Be Wary of Acupuncture, Qigong, and "Traditional Chinese Medicine"

[FLAprogressive]

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/acu.html

[gateley]

1. Seriously? Acupuncture? I wonder what drug company/ies are behind Quack Watch?

Have they ever endorsed any approach that wasn't AMA=endorsed? I wonder if not too many years ago they would have had "chiropractic" on their list.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ingac70]

4. It is still on their list....

http://www.quackwatch.org/

[Orrex]

5. Actual science rejects the idea that chiropractic causes magical healing by correcting subluxations

To date there has not been a single shred of evidence that this aspect of chiropractic actually functions as claimed. Likewise, any claim that chiropractic restores the body's "energy flows" (regardless of the actual phrase used) is completely unsupported by evidence.

Sure, lots of people claim that it works as described, but lots of people believe that James van Praagh isn't a fraud, too.

[shraby]

8. When I was 2, I was dropped on my head..a teenager was

holding me and I jerked my body backward which she wasn't prepared for. It left me pigeon toed and I couldn't raise my head. I was taken to a medical doctor and he in effect told my mother "what you see is what you got". There wasn't anything he could do for me. Not long after that my mother and grandmother took me to a chiropractor. I went for quite a long time, don't remember how long as I was 2 when I started and around 6 when I quit, and I don't know how often I went. But since then I have no sign of "pigeon toe" and my head works like it should. I have no problems with chiropractors..I know they do good. I haven't had to go to one since.

edited to add.

[Orrex]

28. You know, you might have simply grown out of it

The span from two years old to six years old is a period of drastic change. It's not at all inconceivable that your body could have self-corrected as you grew. Obviously we can't assess your recovery at this late date, but I've heard countless post hoc claims along the lines of "my affliction got better after X, therefore X cured my affliction."

I'm glad that you no longer suffer from that problem, but even if your chiropractor actually did cure it as described, it has nothing to do with my underlying complaint that chiropractic quackery makes preposterous claims about "correcting" or "realigning" the body's energy in some way. This has never been demonstrated--not at all, not once, not ever. Any chiropractor who makes that claim is guilty of fraud.

[shraby]

56. The regular doc was pretty sure that it was permanent.

I was so pigeon toed from it I tripped over the one foot. My folks wouldn't and couldn't take the chance that I would "outgrow" it, if they thought there was a chance to correct it with treatment. Treatment was much different then (65 years ago) than it is now.

[Orrex]

61. All right...

First of all, I hope that you'll forgive me when I question your recollection of events that occurred 65 years ago when you were two. Likewise, if we're talking about unprecedented medical breakthroughs re: pediatric physical therapy, we simply can't rely on your memory, nor upon the testimony of family members that long ago.

Also, you briefly make a point that can't be overlooked: "Treatment was much different then than it is now." As was our understanding of toddler injuries. A doctor's diagnosis of "permanent" can hardly be taken as definitive, and certainly not now, when we're more than six decades removed from the event.


Anyway, that's still all irrelevant to the point that I've been making, that claims about "body energy" and whatnot are fraudulent. I'm not claiming that all chiropractors are charlatans, but the ones who peddle that "energy" bullshit most certainly are.

[shraby]

63. The doc was a big old burly man..I went long enough to

remember him. He worked out of his house and everyone's main focus was to repair my injured body, which he did. I also remember he had a beautiful doll house in his dining room. Mom said his wife made all the curtains, etc. for it.
I don't remember the injury, just being told about it by my mom when I was older, but I do remember going to the doctor.

[uppityperson]

81. Chiropractors are good for a number of conditions. But they are not good for many more

The problem is not "are they ever good" but "can they cure most everything". Having worked with several DCs over the yrs, some do not overstate what they can do and some do. Like antibiotics, they are good for certain things, have contraindications and will do no good or harm for other things/people.

[gateley]

9. Then why do insurance companies cover it? Why do MD's and DO's refer patients

to them?

You miss out on so many opportunities waiting for "proof". The bottom line is, if it works for you, that's proof enough. And it's worked for me -- not only healing the complaint I went for (after doctors couldn't do anything but offer pain killers and ask if I'd tried massage) it also alleviated pain I had become so accustomed to I didn't even think about it until it was GONE!

The same thing happened with some back surgery I had. I was used to a chronic pain and it had become part of my life. When I opened my eyes in the recovery room, it was GONE. Same thing, different problem.

So my claim is valid.

[Orrex]

27. They sure as hell don't cover it for its alleged magical healing powers

That is, they don't cover it because it realigns the body's energy or any bullshit like that.

They may cover it because in some cases chiropractic has been shown to have a positive effect upon neck and lower back pain. But when the chiropractor starts going on about how fixing one's subluxations can cure illness or improve bowel health, then that chiropractor is full of shit, and not just in his bowels.

[WolverineDG]

30. There will never be enough "proof" for them nt

[gateley]

32. I know. It must be miserable having such a closed, inflexible mind.

What a way to live.

[HuckleB]

34. Open-mindedness...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

[Orrex]

41. Contrast that with people for whom no proof is necessary

Personal testimony and point-of-sale slogans are all that some people need to conclude that a purveyor of snakeoil is on the up and up.

It's not a matter of rejecting "enough proof." To date, not a single scrap of evidence, much less proof, has been presented in support of the claims that chiropractic actually heals by realigning the body's "energy" or anything like that. It would be absurdly irresponsible to accept such a claim with no proof--why are you so eager to believe something for which there is no actual evidence?

[trotsky]

42. Brilliant post.

I think it stems from a resentment of things science-related - it all comes back to the disappointing anti-intellectualism on both the left and right wings in this country.

[WolverineDG]

46. Well, by continually dismissing posts of those who have benefited from visiting a chiro

you have made sure there isn't any "proof" at all, haven't you? I find it amusing that only one side in this "argument" gets to write the rules on what is & is not evidence.

People have repeatedly posted about their experiences, some negative, but most positive, yet you & the other science worshipers continue to dismiss & belittle those experiences as "not proof" or "it was all in your head." I can tell you that the pain I was in after a car accident was *not* in my head (if it was, why did my doctor prescribe addictive pain meds for it?), & it was not until I had *an* adjustment at a chiropractor that the pain stopped. Not lessened, but stopped.

And, wow, broad brush much? Not everyone who goes to a chiro buys into the "realigning the body's energy" & not all chiros do either (the one I went to certainly didn't).

dg

[SDuderstadt]

50. "science worshippers"...

LOL

[Orrex]

51. No, you are misrepresenting my posts

I have never stated that chiropractors offer nothing of value.

I have stated correctly that any chiropractor who hawks his or her services as some sort of "energy manipulation" is a fraud.

Not everyone who goes to a chiro buys into the "realigning the body's energy" & not all chiros do either (the one I went to certainly didn't).

Bully for you. I suggest that you rereadd what I've written, because you clearly didn't understand that I was railing against the fraudulent and unsubstantiated portion of the practice and not the actual benefit that has been documented.


So your rant about me dismissing and belitting your experience is baseless and irrelevant. Additionally, I am not a "science worshipper," unless you characterize yourself as a "pseudoscience worshipper."

[WolverineDG]

66. "People for whom no proof is necessary"

So, no, I didn't misinterpret your post, since only now you distinguish between the chiros who tout energy manipulation & those who don't. Before my post, it was all chiros. Now you try to say you only meant some. Please.

I've sat back & watched various threads as poster after poster relates their experience with a chiropractor, only to be dismissed & belittled as someone taken advantage of by a quack, that any relief they got was just "all in their heads" because there is no "proof" & then belittled as some "anti-intellectual" who hates science.

dg

[Orrex]

76. Um, no. I just reviewed my first reply in this thread. And my second. And my third. And so on.

Nowhere in any of them did I dismiss all chiropractors, so it's clear that you have not actually read what I've posted.

[uppityperson]

82. Me me! I'm a "science worshipper" indeed. If it can be proven scientifically, it shows proof.

Yes, DC's work for a number of conditions. But they don't for many more. Like antibiotics work on bacteria but not on allergies or viruses.

