“Systematic reviews of controlled clinical studies of treatments used by chiropractors have found no evidence that chiropractic manipulation is effective, with the possible exception of treatment for back pain.[8] A 2011 critical evaluation of 45 systematic reviews concluded that the data included in the study “fail[ed] to demonstrate convincingly that spinal manipulation is an effective intervention for any condition.”[10] Spinal manipulation may be cost-effective for sub-acute or chronic low back pain, but the results for acute low back pain were insufficient.[11] No compelling evidence exists to indicate that maintenance chiropractic care adequately prevents symptoms or diseases.[12]”
It doesn’t, but it might be perceived as treatment.
Suppose you ask your GP to make it rain because your garden is dry and they tell you to go away. Then you go to a chiropractor that talks to you about your garden and then performs a complex ritual that takes a half hour or so. 2 days later it rains.
I think people are misunderstanding your comment.
I don’t think you’re suggesting this proverbial chiropractor made it rain, only that the patient felt listened to, which may make them initially view the treatment favorably. When their symptoms later get better, as they always would have, they attribute it to the chiropractic treatment, not just healing over time