The issue with acupuncture I remember (and this may be 15 years out of date) is that while it meta-analysis indicated a slight positive effect, it didn’t seem to matter where the needles were inserted. All kinds of practitioners used different methodology.
So hopefully that’s all improved. I don’t know that lowering inflammation in move spleens is an adequate root mechanism to explain those broad results though.
The skepticism toward acupuncture is that not only the location where the needle is inserted doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if inserting needle at all, ie it’s no better than sham acupuncture. This looks like the placebo effect.
Would be curious to read if there was a review that does a deep dive in to see what today’s best evidence show, given randomization and blinded controls.
The issue with acupuncture I remember (and this may be 15 years out of date) is that while it meta-analysis indicated a slight positive effect, it didn’t seem to matter where the needles were inserted. All kinds of practitioners used different methodology.
So hopefully that’s all improved. I don’t know that lowering inflammation in move spleens is an adequate root mechanism to explain those broad results though.
The skepticism toward acupuncture is that not only the location where the needle is inserted doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if inserting needle at all, ie it’s no better than sham acupuncture. This looks like the placebo effect.
A 2009 study found it’s no better than poking patients gently with toothpicks. But still still conclude acupuncture is (more) effective. That’s misleading. https://www.respectfulinsolence.com/2009/05/13/another-acupuncture-study-misinterpreted/
Would be curious to read if there was a review that does a deep dive in to see what today’s best evidence show, given randomization and blinded controls.
That means it is probably the patient/practitioner interaction that is doing the work…placebo