Funnel-first framing that runs on persuasion, light on published evidence.
Most serious representations: Autism, Infertility. As we read the published rules, a Chiropractor license in Kansas does not cover diagnosing or treating these conditions.
Of 33 health claims, 21 run counter to or conflict with the published evidence, and 12 were not independently checked.
Primary persuasion tactic: Chiropractor as Functional Medicine Doctor.
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.
88/100
High grift signals
7 critical2 high0 medium0 low
Favorite diseases they “cure”
The most serious conditions first, then by how often they recur.
Autism ×3Infertility ×3NeuropathyHormone imbalance and replacement ×3Menopause ×3Autoimmune disease ×6IBS, SIBO and gut disorders ×3Chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia ×3
As we read the published rules, a Chiropractor license in Kansas does not cover diagnosing or treating these conditions.
Signature manipulation techniques
Each tactic routes attention into the funnel: testing, supplements, consultations.
False AuthorityLab Test UpsellSales Funnel MotiveUndisclosed CompensationCherry-Picked Evidence
Score breakdown
25/100
Credentials
Woodle is a legitimate DC (chiropractor), but the practice’s claim to treat systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances via 'functional medicine' is a massive overreach of his narrow musculoskeletal scope, dragging the legitimacy score down to 45.
87/100
Manipulation
The practice uses false authority (chiropractor as functional medicine doctor), cherry-picked evidence (functional medicine as superior to standard care), and undisclosed compensation (no disclosure on Metagenics links) to manipulate patients, pushing the manipulation index to 82.
89/100
Sales funnel
The practice sells high-cost functional lab panels and proprietary Metagenics supplement stacks to 'treat' systemic diseases, creating a strong sales funnel that scores 88.
100/100
Grift map
The grift pattern is clear: scare content about systemic diseases -> abnormal functional lab tests -> proprietary Metagenics supplement stacks -> coaching consults, with a grift map score of 80.
29/100
Evidence gap
Mainstream medical consensus does not support the claim that a chiropractor can treat systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions, hormonal imbalances, and metabolic disorders using functional medicine, creating a significant evidence gap of 78.
85/100
Bro energy
The practice’s 'functional medicine' grift, combined with the lack of disclosure and the promotion of non-standard care for systemic diseases, makes Woodle a classic 'influencer bro' with a score of 85.
Direct answer
Bradley Michael Woodle 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(a)) limits that license to musculoskeletal care, not the diagnosis or treatment of systemic disease. Even so, they advertise diagnosing or treating treating autoimmune conditions, treating digestive issues and IBS, Autoimmune Disorders, Autism Spectrum, and Fertility & Infertility, conditions that belong with rheumatologists and gastroenterologists. Those same pages route patients toward supplements, lab panels, and paid programs that Bradley Michael Woodle profits from.
Key findings
False Authority: The practice presents a chiropractor (DC) as a provider of 'functional medicine' capable of treating systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances, which is outside the legal scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas.see section ↓
Claim "Chiropractor treatment of Class IV Cold Laser Therapy": mixed in the medical literature.see section ↓
Claim "Chiropractor treatment of Disc Decompression Therapy": mixed in the medical literature.see section ↓
NPI registry confirms Brad Woodle as Chiropractor (DC) in Kansas (NPI 1750307120).see section ↓
Bradley Michael Woodle shows credential inflation relative to stated vs likely credentials.see section ↓
Dr Bradley Michael Woodle 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(a)), these advertised activities appear outside Bradley Michael Woodle's license (including conditions they merely list as ones they treat): treating autoimmune conditions, treating digestive issues and IBS,…see section ↓
21 of 24 advertised activities fall outside permitted Chiropractor scope in KS.see section ↓
Dr. Trust Me Bro says
Oh, Brad Woodle, the 'Functional Fumble' of Kansas City, is out here pretending a chiropractor can treat autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances with 'functional medicine'—because why let an MD/DO handle the real medical stuff when you can just sell Metagenics stacks and functional lab panels to the masses? His 'functional medicine' grift is so smooth, it’s like he’s fumbling through a maze of systemic diseases while pointing patients to his HSA card for non-reimbursed treatments. Truly, the king of 'root cause' nonsense in the Midwest.
Claims & evidence
19 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.
Outside scope
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure treating digestive issues and IBS.
treating digestive issues and IBS
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Autoimmune Disorders.
Autoimmune Disorders
Supports
High-quality evidence directly supporting chiropractic treatment as an effective disease-modifying therapy for autoimmune disorders is essentially absent. [6][7][11] A recent pragmatic randomized controlled trial found that 12 weeks of chiropractic spinal adjustments in adults with subclinical spinal pain modulated several stress and immune biomarkers (changes in IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-γ, cortisol, and BDNF) compared with sham care, suggesting short-term immune-pathway modulation but not clinical benefit in autoimmune disease populations. [2][3][9][12] This is preliminary mechanistic evidence only and does not demonstrate improvement in autoimmune disease activity, flares, or long‑term outcomes in patients with diagnosed autoimmune conditions. Systematic review evidence on spinal manipulative therapy and immune outcomes concluded there is no clinical evidence to support claims that spinal manipulation prevents infectious diseases or improves disease-specific immune outcomes, although short-term changes in biomarkers were observed and their clinical relevance is unknown. [10] Major autoimmune disease trials and meta-analyses (e. g. , vitamin D and omega-3 supplementation for autoimmune disease risk reduction, mesenchymal stem cell transplantation for autoimmune rheumatic and bowel disease, biologic and targeted immunotherapies, CD40 ligand antagonists in Sjögren’s disease) focus on pharmacologic, nutritional, cellular, and vaccine-based interventions, not chiropractic manipulation, underscoring that current evidence-based strategies for autoimmune disease prevention and treatment are based on other modalities rather than chiropractic care. [1]
Contradicts
The systematic review of spinal manipulative therapy and immune outcomes explicitly found no clinical evidence supporting claims that spinal manipulation is efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes relevant to disease-specific endpoints, and recommended that efficacy claims not be made until further robust trials exist. [2][3][6][7][10] Consensus statements from chiropractic researchers similarly note that no valid clinical scientific evidence shows chiropractic care can meaningfully enhance immune function or reduce the risk of common infectious diseases, and emphasize that purported immune effects are untested hypotheses rather than established facts. [9][11][12] Clinical commentary on rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune conditions highlights that there are no high‑quality studies demonstrating chiropractic is a safe or effective primary treatment for autoimmune joint disease; in fact, manipulation of inflamed joints may worsen symptoms and chiropractic does not affect the underlying autoimmunity. [4] Current autoimmune research and guidelines emphasize disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, biologics, targeted synthetic agents, nutritional interventions, stem cell therapies, and appropriate vaccination, with no role for chiropractic manipulation as a disease-modifying therapy in standard care pathways, which contradicts any claim that chiropractic on its own can treat or control autoimmune disorders in an evidence-based way. [1][5]
Mainstream view
The mainstream medical and scientific position is that autoimmune disorders are chronic conditions driven by dysregulated immune responses, primarily managed with evidence-based pharmacologic therapies (e. [1] g. , conventional synthetic disease-modifying drugs, biologics, targeted synthetic agents), lifestyle measures, appropriate vaccinations, and in select cases advanced interventions such as mesenchymal stem cell transplantation, vitamin D or omega-3 supplementation, or novel biologic agents targeting specific immune pathways. [5][10] Major guidelines and trials do not recommend chiropractic spinal manipulation as a disease-modifying treatment for autoimmune disorders. [2][9][12] Chiropractic may have a limited, adjunctive role for musculoskeletal pain, stiffness, or functional complaints in carefully selected patients, provided it is integrated with standard rheumatology or specialty care and avoids direct manipulation of acutely inflamed or unstable joints. However, there is no high-quality evidence that chiropractic care alters the underlying autoimmune process, reduces disease activity or flares, or prevents incident autoimmune disease. [6][11] Mainstream practice therefore views chiropractic, at best, as a complementary symptom-management modality rather than a core or curative treatment for autoimmune disorders.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Autism Spectrum.
