Major Study Backs Acupuncture

[Celebration]

http://www.staffnurse.com/nursing-news-articles/major-study-backs-acupuncture-2158.html

It was studied by Dr Claudia Witt of the University Medical Centre, Berlin, Germany, and colleagues who recruited 3,553 patients with chronic pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee or hip.

The patients were divided into three groups, one randomly assigned to 15 sessions of acupuncture over three months, one randomly assigned to standard treatment then acupuncture for three months, and a large group given acupuncture (who did not consent to randomisation).

In the November 2006 issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism, the researchers report: "Patients who were treated with acupuncture in addition to routine care showed significant improvements in symptoms and quality of life compared with patients who received routine care alone.

"The addition of acupuncture to the treatment regimen resulted in a clinically relevant and persistent benefit," the authors concluded.

The improvement in symptoms continued after the treatment had ended. Following this study, German doctors and health insurers may recommend that the cost of acupuncture is reimbursed via state health insurance.

[Kiouni]

1. glad to see that

alternative medicine is joining modern medicine. like most old home remedies these wholistic treatments are time tested.

[sam sarrha]

2. it eliminated the symptoms of the carpal tunnel in my hands, i could barely use them

[pecwae]

3. Acupunture was instrumental

in relieving my chronic back pain. I had to stop using it due to the cost and my insurance won't cover it.

[trotsky]

4. That it seems to work hasn't been seriously disputed for quite some time.

That it works by manipulating the body's "energy flow" is what's still unproven, unsupported, and ultimately, hogwash.

[Celebration]

5. Maybe you and I can agree on some things then

1. Acupuncture seems to work. There is plenty of evidence supporting that.

2. There is not adequate research into the exact mechanism by which acupuncture works.

3. While not necessary for the patients who are beneficiaries of acupuncture, it is a really good idea to get an adequate scientific explanation for the way in which acupuncture works, particularly since the effects seem to last well beyond the "endorphin release" theory could explain.

Those we can most likely agree on. The below is more "theoretical"

Obviously there is some scientific explanation, and it is a "mysterious force" only because of lack of current scientific understanding.

I came across a kind of proposed explanation today, which is why I am posting this now. Whether this will pan out of course we do not know. "Ultimately hogwash" is a prediction. At this point I don't think a prediction can be made as to what explanation will ultimately be proven in studies--

The concept of acupuncture points and meridians in Qigong has been explored in China for two thousand years. ....snip........The physical base has not been identified until some measurements were conducted in the 1970s. It indicates that current is carried in the myelin sheath laid down by specialized cells called Schwann cells ...snip....The cells that biologists had considered merely as insulation turned out to be the real wires to conduct DC current. It is thought that the acupuncture points along the meridians may act as amplifiers to maintain the strength of the current, similar to the booster amplifiers along a transmission line used to keep the signal from getting weaker with distance.

http://universe-review.ca/R10-11-gradient.htm#qigong

[trotsky]

6. Disagree totally on #2.

There's been research on that - and the research consistently shows there is no such "energy flow" or anything like it in the human body. Acupuncture works within the known frameworks of neural transmitters, such as the release of endorphins and the like. "Endorphin release" is not just a theory, it's a real, proven physiological process. And it's 100% natural. That it is also understood by mean evil bad science appears to be why you don't want to give it any credit, instead grasping at whatever "mystical" theory is popular at the moment.

[Celebration]

7. And what is your explanation

For needling of acupuncture points affecting the release of endorphins? How does it do that? Your statement that it releases endorphins is an observation of what happens, but not an explanation of WHY it happens. And, more importantly, why would the effect last months after the last treatment? Lots of things release endorphins, and we don't really know why--laughter, etc. But the effect has not been shown to last long. In fact, I am not even sure that research has been done that shows increased endorphin release months after acupuncture. But, *if* it does, there must be some scientific explanation for that. And *if* endorphin release does *not* still occur months after the last acupuncture treatment, then there must be an additional explanation for why acupuncture works, other than endorphin release.

Exactly what research refutes the proposed explanation that I posted?

[trotsky]

8. Basic knowledge of neural functioning refutes your "explanation."

If neural transmissions frequently required artificial "amplification" it would be a wonder that we (or any vertebrate) had ever evolved in the first place.

