Deetee
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2003
- Messages
- 3,789
Mainly for information.
The journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London is publishing a series of articles/reviews on "The scientific basis for alternative medicine".
The first one is on acupuncture (Volume 6 no4 July/August 2006, p381-
386. Systematic review of systematic reviews of acupuncture published 1996-2005, By Derry CJ et al).
Despite choosing acupuncture (one of the forms of alternative therapy with supposedly the most "robust" evidence base) for their first foray into the subject, the fairly strongly-worded conclusions are that there is no evidence of benefit.
Bottom line -
They do however say that "The possibility of some small but clinically useful benefit cannot be excluded on the basis of the evidence to hand."
I look forward to the next issue.
The journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London is publishing a series of articles/reviews on "The scientific basis for alternative medicine".
The first one is on acupuncture (Volume 6 no4 July/August 2006, p381-
386. Systematic review of systematic reviews of acupuncture published 1996-2005, By Derry CJ et al).
Despite choosing acupuncture (one of the forms of alternative therapy with supposedly the most "robust" evidence base) for their first foray into the subject, the fairly strongly-worded conclusions are that there is no evidence of benefit.
Bottom line -
They do however say that "The possibility of some small but clinically useful benefit cannot be excluded on the basis of the evidence to hand."
I look forward to the next issue.