Not all DC's buy into the bullshit, but enough of them do to make a problem which is a shame since yes, chiropractic adjustments DO help some things.

[SidDithers]

77. +1...nt

Sid

[ingac70]

11. magical healing? No. Serious pain relief? Hell yes. n/t

[Confusious]

25. I am not a fan of quackery

I think it can be seen from my posts.

But when I was younger, I had a pain in my side whenever I ran to long. Made breathing deep uncomfortable.

Went to the chiropractor, he said I had a pinched nerve. Pushed on my collar bone, I heard a pop, never had the problem again. (This would be different from the usual money-draining quackery in that is was a real physical problem, not in my mind, and I only went once)

Did go again after a motorcycle accident. The fucking quack messed up my back for a few years.

[Dorian Gray]

37. There are some

who seem to work almost like physical therapists... prescribing certain exercises to help with pain or pinched nerves. And doing some massage/cracking to work out kinks.

Then there are others who crazily talk about fertility and other issues that I in no way believe chiropractors can help with. I went in to one once because my lower back was sore and I thought some proper cracking would help, and he tried to convince me that he could get me pregnant through ONGOING treatment. (That came up because I refused to take the X RAYS he was trying to get me to take because I was trying to get pregnant.)

He was a quack, and I never ever went back.

[gateley]

10. Not surprised. Maybe because they can't prescribe drugs? nt

[HuckleB]

29. Chiropractic Vertebral Subluxations: Science vs. Pseudoscience

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6839

The End of Chiropractic
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=3022

Chiropractic – A Brief Overview, Part I
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=537

Read up, then get back to us.

[Wilms]

3. What's needling you about it.

:shrug:

[glinda]

6. Acupuncture helped my 87 yr. old mother with her back problems. It totally works.

[laconicsax]

14. You could have helped her equally well without paying a magician. n/t

[glinda]

31. Recent study in Germany with another Country has proven that acupuncture actually

stimulates certain nerves that correspond with release of chems into parts of the pain centers in brains.
My mother was given tons of hard narcotics by her Doctor. They were making her into a zombie as well as accelerating dementia and ALZ. She could barely walk. After about three months of acupuncture at a local community clinic, she has little use for the painkillers except upon occasion and her mobility is tons better. She is handicapped with severe arthritis. Total cost for about three months of treatment was well under $200 including paying for parking.
I am grateful. Say what you want.

[HuckleB]

33. All that study shows is that the brain notices when the body is poked.

A similar studies showed the same results when people simply touched a part of the body that had been hurt.

The brain works! YEEEEAAAHHH!!

[glinda]

40. They tested it without acupuncture for pain response in brain. If it works fine.

Don't get it if you think it is bunk. It helped my mother to walk again. You do what you want. She was at the last resort for help and we are grateful that she has improved. She also didn't believe in it and is glad that she went. Pretty good for an 87 yr. old.

[HuckleB]

47. It's not that I think it's bunk.

It's that the evidence is overwhelming: It is bunk. The usual anecdote routine that you're offering does not change that.

[madfloridian]

7. Acupuncture works wonders.

I know from experience.

[laconicsax]

13. The results are unrelated to the method used.

Acupuncture is the method of placing needles in precise locations to achieve specific results according to meridians that control the flow of Qi.

Studies have consistently shown that you get the same results regardless of where you stick the needles, or if you even use needles. The body's physiological responses to pain, touch, and other dermal stimuli is what you experienced, not improved Qi flow or any other precept of acupuncture.

The method is bullshit.

[pnwmom]

16. Duke University researchers say acupuncture reduces the pain of surgery.

http://ondemand.duke.edu/video/22533/acupuncture-reduces-pain-need-

Using acupuncture before and during surgery significantly reduces the level of pain and the amount of potent painkillers needed by patients after the surgery is over, according to Duke University Medical Center anesthesiologists who combined data from 15 small randomized acupuncture clinical trials.