As far as the endorphin mechanism goes, it could be like the type of headache I will sometimes get: I'd wake up with a mild tension headache, and if I didn't do anything about it, it would last the whole day, until I got a full night's rest and woke up the next morning. But if I take two Excedrin with breakfast, the headache is gone in 20 minutes - and doesn't come back, even well after the Excedrin has worn off. The pain of the headache reinforces the tension that's causing the headache. Relieving the pain relieves the tension - breaks the cycle - which eliminates the source of the headache. Seems eminently reasonable to me, and doesn't invoke any unproven magical properties or energy flows.

[Celebration]

9. You didn't answer the question

Not about the long term effect, which Excedrin does not have, and not be invoking the term "basic knowledge" without a reference to research that refutes it. As far as I know nobody has even tried to experimentally refute or confirm this idea. The researcher that I quoted laments the pulling of funding for his project.

Note that I am NOT saying that this concept is proven. However, it has not been refuted.

[trotsky]

10. The standard procedure is not to refute every wild claim.

I know the science-haters despise this basic standard, but it's up to the claimants to provide proof. That no one has undertaken a special study specifically to disprove your pet theory is no "evidence" that your theory is valid. Sorry.

[Celebration]

11. study

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16265984&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_docsum

Am J Chin Med. 2005;33(5):723-8. Differences in electrical conduction properties between meridians and non-meridians.Lee MS, Jeong SY, Lee YH, Jeong DM, Eo YG, Ko SB.
Center for Integrative Medicine, Institute of Medical Science, Wonkwang University, Iksan 570-749, Republic of Korea.

Therapy using the acupuncture meridian system is an important part of traditional Chinese medicine. The purpose of this study was to investigate the electrical conduction properties of the meridians. The current conduction and potential profiles were compared after switching the current direction in the Hegu (LI-4) and Quchi (LI- 11) meridians and over a non-acupuncture point 1 cm from Quchi (LI-11) in 20 healthy subjects. Both meridians demonstrated significantly higher conductivity between Hegu (LI-4) and Quchi (LI-11) than between Hegu (LI-4) and the non-acupuncture point. The direction of current, peak frequency and absolute potential values in the direction Hegu (LI-4) to Quchi (LI-11) differed significantly from those in the direction Quchi (LI-11) to Hegu (LI-4). These results suggest that the conducting pathways are stronger in the meridians than in the non-meridians and that preferential conduction directions exist between two acupuncture points. These results are consistent with the theories of Qi-circulation and traditional Chinese medicine.

PMID: 16265984

[trotsky]

12. I don't see how that study backs up what you said.

Perhaps you can explain. Or cite the actual data of the study?

Besides, it's from the NIH. Can't trust them!

[Celebration]

13. it is on the database

I doubt if they (NIH) had anything to do with a Korean study.....

This is consistent with the theory of qi, if you care to read the results again.

I have no problem with the statement that qi isn't proven. I do have a problem with leaping from that to saying it is unsupported or hogwash. This and other studies are supportive of the concept of qi--

"These results suggest that the conducting pathways are stronger in the meridians than in the non-meridians and that preferential conduction directions exist between two acupuncture points. These results are consistent with the theories of Qi-circulation and traditional Chinese medicine."

This is consistent with the theory of there being a "flow" of energy from one point to another. Sans a theory of qi, or something similar, meridians and nonmeridians would not be distinguishable, and there would be no "preferential conduction direction" between two acupuncture points.

[trotsky]

14. "consistent with the theory of qi" - Even if it truly is...

does not mean the theory is supported. After all, if I postulate that angels push down on objects with an accelerative force of 9.8 meters per second squared near the surface of the earth, that's certainly "consistent with the theory of gravity," isn't it? Does it mean my theory holds any weight?

[Celebration]

15. what are the reasonable theories that explain the data?

You have the theory of qi, and you have nothing. You want to take a shot at something reasonable sounding? Go ahead. There has to be a scientific explanation for the data, and I doubt if it is angels. When we had gravity, but no proven theory for gravity and how it worked, we were in the same position as we are now with regard to qi, most likely. It is not as if objects floated around in the air before we had a scientifically proven explanation.

[trotsky]

16. Say what? It's either "qi" or nothing?

You aren't really serious, are you?