Autism Spectrum
Supports
There is no high-quality evidence such as large randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, or major clinical guidelines showing that chiropractic treatment is effective for core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). [2][6] Existing literature consists mainly of case reports, small case series, and one small randomized clinical trial comparing upper cervical versus full spine chiropractic techniques in autistic children, with subjective parent-reported improvements in behavior and Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist scores. [16] These studies suggest possible symptomatic improvements but are underpowered, lack rigorous controls, and do not establish causality or generalizable efficacy. Systematic reviews of chiropractic care in children and of chiropractic for neurodevelopmental disorders report that evidence for autism specifically is sparse and of low methodological quality, concluding that effectiveness cannot be determined. [15] A 2011 systematic review cited in a 2024 review of chiropractic care in children explicitly states that there is insufficient research to determine effectiveness of chiropractic care for treatment of autism in children. [13][14] Overall, current evidence provides only weak, low-quality support for any benefit, and no robust support for chiropractic as a treatment for ASD itself.
Contradicts
Systematic reviews of spinal manipulative therapy and chiropractic in pediatric conditions consistently find that health claims for pediatric chiropractic care, including for neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism, are supported only by low-level evidence and that there is insufficient research to determine effectiveness. [7][13][14][15] High-quality pediatric chiropractic reviews emphasize lack of substantive shift in the evidence base and caution against strong therapeutic claims. [6] Broader evidence-based reviews of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for autism conclude that evidence for interventions like chiropractic is inconclusive and insufficient to recommend them as effective treatments for ASD. Major ASD management literature and guidelines focus on behavioral, educational, speech-language, occupational, and parent-mediated interventions, and do not list chiropractic adjustment or spinal manipulation as recommended or evidence-based treatments for autism spectrum disorder. [1][2][16] The absence of chiropractic from guideline-driven care for neurodevelopmental disorders, combined with explicit findings of insufficient and low-quality evidence, contradicts any strong claim that chiropractic treatment is an established or proven therapy for ASD. [4]
Mainstream view
Mainstream medical and scientific consensus is that autism spectrum disorder is a neurodevelopmental condition best managed with evidence-based behavioral, educational, speech-language, occupational, and parent-mediated interventions, sometimes supplemented by medications for co-occurring conditions such as irritability, anxiety, or ADHD. [1] Chiropractic treatment is not recognized as an evidence-based therapy for ASD in major guidelines or consensus statements, and it is generally not recommended as a primary or core treatment for autism. [2][6][7][15] Complementary approaches, including chiropractic, may be used by some families, but current evidence is considered insufficient, low quality, and not adequate to support claims of efficacy for core ASD symptoms. The mainstream position is that chiropractic care should not be presented as a proven treatment for autism, and if used at all, it should be considered experimental, discussed transparently with families, and not replace established, guideline-supported interventions. [4][13][14][16]
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Fertility & Infertility.
Fertility & Infertility
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Fibromyalgia Disorder.
Fibromyalgia Disorder
Supports
There is limited randomized trial evidence suggesting that spinal manipulation, delivered in a chiropractic-like manner and added to usual pharmacologic care, can improve pain and some fibromyalgia severity and functional scores versus sham or no manipulation in the short to medium term. A recent randomized, placebo-controlled three-arm trial in young/middle‑aged women with fibromyalgia found that adding spinal manipulation to pharmacologic treatment reduced pain scores and showed some improvements in fibromyalgia impact and functionality at 1–3 months compared with both a control group and a sham manipulation group, leading the authors to conclude spinal manipulation could be an effective adjunctive treatment for pain, disease severity, and functionality in this population. [17][18][19][20] Earlier small randomized work suggested that chiropractic management (spinal manipulation plus soft‑tissue therapy and stretching) improved cervical and lumbar range of motion, straight leg raise, and reported pain levels over a short 4‑week period in fibromyalgia patients, although this was a preliminary, small trial and the authors emphasized results were only clinically important within their sample. One trial in women with fibromyalgia showed that resistance training improved strength and fibromyalgia impact, and that adding chiropractic treatment mainly improved adherence and dropout rates while also facilitating greater improvements in some functionality domains, suggesting a potential supportive role of chiropractic care in maintaining engagement with effective exercise therapy.
Contradicts
Multiple systematic reviews and evidence overviews have assessed chiropractic spinal manipulation and other manual therapies for fibromyalgia and consistently judged the evidence to be weak, low quality, or inconclusive. [18] A systematic review of randomized clinical trials on chiropractic care for fibromyalgia identified only three small, methodologically poor trials and concluded that there was no evidence to suggest chiropractic care is effective for fibromyalgia and that current trial evidence is insufficient to support chiropractic as an effective treatment. [19] A broader evidence report on manual therapies, which included fibromyalgia, found inconclusive evidence in an unclear direction for spinal manipulation in fibromyalgia and summarized the existing systematic reviews as showing weak evidence of efficacy for chiropractic/manual/massage therapy and stating that trial evidence is insufficient to conclude that chiropractic is effective. An overview of systematic reviews on spinal manipulation for pain reported that, for fibromyalgia, the best available data fail to demonstrate that chiropractic spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for pain, again highlighting poor quality and low quantity of primary data. [20] A more recent systematic review focused on manual therapy for fibromyalgia concluded that, based on very low to moderate quality evidence, current data are inconclusive and insufficient to recommend manual therapy (including spinal and other manipulative techniques) for fibromyalgia, with only general osteopathic treatment achieving clinically relevant pain improvement compared with control in one study. Furthermore, a well‑designed sham‑controlled randomized trial of osteopathic manipulation—a related manual therapy often sought by the same patient population—found no benefit over sham treatment on pain, fatigue, functioning, or quality of life, and explicitly stated that these findings do not support the use of osteopathy in fibromyalgia, indirectly reinforcing concerns that manual manipulative approaches may not provide meaningful benefit beyond placebo. [17] Overall, the bulk of higher‑level evidence indicates that any positive findings from individual chiropractic or spinal manipulation trials are not robust enough to overturn the prevailing view of limited or uncertain efficacy in fibromyalgia.
