![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Fake acupuncture works nearly as well as the real thing for low back pain, and either kind performs much better than usual care, German researchers have found. Almost half the patients treated with acupuncture needles felt relief that lasted months. In contrast, only about a quarter of the patients receiving medications and other Western medical treatments felt better.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...XkBKHp8TPqZKbA |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Fake acupuncture and "real" acupuncture works the same way as all quack medicine out there, through the power of suggestion and the placebo effect.
Quote:
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Acupuncture is one of those things I'm iffy about. I've seen shows where someone is undergoing major surgery with only this as anasthetic. I find it hard to believe that the placebo effect is that strong.
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
I know there's a theory out there that the brain can only process one pain at a time. It's one of the reasons if we have to give a kid two shots instead of one, we'll do it at the exact same time. (Of course, even if feeling 2 shots, at least it's only one traumatic moment instead of two.) I wonder if acupuncture works to a similar effect? Brain processing needle pain, not processing back/whatever pain?
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Unfortunately/fortunately(?) suggestibility does work well for certain conditions, but this tends to lead to further quackery that has no place in medicine. First acupuncture that works because people think it works, then ridiculous things like Homeopathy which is basically water that was vaguely waved near a condition once suddenly having the power to cure that condition. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
I find it odd that the placebo effect would be so much stronger for acupuncture than for Western type treatment. I would think that the effect would be essentially the same no matter the treatment, the only thing required would be for the patient to believe in the curative power of the treatment. That acupuncture would have twice the "placebo power" of conventional methods makes me very curious. Add to that the fact that the "fake" acupuncture was simply not quite following the normal techniques, or being slightly off from normal insertion points, and I become very curious about these differences.
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Nonny |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Now that I remember a similar "facupuncture" thing has been a smash hit as a back pain relief in USSR in mid-1980es:
![]() You just had to put it around the back and the pointy things do all the work. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
There was an interesting article in Discover magazine about a study that showed tested placebo pills against placebo acupuncture.
They found that not getting accupuncture had a lower rate of side effects (25% from the fake needles, 31% had effects from the fake pills) and also had a higher level of pain relief. So if you are in pain, it is better to not get acupuncture than it is to not take pills. Just thought you should know! |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|