Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Acupuncture: sham healthcare
Share: 
by literaryguru | June 1, 2008 at 08:55 pm
896 views | 0 Recommendations | 10 comments
Photos
While acupuncture is widely accepted as a viable method of healthcare, there are still serious questions as to whether it has any effect at all. In a study completed on 302 random subjects at the Department of Internal Medicine II, Technische Universitat Munchen, Munich, Germany, where acupuncture was tested against random puncturing of the subjects using needles without using any technique, no difference in the outcome was found. Practitioners of acupuncture claim that this field of healthcare works by interrupting the flow of a force called “chi”using needles. As “chi” has never been observed or measured and no evidence has ever been produced to prove its existence, the method itself remains in question. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Contrary to the popular belief that acupuncture as we know it has been around for “thousands of years,” it actually has its roots in 18th century France. The Chinese did practice a version of acupuncture but it did not include any mention of “chi” and had nothing in common with the modern practice except its use of needles. The methods we see today were invented by French doctors who ressurected the Chinese tradition and added their own techniques. A version of this was introduced to England in 1821 by Edward Joukes (a midwife) who administered needles to a woman who was complaining of “pains in her loins.” After a French doctor named Chevalier Sarlandiere claimed successes with acupuncture in a French medical journal, doctors in the U.S. also began to espouse its benefits. Franklin Bache, physician and the great-grand son of Benjamin Franklin and Doctor J. Hunter Ewing discussed the practice in various medical journals in the U.S. in 1826, giving it a positive review. As this method was reputed to have come from “ancient Chinese traditions,” Chinese settlers then began to offer this service for money.
A closer look at the history and the various styles of acupuncture will reveal that it is a relatively new phenomenom and it has no common method. There are Japanese, Thai, Korean and Indian versions, most of which were all invented in the last few decades. Some styles call for the insertion of needles, some use touch and others simply wave their hands over “energy meridions.” Practitioners from all these schools of acupuncture claim clinical efficacy, but none have proven its worth under rigourous scientific examination.
It is also worth noting that acupuncturists mainly claim to treat illnesses that are psychosomatic (impotence), intermittent (headaches, acne) or sicknesses that will always clear up eventually (the common cold). There are also a variety of endorphins and steroids (cortisol) that are released when the skin is punctured that will block some pain for a short duration of time; however, this can be likened to kicking someone in the knee to stop them from feeling their headache.
With no evidence for the existence of “chi,” no common practice to evaluate, little historical evidence of a cultural phenomenon and empirical evidence contradicting its usefulness, acupuncture has a long way to go before it should be allowed into modern medicine. As patients expect to trust the advice of their medical community, discussing acupuncture frankly is a necessity in a field propagated by integrity. Until any scientific evidence shows up on appeal, this jury has come to its conclusion: acupuncture is a sham science.
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (10)
at 21:41 on June 1st, 2008
Ah Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha - five simplistic paragraphs to attempt the dismissal of centuries of successful treatment for countless numbers of patients worldwide. You need to do a LOT more research before tackling a topic with as much historical significance as acupuncture. Citing that "contrary to popular belief" and then attempting to attribute acupuncture to the French only goes further to discredit this unsubstantiated piece of drivel.
A simple search on Wikipedia would have informed you that the earliest forms of acupuncture was traced back to the Chinese as far back as 3000 years ago. But certainly it has been confirmed historically to the Chinese at least to B.C. And if you had done a search on Google, you would have discovered 21,800,000 results in under a second. French? I don't think so.
Citing one study - by the Germans no less - that shows results from a very narrow range of subjects would never stand up to scientific scrutiny. More ironic is the fact that Bayer - a huge global German pharmaceutical company - has made enormous profits for decades from their trademark moneymaker: Aspirin. ASPIRIN. It works, works well and has worked well for centuries (the ancient Egyptians were credited for that discovery). Yet no scientific study has ever been able to show how and why it works. Zip. Nada. So based on your own logic, since aspirin's efficacy cannot be proven scientifically, no one should bother to use it at all?
A century ago, doctors were decrying and ostracizing chiropractors as scam artists. Today, doctors not only recognize chiropractors but often make referrals, often with the blessing of health insurance companies.
Sorry to be so harsh on your post but unfortunately there are just too many people out there with a computer writing too much unfounded information for an audience of people who are willing to believe just about anything they read online.
at 12:06 on June 2nd, 2008
Rather than rip apart your commentary, which would be quite easy but time consuming, I will reiterate the points I have made and let readers "google" for the truth in these matters:
1) What is now practiced as acupuncture was formalized in France by French doctors. While this bore a resemblance to a Chinese technique, it cannot simply be called the same thing.
