Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
None of those compared the effect directly to placebo in the way that the New England Journal did. I don't see any reason to stop being skeptical.
|
The problem with the NEJM study was that it did not in any way have a placebo. That's why the comment about the sloppiness. The study didn't support the finding that acupuncture was ineffective. What it did find was that the "traditional" placement of the needles as being at certain vital spots is not supported. It indicates that the presence of the needle is sufficient to induce anesthesia, regardless of loci.
It is the presence of the needle that induces the effect, not the location. The effect is shown in that study, as well as many other studies that did include placebo artefacts (needle + placebo vs needle + drug vs needle alone).
Acupuncture works.