame “metabolic wellness” in concrete, measurable terms (HbA1c, fasting glucose, weight, blood pressure, lipids) rather than as a marketing concept.[8][9][13][14]
“Functional Medicine”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Functional Medicine.
Functional Medicine
- Supports
- There is limited peer‑reviewed evidence evaluating functional medicine as a distinct, validated medical model. [13] Some academic reviews describe functional medicine as a systems‑biology, patient‑centered framework that uses evidence‑based modalities such as nutrition, exercise, stress reduction, and certain medications or supplements, all of which individually have supportive evidence in conventional medicine for chronic disease prevention and management. [12] Observational outcome data (e. g. , quality‑of‑life or practice‑based cohorts) have reported patient‑reported improvements after care delivered in a functional‑medicine style clinic, but these are not randomized trials and mainly show associations rather than causation. [14] Lifestyle and nutrition interventions that functional medicine often employs—such as improving diet quality, physical activity, sleep, and stress management—are strongly supported by mainstream RCTs, guidelines, and systematic reviews, but these trials typically evaluate the interventions themselves, not “functional medicine” branding or its broader diagnostic/testing paradigm.
- Contradicts
- Major mainstream bodies have explicitly judged the overall evidence base for functional medicine to be insufficient. [13] A formal review by the American Academy of Family Physicians concluded there was not enough high‑quality evidence to support teaching functional medicine practice techniques in accredited continuing education, and noted that some claims and treatments promoted under the functional‑medicine banner may be potentially dangerous because they rely on unvalidated tests and supplement regimens rather than guideline‑based care. [12] Independent academic and science‑communication critiques describe functional medicine as a rebranding of complementary and alternative medicine, highlight its frequent use of unproven diagnoses (such as adrenal fatigue) and extensive biochemical testing of unproven clinical value, and emphasize that there are no robust randomized controlled trials or large, high‑quality comparative effectiveness studies demonstrating that the functional‑medicine model, as a package, improves hard outcomes (mortality, major morbidity, health‑care utilization) beyond standard, evidence‑based care. [14] Publications promoting functional medicine approaches to specific conditions (for example, long COVID) acknowledge that underlying pathophysiology and treatments remain poorly defined and that suggested protocols rely on extrapolation, low‑level evidence, and expert opinion rather than rigorous trials, underscoring that the model is largely hypothesis‑driven and not yet validated. Overall, high‑quality systematic reviews, meta‑analyses, and major guidelines do not endorse functional medicine itself as an evidence‑based, superior medical paradigm; instead, they support selected lifestyle or nutrition components that functional‑medicine practitioners also use but which are already part of conventional preventive and chronic‑disease care.
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medicine views functional medicine as a loosely defined, alternative or integrative framework that borrows many legitimate, evidence‑based tools (nutrition counseling, exercise prescriptions, risk‑factor modification) but wraps them in a broader practice model that lacks rigorous validation and often incorporates unproven testing, diagnoses, and supplement protocols. [12][13] Leading professional societies do not recognize functional medicine as a formal medical specialty, and large clinical guidelines do not recommend seeking “functional medicine” per se; instead, they emphasize evidence‑based lifestyle and pharmacologic interventions delivered within conventional care. The prevailing position is that while some individual interventions used by functional‑medicine practitioners are strongly evidence‑based, the branded functional‑medicine model—especially its extensive, non‑standard laboratory panels, root‑cause narratives, and supplement‑heavy regimens—does not have sufficient high‑quality RCTs, comparative trials, or guideline support to be considered a validated, superior approach to diagnosis or treatment, and should be approached with caution, using standard evidence‑based medicine as the primary framework. [14] Deterministic PubMed cross-check found no matching indexed studies for these terms (absence of indexed evidence is not evidence against the claim).
“Functional Medicine”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to advertise Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing as within their scope of practice.
Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing
- Supports
- The vague claim “personalized DNA & metabolic testing” most commonly refers to nutrigenetic or nutrigenomic testing used to personalize diet, weight-loss, or metabolic health interventions. High‑quality trials and reviews show at best modest, context‑dependent benefits, not a broad, powerful effect. A randomized controlled trial (NOW trial) embedded in a standard lifestyle program found that adding nutrigenomics-guided advice led to greater short- and medium-term improvements in body fat percentage and dietary fat intake compared with a standard program, although differences diminished at 12 months. [16] The published NOW trial report similarly concluded that nutrigenomics-guided lifestyle intervention improved long‑term dietary adherence compared with a standard Diabetes Prevention Program–style intervention, suggesting genotype information can modestly support behavior change and adherence in structured programs. [15] A narrative review of obesity and nutrigenetic testing summarizes several RCTs and observational studies where nutrigenetic-guided diets sometimes produced greater short-term reductions in BMI and waist circumference than standard diets, particularly in subgroups carrying specific risk alleles, and highlights at least one RCT in which FTO risk carriers receiving genotype-based advice lost slightly more weight and waist circumference than controls. [18] Broader reviews of personalized nutrition trials (not limited to weight loss) note that genetic risk feedback can increase motivation and, in some cases, improve adherence to specific nutrient targets (e. [17] g. , sodium or alcohol reduction) among higher‑risk genotype carriers, supporting a modest, targeted role for genetic data in behavior change when combined with counseling.
- Contradicts
- Multiple systematic and narrative reviews emphasize that overall evidence for DNA-based personalized nutrition and metabolic testing producing clinically meaningful improvements in weight loss or metabolic outcomes remains limited and inconsistent. [15][16] A systematic review of RCTs that incorporated genetic testing into nutrition care found that in the majority of conclusion statements there was no significant effect of including genetic information on dietary outcomes compared with standard counseling, with only limited signals of benefit for high‑risk genotype carriers in specific behaviors such as sodium or alcohol reduction. [17] A focused review of nutrigenetic testing for obesity reports that, in key RCTs, nutrigenetic‑guided diets did not outperform standard balanced diets for weight loss at 8–24 weeks, including an RCT of overweight/obese veterans in which weight, BMI and waist circumference did not differ between nutrigenetic and standard diet groups. Another RCT comparing genotype‑based dietary advice to general recommendations showed that although participants perceived genetic advice as more useful and interesting, objective dietary changes at 3–12 months were modest and not consistently superior to standard advice, indicating that enthusiasm does not reliably translate into large clinical benefits. Recent reviews of “key evidence for personalised nutrition” conclude that genotype-based interventions delivered in isolation have limited and inconsistent effects on clinical and behavioral outcomes such as weight loss, diet quality and metabolic markers, and that genetic data alone is not an effective basis for personalized nutrition. A broader review of genetics and personalized nutrition similarly states that despite nearly two decades of research and commercial direct‑to‑consumer offerings, robust evidence that gene‑based dietary recommendations improve hard outcomes is still generally lacking, especially for complex metabolic traits. [18]
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medical and scientific opinion is that routine “personalized DNA and metabolic testing” for weight loss, general health optimization, or everyday dietary personalization is not yet supported by strong evidence and should not be marketed as a proven, high‑impact intervention. [15] Major guidelines in obesity and cardiometabolic care continue to recommend established, phenotype‑based lifestyle interventions (calorie reduction, diet quality, physical activity, behavior therapy, and evidence‑based pharmacotherapy or surgery where appropriate), without recommending commercial nutrigenetic testing as standard of care, because current RCTs and systematic reviews show at most small, inconsistent, and context‑dependent benefits when genetic information is added. [18] Expert reviews of personalized nutrition emphasize that while genetic markers can explain some interindividual variability and may slightly enhance motivation or adherence in structured programs, they should currently be treated as adjunctive tools under research or specialized use rather than stand‑alone clinical solutions, and claims that DNA‑based metabolic testing can reliably and substantially improve health or weight beyond conventional methods are considered overstated. [16][17]
“Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Safe Supplement Protocols.
