Acupuncture in the news! study results

[Guest guest]

i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be well

designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to why

they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also, the

true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that in

clinic). something seems askew.

 

kath

 

 

On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes wrote:

>

> As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much discussion

> about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162) across 340

> trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our research class

> this week.

>

> If you read the original study design you can see what the description of

> their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and " placebo "

> differently its important to understand the specific description of the

> " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used " the

> same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted superficially

> (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

>

> Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They were

> studying *specificity*.

> " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

> actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

> efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be used as a

> test of specificity. "

> *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical eye

> would hopefully catch.

> **

> ------------------------------

> Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

> Vice President of Academic Affairs

> Academic Dean - San Diego

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> 619-574-6909 ext. 105

> www.pacificcollege.edu

>

> *

>

>

> this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what the

> study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to do

> that . . .

>

> k

>

>

> _____________

> Alumni-sd mailing list

> Alumni-sd

> http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd

>

>

>

 

 

--

Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA

Oriental Medicine

Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

Asheville Center For

70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

kbartlett

www.AcupunctureAsheville.com <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/>

 

 

--

Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA

Oriental Medicine

Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

Asheville Center For

70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

kbartlett

www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi acukath

 

If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the " standarized

ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps (just

look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good results.

Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element tradition,

we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an excellent

therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

" native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent results.

 

All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human body

is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with a

person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't work.

 

Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

tradition works...

 

Juan

 

 

 

 

acukath escribió:

>

> i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be well

> designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

> region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to why

> they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also, the

> true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that in

> clinic). something seems askew.

>

> kath

>

> On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes

> <sgomes%40pacificcollege.edu>> wrote:

> >

> > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much discussion

> > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

> across 340

> > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

> research class

> > this week.

> >

> > If you read the original study design you can see what the

> description of

> > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

> " placebo "

> > differently its important to understand the specific description of the

> > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used " the

> > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted superficially

> > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

> >

> > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They

> were

> > studying *specificity*.

> > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

> > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

> > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

> used as a

> > test of specificity. "

> > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical eye

> > would hopefully catch.

> > **

> > ------------------------------

> > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

> > Vice President of Academic Affairs

> > Academic Dean - San Diego

> > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

> > www.pacificcollege.edu

> >

> > *

> >

> >

> > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what the

> > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to do

> > that . . .

> >

> > k

> >

> >

> > _____________

> > Alumni-sd mailing list

> > Alumni-sd <Alumni-sd%40pacificcollege.edu>

> > http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd

> <http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd>

> >

> >

> >

>

> --

>

> Oriental Medicine

> Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> Asheville Center For

> 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> kbartlett

> <kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> www.AcupunctureAsheville.com <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/

> <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/>>

>

> --

>

> Oriental Medicine

> Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> Asheville Center For

> 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> kbartlett

> <kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

>

>

[Guest guest]

Well said, Juan.

 

Anne

-------------- Original message ----------------------

aramis1971

> Hi acukath

>

> If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

> and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the " standarized

> ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

> reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

> that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

> also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

> points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps (just

> look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

> system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

> needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

> acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

> treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

> authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good results.

> Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element tradition,

> we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

> elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an excellent

> therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

> " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent results.

>

> All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human body

> is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

> and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with a

> person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

> and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

> absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't work.

>

> Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

> tradition works...

>

> Juan

>

>

>

>

> acukath escribió:

> >

> > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be well

> > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

> > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to why

> > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also, the

> > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that in

> > clinic). something seems askew.

> >

> > kath

> >

> > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes

> > <sgomes%40pacificcollege.edu>> wrote:

> > >

> > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much discussion

> > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

> > across 340

> > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

> > research class

> > > this week.

> > >

> > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

> > description of

> > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

> > " placebo "

> > > differently its important to understand the specific description of the

> > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used " the

> > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted superficially

> > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

> > >

> > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They

> > were

> > > studying *specificity*.

> > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

> > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

> > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

> > used as a

> > > test of specificity. "

> > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical eye

> > > would hopefully catch.

> > > **

> > > ------------------------------

> > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

> > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

> > > Academic Dean - San Diego

> > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

> > > www.pacificcollege.edu

> > >

> > > *

> > >

> > >

> > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what the

> > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to do

> > > that . . .

> > >

> > > k

> > >

> > >

> > > _____________

> > > Alumni-sd mailing list

> > > Alumni-sd <Alumni-sd%40pacificcollege.edu>

> > > http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd

> > <http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd>

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > --

> >

> > Oriental Medicine

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

> >

> > Asheville Center For

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> > kbartlett

> > <kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/

> > <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/>>

> >

> > --

> >

> > Oriental Medicine

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

> >

> > Asheville Center For

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> > kbartlett

> > <kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

juan:

 

you raise a thoughtful point about points being all over the body, according

to different systems, not merely those catalogued and widely used on the 12

primary meridians.