[laconicsax]

18. That doesn't address what I said.

The results are unrelated to the method. That study only evaluates the results, not the method.

Assuming that http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/101/2/151.long">this is the study in question (same author, same year), this becomes quite clear.

Not only that, but the study isn't even the slam-dunk the video makes it out to be. The conclusions even note that subsequent research is needed to confirm the findings.

[pnwmom]

20. Many medical procedures -- particularly old ones -- are used on the basis of results.

But there is plenty of research showing that acupuncture can be effective, even if we don't know why.

[laconicsax]

22. That's the thing--we do know why, and it has nothing to do with the method.

People knew that chewing willow bark or using it in a tea reduced fever and relieved pain. The question of why was investigated and salicylic acid was discovered to be the cause. Now, you can take acetylsalicylic acid (a synthetic form of salicylic acid) in the form of asprin to get the same benefits.

Acupuncture relieves pain because of physiological responses to pain and dermal stimulation, not because of meridians/Qi/etc. The results are real, the method is fraudulent. If you want the same results, you can buy your own needles and stick them wherever you like, whenever you like. You can even get the same results by touch if you don't want to risk self-harm.

[madfloridian]

35. That is just not true.

That is not a true statement.

It does relieve pain.

[laconicsax]

44. You completely missed the point.

The results (pain relief) are unrelated to the method (placing needles at specific locations according to Qi flow).

Acupuncture is not the results, it is the method. The method is bullshit and does not cause the results.

[Rhiannon12866]

15. I agree.

I do think it does depend on the practitioner, though. My acupuncture doctor was an M.D., and when acupuncture didn't cure me, he encouraged me to have surgery, then followed up to help me heal faster. But where I've really seen it work wonders has been with my veterinarian, who uses both traditional and Eastern medicine. My 17-year-old cocker couldn't walk at all, had to hold him up when I took him out. When the supplements from the vet didn't help that much, I took him for acupuncture sessions and it was amazing. It was non-invasive and he walked just fine for the rest of his life. :)

[HuckleB]

36. No, it doesn't.

Acupuncture – An Implausible Premise Lacking Evidence
http://sciencebasedparenting.com/2009/06/28/acupuncture-an-implausible-premise-lacking-evidence/

CONTROLS FOR ACUPUNCTURE STUDIES ARE IMPROVING. THEIR RESULTS ARE NOT. HOW ARE PEER REVIEWERS REACTING?
http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/acupuncture_real_or_sham/

More Evidence that Acupuncture is a Placebo
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2233

Another acupuncture study misinterpret
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/05/another_acupuncture_study_misinterpreted.php

The overwhelming majority of the evidence shows that acupuncture is a placebo at best.

[laconicsax]

12. Just because it's bullshit?

That hardly seems fair.

[pnwmom]

17. UCSF doctors say acupuncture with massage reduces pain after cancer surgery.

But you know better, right?

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2007/03/5551/massage-and-acupuncture-reduce-pain-after-cancer-surgery


During the three-day post-operative period, patients used an 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale to rank severity of current pain and of pain during the previous 24 hours.

“There was quite a variance when it came to level of pain for each patient. Patients who were very well medicated for pain and nausea still experienced dramatic ups and downs during their post-operative days,” Mehling said. “Getting up from bed for the first time after abdominal surgery or having a catheter removed probably contributed to the patient’s pain rating. For patients who received acupuncture and massage, it is possible that this personal attention contributed to a marked decrease in anxiety.”

Patients received Swedish massage, which involves kneading and applying long strokes to soft tissue and muscles, and an acupressure-type (shiatsu) foot massage for 10-30 minutes depending on their clinical needs and condition. Acupuncture treatment was based on the traditional Chinese medicine standardized core set of acupuncture points and was used to treat pain, nausea and anxiety.

“Pain decreased for those in the intervention group more than for those in the control group,” said Mehling. “Looking at an average pain baseline score, we found 1.1 point improvement in pain level on the first post-operative day for the group given massage and acupuncture, and only 0.1 point improvement in the control group that did not have intervention. Over the three days of the study, the average scores among patients reporting significant pain improved by 1.8 for the massage and acupuncture group compared to 0.3 in the control group.”