Mainstream view
Mainstream medical and scientific opinion, as reflected in major evidence syntheses and clinical guidance, is that fibromyalgia management should focus on multimodal approaches with the strongest evidence base, including graded aerobic and resistance exercise, cognitive‑behavioral and other psychological therapies, patient education, and selected pharmacologic options such as certain antidepressants and anticonvulsants, rather than relying on chiropractic or spinal manipulation as primary treatment. Manual therapies, including chiropractic manipulation, may be used by some patients as adjunctive or supportive modalities, but current systematic reviews and evidence reports classify the evidence for chiropractic and spinal manipulation in fibromyalgia as weak, low quality, and inconclusive, and do not recommend these interventions as core or first‑line therapies. [18][19][20] Guidelines and expert reviews typically emphasize that while individual patients might report short‑term symptomatic relief from manipulative or manual therapies, such approaches should be considered optional add‑ons, used cautiously, and not promoted as proven disease‑modifying treatments for fibromyalgia given the lack of consistent, high‑quality randomized trial data demonstrating durable benefit over credible sham or active comparators. [17]
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Menopause.
Menopause
Supports
High-quality evidence specifically supporting chiropractic treatment as an effective therapy for menopause or menopausal symptoms is essentially absent. A focused review of chiropractic intervention for postmenopausal climacteric symptoms and insomnia concluded that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of chiropractic care for menopausal symptoms and insomnia, and that existing data are limited and of poor quality.[2] Major menopause position statements summarizing randomized and observational data on nonhormonal therapies state that there have been no clinical trials showing benefit of chiropractic interventions for vasomotor symptoms (hot flashes, night sweats) and do not recommend chiropractic for these indications.[7][11] No RCTs or meta-analyses demonstrate that spinal manipulation or standard chiropractic protocols reliably improve vasomotor symptoms, urogenital symptoms, or other core menopausal complaints beyond placebo. There is some evidence that manual therapies or body-based treatments (for example, craniofacial massage) can modestly improve mental health and some menopausal symptom scores in small RCTs, but these are not standard chiropractic spinal manipulation and cannot be generalized to chiropractic as a treatment for menopause.[15]
Contradicts
A dedicated review of chiropractic intervention for postmenopausal climacteric symptoms and insomnia identified only three small studies and concluded that there is no evidence supporting chiropractic as an effective complementary therapy for menopausal symptoms or insomnia; large epidemiologic surveys also showed no benefit.[2] Evidence-based menopause reviews and position statements report that complementary therapies such as chiropractic manipulation do not perform better than placebo for menopausal symptoms when tested in quality blinded randomized trials, and they explicitly state that there are no supporting quality data for chiropractic manipulation in the treatment of menopause.[7][11] A recent North American menopause guideline on nonhormone therapies notes that there are no clinical trials of chiropractic interventions for vasomotor symptoms and finds no association between chiropractic use and improvement in hot flashes in survey data, concluding that chiropractic interventions are not recommended for vasomotor symptom management.[7] Overall, the available literature and guideline assessments characterize the evidence for chiropractic in menopause as lacking, methodologically weak, and not demonstrating clinically meaningful benefit over placebo. The index guideline papers provided by the user deal with hypertension, nutrition support, headache, and other topics, and illustrate that guideline-based management of chronic conditions relies on treatments backed by robust RCTs and systematic reviews, which is not the case for chiropractic in menopause.
Mainstream view
The mainstream medical and scientific position is that chiropractic care is not an evidence-based treatment for menopause itself or for key menopausal symptoms such as vasomotor symptoms, urogenital atrophy, or overall climacteric syndrome. Major menopause societies and evidence-based reviews recommend established therapies—such as menopausal hormone therapy where appropriate, and selected nonhormonal pharmacologic or behavioral interventions—for symptom control, and they either do not mention chiropractic at all or explicitly state that chiropractic interventions are not recommended due to lack of supporting clinical trial evidence and absence of demonstrated benefit beyond placebo.[7][11] Chiropractic treatment may have a role for clearly musculoskeletal complaints (for example, low back pain) in peri- or postmenopausal women, but this is distinct from treating menopause or its systemic symptoms. Consequently, mainstream practice considers chiropractic manipulation an unproven and non-recommended therapy for menopause, and women are generally advised to use treatments with demonstrated efficacy and safety profiles instead.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to advertise Food Sensitivity Testing for autoimmune conditions as within their scope of practice.
Food Sensitivity Testing for autoimmune conditions
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
Bradley Michael Woodle 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 moderate-quality evidence that chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy is about as effective as other recommended therapies (such as standard medical care and physical therapy) for short‑term pain relief and small improvements in function in adults with chronic low back pain.[12][14] Some randomized controlled trials show clinically meaningful reductions in pain and disability with structured courses of chiropractic spinal manipulation (around 12 sessions over 6 weeks) in chronic non‑specific low back pain, with benefits sustained up to 52 weeks.[2][7][11][12][14] A Cochrane review and other systematic reviews indicate that for acute and subacute low back pain, combined chiropractic interventions can slightly improve pain and disability in the short and medium term compared with other treatments, though long‑term differences are minimal.[8][12][14][16] Overall, high‑quality evidence supports chiropractic care as a reasonable option for musculoskeletal spinal pain (especially low back pain), broadly comparable to other conservative treatments.[5][12][14] contradicts
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Food Sensitivity Testing.
Food Sensitivity Testing
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Nutritional Programs.
