Does Acupuncture Work?

Recommend (0) Comments (3)

You make the statement that under tightly controlled studies, the results of acupuncture are negative.  I beg to differ.  You also say that proponents of acupuncture "cherry pick" studies, yet you cherry pick studies with negative results.

According to your logic, if I can show you ONE WELL DESIGNED study proving acupuncture works, with statistically relevant patient population and reasonable P values (for those who are new to the research world, it's a measure of what probability the results occurred by chance) then it would negate your statement "that there is no actual effect from acupuncture."

My medical school professor, Dr. Lixing Lao (MD from China, PhD from University of MD and author of over 50 publications (written in his profile as "selected" so there's more - see Dr. Lao's profile in the evidence below) was the principle investigator along with Dr. Brian Berman (Family medicine and pain management specialist with over 120 publications in peer reviewed journals and author of 3 books - see Dr. Berman's profile the evidence section below) of a randomized trial using sham acupuncture for 570 patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis.  An objective scale was used (WOMAC - Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) as a primary outcome and secondary outcomes of patient global assessment, 6-minute walk distance, and physical health scores of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) were evaluated at 8 and 26 weeks.

Knee function was improved within 8 weeks (P=0.01) compared to sham and both pain and function significantly improved compred to sham at 26 weeks (P=0.01).  These are primarily OBJECTIVE measurements, with the SF-36 being subjective.

This was an NIH FUNDED study, under extreme scrutiny, run by two extremely competent and well-respected medical professionals, and passed with flying colors.

I feel like an astronaut who's returned to earth from a moon walk facing the Flat Earth Society with pictures from my journey.  They're saying "Pictures can be faked", and "From our perspective, the earth is CLEARLY flat." 

I call my osteoarthritis patients ONE YEAR after their last treatment and ask "how's your knee Mr. Smith?"  And a common response I get is "....I haven't really thought about it, since it doesn't hurt anymore."  "It's so nice to go up and down steps with no pain."

Recommend (1) Comments (1)

Reddy claims that by my logic one study would show that acupuncture works - but this is the exact opposite of what I said. My point is that you have to look at the whole literature. One study is never compelling. Also - I am not checking picking - I am relying upon systemic reviews, which is by definition not cherry picking. Reddy, on the other hands, says he is not cherry picking, then cherry picks one study.

Further - the study he picked is terrible - not well designed.

The study was not blinded. By its own measure - 75% of the patients in the "true" acupuncture group thought they were getting real acupuncture, while only 58% in the Sham group did. Also, there was a very high drop our rate of this study, which compromises the randomization.

This is a weak study - certainly not "undeniable" which is an incredibly naive statement.

The state of the art for acupuncture studies now is using truly double-blind insertion with obscured needles. These studies, so far, are all negative.

You have to look at the entire literature. This one weak study is not convincing. The systematic reviews are essentially negative.

It looks like that metaphorical picture of the earth (and come-one with the flat-earth references) was sketched with crayons.