I looked at the first couple links given the time I have.
These article conclude there seems to be an effect while stressing the conclusions are based on low quality studies.
From Paulo Alexandre Pereira et al 2026:
acupuncture is a safe and effective alternative to medication, despite the low to moderate methodological quality of the included studies
From Chuwen Feng et al 2025:
methodological weaknesses are worth mentioning, such as diversity between studies and the inclusion of lower-quality clinical trials. Future research should consider the importance of conducting large-scale, multicenter randomized controlled trials with standardized methodology to confirm these findings
The science based medecine article I linked earlier references (reviews of) good quality trials & with strict controls, such as E. Ernst et al 2011:
numerous systematic reviews have generated little truly convincing evidence that acupuncture is effective in reducing pain. Serious adverse effects continue to be reported
There are good reasons to remain skeptical, given reseach that include low quality trials see some effect, while others don’t.
I mean you just cherry picked a few here from a broad sample I gave you, and it’s disingenuous to do that to frame it as if all the studies that disagree with your study are low quality.
Looking at 2 out of 8 links provided is the definition of cherry picking. Nowhere did I say that you have to ignore anything. What I gave you is a broad example of many different studies. You zeroed in on two examples, ignored the rest, and then started making wild claims about the quality of research. If you had any genuine interest in the subject, you would’ve actually gone through all the links provided and then examined the available evidence before making further comments. But obviously you just wanted to confirm your existing biases and that’s what you proceeded to do.
there are plenty of peer reviewed studies showing that acupuncture is effective, here are just a few examples:
I looked at the first couple links given the time I have.
These article conclude there seems to be an effect while stressing the conclusions are based on low quality studies.
From Paulo Alexandre Pereira et al 2026:
From Chuwen Feng et al 2025:
The science based medecine article I linked earlier references (reviews of) good quality trials & with strict controls, such as E. Ernst et al 2011:
There are good reasons to remain skeptical, given reseach that include low quality trials see some effect, while others don’t.
I mean you just cherry picked a few here from a broad sample I gave you, and it’s disingenuous to do that to frame it as if all the studies that disagree with your study are low quality.
I looked at the first couple links you pointed me to. This is hardly cherry picking.
The author themselves write their review include low quality study, acknowledging it weakens the conclusions. It’s the author’s assessment, not mine.
Should I ignore the 2 first links, and look a another, specific one?
Looking at 2 out of 8 links provided is the definition of cherry picking. Nowhere did I say that you have to ignore anything. What I gave you is a broad example of many different studies. You zeroed in on two examples, ignored the rest, and then started making wild claims about the quality of research. If you had any genuine interest in the subject, you would’ve actually gone through all the links provided and then examined the available evidence before making further comments. But obviously you just wanted to confirm your existing biases and that’s what you proceeded to do.