Safe Supplement Protocols
- Supports
- The indexed papers provided do not directly address “safe supplement protocols” as a general concept, and none of them are systematic reviews or guidelines about overall supplement safety or protocol design. From the broader academic evidence retrieved, high‑quality reviews and meta‑analyses indicate that many commonly used dietary supplements (e. [21][23] g. , multivitamins, various vitamins and minerals, omega‑3 fatty acids) are generally well tolerated at usual doses in adults, with relatively few serious adverse events detected in randomized trials over short to medium durations. Some systematic reviews focused on specific supplements (e. g. , vitamin D, omega‑3 fatty acids, certain skin‑moisturizing supplements, nicotinamide mononucleotide) report good short‑term safety profiles when used at studied doses under clinical trial conditions, supporting the idea that structured, evidence‑based supplement regimens can be safe when appropriately designed and monitored. Major frameworks and guidance documents (e. g. , from NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, National Academies, NCCIH) emphasize that safety can be optimized by considering dose limits, known toxicities, drug–supplement interactions, vulnerable populations, and regulatory standards, which conceptually supports the existence of “safe protocols” when these elements are rigorously applied. [20][22]
- Contradicts
- The index papers provided do not support any broad assertion that supplement use is inherently safe or that generic “safe supplement protocols” exist across all products and populations. High‑quality systematic reviews show that many dietary supplements lack proven benefit and in some cases may cause harm (e. [20][21][22][23] g. , increased cancer mortality, fractures, hepatotoxicity, adverse cardiovascular outcomes), contradicting any blanket claim that supplement protocols are broadly safe without careful individual risk assessment. Large reviews and government data highlight non‑trivial rates of emergency department visits and serious liver injury linked to supplements, particularly weight‑loss, bodybuilding, and energy products, indicating that unsupervised or aggressive protocols can be unsafe and that product labels and “natural” branding are not reliable safety guarantees. Systematic reviews of many supplement categories (e. g. , cognitive enhancers, alternative therapies, various botanicals) typically find weak, inconsistent evidence, methodological flaws, and uncertainty about long‑term tolerability, underscoring that safety is often insufficiently characterized and that the notion of universally safe protocols over extended periods is not supported by current evidence.
- Mainstream view
- Mainstream medical and scientific opinion is that dietary supplements can be safe and useful in specific, evidence‑based indications (such as treating or preventing defined deficiencies, or in selected conditions like migraine prophylaxis or skin moisturizing) when used at appropriate doses under professional guidance, but that safety is highly product‑, dose‑, and population‑specific rather than guaranteed by generic “protocols. [20][21][22][23] ” Major guidelines and safety frameworks emphasize cautious, individualized use: verifying need, checking for interactions (especially with anticoagulants and other chronic medications), respecting upper intake levels, avoiding high‑risk categories (e. g. , bodybuilding/weight‑loss products with adulterants), and monitoring for adverse effects, particularly in pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers, children, older adults, and patients with liver or kidney disease. The prevailing view is that supplements should not be assumed safe or beneficial solely because they are “natural” or over‑the‑counter; instead, any supplement protocol should be grounded in robust evidence, product quality assurance, and clinical oversight, with recognition that for many popular supplements long‑term safety and efficacy remain uncertain.
“Safe Supplement Protocols”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner 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. [24][25][26][27] 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. [24][25][26][27] 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. [24][25][26][27] 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. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure EMSELLA Chair Therapy.
EMSELLA Chair Therapy
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“EMSELLA® Chair Therapy”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Naturopathic medicine.
Naturopathic medicine
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Naturopathic medicine”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Teresa Marie Volner is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Herbal Therapy.
