As reported here, a recent study found that sticking needles in people randomly is pretty much as effective as using "proper" acupuncture
( Read more... )
actually - traditional acupuncture (theory and practice) has been -confirmed- in other studies (in specific treatments). -acupressure- has been ruled "woo woo". (as has "touch therapy" and a load of other ones) Big difference. so no it's not complete nonsense. It just contains some nonsense - and the proportion of that is unknown as yet.
(and investigation has been kept separate from the mythology in the reports I've seen - but it has been a few years since I last read any) Personally I think this whole field should be kept in the "questionable, under review" branch until more thorough research is done.
Well, this study quite clearly demolishes the "theory and practice" of acupuncture, from what I can see. Poking people with needles is just as effective as poking people with needles according to the practice of acupuncture. That means that the practice of acupuncture has no effect, just the needles and/or placebo effect.
No it doesn't - just this particular group of treatments. It also opens up a new channel of enquiry re: WHY these needles are effective in this treatment regardless of acupuncture methods. It is still an open question.
However this doesn't legitimize the practise either - just to keep that clear.
Look, Acupuncture has this huge complicated theoretical basis involving "chi flows" and "energy centres" and such guff. If that theoretical underpinning, which goes against everything science tells us about how the human body operates, is completely wrong about one application of the theory, it's a damn good indication to me that it's most probably also wrong for all other applications.
We're left with a really big placebo effect, or possibly some effect from the needles that works in a way completely different to how the acupuncturists claim. So, if there is an actual effect from the needles, the acupuncturists have got it all wrong. They need to throw away their mumbo-jumbo magical theory and start looking at what actually happens.
But of course, they will never do such a thing, because they're SCAM practitioners, and their mystique is far more important than actual evidence.
Re: control groups?politasSeptember 27 2007, 07:49:03 UTC
I thought that poking needles in people without using the "theory and practice" of acupuncture was the control group. And what was shown was that the "theory and practice" of acupuncture is nonsense. The difference between the control and the acupuncture was statistically meaningless.
What it did clearly show, is that people thought they felt better after "receiving acupuncture", whether or not they actually got acupuncture, or just had someone poking them with small needles, and that chronic back pain does not respond well to medicine, which is pretty well known, or we wouldn't have so many "alternative practitioners" working that field.
Personally, I think that chronic back pain is extremely susceptible to placebo effects, since there's a large mental factor in the condition. You're expecting back pain, so your muscles tense up, and you get back pain.
Re: control groups?politasSeptember 27 2007, 22:54:44 UTC
Is that really required? They've already shown that whatever effect acupuncture has, it has nothing to do with how the practitioners and theorists claim it operates. That pretty much just leaves placebo.
Scientific medicine tends to have no placebo effect. In fact, it often has a negative placebo, due to lawsuits leading doctors to fall over themselves to warn patients about the risks and real expected results of treatments.
I think the big trouble is the fact that you can't sue acupuncturists and other SCAM practitioners for making outrageous claims.
Comments 9
Big difference.
so no it's not complete nonsense. It just contains some nonsense - and the proportion of that is unknown as yet.
(and investigation has been kept separate from the mythology in the reports I've seen - but it has been a few years since I last read any)
Personally I think this whole field should be kept in the "questionable, under review" branch until more thorough research is done.
Reply
Reply
It is still an open question.
However this doesn't legitimize the practise either - just to keep that clear.
Reply
We're left with a really big placebo effect, or possibly some effect from the needles that works in a way completely different to how the acupuncturists claim. So, if there is an actual effect from the needles, the acupuncturists have got it all wrong. They need to throw away their mumbo-jumbo magical theory and start looking at what actually happens.
But of course, they will never do such a thing, because they're SCAM practitioners, and their mystique is far more important than actual evidence.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
What it did clearly show, is that people thought they felt better after "receiving acupuncture", whether or not they actually got acupuncture, or just had someone poking them with small needles, and that chronic back pain does not respond well to medicine, which is pretty well known, or we wouldn't have so many "alternative practitioners" working that field.
Personally, I think that chronic back pain is extremely susceptible to placebo effects, since there's a large mental factor in the condition. You're expecting back pain, so your muscles tense up, and you get back pain.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Scientific medicine tends to have no placebo effect. In fact, it often has a negative placebo, due to lawsuits leading doctors to fall over themselves to warn patients about the risks and real expected results of treatments.
I think the big trouble is the fact that you can't sue acupuncturists and other SCAM practitioners for making outrageous claims.
Reply
Leave a comment