Originally Posted by
taai gihk yahn
having done research myself, I agree that it is very difficult to design a good study, and in some cases it may not be possible to accurately asses certain things w/RCT's (although anecdotal case studies can be a great alternative!)
My vision of the future of Medicine is an integrated approach. A major component of this is inter-disciplinary respect, understanding and communication. I don't want to oppose other models, I want to work with them for the benefit of my patients.
In this vein, it's very tempting to want to "speak the local language"; to have some kind of Western BioMed explanation as to why what I'm doing actually works... and I will admit that I've collected a few choice pieces of research which I feel to be well designed and up to snuff, or at least vetted by a respectable international body. However, I am 100% in agreement that studies from China are NOT reliable, RCTs are often not able to accurately assess certain components of acupuncture due to their propensity towards generalization, and TCM studies often leave huge gaps in their approach. It's to the point where I feel that I'm better off explaining acupuncture to MDs via the standard "Foreign Body Invasion" model ("Look, it's like simultaneously capitalizing on the inflammatory/autoimmune effects of getting a sliver and the effects of triggering a selected nerve fibre response..." Super crude, limited in scope, but understandable at least.)
The anecdotal case studies method is definitely the route I prefer these days. In Canada, many medical tests are government subsidized, so it's very easy to have patients get a bunch of tests done before beginning treatment, and have them track their progression in part through regular testing. Of course, the changes in their symptoms are also an important component, as are the changes in their signs... although often times acupuncture deals with subclinical signs, so it's sometimes difficult to point to these when talking with a Western Doctor. Naturally, it's easier when there's some kind of true clinical sign. In combination, they provide a strong picture of the results of treatment for myself, the patient, and their doctor.
Actually, my father went to see an acupuncturist in Toronto a few years back. He had quite poor liver funtion and high cholesterol. His bloodwork has always been a cause for concern. After his treatments, he went and had new bloodwork done, and his MD called him in to discuss the results. The first thing he asked was, "are you on any medications or treatments that I'm not aware of?" My dad, being a classic "don't p!ss off the MD" personality, said No. His MD continued on to say, "Your bloodwork is the best it's been it 15 years." If only my dad had explained himself!
The rest of your post was a truly enjoyable and informative read. In no way do I feel you to be criticizing acupuncture, and I commend you for your rigorous approach to research analysis.
Originally Posted by
Doc Stier
I cordially invite anyone who believes the statements quoted above to visit me for empirical clarification on this subject...
Haha Doc, way to throw down the gauntlet!
Originally Posted by
sanjuro_ronin
and after 20 min session, I had almost total ROM and after 5 sessions I was MUCH better.
Glad to hear you had a positive experience!
Last edited by Xiao3 Meng4; 12-12-2008 at 09:03 AM.
"It is the peculiar quality of a fool to perceive the faults of others and to forget his own." -Cicero