Evidence for acupuncture?

[Aught3]

PARIS: Acupuncture is no hoax, it works by eases pain in the limbs because it releases a natural molecule called adenosine, according to American neuroscientists.

The mechanism was discovered through experiments in lab mice, which were given an injection of an inflammation-inducing chemical in their right paw.

The researchers inserted fine needles below the midline of the mice's knee, at a well-known acupuncture location called the Zusanli point.

Mimicking acupuncture

They rotated the needle gently every five minutes for 30 minutes, mimicking a standard acupuncture treatment.

During and just after this operation, levels of adenosine in the tissues surrounding the needle surged 24-fold. The mouse's discomfort - measurable by the rodents' response time to touch and heat - was reduced by two-thirds, they found.

The same test was carried out on mice that had been genetically engineered to lack adenosine. The acupuncture failed to have any effect, and the mice reacted in discomfort, as before.

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/3473

 

[Case]

How about sticking a needle into some spot that isn't an 'acupuncture point' and 'gently' turning the needle there?
I say the mice will show the same pain reaction, ahem, increase in adenosine levels and change in reaction time to stimuli.
I wonder how long it took them to figure out that sticking a needle in someone's tissue causes, well, PAIN.

DUH. Genius. Evidence for what, I ask.

 

[SchrodingersFinch]

I recently listened to an old The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe podcast where they discussed a (then) recent study on acupuncture.
I managed to find it quite quickly, and it happens to be free, so here it is:
German Acupuncture Trials (GERAC) for Chronic Low Back Pain

They studied people with a history of chronic low back pain. The results are basically that there was no real difference between the effectiveness of real acupuncture practiced "according to principles of traditional Chinese medicine" and sham acupuncture "consisting of superficial needling at nonacupuncture points". Both however were almost twice as effective as conventional therapy, which consisted of a combination of drugs, physical therapy, and exercise.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

We do have acumpucture that works, it's called vaccines and intravenous medication, unfortunatly the effectiness of it has litle to do with the needle but rather more with the chemical content of it. (...yeah I'm just messing arround)

 

[Unwardil]

So... Really what would be better than acupuncture is a drug that synthesizes the compound which is released by acupuncture.

 

[Squawk]

I did quite a bit of research on this last year after numerous discussion on the subject with, I think, borro.

The trouble with discussing the effiacy of acupuncture is designing an appropriate control. Sticking needles in people produces a physiological reaction (durr), and it can be demonstrated that this effect is beneficial. What is not certain is how important the location of the needles inserted are, depth, duration and so on and so forth. To date (last I read) nobody had come up with a control that was sufficient to be considered placebo.

I remember linking to numerous studies in lor chat, should be in the logs somewhere, but a fairly quick search of the literature should be revealing.

 

[zrzzz1]

If it really has a physiological basis, why do people never have complications from acupuncture/homeopathy/healing stones/psychic medicine/etc...? Why does it always seem to cure exactly the ailment they are trying to treat?

Why are their no malpractice lawsuits for people who have been injured by acupuncture? Surely something that can cure can also cause injury.

 

[FaithlessThinker]

Why are their no malpractice lawsuits for people who have been injured by acupuncture? Surely something that can cure can also cause injury.

Wikipedia - Acupuncture - Safety (read on for Legal and political status)

Sounds like acupuncture maybe one of the safest forms of alternative medicine, as long as we leave our body in the hands of properly trained acupuncturists.

 

[Case]

I'm sure the safest form of quackery alternative medicine (in a sense of adverse effects caused by the administration of the treatment) is homeopathy. I'm also sure James Randi would agree.

 

[Neil86]

I remember reading an article on this last week, unfortunately I can't remember where so I can't back this up or guarantee it is exactly correct though the gist of it still stands. The study compared acupuncture plus conventional medicine, to acupuncture sticking the needles in at random plus conventional medication to poking the patient with a pin but not breaking the skin plus conventional medicine, there was no difference between the 3 groups.
Here is a similar study I just found http://www.livescience.com/health/090120-acupuncture-placebo.html

 

[Whisperelmwood]

The article is 3 years old, ish, but it is still relevant:

Acupuncture and back pain: some interesting background references

I find Ben Goldacre and 'Bad Science' to be one of the best and most accessible pseudoscience debunking resources. He speaks about Acupuncture in his book 'Bad Science' as well, which I am currently re-reading, and it has negligible benefits, if any. He also describes the various forms of acupuncture placebo that have been used in various studies. You should pick the book up, it goes into many forms of pseudoscience, as well as Big-Pharma and the way media distorts science journalism.

Here's a collection of his articles that either go into or mention acupuncture: Bad science: Acupuncture

The basic conclusion? Acupuncture is as much placebo as Homeopathy. Which is to say - it is all placebo.