Debunking Acupuncture

Discussion of massage and bodywork techniques, along with holistic therapies, both generic and modality specific. A broad spectrum of discussion!

Moderators: stonegirl, riversinger

Debunking Acupuncture

Postby Rozax on Fri Mar 30, 2012 4:28 am

Does acupuncture work for pain? A review of modern acupuncture evidence and myths, particularly with regards to treating low back pain and other common pain problems
published 2/02/09, updated 3/20/12
In early 2009, the British Medical Journal published a new analysis of acupuncture for pain … with discouraging results.1 Again! Not the first time. Not the last.

More recently and dramatically, the journal Pain did it again — one of the top ten journals for pain and injury science. In early 2011, Pain published a thorough and rather harsh scientific smack down of acupuncture, concluding that there is “little truly convincing evidence that acupuncture is effective in reducing pain.”

What do we make of this? While this quote gives you the gist of it, I suggest clicking that first hyperlink and reading the full article.
The big print giveth and the small print taketh away.
User avatar
Rozax
Registered Member
 
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby riversinger on Sat Mar 31, 2012 5:45 am

I tend to think that the medical profession is so heavily invested in by the major pharmaceutical companies that many of these studies are heavily biased. After all drugs & surgery are usually all you'll be offered when going to see the doctor - it is what they're trained to do - so that's what their patients should expect to get from them.

They don't usually have a background in the legit or otherwise complementary therapies, nor do they generally want to give any support/credence to them working. After all if they can't sell you on the "benefits" of drugs & surgery they don't make any money! Just my take on things in a nutshell.

While standardized medicine certainly has it's place, and is necessary, it's also more than a bit of a monopoly in this country! We're marketed to death by the Big Pharma ads on TV all the time, but now that they have to state many of the side-effects I'm even more convinced that many of these drugs are worse than whatever you think you may have, or been diagnosed with!

Common sense & home remedies would probably be debunked too if these medical journals are any indication!
The song of the spirit is as the song
of the river, on a journey back to source.
riversinger
Moderator
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Bucks County, PA

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby squash_blsm on Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:06 am

I feel that traditional western allopathic "medicine" has a vested interest in "debunking" ANY alternative therapy.

There are just as many studies showing that alternative therapies including acupuncture have many health benefits - including pain relief (except it's just easier to take that pill and mask the pain instead of dealing with it - isn't it?).

We need to be fully aware of supposed foundations and research institutes that have an agenda because they are funded by powerful organizations and corporations - primarily big pharma and those who have a financial interest in squashing any and all therapies that threaten that interest.

So my thought?
Meh.

People will do what WORKS for them...IF they have access to alternative care.
Unfortunately trying to keep people from even TRYING alternative therapies is, in my mind, just plain disempowering and bordering on villainous tyranny. :grin:
Help make a difference in our world by joining the Spa Professionals team on Kiva.org and make a loan to someone in need today.
http://www.kiva.org/...ls/by/cindy9404
User avatar
squash_blsm
Moderator
 
Posts: 1051
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby pueppi on Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:08 pm

squash_blsm wrote:I feel that traditional western allopathic "medicine" has a vested interest in "debunking" ANY alternative therapy.

:iagree:

This gentleman seems to be trying to sell his book... "Save Yourself From Lowe Back Pain" more than anything else.

    He states: "17.More about what I hear from patients and readers: I understand and appreciate that “cured” patients would probably not have come to see me later on for the same problem. However, I’m really plugged into the lives of a lot of pain patients, and there is simply no theme of acupuncture-cure stories. No one comes in for wrist pain and comments that “I used to have neck pain, too, but it was cured by an acupuncturist.” The stories just aren’t there, in my experience. The stories that are there are the failure stories. Seemingly every other patient who’s been through the “therapy grinder” (tried everything) has received acupuncture that did little or nothing to help them."