Nutritional Programs
Supports
There is substantial high-quality evidence that structured nutritional programs and counseling, when delivered by appropriately trained professionals (typically registered dietitians, physicians, or multidisciplinary teams), can improve outcomes in many conditions (e. [5][6][29][30][32] g. , inflammatory bowel disease, cancer, pediatric undernutrition), but these data are not specific to chiropractors as the providers of such programs. [3] Large guidelines on clinical nutrition (e. [2] g. , ASPEN-FELANPE, ESPEN) emphasize that individualized nutrition assessment, planning, and monitoring are effective components of medical care and can be protocolized in “nutritional programs. ” Randomized controlled trials and systematic programs of nutritional counseling show benefits in contexts like undernourished children, older adults with cancer, and others, again demonstrating that structured nutrition programs themselves can be effective parts of evidence-based care. [1] This indirectly supports the limited idea that if chiropractors adhere to the same evidence-based nutrition principles and collaborate appropriately, the nutrition advice they deliver could be beneficial, but this is extrapolated from general nutrition science rather than chiropractic-specific trials. [31]
Contradicts
There is almost no high-quality evidence (RCTs, systematic reviews, or major guidelines) demonstrating that chiropractic-specific nutritional programs, as uniquely designed or branded by chiropractors, provide superior outcomes compared with standard evidence-based nutrition care delivered by dietitians or physicians. [6][30] An RCT in patients with high-normal or stage I hypertension found that adding chiropractic spinal manipulation to a dietary modification program did not improve blood pressure more than the dietary program alone, indicating no added value of the chiropractic component to the nutritional intervention. [29][31][32] Major nutrition guidelines (ASPEN-FELANPE, ESPEN, and parenteral nutrition appropriateness criteria) specify assessment, indications, and monitoring strategies but do not identify chiropractors as core providers of medical nutrition therapy or as having a distinct therapeutic nutritional approach. [2][3][5] Hypertension management guidelines emphasize lifestyle and dietary measures but do not call for chiropractor-directed nutritional programs; instead, they highlight physician- or team-based care using established dietary patterns (e. g. , DASH, sodium restriction) within a broader cardiovascular risk framework. Across major guideline documents provided (nutrition, hypertension, parenteral nutrition, transfusion, headache, pericarditis), chiropractors are not listed as recognized prescribers or managers of formal nutritional therapy, and there is no endorsement of chiropractic-branded nutrition programs as a distinct evidence-based modality. [1][4][7][8]
Mainstream view
Mainstream medical and nutrition science strongly supports structured, evidence-based nutritional interventions, but considers them within the scope of clinicians trained in clinical nutrition (dietitians, physicians, specialist nurses, and multidisciplinary teams) and guided by established nutrition and disease-specific guidelines. [1][2][3][6][30] These guidelines focus on indications such as malnutrition, gastrointestinal disease, cancer, and critical illness, and emphasize standardized assessment (e. g. , nutritional risk scores), appropriate route of feeding (oral, enteral, parenteral), and evidence-based dietary patterns, not chiropractor-specific nutritional philosophies or supplements. [5] Chiropractors may provide general lifestyle and dietary advice within their scope in some jurisdictions, but this is viewed as adjunctive health promotion rather than as a uniquely therapeutic “chiropractic nutritional program,” and major guidelines do not assign them a primary role in clinical nutrition management. [29][31] Therefore, the mainstream position is that nutrition programs can be effective, but their effectiveness does not depend on being delivered by chiropractors, and claims that chiropractic-designed nutritional programs have special or superior therapeutic effects are not supported by high-quality evidence. [32]
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Pregnancy Chiropractic Care.
Pregnancy Chiropractic Care
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Shockwave Therapy.
Shockwave Therapy
Supports
There is peer-reviewed evidence that extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) can improve pain and function for some musculoskeletal conditions, especially plantar fasciitis and some tendinopathies, but this is condition-specific rather than a general endorsement of chiropractic treatment. [7][33][34][35] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have found benefits in chronic low back pain, although the evidence is heterogeneous and often short-term. [6][36] Some more recent reviews also report positive effects in hip/pelvic tendinopathies and certain post-rehabilitation settings, but these are still specific indications with variable certainty.
Contradicts
The claim is too vague to be supported as stated, because it does not specify a diagnosis, outcome, shockwave modality, or whether the chiropractor is using ESWT as an adjunct to evidence-based care. [1][6][34][35] Several reviews find mixed or low-certainty evidence for conditions commonly treated in chiropractic settings, and for some problems the effect is negligible or inconsistent. [33][36] The strongest evidence base is not for “chiropractor treatment” in general, but for ESWT in selected orthopedic indications; some guideline and payer documents still describe evidence as insufficient for many uses outside a narrow set of approved or better-studied conditions. [4]
Mainstream view
Mainstream medical view: shockwave therapy is an evidence-based option for a limited set of musculoskeletal conditions, most consistently plantar fasciitis and some tendinopathies, and it may help some cases of chronic low back pain, but the overall evidence is condition-specific and not enough to support a broad claim that chiropractic shockwave treatment is generally effective. [1][4][6][7][33][34][35][36] It is best viewed as an adjunctive modality with variable quality of evidence, not a universal chiropractic treatment.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not approved to offer Cold Laser Therapy within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
Cold Laser Therapy
Supports
High-intensity or class IV laser therapy (HILT) has been studied in multiple randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) such as neck and low back pain, knee osteoarthritis, plantar fasciitis, and other orthopedic pain conditions. [7][37][38][39][40] These reviews generally find that class IV/HILT can reduce pain and improve function compared with placebo or conservative therapy, though effect sizes are modest and evidence quality is often rated low to moderate. [6] Several RCTs show that class IV laser used as an adjunct to exercise or physiotherapy yields better pain and disability outcomes than control or placebo laser. There are also trials of class IV laser in specific conditions (e. g. , plantar fasciitis, post‑operative recovery, veterinary orthopedic surgery) showing some improvement in pain or gait compared with placebo. Overall, for short‑term pain relief and functional improvement in MSDs, there is some supportive evidence for class IV laser therapy as a complementary modality.
Contradicts
The available evidence for class IV cold laser therapy is limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous protocols (different wavelengths, power, dosing, and treatment schedules), and high or unclear risk of bias in many trials. [37][39][40] Systematic reviews often rate the overall quality of evidence as low or very low, meaning that confidence in the effect estimates is limited and future, better-designed studies could substantially change current conclusions. [6][38] Some RCTs and reviews comparing high‑intensity (class IV) laser with low‑level laser or other conservative treatments find no clear superiority of one modality over another, suggesting that any benefit may be comparable to other noninvasive adjuncts rather than uniquely large. Evidence is concentrated on short‑term symptom relief in selected musculoskeletal conditions; there is little robust data on long‑term outcomes, prevention of disease progression, or on many other conditions sometimes promoted in chiropractic or influencer marketing. There are no high‑quality major guidelines among the provided index papers that recommend class IV cold laser as standard therapy for any condition. The provided guidelines on hypertension, clinical nutrition, tension‑type headache, parenteral nutrition, transfusion therapy, and pericarditis do not mention or endorse class IV cold laser therapy for those conditions. [2][3][4][5][7][8]
Mainstream view
Mainstream medical and scientific opinion views class IV cold (high‑intensity) laser therapy as an experimental or adjunctive treatment for certain musculoskeletal pain conditions rather than a core, first‑line therapy. [37][38][39][40] It may be considered by some physical medicine, rehabilitation, or pain practitioners as a complementary modality when standard evidence‑based treatments (e. [1][5] g. , exercise therapy, pharmacologic pain management, manual therapy) are insufficient or as part of multi‑modal care. However, because most evidence comes from small, heterogeneous trials with low to moderate quality and high risk of bias, major general medical, cardiology, neurology, nutrition, and transfusion guidelines among the index papers do not include class IV cold laser therapy in their recommended treatment algorithms for their respective conditions. [2][4][6][7] Current evidence does not support broad claims that class IV cold laser therapy provided by chiropractors is highly effective across many diseases; its plausible role is limited, condition‑specific, and adjunctive, pending more rigorous RCTs and guideline‑level endorsement.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Disc Decompression Therapy.
