Acupuncture- Real or B.S.

[Adayinthe]

I have been treated with acupuncture/IMS for various reasons over the last 10 or so years.

The thing to remember is that it should be used as a supplemental treatment to the issue.

When I was in high school I ended up with a horrible case of turf toe from playing soccer, and it got so bad I could barely walk. My physio gave me a few exercises, and those are what made the biggest difference, and the acupuncture sped the process up a bit. It was not the cure, but did help.

I had IMS to help with a rather horrible neck injury in the c3/c4 region. Once again, a lot of standard physiotherapy methods were used to treat the area and IMS just happened to be one of them.

I have attempted to use acupuncture to help with migraines as well. With this type of treatment I found it to be more of the relaxation/quiet time that comes from the practice that played a bigger part then the needle placement itself. Acupuncture has never prevented or stopped a migraine for me, but has definitely taken my mind off the pain for a chunk of time.

Everyone will believe what they will, but it comes down to the individual when all is said and done. Try it. Just don't rely on it for the be all end all cure.

[troutman]

This reminds me of another article that had personal significance for me:

Mar 16 2011
Help – My Doctor is a Crank!

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=11506

I often receive e-mail from SBM readers (or SGU listeners) who have had the experience of their doctor, nurse, dentist, physical therapist, or other health care provider recommending to them a treatment option that seems dubious, if not outright pseudoscientific. They want advice on what to do.

I really like my family doctor.

Recently, I observed that he is now sharing space with an accupuncturist. I asked him about it to see what his attitude was. Up to now, his advice always seemed to be rational and evidence-based. He said that many things that accupuncturists claim to heal are bogus, but that there are things that "western medicine does not understand as well as eastern practices". He refers some patients to the accupuncturist. I told him I am skeptical about it.

I don't think I would ever want to leave my doctor, as it it so hard to find a family doctor in Calgary. I think he appreciates my feelings, and would not recommend CAM treatments for me.

What would you do if you thought your doctor was a quack?

[photon]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

I'm aware. But for a review to have substance, it can't just weigh the evidence of several different categories. ie "acupuncture is inconclusive because sometimes it works (ie muscle relaxation) sometimes not (migraines).

What you describe is exactly the kind of thing a review could conclude.

"There were only four conditions for which more than one systematic review reached the same conclusions, and only one of the four was positive (neck pain)."

"Unanimously positive conclusions from more than one high-quality systematic review existed only for neck pain."

How else do you propose that patterns of efficacy be determined, other than reviewing the literature from that point of view?

Individual studies are often very limited in their scope, can be badly designed, be a false positive, or countless other issues that could arise with a single study.

It's less "is acupuncture effective", because each review and each paper in the review being reviewed will have its own goals and criteria, it's more "does acupuncture do what it claims".

It's clear to me that it has substance, and it clearly had substance according to the anonymous referees of the journal.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by troutman

This reminds me of another article that had personal significance for me:

Mar 16 2011
Help – My Doctor is a Crank!

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=11506

I often receive e-mail from SBM readers (or SGU listeners) who have had the experience of their doctor, nurse, dentist, physical therapist, or other health care provider recommending to them a treatment option that seems dubious, if not outright pseudoscientific. They want advice on what to do.

I really like my family doctor.

Recently, I observed that he is now sharing space with an accupuncturist. I asked him about it to see what his attitude was. Up to now, his advice always seemed to be rational and evidence-based. He said that many things that accupuncturists claim to heal are bogus, but that there are things that "western medicine does not understand as well as eastern practices". He refers some patients to the accupuncturist. I told him I am skeptical about it.

I don't think I would ever want to leave my doctor, as it it so hard to find a family doctor in Calgary. I think he appreciates my feelings, and would not recommend CAM treatments for me.

What would you do if you thought your doctor was a quack?

As a doctor he is likely to respect your wishes. Besides, you may never get a better doctor out there. I think it allows for him to open up his practice to a new patient base, and may simply be a bussiness decision.

[Suzles]

I have never been a believer but my dog happens to go to a vet that also practices 'natural' remedies (homoeopathy and acupuncture). I get the placebo effect for humans but how does it work for my dog?

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by photon

What you describe is exactly the kind of thing a review could conclude.

"There were only four conditions for which more than one systematic review reached the same conclusions, and only one of the four was positive (neck pain)."

Right, acupuncture in general. But for all we know the other three conditions were bunk (ie positive results for acupuncture treating migraines, the flu, etc).