We all help people in different ways. Sometimes one modality works and sometimes another is needed. Not every person with sciatica needs a dose-pack (steroids)... sometimes they need massage. Not every client with neck pain needs massage... sometimes they need chiropractic. Not every elbow pain injury responds to chiropractic... sometimes they need acupuncture. Etc.


    He also states: "24.Working as a Registered Massage Therapist, I routinely saw placebo backfire in this way. Pain patients in general, and low back pain patients in particular, are already strongly predisposed to anxious assumptions that their problem is “really bad.” When the placebo effect of acupuncture wears off, as it must, this anxiety is reinforced and the pain is elevated to the status of a fiercer enemy. A nice trap. I describe this in a little more detail in Save Yourself from Low Back Pain!"


After looking through this fellows pages, he also seems to be anti-homeopathy... and provides a lot of negative notes and resources against chiropractic. As with most journal articles... some will show benefits and others will not. It all depends on the journal article you pull to proove your point.


I believe this gentleman does have a bias against "alternative" medicine and therefore my assessment is... :blahblah:

As far as I am concerned, it is a waste of my time to dig any deeper into that blog... I'd rather spend my time on more productive things in life.
The Massage Toolbox - Ideas, Resources, Tools and Music. ♫ - Or, search the Post Archives. And, visit us on Facebook.
User avatar
pueppi
Registered Member
 
Posts: 5259
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 6:01 am
Location: Texas / The Lone Star State

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby Rozax on Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:56 pm

I feel that everyone generally doesn't give the placebo effect enough credit. I read an article of a study some time ago (not the actual study, but an article about it, mind you) that observed young children going through chemotherapy. An exercise they were given was to draw their cancer (mostly depicted as evil monsters) being defeated by knights (or, possibly, any hero of the child's choosing), and the children who partook in this had better results.

I've tried using the placebo effect on myself in various cases, but knowing what I was doing kinda ruined my results. For example, I randomly decided I would drink more water to treat my anxiety. Nothing connecting the two; just trying to trick my nerves into being more cooperative (I tried M&Ms for focus in high school). And water is essentially free, so it would've been nice. I ended up going on a year of anti-depressants, which wasn't cheap, but it was worth it. From a holistic standpoint, which I respect, it is kinda like detonating a bomb to kill a fly, but this proverbial fly was having rather devastating effects on me, and I didn't know where it was. I don't know how the homeopathic principal of "let like be cured by like" would have helped this, and given what I've read of homeopathy on wikipedia, I'm not so sure how much it would have helped me, anyway:

Homeopathic remedies are prepared by serial dilution with shaking by forceful striking on an elastic body, which homeopaths term succussion. Each dilution followed by succussion is assumed to increase the effectiveness. Homeopaths call this process potentization. Dilution often continues until none of the original substance remains...

...A 2C dilution requires a substance to be diluted to one part in one hundred, and then some of that diluted solution diluted by a further factor of one hundred. This works out to one part of the original substance in 10,000 parts of the solution. A 6C dilution repeats this process six times, ending up with the original material diluted by a factor of 100−^6=10−^12 (one part in one trillion or 1/1,000,000,000,000). Higher dilutions follow the same pattern. In homeopathy, a solution that is more dilute is described as having a higher potency, and more dilute substances are considered by homeopaths to be stronger and deeper-acting remedies. The end product is often so diluted that it is indistinguishable from the dilutant (pure water, sugar or alcohol)...

...Homeopathic remedies should not contain pharmacologically active molecules, A pharmacological effect would violate fundamental principles of homeopathy. Modern homeopathic practitioners have suggested water has a memory allowing homeopathic preparations to work without any of the original diluted substance...