[laconicsax]

19. Results vs. method.

Acupuncture is the method, and the results are independent of that method. This has been shown consistently--sticking needles in your skin has a pain-mitigating effect, as do other forms of touch and dermal stimulation. The cause in all those cases is shown to be unrelated to meridians/Qi flow/other magical bullshit.

If you want to prove that acupuncture works, you need to find a study that shows that the effects of acupuncture are directly related to where the needles are placed, and that the effects are as predicted by TCM. Generic 'needles mitigate pain' studies don't do this.

[pnwmom]

21. So sticking needles in has a "pain mitigating effect" even according to you.

It took Chinese medicine -- not quack medicine -- to teach us that.

The only reason we know this reduces pain is because we investigated the practices of acupuncture -- and confirmed that they worked. Just because we don't accept the philosophical underpinnings of the practice doesn't make it ineffective.

[laconicsax]

23. No, but it does make it fraudulent.

I'm not denying that acupuncturists get results, I'm denying that the results have anything to do with their methods (what you're paying them for).

The results of acupuncture are unrelated to the methods. The physiological underpinnings are also the same as with massage and other methods of dermal stimuli, so acupuncture wasn't a necessary component to this. It just benefits from these effects without having to admit that its methods are bullshit.

You want effective? Save yourself the time and money of going to a quack and do it yourself.

[Flo Mingo]

26. I pay for results

If one method doesn't work, I'll try another because it's result that I'm looking for.

If the methodology of acupuncture is, as you so articulately stated, bullshit, then why aren't there scads of imitators? Why not "Pricks R Us" pain management clinics where you stand against a wall and let them throw real fine tipped darts at you? I mean, why don't tattoo parlors advertise as pain relief clinics.

Honestly, I don't profess to know how acupuncture works. Don't really care. But if I go for a treatment and feel better when I leave that's the result I'm looking (and paying) for. They can tell me is Shinto magic for all I care.

Sorry, but you're going to have to do a much better job if you're trying to debunk what has been a successful medical practice for thousands of years.

[laconicsax]

45. The results are unrelated to the method used in acupuncture.

I honestly don't understand why this is such a difficult concept for some people to understand.

Acupuncture is the placing of needles at specific points (meridians) to facilitate the flow of Qi. That's the method, and it's been shown multiple times to be complete hokum: Qi and meridians don't exist.

The pain relief is the result of physiological responses to the needles themselves, not where they're placed. You can get the same results for a lot less money if you needle yourself.

[pnwmom]

38. The MD's who are studying it and even using it don't consider it fraudulent.

Neither do I.

[laconicsax]

48. And some people don't consider waterboarding to be torture.

Opinion is not the singular of facts.

[pnwmom]

52. So now you're comparing acupuncture to waterboarding.

Some analogy.

:sarcasm:

[laconicsax]

54. No, I'm comparing opinion to opinion.

Some people think acupuncture isn't fraud. Doesn't make it true.
Some people think waterboarding isn't torture. Doesn't make it true.
Some people think cucumbers taste better pickled. Doesn't make it true.
Some people think that the US version of The Office is better than the UK version. Doesn't make it true.
Some people think that Obama was born in Kenya. Doesn't make it true.

[pnwmom]

55. There have been plenty of scientific studies showing acupuncture works.

So it isn't a "fraud."

[trotsky]

57. You would almost seem to be intentionally missing the point.

This isn't about whether acupuncture works. No one is arguing that. Do you understand?

It's about whether it works by manipulating energy flows, or if it works on a very simple physical level, by stimulating the release of endorphins.

The studies that show acupuncture works, show that it works no matter who sticks the needles or where. They show that there is no energy flow ("chi"), it's a simple physiological reaction. No magic whatsoever.

Get it now?

[pnwmom]

65. You are sticking your nose in here without reading all the previous posts.

I did not and do not defend the philosophy of chi.

I defended the practice of acupuncture, a practice which has been shown to be effective in scientific studies. The disagreement between me and the other poster relates to the definition of "fraud."

[trotsky]

75. Nope, I'm just understanding what is being said.

You are defending a position that isn't being attacked.

[laconicsax]

59. Let's try a simple analogy:

Group A invents a cold fusion reactor.
Tests indicate that the device clearly produces heat energy.
Further investigation reveals that the heat energy is produced by a simple chemical reaction and not nuclear fusion.

Would you say that the reactor works and that cold fusion has been proven? Or, would you say that the results are unrelated to the method and that group A's claims about cold fusion are fraudulent?

[pnwmom]

67. All the analogies in the world won't change the fact

that our disagreement is to the meaning of the word "fraud" as applied to acupuncture. I don't think there is anything deceitful or fraudulent in the practice of acupuncture by trained professionals. And the National Institutes of Health doesn't, either -- even though much is still unknown about how and why it works.

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ecam/2011/180805.html


Abstract

In November 2007, the Society for Acupuncture Research (SAR) held an international symposium to mark the 10th anniversary of the 1997 NIH Consensus Development Conference on Acupuncture. The symposium presentations revealed the considerable maturation of the field of acupuncture research, yet two provocative paradoxes emerged. First, a number of well-designed clinical trials have reported that true acupuncture is superior to usual care, but does not significantly outperform sham acupuncture, findings apparently at odds with traditional theories regarding acupuncture point specificity. Second, although many studies using animal and human experimental models have reported physiological effects that vary as a function of needling parameters (e.g., mode of stimulation) the extent to which these parameters influence therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials is unclear. This White Paper, collaboratively written by the SAR Board of Directors, identifies gaps in knowledge underlying the paradoxes and proposes strategies for their resolution through translational research. We recommend that acupuncture treatments should be studied (1) “top down” as multi-component “whole-system” interventions and (2) “bottom up” as mechanistic studies that focus on understanding how individual treatment components interact and translate into clinical and physiological outcomes. Such a strategy, incorporating considerations of efficacy, effectiveness and qualitative measures, will strengthen the evidence base for such complex interventions as acupuncture.

1. Introduction

The 1997 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Development Conference on Acupuncture was a landmark event in the history of acupuncture research <1>. The Consensus Statement concluded, “There is sufficient evidence of acupuncture’s value to expand its use into conventional medicine and to encourage further studies of its physiological and clinical value.” It also emphasized that conclusions regarding acupuncture’s efficacy and safety for most conditions were significantly limited by the low number of methodologically sound research trials.

In November 2007, the Society for Acupuncture Research (SAR) held an international symposium aimed at presenting and discussing the progress made in acupuncture research during the decade following the NIH Consensus Development Conference. The symposium presentations, as well as their published summaries <2–4>, unequivocally showed that the field of acupuncture research has significantly expanded and matured since 1997. Phase II/III sham-controlled clinical trials have been successfully completed, and a broad range of basic research studies have identified numerous biochemical and physiological correlates of acupuncture (see Box 1 for overviews of conclusions from the summaries of clinical and basic research presented at the 2007 symposium). However, intriguing paradoxes emerged during the symposium and the writing of the summaries. Proceedings from our 2007 conferences as well as syntheses of our findings from systematic reviews were discussed at a structured SAR Board workshop in October, 2008 (held at Georgetown University and facilitated by Aviad Haramati, a non-SAR member). The workshop resulted in the articulation of two primary paradoxes as well as an outline for this White Paper. Drafts of this paper were then written by a subset of the authors, with eventual input from all Board members and a series of external reviewers.


Box 1: Summary of conclusions emerging from the 2007 Society for Acupuncture Research Conference <3, 4>.

The emergent potential paradoxes that frame this paper are the
(1) A large number of well-designed clinical trials have reported that true acupuncture is superior to usual care, but does not significantly outperform sham acupuncture, findings apparently at odds with traditional theories regarding acupuncture point specificity and needling technique.
(2) While many studies in animal and human experimental models have reported physiological effects that vary as a function of needling parameters (e.g., needle insertion depth, mode of stimulation), the extent to which these parameters influence therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials is unclear.

