A Tipping Point in ICA’s History: The ICA Must Cut Ties with the WFC
Originally published: 2025-08-13
“Remaining in the WFC is not a stand for subluxation. It’s a surrender of legitimacy to an organization that has made clear it opposes everything subluxation-centered chiropractors stand for.”
A Tipping Point in ICA’s History
A storm is gathering inside the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) and it’s long overdue. The membership is rising, the Representative Assembly is speaking, and ICA-affiliated organizations are demanding clarity. At the center of the conflict: the ICA’s ongoing affiliation with the World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC), an organization widely seen as hostile to the ICA’s core values.
“I’d love to see ICA move away from WFC. What will it take? All of us supporting Dr. Edwin Cordero as he takes on this task of separating the tentacles that have surrounded ICA for years.” — Dr. Jack Bourla
Across Facebook, Substack, and ICA discussion forums, the message is unmistakable: get out of the WFC now.
“We absolutely have to sever ties with the WFC. How can we support an organization that is not aligned with our core values?”
— Dr. Mike Koster
The Members Are Speaking Loud and Clear
Dr. Austin Davis, a past RA for California and Montana and a current alternate RA for Montana, put it plainly:
“I am in full support of cutting affiliation from the WFC...
Their ridiculous stance on chiropractic not being of benefit to immune function during the C19 era and their plans to further integrate with the medical profession... they have sold out.”
Dr. Gregg Rubinstein, ICA Representative for New York, echoed the sentiment:
“We do not support the WFC. Their stance on vaccine mandates, denying the link between chiropractic and the immune system, and essentially listing subluxation management as a historical concept is against what we stand for...
Having a seat at the table only increases the likelihood of us getting food poisoning.”
Dr. Chase Dyess, ICA Representative for Texas, made his stance unambiguously public:
“I cannot support the WFC’s direction. I strongly support leaving any affiliation with the WFC.” “Now, the WFC is pushing for deeper integration into the medical system, even supporting the use of drugs ‘where lawful’ in certain states. This runs completely counter to the chiropractic principle I’ve built my life around.”
Dr. Brian Lieberman, ICA Georgia Representative, said:
“I would vote no if I had a seat at ‘our’ table but I don’t... yet.”
“We have people who would never join the ICA as long as we keep sending money and supporting the WFC!”
The Affiliates Are Paying Attention
Drew Henderson, Vice President of the Georgia Council of Chiropractic (GCC), posed a series of thoughtful, strategic questions to every ICA board member—questions that any transparent organization should welcome. But as of this writing, ICA leadership has not answered.
“With a little explanation I might at least see their point of view. But it's just crickets.” — Drew Henderson
Other organizations are also taking note. The Chiropractic Society of Texas publicly stated it would consider rejoining the ICA if it left the WFC. And in Australia and New Zealand, leaders like Dr. Adam Sherriff and Dr. Samuel Floreani declared their willingness to rally around a more vitalistic, truly international ICA.
“If the ICA left the WFC and led chiropractic worldwide back on the path of vitalism and Vertebral Subluxation, I am certain you would get a lot of support from Australian and New Zealand chiropractors.” — Dr. Adam Sherriff
Leadership's Deafening Silence
Despite this groundswell of support to exit, not a single ICA board member has publicly cast a vote. Even when respectfully asked, repeatedly, by members and RAs alike, some board members evade, some deflect, and others offer platitudes about “being on the field” and “changing things from within.”
Dr. Todd McDougle, a sitting ICA Board Member, offered this:
“I support having a seat at the table! Better to be on the field than watching the game from afar! I never was an armchair quarterback!”
But members see through this:
“Having a seat at the table is meaningless when the table is designed to eliminate you.” — Dr. Matthew McCoy
“Ending the ICA’s relationship with the WFC would restore more faith and confidence in the organization and create a bridge to work together on preserving and exploding chiropractic in the world.” — Dr. David Serio
"Change from Within" Has Failed for Decades
Former ICA presidents, including Dr. Fred Barge, who resigned over this very issue, warned that the “change them from within” argument is a dead-end. Former leaders like Dr. John Maltby were given WFC positions and achieved nothing in terms of changing them from within. Meanwhile, the WFC only grew stronger in its disdain for the ICA’s values.
It publicly denied any clinical relationship between chiropractic and immune function.
It encouraged regulators to sanction chiropractors who made such claims.
It aligned with WHO and UN public health mandates, including vaccine campaigns.
It mocked subluxation-focused chiropractors as “evangelists,” “cultists,” and a “damaging minority” to be “eradicated.”
“For me personally the future of chiropractic needs a strong vitalistic international voice... In a time when the WFC’s influence is drifting away from our roots, the opportunity for the ICA to become the true voice of principled chiropractic has never been greater.” — Dr. Samuel Floreani (Australia)
Even Longtime Critics Are Reconsidering ICA If It Leaves the WFC
“If the ICA left the WFC, I might actually consider joining.” — Dr. Daniel Knowles
“I’d join too.” — Dr. Shane Walker
“Liam Schubel: I would be in too.”
“This would be a step toward actually representing chiropractic.” — Dr. Daniel Knowles
The potential for renewed growth, international influence, and credibility is immense—but only if the ICA listens to its members.
“Definitely need to get away from the WFC… Protecting the principle and practice of chiropractic is of utmost importance.”— Dr. Nick Tedder
The Way Forward: Transparency and a Public Vote
There is only one path that aligns with ICA's stated mission:
Hold a public vote of the ICA Board on WFC membership.
Require disclosure of any WFC-related conflicts of interest from voting members.
Release a formal explanation of each board member’s position.
Honor the will of the Representative Assembly and the dues-paying members.
Anything less than full transparency and action will be seen as a betrayal of principle and an endorsement of the very forces threatening chiropractic's unique identity.
“This discussion should be happening in the open. If the ICA Board goes behind closed doors and votes to remain in the WFC, it will be a slap in the face to its membership.” — Dr. Matthew McCoy
Conclusion: The Time to Act Is Now
The ICA cannot serve two masters. It cannot claim to defend principled, subluxation-centered chiropractic while giving money, legitimacy, and influence to an organization that openly opposes those very principles.
“Chiropractic doesn’t need more players in someone else’s rigged game. It needs leaders who are willing to walk off the field and build a better one.” — Dr. McCoy
Withdraw from the WFC.
Stand with the membership.
Stand for chiropractic.
Stand for subluxation.