I've offered just one current natural theory to explain the (occasional) success acupuncture apparently shows. With a wave of your hand, you've dismissed it without offering any reasoning why. I guess the more important question of why acupuncture doesn't ALWAYS work is the most noticeable sticking point for your pet theory, but of course you don't care to dwell on that.

Think about my angel analogy some more. Before there was a naturalistic theory of gravity, would that have made my angel theory correct then?

[Celebration]

17. it has to be something

This has to do with the specific study I cited. There has to be a reason for the results. Got it? It can't be nothing. Qi fits. Qi is not proven. However, qi has been postulated for thousands of years, even BEFORE evidence accumulated. Now we have the evidence. First the theory, then the evidence. It fits. Or, I guess that is all a coincidence??? Somebody makes up a theory, and it isn't proven but proves useful enough that the theory (myth, whatever) is kept alive generation after generation. Then, WHOA, what is this? We get ACTUAL EVIDENCE that fits the theory, this very old theory that has proven useful. That is the beginning stage of how theories are actually proven.

Your wild ass idea about angels, thought of on a whim on a message board, *after* the evidence comes in, is not exactly comparable, whether you would like that to be the case or not.

[trotsky]

18. My theory of angels fits.

Without a naturalistic theory of gravity, it would fit.

Does that make it true?

People kept alive for far more generations the idea that the earth was flat. I mean, that theory fit VERY well with the observed evidence, didn't it?

I can't break this down any further - you have an incredible misunderstanding of science and what theories mean.

[Celebration]

19. not at all

First there is a theory. Then, scientists go out looking for confirmation of the theory. I quoted a study that found some confirmation. It isn't proof, but it is support. One study does not constitute proof. One study is "support" for the theory.

[trotsky]

20. If this study actually supported the "qi" theory directly, you'd have a point.

But it doesn't. Sorry.

[Riddler]

21. Has anyone had any experience with accupuncture and diabetic peripheral neuropathy?

My 22 son, diagnosed type 1 at 14 months old, is now almost invalid with neuropathy. Neurotin didn't work too well, and now he's on Lyrica, which helps but only makes the pain bearable. I had accupuncture done on my lower back about 5 years ago for a recurring back problem, and it worked so well I haven't experienced any pain since then. I was wondering if it could possibly help neuropathy problems.

[Celebration]

22. neuropathy

I don't have any personal experience with this. From what I understand, it can be effective but it also could mean continual treatment rather than a short course of a few sessions.

Here is a clinical trial on neuropathy and the "Molecular Magnetic Energizer." If you live anywhere near where these trials are taking place, your son might want to consider it.

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00134524

There are some supplements that *may* be of benefit for neuropathy. Has he considered those?

In other countries, LLLT (low level laser therapy) is used for neuropathy. There are devices in the USA that are approved for other things like shoulder pain and carpal tunnel syndrome, but as far as I know, not specifically for neuropathy. It is likely that you could find a health care professional that would be willing to try it on neuropathy (some chiropractors and naturopathic doctors have these devices).

There are also some special socks that are helpful for neuropathy. I actually do have experience with these. I bought them for my father in law.

http://www.holofiber.com/news_news0204HH.php

Here is the deal--expensive as far as socks go, but not that much compared to an acupuncture appointment. They are almost miraculous feeling at first. These warmed up his feet greatly when nothing else worked. He absolutely loved them. However, they lost efficacy within a month or so. He was continually washing and wearing them so I just think they kind of play out over time. However, he was in hospice care and his deteriorating condition may have had something to do with this.

Good luck.

[Riddler]

24. Thank you both for the information on neuropathy

I have already emailed the Dr. in charge of the Molecular Magnetic Energizer here in NC. I will also look into the socks you suggested as his feet are always cold. I'm not sure what supplements you are speaking of, but there are some vitamins and herbal supplements that were recommended by his doctor, but they didn't help at all.

As for the accupuncture, I will look into it and check with the accupuncturist who worked on back and see what he says about it. I just wanted some opinions from anyone who had experience in it before asking for his reccomendations.

[Sgent]

23. My mother

an MD who also had some accupuncture training used this with great success on a few patients. She was never convinced it wasn't a placebo -- but for those whom it worked, it seemed to help quite a bit.