Acupuncture and the scientific method: Part II
Posted on 05/02/2009 by Cathe in Acupuncture , Articles , General medicine , Chinese medicine |
Send e-mail - Share on Facebook | 718 Views Direct 
One of the aspects to be addressed when it comes to scientific work in acupuncture is the theme of "control group".
A scientific work, to be taken into account, must first gather a significant number of participants as homogeneous as possible and have a control group.
That is, participants are divided randomly into two groups, each of which is treated differently, to provide a reference. In this case it is the randomized controlled trial. When the patients nor the doctors know what type of therapy is administered to one group and another which is referred to as "double-blind study."
Even in the case of drug trials is a very difficult criterion to apply. If acupuncture is impossible.
Indeed, we can select 2 homogeneous groups and treat each other with acupuncture and other methods: drugs, TENS, ultrasound, massage and more. It goes without saying that such an understanding is achieved only work in a public health facility where you can practice acupuncture that is usually not in Italy.
But what is absolutely not acceptable when it comes to "sham", the "false acupuncture"! The sham placebo can not be considered, even if it stings more to the surface, out of the channels, even if you use points not usually used for that particular symptom, some effect is produced anyway.
You can not consider this method to discredit the effectiveness of acupuncture, as my teacher says a watch, even if still, twice a day marks the exact time! The case exists and the body has far more resources than we can imagine.
The sham can not be used as a treatment without effect, so it has no value as a reference!
I do not think anyone ever thought of pretending to operate on a patient to see if surgery on the rotator cuff is effective!
That's why the scientific method, normally used to monitor the effectiveness of drugs, you can not adapt the functional architecture of acupuncture. Simply acting drugs and acupuncture based on different principles.
Perhaps the doctors who are preparing to make this work should deal with acupuncture experts to understand how to build a scientific method and not suitable to depart from false premises.
I think it just really together, we will be able to develop and mature scientific thought can produce a further step towards quality and the pursuit of truth.
Related articles:
- Acupuncture and media: Corriere article to say the least misleading.
- Still wasting time talking about fake acupuncture?
- Acupuncture and the scientific method: the first part
- Acupuncture in pregnancy. Useful but ignored.
Tags: Acupuncture , scientific method , placebo
On 05/02/2009 at 4:30 pm ELENA says:
Dear Cathie, first of all congratulations for the blog and articles!
I think that opinions appeared in newspapers (Repubblica and Corriere) and weekly (Prof. Veronesi on Today) about acupuncture are interested and a little bias' in bad faith, the articles in the Cochrane were misinterpreted and misrepresented the extent that a the authors of the review (Dr. Allais) wrote a letter in response to the Republic.
With regard to the placebo effect, I think the placebo effect, however, hesitates for each therapeutic practice, I recently heard an interesting speech at a congress on pain when the subjects were studied using functional MRI, and this practice could highlight a specific brain area that is activated in the expectation of a therapeutic intervention!
I think the road of knowledge is still very long and fascinating and it's a shame not to follow it without preconceptions!
Elena
[ Reply to comment: ]
Cathe Reply:
February 5th, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Thanks Helen, the beautiful comment and visit. As always you have a very open mind! Rather, if you want to read an interesting article on the placebo visit here: http://www.francescoamato.com/blog/2008/09/16/test-clinici-farmaci-e-placebo-una-montagna-di-balle/ . E 'Franz wrote an article some time ago on his blog. Really interesting
[ Reply to comment: ]