Yanking Necks for Views? Why You Won’t Catch Me Doing That.

Man in a suit looks expressionless in an office with blinds. Text: "Can you yank my head like those chiros online?" and "I am dead inside."

The Rise of the Internet Neck Yank

It’s hard to scroll through social media these days without stumbling across some chiro going full WWE on a patient’s neck. The now-iconic Y-Strap tug and that infamous “ring-shaped spinal snapper” (we’ll avoid the trademark, but you know the one) have turned spinal adjustments into clickbait performances.

These videos are often dramatic, loud, and strangely satisfying to watch. There’s always a massive "pop," some exaggerated exhale, and a patient who looks like they just met God. It's all very cinematic — and completely removed from how responsible chiropractic care actually looks.

And leading the charge? A certain Houston-based personality who’s made a name (and trademark) out of turning spinal care into a circus act. You won’t hear his name here because, frankly, he’s an embarrassment to the profession. When the entire “technique” revolves around yanking someone’s spine with a strap while growling phrases like “crackalackin’”, you know it’s more about views than vertebrae.

These internet-famous techniques are built for spectacle, not safety. They're long-lever, high-force, and lack any real clinical precision. And while the videos rake in millions of views, they leave a lot of us in the field cringing — because what’s being sold to the public is a parody of what we actually do.

Yes, chiropractic care can be powerful. Yes, it can be fast. But no, it should never look like a skydiving harness and a prayer.

Technique Taxonomy: Understanding the Four Quadrants

Four images show massage techniques. Three have green checks: "Low Velocity, Low Amplitude," "Low Velocity, High Amplitude," "High Velocity, Low Amplitude." One has a red X: "High Velocity, High Amplitude." Text below explains manual therapy categories.

Not all hands-on care is created equal. In fact, one of the most helpful ways to understand manual therapy is to break it down into four distinct categories based on velocity (how fast) and amplitude (how much movement or force):

LVLA – Low Velocity, Low Amplitude

Think gentle. This includes massage, mobilizations, stretching, strain-counterstrain, trigger point therapy — the stuff that doesn’t make loud noises or go viral, but gets solid results. These techniques are widely accepted, well-tolerated, and incredibly safe. They're also a cornerstone of care for sensitive patients, acute injuries, and anyone needing a lighter touch.

LVHA – Low Velocity, High Amplitude

This is where traction lives — the good kind. Flexion-distraction, long-axis distraction, decompression — all fall under this umbrella. These moves are slow, controlled, and usually involve a sustained stretch or glide. Used properly, they’re gentle on the nervous system and ideal for decompressing joints or relieving pressure without sudden thrusts.

HVLA – High Velocity, Low Amplitude

This is the gold standard. It’s what most chiropractors are trained to do: a quick, precise thrust using a short lever arm and minimal movement. The goal is to restore motion and reduce dysfunction with maximum specificity and minimum risk. When done right, it’s effective, efficient, and safe — especially compared to the alternatives.

HVHA – High Velocity, High Amplitude

Now we’re in red flag territory. This is where you find the Y-Strap, the “spinal slingshot,” and other gimmick-heavy maneuvers. These techniques often use long levers, heavy force, and rapid traction — sometimes with tools, straps, or even full-body pulls. And here’s the kicker: they break two of the three core safety principles we’re taught in chiropractic school. No short lever. No short distance. Just speed and spectacle.

It’s the equivalent of using a sledgehammer where a precision screwdriver would do the job.

The big problem? These HVHA moves aren’t just unrefined — they’re also unnecessary. There’s no condition, no clinical rationale, that requires a full-body yank to the cervical spine. It’s not about what helps the patient. It’s about what looks impressive on camera.

What the Research Says (and Doesn’t Say)

Hand reaching towards a floating light bulb against a cloudy sky, evoking ideas and creativity. Soft, muted colors. No text present.

Here’s the truth: we don’t have any solid research comparing the safety or effectiveness of conventional HVLA adjustments to these viral HVHA traction maneuvers. No randomized trials, no large-scale studies, no long-term outcome data. Just a whole lot of dramatic YouTube footage and anecdotal hype.

That doesn’t mean these techniques are proven dangerous — but it sure as hell doesn’t make them safe either.

Most of the existing literature on manipulation safety focuses on rotational thrusts in the cervical spine, particularly in relation to vertebral artery strain. Those studies have helped shape how chiropractors evaluate risk and refine their techniques — and they’ve made us more careful when it comes to neck rotation. Ironically, that leaves a gap in research when it comes to axial traction — especially when it's delivered at high velocity.

Could axial traction be safer than rotation? Theoretically, maybe. It might even strain the vertebral artery less than traditional neck manipulations — but we simply don’t know. And when something combines high velocity, long levers, and no real segmental control, the risk increases no matter what plane you’re working in.

In evidence-based practice, the absence of research should never be confused with the presence of safety. If anything, a lack of data demands more caution, not less — especially when someone's cervical spine is involved.

And here's another key point: just because something “feels good” or gets a dramatic reaction doesn’t mean it’s clinically effective. Temporary relief isn't the same as therapeutic change. Without follow-up data, we can’t say whether these moves offer any lasting benefit — or if they’re just adrenaline, novelty, and placebo.