 

but for the sake of discussing why similar results were achieved in the sham

& true groups in the German study, i'm not sure that is a fair explanation

of why the sham group did so well. the points used in other systems, as you

mention [korean hand, facial, Mst. Tong, and so forth] are all utilized

based on applying the theory of that particular system. the sham points in

this study were not chosen according to the theory of any system or ahshi.

they chose the points by location: 5 cm lateral to the outer ub line and

several points in the legs that did not correspond to point locations on the

12 primaries. they purposefully chose locations that did not correspond to

meridians, TCM theory, or any other system, and yet still elicited an

effective rate only 4% lower than the true group.

 

i'm wondering if the results of the study could be duplicated?

 

k

 

On 9/29/07, aramis1971 <aramis1971 wrote:

>

> Hi acukath

>

> If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

> and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the " standarized

> ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

> reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

> that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

> also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

> points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps (just

> look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

> system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

> needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

> acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

> treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

> authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good results.

> Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element tradition,

> we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

> elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an excellent

> therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

> " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent results.

>

> All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human body

> is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

> and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with a

> person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

> and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

> absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't work.

>

> Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

> tradition works...

>

> Juan

>

> acukath <acukath%40gmail.com> escribió:

> >

> > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be well

> > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

> > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to

> why

> > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also,

> the

> > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that in

> > clinic). something seems askew.

> >

> > kath

> >

> > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes

<sgomes<sgomes%40pacificcollege.edu>

> > <sgomes% <sgomes%25>40pacificcollege.edu>> wrote:

> > >

> > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

> discussion

> > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

> > across 340

> > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

> > research class

> > > this week.

> > >

> > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

> > description of

> > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

> > " placebo "

> > > differently its important to understand the specific description of

> the

> > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used " the

> > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted superficially

> > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

> > >

> > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They

> > were

> > > studying *specificity*.

> > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

> > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

> > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

> > used as a

> > > test of specificity. "

> > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical eye

> > > would hopefully catch.

> > > **

> > > ------------------------------

> > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

> > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

> > > Academic Dean - San Diego

> > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

> > > www.pacificcollege.edu

> > >

> > > *

> > >

> > >

> > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what

> the

> > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to

> do

> > > that . . .

> > >

> > > k

> > >

> > >

> > > _____________

> > > Alumni-sd mailing list

> > > Alumni-sd <Alumni-sd%40pacificcollege.edu> <

> Alumni-sd%40pacificcollege.edu>

> > > http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd

> > <http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd>

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > --

> >

> > Oriental Medicine

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

> >

> > Asheville Center For

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> > kbartlett<kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25>40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/

> > <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/>>

> >

> > --

> >

> > Oriental Medicine

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

> >

> > Asheville Center For

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> > kbartlett<kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25>40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

> > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Ben

 

Beware of those who in the name of the Medical establishment

(mega-corporations, insurance companies, banks, lawyers et al.) hiding behind

the MDs, are

already in the process of pushing the well trained acupuncturists out of

acupuncture and attempting to replace them with the week-end warriors and their

medical assistants who need no training yet will get fully reimbursed!!

 

Those who correctly call this a " sick society " are awake and aware. But is

there anything that can be done about it......especially when the system has

built-in slavery controls even within the AP/OM profession?

 

Richard

 

In a message dated 10/1/2007 4:04:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

bhawes writes:

 

Here's the money quote on this study:

" Acupuncture was administered in 340 outpatient practices

by physicians of various specializations who had at least 140

hours of acupuncture training: 55% had undergone basic training

(mean, 213 hours) and 45% had advanced training (mean,

376 hours). The study physicians had practiced acupuncture

for 2 to 36 years (median, 8.0 years). All took part in a 1-day

training session with emphasis on acupuncture methods and

study design. "

 

" At least " 140 hours. Compared to our minimum of 2500 hours. So does

anybody think these clowns know what " real " acupuncture is? This is

junk. Pure baloney. Designed to make us look bad, if it has any point at

all besides providing work for MD's with too much time on their hands.

This just stinks.

 

-Ben Hawes, L.Ac.

 

 

 

 

 

 

************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi all, I don't think my first posting of this went through. Apologies if it did

and I'm repeating myself.

 

 

3 interesting things from my point of view:

 

1. The study is actually showing that two different schools of

Chinese Medical Acupuncture (let’s call them deep-puncture vs

shallow-puncture) both work equally well.

