kenneth fish wrote:What is most notable is that none of this research has passed sufficient muster to be published in the more reputable journals of anatomy or physiology.
kenneth fish wrote:What is most notable is that none of this research has passed sufficient muster to be published in the more reputable journals of anatomy or physiology.
Scientific Reviews
Richardson and Vincent analyzed 28 studies of effect of acupuncture on pain, all published between 1973 and 1986 in English language peer-reviewed journals. Fifteen showed no difference in effectiveness between acupuncture and control groups. Thirteen showed some effectiveness for acupuncture over control groups, but not all controls were the same. (Some were compared to sham acupuncture, some to medical therapy, etc.) Overall, the differences were small [12-13].
The NCAHF Task Force on Acupuncture evaluated the above studies, as well as more recent ones, and found that reported benefits varied inversely with quality of the experimental design. The greater the benefit claimed, the worse the experimental design. Most studies that showed positive effects used too few subjects to be statistically significant. The best designed experiments - those with the highest number of controls on variables - found no difference between acupuncture and control groups.
In 1989, three Dutch epidemiologists reported similar conclusions about 91 separate clinical trials of acupuncture for various disorders. They also found that the stricter the controls, the smaller the difference between acupuncture and control groups [14].
Acupuncture is being used in drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs. Because there are serious flaws in the way studies on rehabilitation have been performed, the results cannot be considered valid.
A successful medical procedure should be consistently effective in a large majority of trials, and be repeatable in the hands of most therapists. Acupuncture does not satisfy these basic criteria.
The American Medical Association's Council on Scientific Affairs stated in a 1981 report that since acupuncture is an experimental procedure, it should be performed only in research settings by licensed physicians or others under their direct supervision. The report urged state medical societies to seek appropriate laws to restrict the performance of acupuncture to research settings [15].
The National Council Against Health Fraud believes that after more than twenty years in the court of scientific opinion, acupuncture has not been demonstrated effective for any condition.
Disclaimer: Stating there is no proof in the literature for something you believe works does not confirm the results of studies of another thing you believe in the existence of when said results are of a questionable nature.
none of this research has passed sufficient muster
windwalker wrote:has acupuncture passed sufficient muster to be published by main stream medical journals
as a valid medical treatment ?
BonesCom wrote:The picture you have posted has nothing to do with either medical or scientific research journals.
BonesCom wrote:. . . follows the recommendations of the independent peer reviewers.
BonesCom wrote:
. . . follows the recommendations of the independent peer reviewers.
This is where the process can fail and I'm not talking specifically about acupuncture studies. I have had some insight into this process and I can assure you just how 'independent' the reviewer is can be influenced by what boards of directors the reviewer also sits on. Its probably a minority of cases but they do exist.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests