Acupuncture and the scientific method: the first part
Posted on 02/04/2009 by Cathe in Articles |
Send e-mail - Share on Facebook | 901 Views Direct 
Since the last period are three articles that appeared spit judgments on the effectiveness of acupuncture, it seems correct to write at least two more level playing field.
I apologize if I am right now a little technical, but the subject matter is close to my heart not only because of my work is that we talk, but mostly because I believe that acupuncture is really a great tool, so that if depended on me, it would put hospitals in the usual treatments and protocols.
We start with the scientific method as it often is on this ground that the fight is carried to "odd weapons."
In fact there is a defined set of the points to be used to treat each symptom, the patient should be treated as a whole, considering for example, if in addition to headache are other issues, see constipation or sexual dysfunction or menstrual disorders or insomnia, so to speak.
Moreover, the points are chosen on the basis of topographic distribution of pain, ie how many and which body parts are affected.
Finally, there are different methods and techniques to treat the same problem.
In addition, although denigrated and called "medical self-referenced" (like saying that if one is the first to say something that is not a pipe), there are dell'agopuntore experience, his empathy with the patient and his personal energy. But since there is the 'evidence based medicine that is "based on scientific evidence," the experience of becoming a doctor is almost a shame, something obsolete, there is only the "medical evidence". Just a shame that this "medicine", says one thing one day and the next the exact opposite.
Nevertheless, we can overcome these problems by using common sense and balance as in everything, not considering for example a specific number of points, but the treatment in its entirety by reference to a method rather than another, but most work should be left to real acupuncture, doctors say that not only have made a serious school, but also have some practical experience. In short, not one of those doctors who, as the article of Dr Linde Republic , "had only basic training."
What I think we need to understand is that the authors of the much-vaunted "scientific work" will give a lot of airs, but scientists are then able to accept without batting an eyelid that acupuncture, art practiced for thousands of years and handed down from master to disciple, is performed by a doctor who may have done a basic course of a month.
This honestly does not seem a very "scientific method"!
Related articles:
- Acupuncture and the scientific method: Part II
- Acupuncture and media: Corriere article to say the least misleading.
- Still wasting time talking about fake acupuncture?
- Being deeply superficial
Tags: Acupuncture , scientific method
On 02/04/2009 at 9:19 am James says:
Critics say Lack of evidence of EBM and Lack of Benefits Are Not The Same, That and the webserver are pooled and aggregated, the more it is Difficult to appear The Patients in the studies with the patient in front of the doctor - That is, EBM Applies To Populations, Not Necessarily to individuals. In The limits of evidence-based medicine, Tonelli Argüeso That "The Knowledge Gained from clinical research does not Directly answer the primary clinical question of what is best for the patient at hand." Tonelli Suggests That proponents of evidence-based medicine discount the value of clinical experience. I omit the translation, I emphasize only that Toney is a thoracic surgeon in Boston one of the world's leading experts in his field. If your head you can ask questions also harbors doubts about the evidence based medicine ...
[ Reply to comment: ]
On 02/04/2009 at 1:41 pm Oni-to-co-rin says:
Good job, Dr! Speak more than placebo in the second half or we can expect a separate article?
[ Reply to comment: ]
On 02/12/2009 at 5:48 pm "They listen to the radio and know that long ago ..." | read Farsi said:
[...] The things we do but we "explain the other? One answer seems to come from an article by Catherine Bellwald up One two three: since there is the 'evidence based medicine that is "evidence-based [...]