Bottom line: there’s no research proving these techniques are better, and no research proving they’re safe. That’s not a gap I’m willing to gamble with — especially when there are proven, well-understood, and precise techniques that get great results without the risks.

What We Were Taught: Clinical Principles That Still Matter

Colorful skull illustration on a black background with "Atlas of Human Anatomy" text. Caption humorously references chiropractors.

Every chiropractor goes through rigorous training in spinal anatomy, biomechanics, and manual therapy. And from day one, we’re drilled on the fundamental principles of a safe and effective adjustment — especially when it comes to the cervical spine.

The gold standard for manipulation is HVLA: High Velocity, Low Amplitude. The “high velocity” gives us the quick thrust needed to stimulate joint receptors and restore motion, while the “low amplitude” ensures we stay within safe, controlled ranges of motion. Most importantly, we’re taught to use a short lever arm — meaning the adjustment is localized, specific, and directed at a single spinal segment.

These principles exist for a reason: they reduce risk, maximize control, and provide therapeutic effect without unnecessary strain.

Now contrast that with the internet-famous maneuvers we talked about earlier — the ones that use straps, yanks, and full-body traction. These techniques fall into a category I’d call HVHA: High Velocity, High Amplitude. They’re the exact opposite of what we’re taught to do. Long lever arms. High force. Wide, uncontrolled motion across multiple segments. No specificity. No finesse.

It’s like the difference between using a scalpel and swinging a machete.

Even if we’re being generous and assume these moves might have some therapeutic benefit, they still violate two out of three of the key principles for safe adjusting. That’s not an evolution of care — it’s a regression.

And here’s what really matters: there’s no clinical reason to ever perform these types of maneuvers. There’s no condition that calls for a rapid, full-body spinal yank. There’s no biomechanical logic that says, “Let’s just pull hard and hope something good happens.” It’s not care — it’s choreography.

When I use traction in practice, it’s low and slow — just like I was taught. Controlled, gentle, and designed to gradually decompress the spine, not shock it into submission.

Technique matters. It always has. And when chiropractors throw out everything we’re taught in favor of flashy internet tricks, they’re not just risking patient safety — they’re throwing away the credibility of the entire profession.

Risk vs. Reward: What’s Really at Stake?

At the end of the day, every treatment decision we make comes down to a simple equation: Do the potential benefits outweigh the risks?

When it comes to these viral high-velocity, high-amplitude traction maneuvers — the answer is a hard no.

Let’s talk about risk first. Anytime you apply force to the cervical spine, you're working in close proximity to vital neurovascular structures: vertebral arteries, spinal cord, nerve roots. That’s why we’re trained to be precise, controlled, and selective. The problem with HVHA traction techniques is that they often bypass all of that — delivering force across multiple spinal segments, with no segmental contact, and no ability to isolate motion.

This means you’re not just adjusting a joint — you’re gambling with the entire upper spine and everything around it.

What’s the potential reward? Maybe a satisfying “pop.” Maybe a temporary sense of relief. Maybe a good Instagram clip. But that’s not clinical success. That’s not therapeutic change. That’s stimulus without strategy — and at worst, it’s a setup for injury.

And let’s not forget: patients trust us with their health, not for a performance. The moment we start prioritizing dramatic reactions over informed, evidence-guided care, we’ve lost the plot.

We’ve all had patients ask for “that thing they saw online” — the neck yank, the strap pull, the full-body decompress-o-matic. It’s easy to understand why. These videos are everywhere, and they make it look like chiropractic magic. But part of our job as providers is to educate, filter hype from reality, and explain why safety and outcomes will always matter more than spectacle.

Because here’s the truth no one in those videos wants to say: just because it makes noise doesn’t mean it made a difference — and just because it felt intense doesn’t mean it was safe

The Bottom Line — Choose Skill Over Spectacle

In an era where clicks and views drive more attention than credentials or outcomes, it’s tempting to believe that louder, flashier, and more dramatic means better. But when it comes to spinal care — and especially cervical manipulation — what looks impressive online isn’t always what’s best for the patient.

The reality is simple: high-velocity, high-amplitude traction techniques aren’t supported by research, violate core principles of safe adjusting, and carry unnecessary risk. They aren’t innovative — they’re reckless. And the moment chiropractic becomes about showmanship instead of skill, we all lose.

Real chiropractic care isn’t about straps, theatrics, or making someone flinch for a thumbnail photo. It’s about clinical reasoning, precision technique, and a deep understanding of anatomy and patient-specific needs. It’s about doing the right thing — even if it’s not flashy — because your patient’s health matters more than your social media engagement.

So, to the patients out there: if you’re ever tempted to ask for “one of those YouTube yanks,” just know this — you deserve better than that. You deserve thoughtful care, delivered by someone who understands your body and respects the risks.

And to the chiropractors chasing clicks instead of clinical outcomes: you’re not leading the profession forward — you’re turning it into a meme. Let’s do better.

Have a wonderful week,

Dr. Lucas Marchand