Real needling and its insular effects :), a link

[Guest guest]

Hi all. I've been off-list for a long time, so forgive me I'm just

repeating old news:

 

*http://tinyurl.com/c39ow

*Is about a study on real acupuncture x trick acupuncture and the

insula. We scored one. Goes like

 

" The research team used brain imaging to show that treatment with

genuine needles activates brain areas beyond the ones that light up when

trick needles are used. " This is the first brain-imaging study that has

shown an effect beyond placebo, " says George Lewith, an expert in

complementary medicine at the University of Southampton who led the study. "

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

the problem is that the " trick needles " or " blunt needles which

didn't penetrate the skin " are also part of acupuncture... they are

in fact part of the classical nine needles mentioned in Ling Shu 1.

Just because it is not currently commonly used in the PRC (or the

West) doesn't make it not " real acupuncture " .

 

in my mind, such studies are of interest in demonstrating

differences in effects of various traditional modalities, but we do

ourselves a real disservice if we allow ignorance of the breadth of

acumoxa therapy determine what is perceived as " real " and " placebo " .

 

my 2 yen

 

robert hayden

 

Chinese Medicine ,

Danielluzacupuntura <danielluzacupuntura@i...> wrote:

> Hi all. I've been off-list for a long time, so forgive me I'm just

> repeating old news:

>

> *http://tinyurl.com/c39ow

> *Is about a study on real acupuncture x trick acupuncture and the

> insula. We scored one. Goes like

>

> " The research team used brain imaging to show that treatment with

> genuine needles activates brain areas beyond the ones that light

up when

> trick needles are used. " This is the first brain-imaging study

that has

> shown an effect beyond placebo, " says George Lewith, an expert in

> complementary medicine at the University of Southampton who led

the study. "

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

the problem is that the " trick needles " or " blunt needles which

didn't penetrate the skin " are also part of acupuncture... they are

in fact part of the classical nine needles mentioned in Ling Shu 1.

Just because it is not currently commonly used in the PRC (or the

West) doesn't make it not " real acupuncture " .

 

in my mind, such studies are of interest in demonstrating

differences in effects of various traditional modalities, but we do

ourselves a real disservice if we allow ignorance of the breadth of

acumoxa therapy determine what is perceived as " real " and " placebo " .

 

my 2 yen

 

robert hayden

 

(Tom) Exactly. The problem with the JAMA study that was uploaded yesterday,

is that we don't know how the " sham " acupuncture was performed. For

selection of sham points it refers to another study by Melchart et al:

http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Doi=73473

Has anyone read this article?

Another critique of the JAMA articles was that the acupuncture protocol for the

migraine patients was (semi-)standardized: same points for everyone: GB 20, 40

or 41 or 42, GV 20, LIV 3, TE 3 or 5, EX TaiYang. That's not how we do

acupuncture, is it?