If this is the case, then I'm sure my tap water has plenty of memory based on everything it's experienced, from its source to my faucet, and everything in between.
The big print giveth and the small print taketh away.
User avatar
Rozax
Registered Member
 
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby EgoMagickian on Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:22 pm

I suspect that current science is not yet sophisticated enough to study chinese medicine accurately. Maybe one day. Until then, too much gets lots in translation from one cosmovision to the other.
User avatar
EgoMagickian
Tech Admin
 
Posts: 2242
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 12:34 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby JasonE on Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:52 pm

EgoMagickian wrote:I suspect that current science is not yet sophisticated enough to study chinese medicine accurately. Maybe one day. Until then, too much gets lots in translation from one cosmovision to the other.


I suspect that the ancient Chinese would have explained it all very differently if they had a more thorough understanding of anatomy, physiology, pathology, and biochemistry.

Modern Chinese acupuncture researchers are studying it intensely on a full-time basis. Their top researcher stated in a published interview that acupuncture "does not work on about 20-30% of the population"... and further stated that he is one of those immune to its effects.

I have had mixed results with acupuncture. For some things, it did nothing. For other things, it seemed to make a big difference. But why? That's the golden question!
Jason Erickson, NCTMB, ACE-CPT, AIS-TA
Massage Therapist, Personal Trainer
http://www.CSTMinnesota.com

Internet forums are like going to the zoo; if you get enough monkeys together, sooner or later someone will start throwing their poo.
User avatar
JasonE
Moderator-S.S.S
 
Posts: 2234
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 9:12 pm
Location: Burnsville, MN

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby Rozax on Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:55 am

JasonE wrote:
EgoMagickian wrote:I suspect that current science is not yet sophisticated enough to study chinese medicine accurately. Maybe one day. Until then, too much gets lots in translation from one cosmovision to the other.

I suspect that the ancient Chinese would have explained it all very differently if they had a more thorough understanding of anatomy, physiology, pathology, and biochemistry. <snip>

This same journalist says as much in this article: Do You Believe in Qi?

For the nit-picky record, I always pronounce it as chi. I've yet to meet a mainstream westerner who pronounces it as key. The spelling is nothing to go by, either. I once had a classmate named Qiang, but it's pronounced yang. Again, that's just my nit-picky two cents.
The big print giveth and the small print taketh away.
User avatar
Rozax
Registered Member
 
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby EgoMagickian on Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:08 pm

Rozax wrote:
JasonE wrote:
EgoMagickian wrote:I suspect that current science is not yet sophisticated enough to study chinese medicine accurately. Maybe one day. Until then, too much gets lots in translation from one cosmovision to the other.

I suspect that the ancient Chinese would have explained it all very differently if they had a more thorough understanding of anatomy, physiology, pathology, and biochemistry. <snip>

This same journalist says as much in this article: Do You Believe in Qi?

For the nit-picky record, I always pronounce it as chi. I've yet to meet a mainstream westerner who pronounces it as key. The spelling is nothing to go by, either. I once had a classmate named Qiang, but it's pronounced yang. Again, that's just my nit-picky two cents.


Oh that was a beautiful article, I'm glad I read it. I appreciate his appreciation for poetic, not just scientific, forms of truth. The way he approaches qi is pretty much how I try to approach everything. I call it radical agnosticism.
User avatar
EgoMagickian
Tech Admin
 
Posts: 2242
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 12:34 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby pueppi on Tue May 29, 2012 10:27 am

Here's something from the Archives of Internal Medicine (Arch Intern Med. 2012;():1-9. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.1233 ) which may be useful:

Original Investigation |
ONLINE FIRST

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Acupuncture in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD):
The COPD-Acupuncture Trial (CAT)Acupuncture in Patients With COPD

Masao Suzuki, LAc, PhD; Shigeo Muro, MD, PhD; Yuki Ando, MSc; Takashi Omori, PhD; Tetsuhiro Shiota, MD, PhD; Kazuo Endo, MD; Susumu Sato, MD, PhD; Kensaku Aihara, MD; Masataka Matsumoto, MD; Shinko Suzuki, MD; Ryo Itotani, MD; Manabu Ishitoko, MD; Yoshikazu Hara, MD; Masaya Takemura, MD, PhD; Tetsuya Ueda, MD, PhD; Hitoshi Kagioka, MD, PhD; Masataka Hirabayashi, MD; Motonari Fukui, MD, PhD; Michiaki Mishima, MD, PhD

Author Affiliations: Department of Respiratory Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto (Drs M. Suzuki, Muro, Sato, and Mishima), Division of Respiratory Medicine, Respiratory Disease Center Kitano Hospital, The Tazuke Kofukai Medical Research Institute, Osaka (Drs M. Suzuki, Aihara, Matsumoto, S. Suzuki, Itotani, Ishitoko, Takemura, Ueda, Kagioka, and Fukui), Biostatistics Group, Center for Product Evaluation, Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, Tokyo (Ms Ando), Epidemiology and Biostatistics Laboratory, Faculty of Culture and Information Science, Doshisha University, Kyoto (Dr Omori), Department of Respiratory Medicine, Ako City Hospital, Ako City (Dr Shiota), Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki Hospital, Hyogo (Drs Endo, Hara, and Hirabayashi), and Department of Clinical Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Meiji University of Integrative Medicine, Kyoto (Dr M. Suzuki), Japan.

Arch Intern Med. 2012;():1-9. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.1233
Published online May 14, 2012


ABSTRACT

Background
Dyspnea on exertion (DOE) is a major symptom of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is difficult to control. This study was performed to determine whether acupuncture is superior to placebo needling in improving DOE in patients with COPD who are receiving standard medication.

Methods
Sixty-eight of 111 patients from the Kansai region of Japan who were diagnosed as having COPD and were receiving standard medication participated in a randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial (July 1, 2006, through March 31, 2009) in which the patients, evaluators, and statistician were unaware of the random allocation. Participants were randomly assigned to traditional acupuncture (real acupuncture group, n = 34) or placebo needling (placebo acupuncture group, n = 34). Both groups received real or placebo needling at the same acupoints once a week for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the modified Borg scale score evaluated immediately after the 6-minute walk test. Measurements were obtained at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment.

Result
After 12 weeks, the Borg scale score after the 6-minute walk test was significantly better in the real acupuncture group compared with the placebo acupuncture group (mean [SD] difference from baseline by analysis of covariance, −3.6 [1.9] vs 0.4 [1.2]; mean difference between groups by analysis of covariance, −3.58; 95% CI, −4.27 to −2.90). Patients with COPD who received real acupuncture also experienced improvement in the 6-minute walk distance during exercise, indicating better exercise tolerance and reduced DOE.

Conclusion
This study clearly demonstrates that acupuncture is a useful adjunctive therapy in reducing DOE in patients with COPD.

Trial Registration umin.ac.jp/ctr Identifier: UMIN000001277
The Massage Toolbox - Ideas, Resources, Tools and Music. ♫ - Or, search the Post Archives. And, visit us on Facebook.
User avatar
pueppi
Registered Member
 
Posts: 5259
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 6:01 am
Location: Texas / The Lone Star State

Re: Debunking Acupuncture

Postby randomness0 on Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:26 am

One of the problems associated with (western) research studies into acupuncture is that the research requires a standard protocol for treatment whereas most acupuncture practitioners will view each presenting client as an individual and treat them accordingly.
There will always be issues with trying to fit traditional medicine philosophies within a western medicine research model. Not saying that this is right or wrong, merely observing that there is always the potential for conflict between the two approaches. Similar arguments could be used for some areas of research into the benefits and effects of massage.

Richard
========
Mobile Massage in Sydney - http://www.massagesydney.com.au
Remedial Massage Clovelly - http://www.remedial-massage.com.au/clovelly
randomness0
Registered Member
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 4:11 pm
Location: australia


Return to Massage & Holistic Therapies (Techniques, Modalities, etc.)

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot]