• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Acupuncture not just a placebo effect

14 People. Wow, That many? Why not just 2?


"In one intervention, patients were touched with blunt needles but were aware that the needle would not pierce the skin and that it did not have any therapeutic value."

"Another intervention involved treatment with specially developed "trick" needles that give the impression that the skin was being penetrated even though the needles never actually pierced the skin. "

"The third intervention was real acupuncture. "

They then talk about areas of the Brain that are activated. Why not just do a study on it actually curing certain ailments, etc in respect to the trick needles?

So what they (presumably) show, in the study of 14 people, is when a needle does not pierce the skin (trick needle) and when a needle does pierce the skin (real needle) it results in "another region of the brain, the insular, [being] excited by the treatment"

Yeah ok, really exciting stuff. Getting stabbed with a real needle as opposed to a "fake one" results in "another region of the brain, the insular, being excited".

PS: And was it DB? Did the administrator know if it was a fake needle or a real one?


Not knowing much about acupuncture, isn't there creedo that there are CERTAIN SPOTS that the needle is put into?

Ie: Placebo can be putting a real needle in the wrong spot?
 
"Why not just do a study on it actually curing certain ailments, etc in respect to the trick needles?"

I suppose in the interests of objectivity. Using sensors to detect signals in significant areas of the brain, cuts out the need to subjectively define (by the patient or doctor) whether or not any ailment has actually been "cured".
 
Explorer said:
"Why not just do a study on it actually curing certain ailments, etc in respect to the trick needles?"

I suppose in the interests of objectivity. Using sensors to detect signals in significant areas of the brain, cuts out the need to subjectively define (by the patient or doctor) whether or not any ailment has actually been "cured".
Click to expand...

So it shows (presumably) that areas of the brain are activated when a real needle is inserted in the body vs a fake needle not being inserted into the body.

Take acupuncture totally out of that, it's irrelevent. Is there are any difference in the brain when the skin is pierced vs when it is not pierced?
 
Explorer said:
"Why not just do a study on it actually curing certain ailments, etc in respect to the trick needles?"

I suppose in the interests of objectivity. Using sensors to detect signals in significant areas of the brain, cuts out the need to subjectively define (by the patient or doctor) whether or not any ailment has actually been "cured".
Click to expand...

Hopefully acupuncture administrators start advertising their claims as "something happens in your brain that doesn't happen when we use trick needles that fold up on themselves instead of being solid".

Again, Presumably. 14 is such a large number it's hard to dispute chance (of which they didn't list the actual results) .. . . .
 
I posted the info from Nature magazine here.
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=56348

The fact is the acupuncture has shown an effect in PAIN CONTROL that is beyond the placebo.
Instead of reacting in a religious, emotional knee-jerk fashion, it looks like Acupuncture now has legit scientific validation in pain control beyond a placebo.
Shoving numerous needles into your body could very well activate the pain reduction centers in the brain.
 
I guess i should not be shocked in the lack of critical thinking skills already being displayed in this thread.
The effects of the needles was shown to be as effective as a drug in pain control, and beyond the placebo.
The skeptical reponse is now go the original study, and carefully analyze the study, and try to understand it.
 
So you are saying all acupuncture claims revolve around pain relief?


Hmm...



....


....



Respiratory Acute Sinusitis
Acute rhinitis
Common cold
Acute tonsillitis
Acute bronchitis
Bronchial asthma


Eye Acute conjunctivitis (pinkeye)
Nearsightedness (in children)
Cataract (without complications)


Mouth Toothache, post extraction pain
Gingivitis (gum disease)
Acute and chronic pharyngitis


Gastrointestinal Disorders Hiccups
Gastritis
Gastric Hyperacidity
Ulcers
Colitis
Constipation
Diarrhea
Paralytic ileus


Neurological and Musculoskeletal Disorders Headache and migraine
Trigeminal neuralgia
Paralysis following stroke
Meniere's disease
Neurogenic bladder dysfunction
Nocturnal enuresis (bed wetting)
Intercostal neuralgia (pain in the ribs)
Cervicobrachial syndrome (pain radiating from neck to arm)
Frozen shoulder or Tennis elbow
Sciatica
Low back pain
Osteoarthritis


Apparently it "Cures" quite a lot.


"Chinese use the term "jing luo" which means, channels, conduit, meridian etc. According to acupuncture, these are the invisible channels through which qi circulates throughout the body. The acupuncture points (or holes as the Chinese term xue is more aptly translated means) are the locations where the qi of the channels rises close to the surface of the body. There are 12 main meridians, six of which are yin and six are yang and numerous minor ones, which form a network of energy channels throughout the body.

In acupuncture, each meridian is related to, and named after, an organ or function, the main ones are: the lung, kidney, gallbladder, stomach, spleen, heart, small intestine, large intestine, gall bladder, urinary bladder, san jiao (three heater) and pericardium (heart protector/ or circulation sex meridian).

There are also 8 extraordinary channels in acupuncture that are considered to be reservoirs supplying qi and blood to the twelve regular channels. These are believed to have a strong connection to the kidney. The meridians are shown in the figures.
"



So, what are the differences of sticking a needle in the qi crap and sticking a needle say, in a random location?


Or how about a point is picked that is say, an inch south of:

acp_pnt2.jpg



Additionally they comment:
"A series of controlled studies has shown evidence for the effectiveness of acupuncture in the treatment of a variety of conditions, including osteoarthritis, chemotherapy-induced nausea, asthma, back pain, painful menstrual cycles, bladder instability, and migraine headaches."

Anyone have any links to sources of these trials? They don't provide them :)

The same site touts Homeopathy too so oh well...

On to another site! THey're also selling magnet belts... ok... forget them... uh on to the next site:

• Headache • Migraine • Carpal tunnel syndrome • Back pain • Back tightness • Neck stiffness and pain • Shoulder pain • Frozen shoulder • Whiplash • Tennis elbow • Golf elbow • Tendonitis • Muscle injury (strain or sprain) • Mamstring and foot pain • Knee pain and weakness • Sciatica • Bone spur • Vertebrae disc protrusion • Multiple sclerosis • Fibromyalgia • Neuralgia • Arthritis • Menstrual cramps • Male and female infertility • PMS • Menopausal syndrome • Insomnia • Stress and tension • Depression • Anxiety • Allergies • Side effect of chemo • Immune deficiency • Fatigue • Facial paralysis • Weight control
"We utilize all your information to make diagnosis based on Chinese Medicine theories of Yin Yang, five elements, meridians and collaterals, internal organs, etiology and pathology to decide which organ and meridian are affected and what nature the disorder is. "
 
-42- said:
Hopefully acupuncture administrators start advertising their claims as "something happens in your brain that doesn't happen when we use trick needles that fold up on themselves instead of being solid".

Again, Presumably. 14 is such a large number it's hard to dispute chance (of which they didn't list the actual results) .. . . .
Click to expand...

Double blind studies are normal in medicine, to rule out placebo effects.

This was a start. I'm sure there will be further studies, possibly involving the 25 million that you would require as proof :D
 
Focus on the scientific results in THIS STUDY.
That is how science works, in very small steps.
It doesn't work by making gross overgeneralizations.

Just focus on the facts from this one study, and put your emotional reasoning aside for a moment, and try to think clearly.
 
In fact, isn't this study simply showing us why it is so difficult to design a double blind experiment for acupuncture?

It's telling us that these blunt needles and "trick" methods might look good, but the brain knows the difference, effectively ruling them out as decent controls.

Which sort of makes a mockery of all those other experiments which rely on those methods.
 
It's never been surprising to me that your brain might up endorphin production in reaction to being stuck with needles. Even long-standing practitioners have said that "It didn't really matter where you put them"....

Of more interest are the specifics:

1. Does "chi" or "ki" exist?

2. Are there "meridians" through which it flows?

3. Is it possible for these meridians to become blocked or congested?

4. Will the application of a needle "unblock" the congested meridian?

5. Is there a direct, provable physiological effect other than reported pain relief?

And so on...
 
I presume that sticking needles in people would stimulate the release of endorphins, so I guess it might well cause some mild pain relief --- but calling this "acupunture" seems a bit pretentious.
 
Dr Adequate said:
I presume that sticking needles in people would stimulate the release of endorphins, so I guess it might well cause some mild pain relief --- but calling this "acupunture" seems a bit pretentious.
Click to expand...

Think TENS machines.

FYI, there is a parallel thread going on in Science.
 
Jason 1978 said:
This was a start. I'm sure there will be further studies, possibly involving the 25 million that you would require as proof :D
Click to expand...

Na, just test the actual claims.

Typically in medicine trials of a few thousand are not uncommon and several trials are done.

Naturally, the results of controlled trials showing a measureable success rate to a placebo of sticking a needle in a non-qi point might go a way to validating the existance of qi and the validity of acupuncture (or opening a new medical explaination). This would certainly cause it to become more popular, and perhaps used to save lives or improve the quality of life.

Why would I want 25 Million?
 
You wouldn't. It's a ridiculous exaggeration of the skeptic's position. Jason thinks that by misrepresenting your opinion it somehow makes you look dogmatic. It's a tactic he uses a lot when he's losing/lost an argument.
 
Cosmophilosopher,

Please note that the linked article actually stated "Scientists say they have proof that acupuncture works in its own right." I will grant you this can be interpreted in different ways, but it is from my experience a reasonable assumption that many people, not least proponents of acupuncture, will regard such a statement about such a study as evidence for pretty much any claim made by acupuncture proponents - wheras this particular actually study appears limited to only indicate that the brain reacts differently between pokes with real and 'fake' needles. Given the current body of scientific knowledge, this does not appear to be particularly revolutionary. It would still, IMO, be a leap of faith by anyone to see this as all-conclusive evidence that acupuncture is a useful medical procedure for the many ailments acupuncturist claim to be able to treat. I have no evidence anyone has yet linked this particular study to such an assertion, but I find it highly probabe that someone will in a not too distant future.

Having said that, some effects in some areas of pain relief using insertion of needles do seem to be supported by evidence.


Jason,

You state "this was a start". However, do you not find it surprising that in spite of the fact that acupuncture has existed since long before the inception of scientific, evidence based (so-called 'modern western medicine'), which should have provided at least opportunities for several decades of scientific investigation of acupuncture, yet the efficacy of the procedure remains both evasive and controversial; moreover, it appears very much to be superceded by 'modern western' medicine in the cultures where acupuncture was first invented?

(Edited for clarification)
 
Cosmophilosopher said:
The fact is the acupuncture has shown an effect in PAIN CONTROL that is beyond the placebo.
Instead of reacting in a religious, emotional knee-jerk fashion, it looks like Acupuncture now has legit scientific validation in pain control beyond a placebo.
Click to expand...
Only if you can show there is no effect when the needles are stuck in the “wrong” place. This study didn’t test for that, so it can’t possibly show that “Acupuncture now has legit scientific validation in pain control beyond a placebo”. Other studies have shown it doesn’t matter where the needles are placed, as long as the recipient believes they are being stuck in the “right” place. So you’re a long way from validating acupuncture with this study.

Cosmophilosopher said:
Shoving numerous needles into your body could very well activate the pain reduction centers in the brain.
Click to expand...
As would a good kick to the balls. So what?
 
"Only the brain areas associated with the sensation of touch were activated when the volunteers were touched with the blunt needles.

During the trick needle treatment, an area of the brain associated with the production of natural opiates - substances that act in a non-specific way to relieve pain - were activated.

This same area was activated with the real acupuncture but, in addition, another region of the brain, the insular, was excited by the treatment.

This was a pathway known to be associated with acupuncture treatment and thought to be involved in pain modulation."



This extract from the BBC article is the definitive answer to some who have complained that the brain would respond anyway, to a needle being stuck into the skin.

Those who mentioned that the tests also should have been conducted outside the defined "pathway areas of the skin, have IMHO, made a good technical point.

Like all these extraordinary claims, the test methods are likely to be extremely difficult to get right first time, by virtue of the fact that the claimants themselves don't truly understand the basis of their claims(although they often argue that in fact, they do).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom