I’d hope this is based on other information than just this particular study. Specifically I think it’s premature to jump from deciding where to put the needles based on traditional diagnostic methods to it not mattering where you stick the needles.

I agree that the culprit here is poor study design, but I’d go about the study a bit differently. First gathering anecdotal evidence for positive acupuncture effects for various conditions, then cross with which of those conditions is most common (largest subject pool).

Don’t tell the subjects the nature of the study – just that it’s a study for their condition for this amount of time. Then, render the subjects unconscious from prior to transport to the treatment location. One group will receive no treatment, the other will receive acupuncture while unconscious. Should make for identical placebo effect while eliminating acupuncture specific placebo effect.

One tiny little correction- in paragraph 13, 2nd under Conclusions and Recommendations, sentence beginning “If it does work…” has “are their easier and less invasive ways” ; this should be “are there easier and less invasive ways.”

I was previously unfamiliar with this blog, but I find the approach very good and will definitely be back.

Do you think that because it is such an elaborate placebo effect (if I have your reasoning right), that is why there is so much anecdotal evidence to support it?

Thanks

David

Back pain can spontaneously resolve. This is no big deal.

You also give a huge clue as to why this is actually not such a big coincidence. You tried various treatments, then chiropractic, then acupuncture. If at any point duing that process your back pain resolved, you would credit whatever the last thing you tried. If the pain resolved earlier, you would be singing the praises of chiropractic.

There are also many people who visit many types of therapists – and so coincidence spontaneous improvements are likely to happen on a regular basis – and everyone will think their case could not be a coincidence.

Further – your memory is now hopelessly contaminated by the narrative that you tell. It is therefore not reliable.

All of this is why we need systematic controlled observations – which show that acupuncture does not work.

Up til about 5 years ago I suffered from chronic lower back pain. It was difficult to bend over or to try to pick things up without some noticeable pain.

Short of surgery, I tried several remedies and none of them seemed to have any lasting effect, and I certainly wasn’t interested in compounding the problem by damaging my liver through the extended and continuous use of things like advil or ibuprofen.

I decided to see a chiropractor. So I went ahead and set up a fairly long term regimen of chiropractic treatment. These treatments were again helpful in the short term but the relief they provided was fairly brief.

I mentioned this to a friend of mine and they suggested I see an accupuncturist. I was VERY skeptical about this and didn’t see how being turned into a human pin-cushion could possible help.

In spite of my strong skepticism in the practice of accupuncture,
I went ahead and scheduled one appointment.
I went in, filled out all the usual paperwork and waited to see the doctor.
I was taken to one of the exam rooms and was told to remove my shirt and pants and was given a gown to wear.

The doctor explained what would happen and what I’d feel and just to lay still and not move.

So she inserted each needle, about 15 in all and left me to just lay there and wait.

Well, after this session I didn’t bother to make another appointment. Not because I felt the treatment didn’t work, but because it did work.

Its been about five years since that treatment and I have not had any back pain since that time. Certainly it couldn’t have been because I “wanted” it to help, heck, I was very skeptical that it would help. I really didn’t believe it would be of any benefit.
But to this day I do not have any back pain. So is it just a big coincidence that it helped when nothing else would?

You can decide for yourself.

What does science mean? it means “knowledge.” what do you really know??? better question is, what is the difference between knowledge and belief??? think about it. really think about it. there is no difference. everything is belief… there is maybe one thing you can know “cogito ergo sum” and that is your existence. besides that what can you really say you know? science is a belief system, just as acupuncture is. i hope you realize that. science is not as concrete as you may think. please look up what a scientific realist vs. instrumentalist is.

understanding of biology? do you understand biology? biology has a long way to go my friend. there is more that is unknown than that is known. it may appear biologist know a lot, but I worked at the NIH and speaking to any biologist they are more confused than ever.

naive stance? i have studied both allopathic medicine and naturopathic medicine. how many science based medicines have helped with the common cold? none. science based medicine has sickened more people with the common cold than it has helped….

acupuncture does “work,” it is effective. misleading anecdotal evidence? tell that to my patients who have tried all allopathic scientific based evidence treatments!!! have you even tried acupuncture with your patients? have you tried acupuncture yourself???

scientific evidence is negative because you are pinning one belief system on another belief system. if you have never tried an artichoke how can you know what an artichoke tastes like? you can’t.

Acupuncture has low plausibility for most of the claims made for it because of our understanding of biology. The “theory of acupuncture” is vague as there are many. The notion of chi is absolutely not scientific, but a pre-scientific philosophy. There are some idea about counter-irritation for purely symptomatic effects, but these are speculative.

At present, acupuncture has no basis in science.

And – more importantly – the clinical evidence is soundly negative. Acupuncture does not “work” (and everyone knows exactly what I mean when I phrase it that way).

Finally – your anecdotes are highly implausible, and they are just that – anecdotes. Essentially you are saying what every purveyor of unproven therapies says – I don’t care that the scientific evidence is negative, I have seen it work. But this is a hopelessly naive stance. You are putting low-grade and inherently misleading anecdotal evidence above well-controlled rigorous observation. That is not science-based medicine.

Secondly – acupuncture is based on the same basis of logic as science is. Science uses inductive logic based upon several observations. So does acupuncture.

Thirdly – nothing in science is proven. theories are inducted just like the theory of acupuncture. so you cannot say that acupuncture has no scientific plausibility, because the theory of acupuncture is based on the same scientific principles.

I trained as an acupuncturist and later went on to medical school to become a neurologist. In my practice I use both modalities to treat my patients. Sometimes there is nothing more effective than acupuncture. There might be no study to prove it, but proof for me is when my patients are able to walk after suffering a stroke. Sometimes I receive patients who after two years of stroke rehabilitation cannot walk on their own. There is no “scientific medicine” that can help them. However with acupuncture – “superstitious medicine”- they walk.