massage therapy or chiropractor?!
Question: Massage therapy or chiropractor?
One thing i would consider is the fact that chiropractic care is usually NOT covered by health insurance, which will limit your clientele. In massage therapy more clients can have access to your warm hands since it will typically be more affordable (unless, talking about $$, you are planning to charge big bucks). Another thing, is that also typically, as chiropractor you want to open your own practice, which of course can be carried from home, but wouldn't it be more professional to own your own clinic-looking business? as masseur, you can even go to client's houses (which is more comfortable for the client) but of course you need to have practice insurance anyhow (I personally love to have massages at home, not having to drive back from the nice massage and then stress again over traffic). Lastly, as masseur, you can even work at cool places such as spas, hotels, sport teams, sport medicine clinic, chiropractor clinics, cruises, and so much more! of course chiropractor will make more money, but school also costs more! Can you go and observe one or two chiropractors working so you can decide if you do like it?
One last thought: I think that "making money" and "doing what you love" will rarely go hand in hand (believe me, I know. I am a teacher). if you really love either or and that is why you can't commit, then it won't matter what much $ you'll make.
Hope this works.
Personal experience working as massage therapist for a physical therapy clinic for 4.5 years; love massages personally and I have had chiropratic treatment myslef.
if you want to get sick well, become a chiropractor. however, you should know that you will have to learn the necessary clinical skills on your own. sad to say i don't know of any upper cervical specific based colleges still in existence. gary, as usual is plain wrong, so pay him no mind. his ignorance and anti-chiropractic prejudice stick out like a sore thumb.
If you are interested in that form of heath, I would consider a four year degree in physical therapy - insurance companies pay for it, and you'll always have clients.
If money is your first incentive, stay away from both professions. You need to be totally committed to a profession like that to be successful.
Massage licensing requirements vary from state to state unless you want national certification. So you might be able to become a therapist in less time depending upon where you want to practice. But it's difficult to make a decent living with the income unless you work at a high-end spa or have clientele with more discretionary income who refer you to their friends and relatives. There's a high turnover rate in massage therapy as well as huge competition. But if you're good at it and effective with your clients, you can develop a base over time. I read an article the other day about alternative practitioners such as acupuncturists having a difficult time in this economy, and I know that chiropractors are constantly cultivating new patients due to large turnover rates. Plus many expand from chiropractic into nutrional arenas. Have you considered Physical or Occupational Therapy or nursing? I think there are better prospects there!
Licensed Massage Therapist in Texas who took it up after retiring and uses the money to supplement other income streams.
I would advise you forget chiropractic - its a very dubious profession with its basis in mystical concepts as opposed to science. Its generally regarded as quackery. Massage therapy would be much better - but I agree with Tink - physiotherapy would be a great option.
EDIT: @Mr E mentions 'upper cervical specific based colleges' - this is because he belongs to one group of chiropractors that go against conventional chiropractic (which believes the cause of most disease is due to 'subluxations' in the spine). Upper cervical chiropractors believe subluxations can occur only in the upper cervical vertebrae (they crack necks only). There is no agreement amongst chiropractors about this; but at the end of the day both branches are wrong - misalignment of the spine is not the major cause of disease.