Acupuncture placebo better than acupuncture

[Jeff Corey]

Give them credit for "Our results indicated that the placebo acupuncture
may indeed lead to a higher pregnancy rate. However,
we cannot draw a firm conclusion because a control arm
without any acupuncture was not included for comparison."

 

[quixotecoyote]

pls?
he is reporting?
he is commenting, and that based on a yahoonews article while the full paper is avaible for free but he did not read it yet.

i am openmindedly interested in Acupuncture, but i read the full studie, and pointed out what i find flaw about the studie.
before comming to an oppinion, one should atleast read the studie.
But sure, when the prejudice is to big before reading it, it makes not really sence to read it.

Not only can't you point out where he was wrong, you can't even engage in coherent blather about it.

If you want to be taken somewhat seriously, don't type like a drunken teenage AOL'er.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Skepti

This bugs me a bit, not you, but the posters like the one at the beginning who didn't know the difference between a "random sample" and random assignment and thought that one needed over 300 people to do an internally valid experiment. And others who sniggle at p=.038. Two tailed, of course.

Yes, the introduction and discussion are packed with manure. But one credo I learned was, "The data talks, BS walks."
I fault the editors for not gleaning the wheat from the chaff here.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Not only can't you point out where he was wrong, you can't even engage in coherent blather about it.

If you want to be taken somewhat seriously, don't type like a drunken teenage AOL'er.

I dunno, but I got what he said. But I didn't get what you meant by an "AOL'er". Whassat?

 

[Delvo]

Inacupuncture!

 

[Jeff Corey]

What's the point of that?

 

[DC]

This quote from the abstract says it all for me.Rather than looking for objective evidence acupuncture works or doesn't work, these 'believers' are looking for confirmation of their pre-existing conviction in magical medicine. What is needed but is missing here is the 'no treatment' arm of the study.This is a common flaw in double blind studies, failing to compare the 'no treatment' group.

Could it be possible, that the people that do not belive in Acupuncture are searching for confirmation?
Because in studies where there are also is a group that gets scientific medicine, and the result shows, the Acupuncture AND the sham Acupuncture both seem to be better than scientific medicine, i see alot handwaving from the people that "know" it doesnt work.

 

[DC]

Not only can't you point out where he was wrong, you can't even engage in coherent blather about it.

If you want to be taken somewhat seriously, don't type like a drunken teenage AOL'er.

yes my spelling sucks, sorry. I dont pay much attention to it, nor did i learn English in school.
I am happy enough wen some understand what i want to express with my funny spelled words

 

[DC]

Inacupuncture!

guess a wordplay like we call it, Inacurate + Acupuncture.

 

[quixotecoyote]

I dunno, but I got what he said. But I didn't get what you meant by an "AOL'er". Whassat?

America OnLine users are supposed to be notoriously clueless.

I used to post to the darwin awards forum. Posting like an "AOLTeen****wit" was grounds for immediate suspension by a mod who would post that as the reason for the infraction. I figured the intent would carry over.

 

[DC]

America OnLine users are supposed to be notoriously clueless.

I used to post to the darwin awards forum. Posting like an "AOLTeen****wit" was grounds for immediate suspension by a mod who would post that as the reason for the infraction. I figured the intent would carry over.

i would be more like a SOLTeen****wit

Swiss Online

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

So? Speculation is allowed in the Discussion section of a scientific article. But the data are still there - the sham acuputure group was significantly better, if not sizably better.

Speculation, yes, deliberately ignoring an obvious possibility, no.

There are two possible explanations for our interesting results: real acupuncture may be associated with a lower pregnancy rate or placebo acupuncture may lead to a higher pregnancy rate.

I can think of a third possibility:

"3.8% of the time a result this extreme would be expected by chance if placebo acupuncture and real acupuncture had the same effect on the overall pregnancy rate. Given there is no viable mechanism of action to explain the difference, this result is in the opposite direction to previous studies and the phenomenon of publication bias, we conclude our and previous statistically significant results are likely to be flukes."

Looking at table I, there are a number of small differences between the two groups which could explain the difference. For example, the real acupuncture group had two more smokers, 9 more couples categorized as having primary infertility (but fewer infertile men) and seven fewer embryos transferred compared to the placebo acupuncture group.

 

[fls]

If you wonder whether the purported hypothesis changed after the experiment was performed and the results were in, you can look at the sample size calculations to get a clue.

In this case, the sample size for two-tailed testing would be about 180, while for one-tailed testing it would be about 140.

The results shouldn't be a surprise, since it has already been well-documented that acupuncture, in the sense that needles are inserted at acupoints, is not effective. Since research comparing acupuncture with no treatment has shown a significant difference (http://www.comoxvalleyacupuncture.com/pdf/paulus study.pdf), it does suggest that psychological factors can influence pregnancy in IVF.

Linda

 

[DC]

If you wonder whether the purported hypothesis changed after the experiment was performed and the results were in, you can look at the sample size calculations to get a clue.

In this case, the sample size for two-tailed testing would be about 180, while for one-tailed testing it would be about 140.

The results shouldn't be a surprise, since it has already been well-documented that acupuncture, in the sense that needles are inserted at acupoints, is not effective. Since research comparing acupuncture with no treatment has shown a significant difference (http://www.comoxvalleyacupuncture.com/pdf/paulus study.pdf), it does suggest that psychological factors can influence pregnancy in IVF.

Linda

Not effective compared to what?

from your link:

The analysis shows that the pregnancy rate for the acupuncture group
is considerably higher than for the control group (42.5% vs 26.3%;
P=.03).

 

[Lothian]

Not effective compared to what?

I would guess that the answer is compared to needles inserted elsewhere.

from your link:

The analysis shows that the pregnancy rate for the acupuncture group
is considerably higher than for the control group (42.5% vs 26.3%;
P=.03).

Errrr that is what she said.

 

[DC]

I would guess that the answer is compared to needles inserted elsewhere.

Errrr that is what she said.

ah, i thought it is not effective compared to no needles at all.

thats why i felt she is contradicting what the study says she linked to.

then i was wrong, sorry.

 

[Dancing David]

(my bolding)

amazing to see that on a sceptics forum.

As opposed to what?

Saying that people shouldn't draw conclusions? Try reading Ivor's post and responding to the points in the post.

 

[fls]

Not effective compared to what?

Compared to pretending to insert needles or not using specific acupoints. That is, the idea of acupuncture - that needles inserted into specific acupoints has a physiologic or therapeutic effect - has been disproven. Whether or not needling (inserting or pretending to insert needles into the body) has an effect any different from expectation may still be worth investigating.

from your link:

The analysis shows that the pregnancy rate for the acupuncture group
is considerably higher than for the control group (42.5% vs 26.3%;
P=.03).

Yes. That demonstrates that either needling has an effect different from expectation, or that expectation can have a significant effect on pregnancy (something that has already been suggested by other observations).

Linda

 

[Dancing David]

Could it be possible, that the people that do not belive in Acupuncture are searching for confirmation?
Because in studies where there are also is a group that gets scientific medicine, and the result shows, the Acupuncture AND the sham Acupuncture both seem to be better than scientific medicine, i see alot handwaving from the people that "know" it doesnt work.

Move goals posts much? One study that is an indication and not conclusive?

You shame yourself with these tactics.

Tylenol is not not recommended to be used twice a week for chronic back pain, you have one six week study. Not studies and no replication.

Keep moving the goal posts DC.

 

[fls]

Could it be possible, that the people that do not belive in Acupuncture are searching for confirmation?
Because in studies where there are also is a group that gets scientific medicine, and the result shows, the Acupuncture AND the sham Acupuncture both seem to be better than scientific medicine, i see alot handwaving from the people that "know" it doesnt work.

I'm making a guess at which studies you are referring to here, but they don't show that acupuncture or needling is any different from expectation. For example, in this study, the response to conventional treatment, acupuncture and sham acupuncture was the same during the course of the treatment. It was only several months after the treatment had finished, that a difference was seen in subjective evaluation of treatment effectiveness. We have already discovered that expectation greatly influences retrograde evaluation of treatment effectiveness (i.e. if you think you received an effective treatment, you remember your pain as greater before the treatment (compared to measures taken at the time) and less (compared to measures taken at the time) after the treatment). And we have already discovered that perception of pain varies with expectation.

As to whether or not anything should be made of the seemingly greater effect of sham acupuncture in this study...

Since prior studies show no difference between sham and real acupuncture, except as to the degree of blinding, it probably should be assumed that this is a fluke. Even though the researchers tried to make something of it in their conclusions, we are not under an obligation to do so.

Linda