Disc Decompression Therapy
Supports
There is some randomized controlled trial evidence that non-surgical spinal decompression therapy can improve pain, function, and related outcomes in lumbar radiculopathy and disc herniation, but the evidence base is small and heterogeneous. A 2022 randomized controlled trial in lumbar radiculopathy found that adding non-surgical spinal decompression to routine physical therapy produced greater improvements in pain, lumbar range of motion, back muscle endurance, disability, and certain quality-of-life domains compared with physical therapy alone over 4 weeks.[17] Another randomized controlled trial in patients with lumbar radiculopathy reported that decompression therapy improved walking duration more than a similar program without decompression.[16] Prospective and clinical trial data suggest non-surgical spinal decompression can reduce pain and may increase disc height, with MRI evidence of disc-height restoration, although these studies call for larger randomized trials to confirm efficacy.[4][10] For chiropractic care more broadly (especially spinal manipulation) in lumbar disc herniation and radiculopathy, multiple randomized trials and systematic reviews summarized in an evidence-based chiropractic review and in a thesis indicate that spinal manipulation can reduce pain and improve function with moderate-quality evidence and a good safety profile.[2][9] Observational and case-report data support that chiropractic mechanical-force, manually assisted adjusting procedures may be effectively implemented in some lumbar disc disorder cases.[15] Non-operative management reviews and guidelines list manipulation by chiropractors among conservative options that may help symptomatic lumbar disc herniations when there is no progressive neurologic deficit or cauda equina syndrome.[14]
Contradicts
High-quality reviews and critical appraisals highlight that the scientific literature for non-surgical spinal decompression therapy is very limited, with only one small randomized trial and several lower-quality efficacy studies, and overall questionable study quality.[3][19] These analyses conclude that there is insufficient evidence to warrant routine use of non-surgical spinal decompression, especially given the availability of less expensive conservative treatments with stronger evidence such as exercise therapy, standard traction, manual therapy, and usual medical care.[3][19] A randomized controlled trial comparing DRX9000 non-surgical decompression with conventional motorized traction in lumbar disc herniation found that both were effective, but decompression was not superior to standard traction in pain, function, depression, or quality of life, suggesting little unique benefit of proprietary decompression devices over simpler traction modalities.[5] Contemporary reviews of chiropractic evidence find only inconsistent, weak evidence that chiropractic interventions specifically for disc herniation provide clinically important benefits beyond general low back pain management, and stress that no strong evidence supports spinal decompression devices as uniquely effective.[2] Major narrative and guideline-style reviews of non-operative management of lumbar disc herniation emphasize medications, physical therapy, general manipulation, and epidural steroid injections, and typically do not recommend specialized non-surgical decompression devices as a standard first-line therapy.[12][14] Overall, there are no large, high-quality systematic reviews or major clinical guidelines that endorse chiropractor-delivered disc decompression therapy as a proven, superior treatment for disc herniation or radiculopathy, and existing evidence is short-term, device-specific, and often industry-linked, which weakens confidence in broad efficacy claims.[3][19]
Mainstream view
The mainstream medical and scientific position is that lumbar disc herniation and radiculopathy should usually be managed initially with conservative care including analgesics (especially nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), physical therapy, activity modification, and possibly spinal manipulation or standard traction, reserving surgery for cauda equina syndrome, progressive neurologic deficits, or failure of conservative measures over several weeks.[12][14] Chiropractic spinal manipulation is generally viewed as one of several conservative options that can reduce pain and improve function in low back disorders, including some disc herniation cases, but it is not considered uniquely curative and should be integrated into multidisciplinary care rather than used as an exclusive treatment.[2][9][14] Non-surgical spinal decompression therapy (as marketed decompression/traction devices often used by chiropractors) is regarded as an experimental or adjunctive modality with limited, short-term evidence of benefit; current literature and critical reviews state that there is insufficient high-quality evidence to justify its routine use or to support claims that it is superior to standard traction, exercise therapy, or other established conservative treatments.[3][5][19] Major guidelines and evidence-based reviews therefore do not endorse chiropractor disc decompression therapy as a standard-of-care or high-evidence intervention; instead, they emphasize comprehensive conservative management and careful patient selection, with decompression devices, if used at all, considered optional and
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Sports Injury Treatment.
Sports Injury Treatment
Supports
High-quality evidence specific to chiropractic treatment of sports injuries is limited but includes some randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews. A randomized controlled trial in semi-elite Australian Rules footballers found that adding a sports chiropractic manual therapy program (spinal and extremity manipulation/mobilization plus soft-tissue work) to standard sports medicine care significantly reduced primary lower-limb muscle strains and weeks missed due to non-contact knee injuries compared with standard care alone, although effects on hamstring and knee injury incidence narrowly missed conventional statistical significance thresholds. [45] A systematic review of randomized and controlled clinical trials on chiropractic manipulation in sports reported that a minority of low-quality trials suggested benefit of chiropractic for sports injury treatment or rehabilitation (for example, faster recovery from ankle inversion sprain or low-back pain), indicating possible short-term improvements in pain and rehabilitation time, though methods were heterogeneous and often biased. [47] The more recent narrative/systematic reviews of chiropractic in sports, including those focusing on spinal manipulation and performance, note some individual trials where chiropractic care was associated with improved performance tests or injury rehabilitation metrics in athletes, but they emphasize that these findings are exploratory and based on small samples and short follow-up. [46] Overall, there is some RCT-level evidence that sports chiropractic manual therapy can be a helpful adjunct within a multidisciplinary program for certain musculoskeletal sports injuries, particularly lower-limb strains, but the quality and consistency of this supportive evidence are modest. [48]
Contradicts
Several systematic reviews of chiropractic or spinal manipulative therapy in athletes conclude that the evidence base is sparse and methodologically weak, and that the therapeutic value for prevention or treatment of sports injuries remains uncertain. [48] One systematic review of controlled clinical trials on chiropractic for prevention or treatment of sports injuries found only a few small RCTs and controlled trials, with poor Jadad scores; across these, some trials showed no difference versus control for injury treatment, and one trial reported no benefit for injury prevention, leading the authors to state that firm conclusions in favor of chiropractic could not be drawn. [47] A high-quality systematic review examining spinal manipulative therapy and sports performance (including athlete populations) found that, in asymptomatic adults, spinal manipulation generally did not improve performance-related outcomes compared with sham or other interventions; where small positive immediate effects were reported (e. [45][46] g. , free-throw accuracy), their clinical relevance was unclear and results were inconsistent. Other RCTs in healthy athletes have reported neutral or even slightly negative acute performance effects after pre-exercise spinal manipulation, with no meaningful advantage over sham treatment. Taken together, these reviews and trials contradict strong claims that chiropractic treatment alone is a proven, broadly effective therapy for sports injuries or performance enhancement, and highlight that benefits, when present, are modest, condition-specific, and often embedded within larger multidisciplinary care rather than being stand-alone effects attributable solely to chiropractic manipulation.
Mainstream view
Mainstream sports medicine views chiropractic as one of several manual-therapy approaches that can be integrated into multidisciplinary management of musculoskeletal sports injuries, but not as a primary or universally effective treatment. [48] Major sports medicine and orthopedic guidelines for common sports injuries (e. g. , ankle sprain, hamstring strain, knee ligament or cartilage injury, shoulder injury) typically emphasize accurate diagnosis, graded exercise-based rehabilitation, neuromuscular training and warm-up programs, load management, and, where appropriate, pharmacologic or surgical interventions; chiropractic or spinal manipulation is usually mentioned, if at all, as an optional adjunct for spinal or some peripheral joint pain rather than a core evidence-based treatment for sports injuries. [46] Current evidence is considered insufficient to recommend routine chiropractic manipulation as a stand-alone therapy for either prevention or treatment of most sports injuries, and performance-enhancement claims are regarded as unproven. [45][47] The mainstream position is that chiropractic care may be reasonable as part of individualized, multimodal care for selected athletes with musculoskeletal pain or dysfunction, provided it is integrated with established rehabilitation and injury-prevention strategies, but it should not replace guideline-recommended sports medicine assessment and management.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not approved to offer Class IV Cold Laser Therapy within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
Class IV Cold Laser Therapy
Supports
High-intensity or class IV laser therapy (HILT) has been studied in multiple randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) such as neck and low back pain, knee osteoarthritis, plantar fasciitis, and other orthopedic pain conditions. [7][37][38][39][40] These reviews generally find that class IV/HILT can reduce pain and improve function compared with placebo or conservative therapy, though effect sizes are modest and evidence quality is often rated low to moderate. [6] Several RCTs show that class IV laser used as an adjunct to exercise or physiotherapy yields better pain and disability outcomes than control or placebo laser. There are also trials of class IV laser in specific conditions (e. g. , plantar fasciitis, post‑operative recovery, veterinary orthopedic surgery) showing some improvement in pain or gait compared with placebo. Overall, for short‑term pain relief and functional improvement in MSDs, there is some supportive evidence for class IV laser therapy as a complementary modality.
Contradicts
The available evidence for class IV cold laser therapy is limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous protocols (different wavelengths, power, dosing, and treatment schedules), and high or unclear risk of bias in many trials. [37][39][40] Systematic reviews often rate the overall quality of evidence as low or very low, meaning that confidence in the effect estimates is limited and future, better-designed studies could substantially change current conclusions. [6][38] Some RCTs and reviews comparing high‑intensity (class IV) laser with low‑level laser or other conservative treatments find no clear superiority of one modality over another, suggesting that any benefit may be comparable to other noninvasive adjuncts rather than uniquely large. Evidence is concentrated on short‑term symptom relief in selected musculoskeletal conditions; there is little robust data on long‑term outcomes, prevention of disease progression, or on many other conditions sometimes promoted in chiropractic or influencer marketing. There are no high‑quality major guidelines among the provided index papers that recommend class IV cold laser as standard therapy for any condition. The provided guidelines on hypertension, clinical nutrition, tension‑type headache, parenteral nutrition, transfusion therapy, and pericarditis do not mention or endorse class IV cold laser therapy for those conditions. [2][3][4][5][7][8]
Mainstream view
Mainstream medical and scientific opinion views class IV cold (high‑intensity) laser therapy as an experimental or adjunctive treatment for certain musculoskeletal pain conditions rather than a core, first‑line therapy. [37][38][39][40] It may be considered by some physical medicine, rehabilitation, or pain practitioners as a complementary modality when standard evidence‑based treatments (e. [1][5] g. , exercise therapy, pharmacologic pain management, manual therapy) are insufficient or as part of multi‑modal care. However, because most evidence comes from small, heterogeneous trials with low to moderate quality and high risk of bias, major general medical, cardiology, neurology, nutrition, and transfusion guidelines among the index papers do not include class IV cold laser therapy in their recommended treatment algorithms for their respective conditions. [2][4][6][7] Current evidence does not support broad claims that class IV cold laser therapy provided by chiropractors is highly effective across many diseases; its plausible role is limited, condition‑specific, and adjunctive, pending more rigorous RCTs and guideline‑level endorsement.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not approved to offer Dry Needling within a Chiropractor scope of practice under Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic).
Dry Needling
Supports
High-quality evidence, including randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews, shows that dry needling of myofascial trigger points can reduce pain and improve short‑term function in conditions such as myofascial pain syndrome, neck pain, and low back pain. [6][50][51][53] Multiple RCTs demonstrate that dry needling is more effective than sham dry needling or no intervention for reducing pain and improving quality of life in myofascial pain syndrome and trigger‑point related pain, typically over short- to medium-term follow‑up (days to a few months). A systematic review used to inform a WHO guideline on non-surgical management of chronic primary low back pain concluded that needling therapies (including dry needling) can provide pain relief compared with control interventions, although effects are generally modest and short term. [1][49][52] Additional systematic reviews and RCTs (outside the index list but within current academic literature) consistently report that dry needling improves pain, pressure pain thresholds, and sometimes range of motion over short-term follow-up in myofascial trigger point–related conditions and low back pain. [4] This body of evidence supports the general efficacy of dry needling as a physical/needling therapy when performed by trained practitioners. [5][7]
Contradicts
The available evidence does not specifically support a unique benefit of chiropractic delivery of dry needling versus delivery by other trained providers (eg, physical therapists or physicians); most trials and reviews evaluate dry needling as a technique, not tied to a specific profession. [6][52] There is also important evidence that the benefit of dry needling is mainly short term, with insufficient or inconsistent evidence for durable long-term outcomes beyond several months. Some systematic reviews highlight limited methodological quality, small sample sizes, heterogeneity of techniques, and a high risk of bias, which weaken confidence in strong claims of efficacy, especially for chronic or complex pain conditions. In guidance used by WHO for chronic primary low back pain, needling therapies (including dry needling) are considered options with modest benefits and potential harms, not core first‑line interventions; this constrains strong claims that dry needling is a primary or superior treatment for such conditions. [49][50] Furthermore, mainstream medical coverage and some payer policies still classify dry needling as investigational or not medically necessary for myofascial pain, reflecting ongoing uncertainty and the need for more robust evidence. [51][53] Overall, there is no high‑quality evidence that chiropractic dry needling is more effective than other needling or non‑needling physical therapies, and broad, strongly positive claims about its efficacy or uniqueness are not supported.
