Study shows acupuncture doesn't work

[Tricky]

From today's news

Study sticks a pin into the effectiveness of acupuncture therapy
Research finds the ancient remedy offers no greater pain relief than sham treatments

Acupuncture proved no more effective than sham treatments for pain from a common chronic condition, according to a new study.
...
The study concluded that adding acupuncture to other treatments the patients were already using provided no greater pain relief than sham acupuncture treatments, according to the Tuesday issue of Annals of Internal Medicine.
...
In the study, patients in all the groups improved, but very early, after only one or two treatments — far earlier than most acupuncturists would expect an improvement — and then remained at the same level for the rest of the study, Buchwald said.

This is very good news, because acupuncture is one quack treatment that seems to be accepted by a fairly large number of otherwise rational people. Of course, pin-heads will still continue to claim that it works for other things. Give it time. They'll all be debunked.

 

[Bronze Dog]

Give it time. They'll all be debunked.

At which point, they'll probably invent some chi-related disease. Symptoms include tiredness at night, occasional forgetfulness, and spells of fatigue that set in after long days at work.

 

[Kiless]

Yes! Thank you. I'm taking this down to my Vet who has a set of cards on their front desk that I saw today, for cat acupuncture.

 

[Tricky]

Yes! Thank you. I'm taking this down to my Vet who has a set of cards on their front desk that I saw today, for cat acupuncture.

LOL. Seriously? If so, why exactly do you use that vet office? Is it the only one nearby?

 

[Deetee]

Of course, pin-heads will still continue to claim that it works for other things.

One thing that always amuses me/causes despair (depending on my state of mind at the time) is how when a study showing, say, acupuncture "helps relieve tension headache" (as an example), the Woos and Tabloids all scream "PROOF - Acupuncture works!" and then using a giant dollop of twisted logic then ascribe this miraculous curative ability to all medical modalities - they conclude acupuncture therefore works for absolutely everything.

This is a bit like someone saying "Paracetamol helps headaches", and having the entire medical profession then promote paracetamol as a cure-all for everything from in growing toe-nails to cancer.

KILESS - you have been warned - BRING BACK FAYE!

 

[Loon]

A single study does not invalidate a mode of treatment. Of course, I'm not aware of any really strong studies supporting accupuncture, and the general consensus is, I believe, that it is at more mildly effective in handling certain types of chroic pain.

 

[Mojo]

Of course, I'm not aware of any really strong studies supporting accupuncture, and the general consensus is, I believe, that it is at more mildly effective in handling certain types of chroic pain.

In other words, a treatment for which it is notoriously difficult to devise a convincing double-blinded placebo has been observed to be possibly effective for conditions, such as pain, which have a subjective component...

 

[Kiless]

LOL. Seriously? If so, why exactly do you use that vet office? Is it the only one nearby?

1) They're the place who gave us all our cats - they were all dumped there or sent there after being found dumped in the bushlands.
2) They have an attached cattery which looks after our cats on extended holidays.
3) It's the first time I've seen these cards appear on their front desk and I was there yesterday placing an order - so it's recent.
4) The cards themselves (I was tempted to quietly shift them behind some advertisments for microchipping so they were invisible...) appeared to have a person with veterinary qualifications or at least some official looking initials - I'll go back tomorrow and get one of the cards and show them your article

 

[Rolfe]

.... the general consensus is, I believe, that it is at more mildly effective in handling certain types of chroic pain.

This, being translated, means that a mild beneficial effect on some types of chronic pain is the aspect that has been most successfully peddled by the usual "argument by blatant assertion" favoured by acupuncturists (along with all alt-meddlers). There is no convincing evidence to support this alleged "consensus" (which I certainly am not a part of), and every reason to suggest that the one or two studies which might possibly suggest this (and of course a single study does not validate a mode of treatment) are in fact simply poorly controlled placebo effect.

Rolfe.

 

[steenkh]

In the news report it is said:

For 12 weeks, researchers tested conventional acupuncture against treatments in which needles were improperly applied in 100 Seattle-area patients suffering from fibromyalgia, which is characterized by chronic pain in the head and torso.

So has it been tested against not inserting any needles at all, and if so, on how many patients?

I seem to recall that inserting needles at the "wrong" places has been tested before and with the same result: It has the same effect as inserting the needles at the "right" places. This does not really say that acupuncture is worthless as a pain killer, only that acupuncture theory is bollocks!

 

[Tricky]

In the news report it is said:

So has it been tested against not inserting any needles at all, and if so, on how many patients?

I seem to recall that inserting needles at the "wrong" places has been tested before and with the same result: It has the same effect as inserting the needles at the "right" places. This does not really say that acupuncture is worthless as a pain killer, only that acupuncture theory is bollocks!

In the article it said:

The sham treatments — acupuncture for an unrelated condition, needle insertion at points that are not used in acupuncture, and simulated acupuncture that didn't actually pierce the skin — were intended to help pinpoint what elements of acupuncture might be beneficial.

I don't know how these sham treatments were compared to each other. I'd like to see the paper.

 

[Kiless]

I seem to recall that inserting needles at the "wrong" places has been tested before and with the same result: It has the same effect as inserting the needles at the "right" places. This does not really say that acupuncture is worthless as a pain killer, only that acupuncture theory is bollocks!

*surpresses visions of daft acupuncturist practicing on cats and having cats claw and beat the living @&#^%@*&#^% out of them..... ...maybe I should just leave the cards there and let the simulus / response do the work for me.....*

 

[Ashles]

Yes! Thank you. I'm taking this down to my Vet who has a set of cards on their front desk that I saw today, for cat acupuncture.

I think anyone who thinks cat acupuncture will have any healing effect on cats.... hmm, what would be a suitably painful punishment for them... ah yes - they should be allowed to go ahead and try it.

As long as I can watch.

 

[drkitten]

A single study does not invalidate a mode of treatment.

Of course not.

On the other hand, if there aren't any strong studies that support accupuncture, and there are strong studies refuting it, one kind of wonders what the standards for evidence are.

How many studies should it take?

How strong does the evidence against accupuncture need to be?

 

[Loon]

Of course not.

On the other hand, if there aren't any strong studies that support accupuncture, and there are strong studies refuting it, one kind of wonders what the standards for evidence are.

How many studies should it take?

How strong does the evidence against accupuncture need to be?

No idea how long it should take or how many studies. Nor do I claim to be an expert on accupuncture. I was just under the impression that the evidence before this study was stronger than everyone else here (all with more experience in the field than I have) seem so think it is.

 

[Kilik]

I think a major issue is the acupuncturist and the twisting of the needle.

This wasn't so clear in the article, as it was not an especially in-depth report. I know something is happening when the needle is turned. I wouldn't be quite so confident acupuncture is going to be debunked case after case, that's just a bit overconfident.

 

[Rolfe]

No idea how long it should take or how many studies. Nor do I claim to be an expert on accupuncture. I was just under the impression that the evidence before this study was stronger than everyone else here (all with more experience in the field than I have) seem so think it is.

The evidence already in hand ranges from the pathetic to the non-existent. It's just that a lot of people have been asserting that there is evidence of efficacy for acupuncture, and if you peddle a lie long enough it tends to grow some roots.

I think some of it is a sort of politeness. Acupuncture isn't so obviously woo as, say, homoeopathy. Something is actually done to the patient. If indeed there were to be a demonstrable effect, we might reasonably expect to find a mechanism of action without having to rewrite all of basic physics and chemistry. So, when it seems just too impolite to go on rubbishing every woo-woo claim there is, some people seem to latch on to acupuncture as something they think might have a bit of semi-legitimacy to it, and say, well, that one might have some credibility. Thus you find quite a lot of medically-savvy people prepared to pay it some lip service, I suspcet just to make it sound as if they're not entirely "closed-minded", and so the impression of legitimacy grows.

There was also, in America, a committee of acupuncture proponents who once managed to get some officially-endorsed guidelines published saying that acupuncture should be integrated into conventional health-care, but really, it was just a group of acupuncturists promoting their own interests. But of course people have quoted this, because it sounds authoritative.

Take a look at Nonsense with Needles.

Rolfe.

PS. There are only two "c"s in acupuncture, and they don't come together.

 

[drkitten]

I know something is happening when the needle is turned.

How do you "know" this?

I wouldn't be quite so confident acupuncture is going to be debunked case after case, that's just a bit overconfident.

"I wouldn't be quite so confident the sun is going to continue to rise day after day, that's just a bit overconfident."

I have the same question for you as for Loon, then. If you're suggesting that we take a cautious wait-and-see approach to acupuncture --- at what point is it reasonable to stop waiting? At what point would it no longer be overconfidence to expect the rest of the experiments to show the same things as the ones we have already done?

How much evidence would need be amassed before acupuncture is no longer considered a viable medical hypothesis?

 

[drkitten]

PS. There are only two "c"s in acupuncture, and they don't come together.

Only unimaginative people can only think of a single way to spell a word.

 

[Kilik]

I have had acupuncture a few years ago which when the needle was twisted it was a very real sensation and effect, like almost a mild tightening and shooting, with electric type sensations too, but not just like a reflex, it stays and effects deep in the body. So that is at least real. I felt effects afterward in my body and health but that's not really provable

I also can feel qi without acupuncture. It starts out very similar to a TENS type machine or electrical current machine, but becomes alot more, a thicker more flowing energy.

I also know there are less effective acupuncturists too.

SO that's my experience anyways

It is also the single most important and effective factor for vitalization of the body. What is called the "runner's high" is a part of this.