Therefore it's conclusion that all acupuncture lacks efficacy is false. Muscle stiffness may be a scientifically-backed use of acupuncture.

Originally Posted by photon

How else do you propose that patterns of efficacy be determined, other than reviewing the literature from that point of view?

Individual studies are often very limited in their scope, can be badly designed, be a false positive, or countless other issues that could arise with a single study.

Yes I'm very aware of the benefits of reviews. Most reviews, however, target one claim directly, such as "glutamine aids in muscle protein anabolism after resistance training", rather than "acupuncture does what it claims". It claims many things. That's like debunking penicillin use because it doesn't cure depression.

Originally Posted by photon

It's less "is acupuncture effective", because each review and each paper in the review being reviewed will have its own goals and criteria, it's more "does acupuncture do what it claims".

It's clear to me that it has substance, and it clearly had substance according to the anonymous referees of the journal.

Like I said, "is penicillin effective"? Well that depends on what you're claiming it to be effective for.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Suzles

I have never been a believer but my dog happens to go to a vet that also practices 'natural' remedies (homoeopathy and acupuncture). I get the placebo effect for humans but how does it work for my dog?

If you think the dog feels better, he feels better.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Suzles

I have never been a believer but my dog happens to go to a vet that also practices 'natural' remedies (homoeopathy and acupuncture). I get the placebo effect for humans but how does it work for my dog?

How do you know it's working on your dog? Is it possible that whatever positive effect you are witnessing may be entirely a skewed perception to justify whatever outlandish cost the vet is charging for "treatment"?

[Suzles]

Originally Posted by troutman

If you think the dog feels better, he feels better.

As I said, I really don't believe in it nor understand it so its not what I think, it is the fact that her blood tests are showing improvement.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Therefore it's conclusion that all acupuncture lacks efficacy is false. Muscle stiffness may be a scientifically-backed use of acupuncture.

I imagine the review describes which studies were specifically about muscle stiffness.

We could search for scientific studies on muscle stiffness, but I wouldn't hold my breath on there being quality studies proving effectiveness, as the entire theory underlying accupuncture is just so much woo (qi and energy fields?).

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Suzles

As I said, I really don't believe in it nor understand it so its not what I think, it is the fact that her blood tests are showing improvement.

Sometimes time heals all wounds.

[photon]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Right, acupuncture in general. But for all we know the other three conditions were bunk (ie positive results for acupuncture treating migraines, the flu, etc).

Therefore it's conclusion that all acupuncture lacks efficacy is false. Muscle pain may be a scientifically-backed use of acupuncture.

Sure, and that would be in the details of the review. And it does explicitly say "pain control" (that and it's in a journal about pain).

Where does it give the conclusion that "all acupuncture lacks efficacy"? It seems to be saying that there's a lack of evidence of efficacy.

What the abstract says is that out of the 57 systematic reviews reviewed it only got unanimous positive conclusions from more than one high quality study in once condition: neck pain. Which tells me in the paper they do exactly what you seem to be complaining they aren't.

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Yes I'm very aware of the benefits of reviews. Most reviews, however, target one claim directly, such as "glutamine aids in muscle protein anabolism after resistance training", rather than "acupuncture does what it claims". It claims many things. That's like debunking penicillin use because it doesn't cure depression.

This is clearly about acupuncture in relation to pain, so your penicillin analogy is flawed.

And this isn't a systematic review, it's a review of systematic reviews.

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Like I said, "is penicillin effective"? Well that depends on what you're claiming it to be effective for.

Well if in the abstract you say "Penicillin is commonly used as an antibiotic", and it's published in the "Journal of the International Association for the Study of Antibiotics" and the review covered 57 reviews which all evaluated the efficacy of penicillin as an antibiotic, then I think it's pretty clear what's going on.

[Shazam]

Ever notice that Chinese parents want their children to become western-style doctors?

There's a reason for that.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Ever notice that Chinese parents want their children to become western-style doctors?

There's a reason for that.

$$$

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by troutman

I imagine the review describes which studies were specifically about muscle stiffness.

We could search for scientific studies on muscle stiffness, but I wouldn't hold my breath on there being quality studies proving effectiveness, as the entire theory underlying accupuncture is just so much woo (qi and energy fields?).

The review talks about acupuncture as it relates to pain. I can entirely agree that it's pretty convincing that there is no conclusive evidence that acupuncture fairs better than a placebo when treating pain. And obviously, the junk about energy fields and crap isn't scientifically backed either.

Originally Posted by Photon

Sure, and that would be in the details of the review. And it does explicitly say "pain control" (that and it's in a journal about pain).

Where does it give the conclusion that "all acupuncture lacks efficacy"? It seems to be saying that there's a lack of evidence of efficacy.

What the abstract says is that out of the 57 systematic reviews reviewed it only got unanimous positive conclusions from more than one high quality study in once condition: neck pain. Which tells me in the paper they do exactly what you seem to be complaining they aren't.

Let me choose my words more carefully. Like I said above, it's pretty convincing that acupuncture fairs better than a placebo when treating pain. This thread, however, seems to be interpreting the article as concluding that there is little evidence to suggest that acupuncture has efficacy in treating anything. I'm mainly speaking for muscle stiffness.

While I don't know much at all about acupuncture, I do know that physiotherapy is a field that uses treatments based on science, and I would hope that the field would not promote use of unproven treatments. Acupuncture in physiotherapy is not about "energy fields" or whatnot, it's about "waking up" tense muscles by stimulation, blood flow, etc.

There have been a few claims in this thread that physiotherapy acupuncture has helped with injuries, rehab, etc, and people have dismissed the claims citing the article. I would hope the scientists of CP would do better to refute such claims instead of just citing said, vague articles.

[photon]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

This thread, however, seems to be interpreting the article as concluding that there is little evidence to suggest that acupuncture has efficacy in treating anything. I'm mainly speaking for muscle stiffness.

Your original criticism though wasn't about what the thread was interpreting, your original criticism was about lack of clarity and that's what I was responding to.

If some people have taken the conclusions of the paper further than they should, well that's not unusual and it's understandable given the non-scientific nature of the history of acupuncture. Not right, but understandable.

If you're talking about muscle stiffness then of course it's not surprising for something in a paper about pain in a journal about pain to address it.

Do you have positive evidence that acupuncture is effective for the treatment of muscle stiffness?

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

While I don't know much at all about acupuncture, I do know that physiotherapy is a field that uses treatments based on science, and I would hope that the field would not promote use of unproven treatments. Acupuncture in physiotherapy is not about "energy fields" or whatnot, it's about "waking up" tense muscles by stimulation, blood flow, etc.

I would hope that the field would not promote unproven treatments, but these things do happen. That something is being used doesn't mean it's effective.

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

There have been a few claims in this thread that physiotherapy acupuncture has helped with injuries, rehab, etc, and people have dismissed the claims citing the article. I would hope the scientists of CP would do better to refute such claims instead of just citing said, vague articles.

I would have expected you to understand why you can't draw a conclusion on anecdotal evidence.

[Red Ice Player]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Dude, if you have a bunch of girlfriends, stick to the ones that aren't trying to get pregnant (and don't have husbands).

Except that BigBrodieFan isn't a dude....

[simmer2]

Over here in North America we feel our medicine is the best possible way to treat patients...it's almost an air of cockiness. We completely dismiss other methods as hokey or phony....yet Canada's Life Expectancy is 10th and the US is 36th in the World. Who is #1? Japan. #2? Hong Kong. While those places likely practice Western Medicine, they likely also practice Eastern Medicine...and Eastern medicine has been around for over 3000 years; they've had time to figure out whether something works or doesn't work.

As humans we have a very difficult understanding of things we can't explain so we obviously dismiss them as irrelevant or ridiculous. It's this short-sided viewpoint which completely limits our ability to see anything beyond what is absolute and matter-a-fact.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Dude, if you have a bunch of girlfriends, stick to the ones that aren't trying to get pregnant (and don't have husbands).

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by photon

Your original criticism though wasn't about what the thread was interpreting, your original criticism was about lack of clarity and that's what I was responding to.

My apologies. Thanks for clarifying.

Originally Posted by photon

Do you have positive evidence that acupuncture is effective for the treatment of muscle stiffness?

I'm a little burnt out from research but I'll post some quick findings.

Originally Posted by photon

I would have expected you to understand why you can't draw a conclusion on anecdotal evidence.

Anecdotal evidence means little, yes. But the general population is ignorant of the scientific method and I would have expected those who are scientifically-inclined to do better than to generalize a review article about acupuncture as a pain treatment to acupuncture as a muscle stiffness treatment.