The goal of this White Paper is not to present a detailed review of the literature. Rather, this paper aims to identify gaps in current knowledge that underlie these paradoxes and to recommend research strategies that can help deconstruct and resolve them. We propose that resolution of the paradoxes lies in applying a bidirectional translational research approach, in which clinical trial design is informed by knowledge of mechanisms underlying acupuncture and by results from pragmatic trials of “real world” clinical practice. With this approach, findings from clinical trials will better inform the role of acupuncture in our evolving health care system.

SNIP



________________________________________

If you are interested, the paradoxes described above are discussed at length in the White Paper.

[laconicsax]

68. I'm sure the Society for Acupuncture Research is completely impartial.

...yet two provocative paradoxes emerged. First, a number of well-designed clinical trials have reported that true acupuncture is superior to usual care, but does not significantly outperform sham acupuncture, findings apparently at odds with traditional theories regarding acupuncture point specificity. Second, although many studies using animal and human experimental models have reported physiological effects that vary as a function of needling parameters (e.g., mode of stimulation) the extent to which these parameters influence therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials is unclear.

Those are only paradoxes if you are unwilling to abandon the position that only "true" acupuncture has any worth, which is hardly an impartial starting point. They're out to prove their brand of magic and don't accept results that cast doubt on their superstition.

[pnwmom]

69. The authors of the paper are medical professionals

at well-respected institutions. The NIH has approved spending millions on acupuncture research and they do not regard it as fraudulent.

Paradoxes in Acupuncture Research: Strategies for Moving Forward
Helene M. Langevin,1 Peter M. Wayne,2 Hugh MacPherson,3 Rosa Schnyer,4 Ryan M. Milley,5 Vitaly Napadow,6 Lixing Lao,7 Jongbae Park,8 Richard E. Harris,9 Misha Cohen,10 Karen J. Sherman,11 Aviad Haramati,12 and Richard Hammerschlag5
1Department of Neurology, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA
2Division for Research and Education in Complementary and Integrative Medical Therapies, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215-3326, USA
3Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK
4College of Pharmacy, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712-0127, USA
5Department of Research, Oregon College of Oriental Medicine, Portland, OR 97216-2859, USA
6Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA 02129-2020, USA
7Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21207-6697, USA
8Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7200, USA
9Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106, USA
10Chicken Soup Chinese Medicine, San Francisco, CA 94103-2961, USA
11Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, WA 98101-1448, USA
12Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20057-1460, USA

[laconicsax]

70. So obviously the Society for Acupuncture Research has no interest in the outcome of the research.

:eyes:

Do to have anything other than a weak appeal to authority?

[pnwmom]

73. Since when are serious medical researchers limited to those with no interest

in the outcome of their research?

Don't all medical researchers have an interest in the outcome of their research?

Is that the best you can do?

[laconicsax]

74. Are you seriously going to argue that conflict of interest is no big deal?

You're conflating two different definitions of "interest" and I can't believe that you don't know it.

[pnwmom]

84. Those are medical researchers at well-respected institutions.

They're paid salaries by their hospitals and universities -- why should they have any more conflict of interest than any other medical researchers?

[laconicsax]

86. Society for Acupuncture Research.

It doesn't matter if they're Nobel laureates, having a professional/financial/personal stake in confirming a preconceived conclusion creates a conflict of interest. It's obvious from what you posted that the the Society begins with the conclusion that acupuncture is proven and looks for evidence to support it.

That is not objective research. Objective research looks for a conclusion that best fits the evidence, not looking for evidence that best fits the conclusion.

In case that still isn't clear, would you trust a group called the Institute for Creation Science to impartially review archaeological and biological evidence of evolution? How about trusting Merck or another pharmaceutical giant to conduct objective research into a potential link between vaccines and autism?

[pnwmom]

87. You're quibbling with the journal that published the research.

I'm saying that the researchers themselves are qualified researchers, regardless of where they chose to publish. And the NIH has supported, and is supporting, a great deal of research that shows that acupuncture does work -- even though the philosophy behind it doesn't accord with what we know about science.

We're also disagreeing with the use of the word "fraud." I don't think there is any deceit involved, and that deceit is part of fraud. You apparently use a different definition -- or else you think all practitioners of acupuncture are deceitful.

[laconicsax]

88. Well, let's see...they're selling something based on lies, so yeah. It's fraud.

Show me an acupuncturist who denies that their method has anything to do with meridians, Qi, or some other kind of made-up nonsense, and I'll gladly accept that not all acupuncturists are fraudsters.

If you still don't think that what they do constitutes fraud, then I suggest you start paying me to ensure that the gravitational constant remains, well, constant. It takes a lot of effort to keep it from fluctuating, and I'd appreciate some compensation.

[SidDithers]

78. Now you're comparing accupuncture proponents to Birthers?...

Wait.

That's actually a pretty good comparison. :hi:

Sid

[SDuderstadt]

79. We should construct some sort of continuum of...

wackiness. I propose that "chem-trailers" be the extreme right side.

[laconicsax]

80. Pshaw. They're tame compared to the 'lizard people' people.

Thems some wacky shit.

[xchrom]

24. recommend

[BuddhaGirl]

39. Be wary of Stephen Barrett

"Failed MD Stephen Barrett" - a crackpot

http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm


"Quackwatch review - Is Stephen Barrett a Quack? Is he fair, balanced, or biased, by Ray Sahelian, M.D. - Quackwatch sends an email to Dr. Sahelian"

http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html


Just to balance things out... ;-)

[ingac70]

43. "Barrett could NOT pass the examinations necessary to become "Board Certified.""

Nice. Wasn't even smart enough to be a shrink.

[Odin2005]

49. Traditional Chinese Medicine = You Support Poachers.

[BuddhaGirl]

53. Pharmaceutical drugs - you support animal testing.

right? :eyes:

[Odin2005]

58. Animal testing isn't driving species extinct.

[laconicsax]

62. *psst*

Yes it is...species of bacteria, parasites, and virii (yes, I know they're technically strains, not species).

[Odin2005]

64. LULZ!

:hi:

[Orrex]

60. If you can come up with an eco-friendly way for me to sell powdered rhino horn, I'm all ears

Until then, why are you trying to keep me from healing sick people with my ancient and traditional methods?

[snagglepuss]

71. Exactly. Black bears get slaughtered so assholes can treat their hemorrhoids

with the bear's gall bladder.

The very fact that Chinese medicine doesn't take animal suffering and slaughter into account speaks volumes about the mindset. Not impressed in the lest. It irritates me no end for people praising something so barbaric.

So some things work. Big effiing deal. If traditional Chinese medicine is sooo superior why do flu outbreaks start in China?

[laconicsax]

72. Better question:

If TCM is sooo superior, why don't those who advocate it take mercury-based immortality pills?

[uppityperson]

83. Be wary of ANY medicine

Any type medicine has its uses and misuses. Beware of the misuses.

That can be a DC who "prescribes" supplements for a particular condition, acting in many states beyond their scope of practice, or says they can cure everything, that everything is related to subluxations.

That can be a MD who prescribes an antibiotic for a viral infection, or says they can cure everything.

That can be a LAC who says they can cure everything by acupuncture.

That can be ANYONE who says they can cure everything by whatevetheheck they do.

Each has its uses, each has its misuses. Yes, I am a "worshiper of science" person. If it can't be proven, repeatedly, I don't believe it works. Unfortunately it is too easy for an unscrupulous practitioner of some sort of "medicine" to take advantage of people, especially those practitioners who are unlicensed or minimally monitored.

[CanSocDem]

85. Personally...

...I like Chinese Medicine Balls aka Baoding balls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baoding_balls

They work. For me.

They are great alternative to dulling my senses with the various pharma pain medications.

And no, I don't have any to sell you.

.

[Orrex]

89. Aren't those the things that you insert in...

naw, never mind.