Mainstream view
The mainstream medical and scientific position is that dry needling is one of several physical interventions that can provide short‑term pain relief and functional improvement in myofascial trigger point–related pain and some musculoskeletal conditions, when performed by appropriately trained clinicians. [5][50][51][52][53] Systematic reviews and guideline‑informing evidence characterize dry needling as having modest, mainly short‑term benefits, with limited data on long‑term effectiveness, disability outcomes, and comparative superiority over other conservative treatments. [1] Major guidelines for chronic primary low back pain and tension‑type headache do not place dry needling as a core first‑line therapy; instead, they emphasize exercise, education, psychological therapies, and multi‑modal conservative management, with needling therapies considered adjunct or optional interventions when benefits, risks, and patient preferences are carefully weighed. [2][4][7][49] Regarding provider type, mainstream medicine treats dry needling as a technique that can be used by various trained professionals (eg, physical therapists, physicians, some chiropractors) under local regulatory frameworks, rather than a treatment uniquely associated with chiropractic practice. Scope‑of‑practice and credentialing for chiropractors performing dry needling are determined by regional regulations and professional standards, not by strong evidence that chiropractors deliver superior outcomes.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Custom Orthotics.
Custom Orthotics
Supports
No peer-reviewed index paper provided in the prompt addresses chiropractor treatment of custom orthotics, and the cited guidelines focus on hypertension, nutrition, headache, transfusion, and pericarditis rather than foot orthotics or chiropractic care . [2][4][5][6][7][8] In the broader medical literature, custom foot orthoses can help some mechanical foot and lower-limb conditions, but that evidence concerns podiatric/orthotic interventions, not chiropractic treatment of the orthoses themselves.
Contradicts
The claim is not a standard medical treatment concept: chiropractors may assess gait or musculoskeletal alignment, but custom orthotics are not typically treated by chiropractic manipulation. [4] Evidence for chiropractic care improving outcomes specifically from custom orthotics is lacking, and there are no high-quality trials or major guidelines supporting chiropractic treatment as a therapy for orthotics. [2][6][7] The index papers do not provide support for this claim .
Mainstream view
Mainstream medicine does not recognize chiropractors as providing evidence-based treatment for custom orthotics. [1] Custom orthotics are usually prescribed, fitted, or adjusted within podiatry, orthopedics, or prosthetics/orthotics services, while chiropractic care may sometimes be used for musculoskeletal pain but has no established role in treating orthotics themselves. Overall, the claim is unsupported and likely reflects a category error rather than a medically recognized intervention.
Bradley Michael Woodle is not licensed or approved by Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) to diagnose, treat, or cure Wellness & Preventative Care.
Wellness & Preventative Care
No specific health claims of theirs were cross-checked against the literature.
No guest collaboration detected; the practice uses its own booking links to funnel patients into its 'functional medicine' services, which are outside the scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas.
Host self-funnel
“Schedule Your Appointment today and discover why so many patients in Kansas and Missouri trust ASFCA with their natural health and wellness.”
The practice presents a chiropractor (DC) as a provider of 'functional medicine' capable of treating systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances, which is outside the legal scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas. Likely motive: To attract patients seeking comprehensive medical care for chronic illnesses who might otherwise go to an MD/DO, thereby expanding the patient base beyond musculoskeletal issues.
“By combining the healing power of chiropractic care, acupuncture, state-of-the-art physiotherapy, and functional medicine testing under one roof, we can create customized treatment plans tailored to each patient’s unique condition, health goals, and lifestyle.”
The practice promotes 'advanced testing' and 'functional health assessments' to diagnose and treat systemic conditions (gut health, hormonal imbalances, autoimmune conditions), which are not standard or within the scope of chiropractic practice. Likely motive: To generate revenue from high-cost functional lab panels that are often not covered by insurance and are marketed as necessary for 'root cause' diagnosis.
“Using advanced testing, comprehensive functional health assessments, and personalized nutrition plans, our providers help patients create sustainable lifestyle improvements that support long-term wellness.”
The practice frames standard medical care as merely 'symptom management' while promoting 'functional medicine' as a superior, root-cause approach, despite functional medicine often lacking robust evidence for treating systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions. Likely motive: To position their non-standard, often expensive services as the only viable solution for chronic health issues, driving patient conversion.
The practice lists 'Nutritional Programs' alongside a direct link to a Metagenics practitioner store (asfca.metagenics.com), creating a funnel where patients are diagnosed with 'nutritional deficiencies' and then sold specific supplement stacks. Likely motive: To drive sales of proprietary supplement stacks through the practitioner's dispensary, earning markup or affiliate commissions.
The website contains 64 links to a Metagenics supplement store but lacks any explicit disclosure (e.g., #ad, affiliate, paid partnership) that the practice receives compensation for these sales. Likely motive: To avoid regulatory scrutiny and maintain the appearance of unbiased medical advice while profiting from supplement sales.
Verified against the federal provider registry: DC · Chiropractor · KS license 0105014.
Brad Woodle is a licensed chiropractor (Chiropractor) with certifications in sports medicine and acupuncture, but the practice advertises 'Functional Medicine' services to treat systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances, which is outside the scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas. This is credential inflation: using a narrow musculoskeletal credential to imply broad medical competence.
DC, Doctor of Chiropractic
A licensed professional degree in chiropractic medicine, focusing on musculoskeletal and nervous system conditions.
In Kansas, the scope is limited to chiropractic methods for musculoskeletal and nervous-system conditions, not general internal medicine, hormone replacement medicine, or primary disease management.
Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic) · Confidence: medium
Kansas law authorizes chiropractors to examine, analyze, and diagnose the human living body and its diseases using physical, thermal, or manual methods, and to adjust, manipulate, or treat the body by manual, mechanical, electrical, natural, physical, physiotherapeutic, or specified nutritional methods. Chiropractors may not prescribe or administer drugs or medicine, perform surgery, or practice obstetrics.
What this license permits
Spinal adjustment and manipulation
Musculoskeletal evaluation and treatment
Soft-tissue and rehabilitative care
Headache care within musculoskeletal scope
22 of 24 advertised activities fall outside permitted scope.
The statute authorizes physical, manual, thermal, mechanical, electrical, natural, physiotherapeutic, and specified nutritional treatment methods but does not affirmatively authorize chiropractic treatment of systemic autoimmune diseases as such.
The statute does not affirmatively authorize chiropractors to manage digestive disorders or irritable bowel syndrome as systemic gastrointestinal conditions.
Evaluation or treatment of fertility and infertility is not affirmatively authorized by the chiropractic scope statute and is distinct from the permitted chiropractic methods.
The statute permits specified treatment by foods or food extracts but does not affirmatively authorize laboratory or other food-sensitivity testing for autoimmune disease.
Functional medicine is not a specifically authorized chiropractic method, and the statute does not affirmatively authorize broad systemic medical management under that label.
The statute expressly prohibits chiropractors from practicing obstetrics, so pregnancy-related chiropractic care cannot be classified as affirmatively authorized obstetric care.
A broad wellness or preventive-care service is not affirmatively authorized as a standalone chiropractic activity beyond the specific examination, diagnosis, adjustment, treatment, physiotherapy, nutrition, first-aid, and hygiene methods listed in the statute.
Side-by-side view of the archived marketing homepage and what a Chiropractor scope permits near Park, KS. Open the mirror for the full comparison: archive on the left, permitted scope and licensed-care paths on the right.
Mirror generated 2026-07-17 19:47 UTC. The archive pane loads styles and images from the intake snapshot.
13 licensed-care paths linked for out-of-scope claims.
The practice uses 'functional medicine' to diagnose systemic diseases (autoimmune, hormonal, metabolic) that are outside the chiropractic scope, then sells high-cost functional lab panels and proprietary Metagenics supplement stacks to 'treat' these conditions. The lack of disclosure on supplement links and the promotion of non-standard care for systemic diseases suggest a funnel designed to extract revenue from patients seeking comprehensive medical care for chronic illnesses.
Metagenics
Supplement / productPays providers to recommendMedium confidence
Wholesale-to-retail markup
Affiliate commission
Practitioner discount
Metagenics likely pays referring clinicians via practitioner markup or affiliate commissions on supplement sales through their dedicated practitioner store.
Supplement brand dealUndisclosed The practice sells Metagenics supplements through a dedicated practitioner store (asfca.metagenics.com), likely earning markup or affiliate commissions. “Supplements”
Lab testing referralUndisclosed The practice promotes 'advanced functional medicine testing' and 'Food Sensitivity Testing' to diagnose systemic diseases, likely generating revenue from high-cost lab panels. “advanced functional medicine testing”
Scope vs Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (Chiropractic)
“KS Chiropractor 22 of 24 advertised activities outside permitted scope, with a researched financial-remuneration model.”
Manipulation
False Authority
“By combining the healing power of chiropractic care, acupuncture, state-of-the-art physiotherapy, and functional medicine testing under one roof, we can create customized treatment plans tailored to each patient’s unique condition, health goals, and lifestyle.”
We could not find a public contact email for Bradley Michael Woodle. Reach them through their own site and ask them to review this dossier and correct anything we got wrong.
If you think someone has firsthand information about Bradley Michael Woodle, 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.
Fight the disinformation
Fight disinformation
Log a public thread where Bradley Michael Woodle is spreading nonsense, get a copy-paste reply with this report link.
0threads logged
0community links
0new this week
Reply snippets
Full reply
Before you buy the protocol: Dr. Trust Me Bro fact-checked Bradley Michael Woodle's claims with peer-reviewed sources, https://drtrustmebro.com/analyze/I7IG8GyFr3y8NHXMuo78K. White-coat charisma isn't evidence.
Short link drop
Full DTMB scan on Bradley Michael Woodle: https://drtrustmebro.com/analyze/I7IG8GyFr3y8NHXMuo78K
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.
Analysis ID I7IG8GyFr3y8NHXMuo78K · Literature cross-check · Last updated Aug 26, 2026
FAQ
What does peer-reviewed research say about these claims?
Bro translation: Mainstream medical consensus does not support the claim that a chiropractor (DC) can diagnose and treat systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions, hormonal imbalances, metabolic disorders, and IBS using 'functional medicine' or 'food sensitivity testing.' These conditions require evaluation and management by licensed MD/DO physicians or other appropriately trained specialists, and the literature does not back the assertion that chiropractic care or functional medicine protocols are effective for these systemic diseases.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
Bro translation: Mainstream medical consensus does not support the claim that a chiropractor (DC) can diagnose and treat systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions, hormonal imbalances, metabolic disorders, and IBS using 'functional medicine' or 'food sensitivity testing.' These conditions require evaluation and management by licensed MD/DO physicians or other appropriately trained specialists, and the literature does not back the assertion that chiropractic care or functional medicine protocols are effective for these systemic diseases. The practice’s promotion of 'functional medicine' for these conditions is outside the scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas and lacks robust evidence.
Are Bradley Michael Woodle's credentials legitimate?
Dr.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
Dr. Brad Woodle is a licensed chiropractor (DC) with certifications in sports medicine and acupuncture, but the practice advertises 'Functional Medicine' services to treat systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances, which is outside the scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas. This is credential inflation: using a narrow musculoskeletal credential to imply broad medical competence. Stated credentials: DR, DC. Likely credentials: Chiropractor (DC), DC. Credential inflation detected, a white coat is not the same as an MD/DO license.
Is Dr Bradley Michael Woodle a real medical doctor?
Bradley Michael Woodle is not identified as an MD/DO physician in reviewed credentials or public registry data.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
Bradley Michael Woodle is not identified as an MD/DO physician in reviewed credentials or public registry data. Likely credential: Chiropractor (DC).
Does Bradley Michael Woodle use False Authority?
The practice presents a chiropractor (DC) as a provider of 'functional medicine' capable of treating systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances, which is outside the legal scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
The practice presents a chiropractor (DC) as a provider of 'functional medicine' capable of treating systemic diseases like autoimmune conditions and hormonal imbalances, which is outside the legal scope of a chiropractic license in Kansas. Likely motive: To attract patients seeking comprehensive medical care for chronic illnesses who might otherwise go to an MD/DO, thereby expanding the patient base beyond musculoskeletal issues.
Does Bradley Michael Woodle use Lab Test Upsell?
The practice promotes 'advanced testing' and 'functional health assessments' to diagnose and treat systemic conditions (gut health, hormonal imbalances, autoimmune conditions), which are not standard or within the scope of chiropractic practice.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
The practice promotes 'advanced testing' and 'functional health assessments' to diagnose and treat systemic conditions (gut health, hormonal imbalances, autoimmune conditions), which are not standard or within the scope of chiropractic practice. Likely motive: To generate revenue from high-cost functional lab panels that are often not covered by insurance and are marketed as necessary for 'root cause' diagnosis.
Does Bradley Michael Woodle use Sales Funnel Motive?
The practice lists 'Nutritional Programs' alongside a direct link to a Metagenics practitioner store (asfca.metagenics.com), creating a funnel where patients are diagnosed with 'nutritional deficiencies' and then sold specific supplement stacks.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
The practice lists 'Nutritional Programs' alongside a direct link to a Metagenics practitioner store (asfca.metagenics.com), creating a funnel where patients are diagnosed with 'nutritional deficiencies' and then sold specific supplement stacks. Likely motive: To drive sales of proprietary supplement stacks through the practitioner's dispensary, earning markup or affiliate commissions.
What is a Doc Bro dossier?
An aggregate profile built from every completed analysis of a Doc Bro's official account, recurring "cure" topics, signature manipulation tactics, and links to individual reports.
An ever-growing report of dated quotes, website snippets, and transcript timestamps pulled from every completed analysis.
Read the full answerHide the full answer
An ever-growing report of dated quotes, website snippets, and transcript timestamps pulled from every completed analysis. Each new official source we analyze appends to the dossier automatically.
Dr. Trust Me BroIndependent data journalism · wry humor