Herbal Therapy
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
“Herbal Therapy”
Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b
Manipulation
transcript · cited
This frames everyday glucose variation as a broad wellness threat and uses it to justify ongoing monitoring and intervention. Likely motive: Move viewers toward CGM sales, coaching, and repeat follow-up
“Keeping your glucose stable is essential for long-term wellness, inflammation control, and metabolic health”
transcript · cited
The page pushes testing as the key to unlocking hidden causes, a classic diagnostic upsell that can lead into more purchases and visits. Likely motive: Sell high-margin testing and downstream protocols
“Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing”
transcript · cited
The copy borrows medical authority to market broad disease-adjacent management while not clearly showing physician-level credentials or disease-specific evidence. Likely motive: Boost trust and sell nonstandard metabolic programs
“A personalized, doctor-led path to balancing blood sugar, improving energy, and reclaiming control over your health”
transcript · cited
A vague branded supplement protocol invites recurring product sales while sounding individualized and medically tailored. Likely motive: Create a recurring supplement revenue stream
“Safe Supplement Protocols”
transcript · cited
A free call is a classic conversion step that moves the audience from content into a paid care or coaching funnel. Likely motive: Convert viewers into paid clients
“Book a Free WINNERS Blueprint Call”
transcript · cited
The page promotes a named commercial product and pushes an order link, but no affiliate/sponsored disclosure is visible on this surface. Likely motive: Drive sales commissions, referral revenue, or vendor partnership income
“New Product Alert: Stelo™ 24/7 Glucose Monitoring Without Fingersticks!”
transcript · cited
The page turns educational content into an immediate purchase prompt, which is a sales-first rather than care-first pattern. Likely motive: Convert traffic directly into product sales
“Order Stelo™ Now”
Commerce & grift map
The money flow looks like a familiar metabolic panic funnel: scare viewers about glucose/inflammation, steer them into DNA/metabolic testing, then sell a supplement protocol and a branded monitoring product. Add a free call and a 1:1/coaching pathway, and the whole thing becomes a machine for turning concern into recurring product and consult revenue.
Zocdoc
Lab testing
book online widget; appointment booking platform
Doc Bro outbound link (live) · Archive pending
Supplements pitched
- Safe Supplement Protocols
“Safe Supplement Protocols”
- supplements
“Without medications, we treat a range of conditions using chiropractic care, supplements, advanced alternative therapies”
Labs pitched
- Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing
“Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing”
- Stelo™ glucose monitoring
“Stelo™ 24/7 Glucose Monitoring Without Fingersticks!”
How the money flows
- Lab testing referralUndisclosed The site promotes a branded glucose monitor/order page that could generate referral or partnership revenue. “Order Stelo™ Now”
“Order Stelo™ Now”
- Coaching or consult upsellUndisclosed A paid 1:1 or group coaching funnel is implied by the free blueprint call and coaching/support language. “Coaching & Support”
“Coaching & Support”
- Paid wellness plan / membershipUndisclosed A direct-to-consumer health-solutions program is being sold around metabolic care and supplements. “Total Care Health Solutions”
“Total Care Health Solutions”
Store links detected
- Book now HEREMedium likelihood
“book online widget”
Sponsors and advertisers
Brands, advertisers, and agencies connected to this content, based on what it promotes and discloses.
- ZocdocBrand
Promoted commerce partner
- DexcomBrand
Promoted commerce partner
- Safe Supplement ProtocolsBrand
Named on a surface without a compensation disclosure
- supplementsBrand
Named on a surface without a compensation disclosure
- Personalized DNA & Metabolic TestingBrand
Named on a surface without a compensation disclosure
- Stelo™ glucose monitoringBrand
Named on a surface without a compensation disclosure
Credentials & scope
Glossary: Chiropractor (“Dr.”)
Stated: CHIROPRACTOR, DR, DOCTOR · Likely: Chiropractor
Verified against the federal provider registry: D.C. · Chiropractor, Internist · KS license T-01088.
Tess Volner is presented as a chiropractor and natural-medicine figure, but the page repeatedly uses doctor language and broad functional-medicine framing to market diabetes/metabolic care, hormone-adjacent testing language, supplements, HBOT, and other non-MD/DO services. That is classic credential inflation: a narrow licensed title is being used to imply general medical authority over internal disease management.
- DC, Doctor of Chiropractic
A state-licensed chiropractic doctorate, not a medical physician degree.
Kansas chiropractic scope is typically limited to musculoskeletal/chiropractic care; it does not authorize general internal-medicine diagnosis/treatment or hormone management.
Permitted scope vs advertised
Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) · Confidence: medium
Kansas chiropractic practice is limited to chiropractic care, and Kansas law separately defines chiropractic as the adjustment and manipulation of the spinal column and related structures; it does not affirmatively authorize diagnosis or treatment of systemic diseases such as diabetes or the broad practice of functional or naturopathic medicine. Kansas authorities also distinguish chiropractic manual manipulation from the practice of medicine and surgery.[2]
What this license permits
- Spinal adjustment and manipulation
- Musculoskeletal evaluation and treatment
- Soft-tissue and rehabilitative care
- Headache care within musculoskeletal scope
16 of 17 advertised activities fall outside permitted scope.
| Advertised | Verdict |
|---|---|
| Listed service Diabetes and metabolic Wellness Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b / KSBHA chiropractic scope materials A chiropractic license in Kansas is not affirmatively authorized to provide general systemic disease management for diabetes or metabolic disease, so this wellness framing remains outside scope absent a specific chiropractic basis. | Outside scope |
| Listed service About Us Winners in Diabetes® Contact Us Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) | Outside scope |
| Listed service Winners in Diabetes® Rule: K.S.A. §65-2871 (Kansas Healing Arts Act) | Outside scope |
| Diagnosing and treating diabetes/metabolic disease as a chiropractic clinic service Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b; K.S.A. 65-2869 Kansas chiropractic scope does not affirmatively authorize diagnosis and treatment of systemic metabolic disease, and Kansas authorities distinguish chiropractic manipulation from medicine and surgery.[2] | Outside scope |
| Functional medicine for diabetes and metabolic wellness Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Functional medicine for systemic diabetes care is not affirmatively authorized by Kansas chiropractic scope, so it falls outside scope unless limited to a clearly chiropractic service. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Functional Medicine Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Functional medicine is a broad systemic-care model, and Kansas chiropractic law does not affirmatively grant chiropractors general authority to practice it. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Personalized DNA & Metabolic Testing Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Ordering or using DNA and metabolic testing to evaluate systemic disease is not affirmatively authorized by Kansas chiropractic scope. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Safe Supplement Protocols Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Supplement protocols for disease management are not affirmatively authorized chiropractic practice in Kansas when presented as general treatment rather than a limited chiropractic adjunct. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is a medical treatment and is not affirmatively authorized within Kansas chiropractic scope. | Outside scope |
| Listed service EMSELLA Chair Therapy Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b EMSELLA chair therapy is not a chiropractic spinal manipulation service, and Kansas chiropractic scope does not affirmatively authorize this type of treatment. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Naturopathic medicine Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Kansas chiropractic scope does not affirmatively authorize naturopathic medicine as a chiropractic practice. | Outside scope |
| Listed service Herbal Therapy Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Herbal therapy for systemic or disease treatment is not affirmatively authorized by Kansas chiropractic scope. | Outside scope |
| Functional-medicine style root-cause care for systemic internal disease Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Root-cause care for systemic internal disease is a general medical model and is not affirmatively authorized for Kansas chiropractors. | Outside scope |
| Ordering or using personalized DNA and metabolic testing to uncover blood sugar problems Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Using genetic and metabolic testing to uncover blood sugar problems is a systemic diagnostic activity that Kansas chiropractic scope does not affirmatively authorize. | Outside scope |
| Using supplements as treatment for a range of conditions Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Treating a range of conditions with supplements is general medical/nutritional treatment, not an affirmatively authorized chiropractic service in Kansas. | Outside scope |
| Offering hormone-adjacent or general medical wellness protocols through natural medicine framing Rule: K.S.A. 65-2837b Hormone-related or general medical wellness protocols fall outside Kansas chiropractic scope because the law does not affirmatively authorize naturopathic or primary-care style internal medicine services. | Outside scope |
Sources: Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (official), Kansas Attorney General Opinion 1996-012, Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, Chiropractic Treatment of Diabetes (official)
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 2026-07-22 05:36 UTC. The archive pane loads styles and images from the intake snapshot.
6 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
- OwnedTess Volner clinic / principal site (totalcarehealthsolutions.com)
- OwnedOfficial site (totalcarechiro.com)
- Linked entityLinked commerce or practice (pages.talktodrtess.com)
Funnel routes (third-party)
- Hosted routeFunnel route on fullscript.com
Tip the jar
Report useful? Optional tips help keep scans, archives, and literature cross-checks running. They never change conclusions.
Submission UIiT2hnLa78BIdfvLaGiM
Fight disinformation
Log a public thread where Teresa Marie Volner 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 Teresa Marie Volner's claims with peer-reviewed sources, https://drtrustmebro.com/analyze/UIiT2hnLa78BIdfvLaGiM. White-coat charisma isn't evidence.
Full DTMB scan on Teresa Marie Volner: https://drtrustmebro.com/analyze/UIiT2hnLa78BIdfvLaGiM
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 email a public contact address from their site so Teresa Marie Volner can review this dossier and dispute anything we got wrong.
Know someone who can help?
If you think someone has firsthand information about Teresa Marie Volner, 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 Teresa Marie Volner. 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: GGcM2EgKu6U2U77APV8Us
- Wall entry: /influencer/GGcM2EgKu6U2U77APV8Us
- Analysis ID: UIiT2hnLa78BIdfvLaGiM
- Source: https://totalcarechiro.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] PPAR agonists as add-on treatment with metformin in management of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- [2] The effect of dopamine agonists on metabolic variables in ...
- [3] Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes by Lifestyle Changes - PMC - NIH
- [4] Improved lifestyle and decreased diabetes risk over 13 years: long-term follow-up of the randomised Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study (DPS)
- [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] Functional Medicine Past, Present, and Future - PMC - NIH
- [13] Form Follows Function: A Functional Medicine Overview - PMC
- [14] Functional Medicine Model of Care and Patient-Reported Quality of Life
- [15] Enhanced long-term dietary change and adherence in a nutrigenomics-guided lifestyle intervention compared to a population-based (GLB/DPP) lifestyle intervention for weight management: results from the NOW randomised controlled trial
- [16] A study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a gene-based nutrition and lifestyle recommendation for weight management among adults: the MyGeneMyDiet® study
- [17] A randomized trial of genetic information for personalized nutrition
- [18] Nutritional Genomics and Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: An Overview
- [19] PubMed indexed study
- [20] Dietary Supplements: Regulatory Challenges and Research ...
- [21] Dietary Supplements and Risk of Cause-Specific Death, Cardiovascular Disease, and Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Primary Prevention Trials - PubMed
- [22] Safety of dietary supplements use among patients with ...
- [23] Do dietary supplements have beneficial health effects in ...
- [24] A General Overview on the Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy - PMC
- [25] Therapeutic effects of hyperbaric oxygen: integrated review
- [26] Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Contraindications - NCBI - NIH
- [27] Tenth European Consensus Conference on Hyperbaric ... - PMC
- [28] PubMed indexed study
- [29] PubMed indexed study
- [30] PubMed indexed study
- [31] PubMed indexed study
- [32] PubMed indexed study