2) A major German study has scientifically debunked the usefullness of acupuncture.
3) Acupuncturists claim successes where the effect of the technique cannot be proven.
at 12:46 on June 2nd, 2008
There is a huge difference between 'won't' and 'can't.' Instead of simply saying you won't, you might want to start by saying you can't. Why don't you just go ahead and amuse the rest of us online by going into substantiated details of why your "claims" are valid and believable. The burden of proof is on you for initiating such claims.
at 13:10 on June 2nd, 2008
Perhaps you should go get some needles stuck in you to deal with your animosity for differing points of view. I'll do it for 20 bucks :)
at 18:15 on June 2nd, 2008
So you post stuff up expecting everyone to agree with you when you have no real basis for your "expertise"? And when someone calls you on it, you get indignant and decide that someone else's opinion is "animosity"? Sounds like a personal problem to me.
Let me guess - you're twenty-something, your Mother always told you that you were perfect and you could do anything and everyone else is wrong. Maybe be you should stick to what your pen name seems to imply instead of pretending to know anything about medicine: Literary Guru. ;-p
at 19:48 on June 3rd, 2008
Robertinseattle,
I refuse to enter into a debate where anything I say will be dismissed. I have already shown a recent scientific experiment that has been peer reviewed in medical journals by innumerable doctors around the world and you wrote that off because the experiment was performed by "Germans." This ethnocentric, racist remark does not deserve my time in a debate.
As to my other points, you have not debunked a single one. You have stated Chinese acupuncture existed for "thousands of years" because "google" said so. If you would have actually examined what I wrote you would have understood how I explained the use of needles in medicine has a long history in certain parts of China, but it was not the technique in use today. Just so you know what I mean by this, there were known people that would stick needles IN TO THE BONE back in 12th to 16th century China. They did not use the "meridions" of present day acupuncture and there was no mention of "chi" whatsoever. In short, the only thing they have in common with modern techniques is the use of a needle.
The French doctors spoken of in my article did exist and they did expand and proliferate the techniques used in modern acupuncture. If you refuse to accept this, that is your own issue with facts that do not collaborate your opinion.
As I have learned from previous experience, honest debate is really not possible with those who only wish to discredit your opinion, so I will leave the remarks to what I have already said. By the way, I am almost 40 and I have several degrees, none of which are any of your business. I also grew up on a farm. No silver spoon here, sorry.
at 04:42 on January 21st, 2009
Tongren Zhenjiu Shuxue Tu Jing - The Bronze Statue Textbook by Wan Weiyi published in Peking 1027 AD shows the acupuncture meridians and chi circulation as used by the physicians at the Imperial Medical College.
at 15:06 on February 10th, 2009
h lang, the book you are talking about described places to insert needles, that is all. As there is no english translation for this book, it is also difficult to use it to confirm either's argument on an english forum.
at 20:58 on May 31st, 2009
I don't care whether accupunture, or any other alternative medical procedure has been scientifically proven to the standards of allopathic medicine's guidelines. I really couldn't care any less. What is far more important to me is that I have the right to choose whatever methods I want. If I know someone who chewed a particular root and stopped coughing and I want to try it, I should be able to. If I want to research this root, all the better. But I want to accept full responsibility for my own health choices. I want alternative health choices.
I participated in an alternative procedure that legally cannot claim to do anything medical, and I was cured, my word not theirs, of depression. I actually did chew a root that stopped my cough. No side effects from either of these
I don't care if the majority of people in this country don't believe that there are benefits from alternative medicine. All I care about is that I have the choice. When a significant part of the world uses other medical procedures that do not "fit in" with western medicine's idea of medicine, one only needs to ask, could this be a situation where greed of the almighty dollar far outweighs common sense?
at 10:02 on June 12th, 2009
I don't want to know what the truth is. I want my blanky. waa waa waa. I don't care about you or the truth all I care about is me. Why don't you go chew a root? Oh wait you already did. My guru says chewing roots ruins the humors of the body not to mention it gets dirt in your teeth. Me, I only take Obecalp. Obecalp has cured as many sick people as all alternative therapies combined, garunteed. In fact I am now healthy enough that I don't even need Obecalp anymore. I have been cured! You should try it, (the getting cured part anyway) it has no side effects whatsoever and can be used to treat hundreds of problems. Forget the rest Obecalp's the best.