 

2. The study also shows that the already recognised and proven

homeostatic effect of acupuncture was more important than competently

chosen points.

 

3. It should be obvious that a patient- and observer- blinded trial

removes much of acupuncture’s effectiveness (i.e. assessment cannot be

fully carried out in double-blinded situations). This by itself would

explain why the homeostatic effect seems to be central in this study.

 

In my practice I use both deep puncture and shallow puncture (as described in

the study) as they are called for.

 

In my practice I also find that it is difficult to make people sick

with acupuncture. The issue becomes one of efficacy over time instead

of simple efficacy - in other words, can I get the same job done in a

shorter period of time with a stable result? The issue of competence

comes down to that - the more experienced the practitioner, the faster

and more stable the results. Otherwise, even a junior practitioner can

get good results from the homeostatic effect that the needles exert.

 

Hugo

 

 

 

" "

Chinese Medicine

Monday, 1 October, 2007 10:27:28 AM

Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

juan:

 

 

 

you raise a thoughtful point about points being all over the body, according

 

to different systems, not merely those catalogued and widely used on the 12

 

primary meridians.

 

 

 

but for the sake of discussing why similar results were achieved in the sham

 

& true groups in the German study, i'm not sure that is a fair explanation

 

of why the sham group did so well. the points used in other systems, as you

 

mention [korean hand, facial, Mst. Tong, and so forth] are all utilized

 

based on applying the theory of that particular system. the sham points in

 

this study were not chosen according to the theory of any system or ahshi.

 

they chose the points by location: 5 cm lateral to the outer ub line and

 

several points in the legs that did not correspond to point locations on the

 

12 primaries. they purposefully chose locations that did not correspond to

 

meridians, TCM theory, or any other system, and yet still elicited an

 

effective rate only 4% lower than the true group.

 

 

 

i'm wondering if the results of the study could be duplicated?

 

 

 

k

 

 

 

On 9/29/07, aramis1971@netscape .net <aramis1971@netscape .net> wrote:

 

>

 

> Hi acukath

 

>

 

> If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

 

> and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the " standarized

 

> ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

 

> reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

 

> that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

 

> also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

 

> points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps (just

 

> look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

 

> system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

 

> needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

 

> acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

 

> treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

 

> authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good results.

 

> Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element tradition,

 

> we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

 

> elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an excellent

 

> therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

 

> " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent results.

 

>

 

> All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human body

 

> is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

 

> and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with a

 

> person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

 

> and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

 

> absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't work.

 

>

 

> Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

 

> tradition works...

 

>

 

> Juan

 

>

 

> acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com> escribió:

 

> >

 

> > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be well

 

> > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

 

> > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to

 

> why

 

> > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also,

 

> the

 

> > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that in

 

> > clinic). something seems askew.

 

> >

 

> > kath

 

> >

 

> > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes@pacificcolle ge.edu<sgomes%40pacificco

llege.edu>

 

> > <sgomes% <sgomes%25>40pacifi ccollege. edu>> wrote:

 

> > >

 

> > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

 

> discussion

 

> > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

 

> > across 340

 

> > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

 

> > research class

 

> > > this week.

 

> > >

 

> > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

 

> > description of

 

> > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

 

> > " placebo "

 

> > > differently its important to understand the specific description of

 

> the

 

> > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used " the

 

> > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted superficially

 

> > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

 

> > >

 

> > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They

 

> > were

 

> > > studying *specificity* .

 

> > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

 

> > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

 

> > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

 

> > used as a

 

> > > test of specificity. "

 

> > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical eye

 

> > > would hopefully catch.

 

> > > **

 

> > > ------------ --------- ---------

 

> > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

 

> > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

 

> > > Academic Dean - San Diego

 

> > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

 

> > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

 

> > > www.pacificcollege. edu

 

> > >

 

> > > *

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what

 

> the

 

> > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to

 

> do

 

> > > that . . .

 

> > >

 

> > > k

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ ________

 

> > > Alumni-sd mailing list

 

> > > Alumni-sd@pacificco llege.edu <Alumni-sd%40pacifi ccollege. edu> <

 

> Alumni-sd%40pacific college.edu>

 

> > > http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd

 

> > <http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd>

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> >

 

> > --

 

> >

 

> > Oriental Medicine

 

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

> >

 

> > Asheville Center For

 

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

 

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

 

> > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett%40Acupun ctureAsheville. com>

 

> > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> 40AcupunctureAsh eville.com>

 

> > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/

 

> > <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/>>

 

> >

 

> > --

 

> >

 

> > Oriental Medicine

 

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

> >

 

> > Asheville Center For

 

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

 

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

 

> > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett%40Acupun ctureAsheville. com>

 

> > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> 40AcupunctureAsh eville.com>

 

> > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com

 

> >

 

> >

[Guest guest]

Here's the money quote on this study:

" Acupuncture was administered in 340 outpatient practices

by physicians of various specializations who had at least 140

hours of acupuncture training: 55% had undergone basic training

(mean, 213 hours) and 45% had advanced training (mean,

376 hours). The study physicians had practiced acupuncture

for 2 to 36 years (median, 8.0 years). All took part in a 1-day

training session with emphasis on acupuncture methods and

study design. "

 

" At least " 140 hours. Compared to our minimum of 2500 hours. So does

anybody think these clowns know what " real " acupuncture is? This is

junk. Pure baloney. Designed to make us look bad, if it has any point at

all besides providing work for MD's with too much time on their hands.

This just stinks.

 

-Ben Hawes, L.Ac.

 

 

Acupuncture in the news! study results

<Chinese Medicine/message/26858;_ylc=X\

3oDMTJyb203bWc1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzk0OTU5NzcEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwODE0BG1zZ\

0lkAzI2ODU4BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzExOTEwNTM3NDI->

 

 

 

Posted by: " " acukath

<acukath?Subject=%20Re%3AAcupuncture%20in%20the%20news%21%20stu\

dy%20results>

acukathb <http://profiles./acukathb>

 

 

Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:27 pm (PST)

 

i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be well

designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as

to why

they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups.

also, the

true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that in

clinic). something seems askew.

 

kath

 

On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes

<sgomes%40pacificcollege.edu>> wrote:

>

> As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

discussion

> about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

across 340

> trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

research class

> this week.

>

> If you read the original study design you can see what the

description of

> their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

" placebo "

> differently its important to understand the specific description

of the

> " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used

" the

> same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted superficially

> (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

>

> Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy.

They were

> studying *specificity*

.

> " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

> actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

> efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would

be used as a

> test of specificity. "

> *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical eye

> would hopefully catch.

> **

> ------------------------------

> Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

> Vice President of Academic Affairs

> Academic Dean - San Diego

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> 619-574-6909 ext. 105

> www.pacificcollege.edu

>

> *

>

>

> this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out

what the

> study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how

to do

> that . . .

>

> k

>

>

> _____________

> Alumni-sd mailing list

> Alumni-sd <Alumni-sd%40pacificcollege.edu>

> http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd

<http://mail.pacificcollege.edu/mailman/listinfo/alumni-sd>

>

>

>

 

--

Oriental Medicine

Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

Asheville Center For

70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

kbartlett

<kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

www.AcupunctureAsheville.com <http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/

<http://www.acupunctureasheville.com/>>

 

--

Oriental Medicine

Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

Asheville Center For

70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

kbartlett

<kbartlett%40AcupunctureAsheville.com>

www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

> Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

> tradition works...

>

> Juan

 

That, among other things is the problem in my opinion. We are neither

trained nor inclined to do research, we are content to allow others to

dictate what is a proper research protocol and yet must defend the

results.

The difficulty has always been what is the control in the trials of

acupuncture. I would say that all of the research from china has had

both poor controls and for the most part terrible designs, never mind

the fact that virtually %100 of the results are favorable.

Control is the name of the game in research, you must know that an

action taken against chance is statistically significant, if you can

not prove this, then you can not prove anything and are therefore

resigned to confer your practice as though on faith. Which again, in

my humble opinion is very close to what i have seen in the profession

and in the education. It works because it works.

Perhaps with the onset of Doctoral programs more research will

continue in the States with different protocols and trials that are

worthy of peer review.

In the end however, i would say that " sham " needling is biased and

does not adequately confront the multiple variables present in any

physical manipulation. Consider for instance that physical therapy has

no controls in their research save individuals that do not do the

prescribed activity.

Tymothy

[Guest guest]

i have to agree with questioning the value of including sham acu in a

study. what's the point? why not just have an acu group and a no therapy

group or a conventional med group as a control? to answer my own question,

i'm thinking they put in the sham group because they still are wondering

whether acu is mere placebo, so they use the sham group as a control for

placebo effect. this is why the press looked at the german study and said

if the sham and true group got similar results, is acu placebo?

 

somewhere back in time, i was told that placebo is about 35%. can anyone

confirm that? if that is true, then both the acu and the sham groups out

preformed placebo.

 

but the question still remains, why did 43% of back pain patients improve

with shallow acupuncture 5cm off the outer ub line (if i recall correctly, 5

points placed beginning at T3 or T7 evenly spaced down to about L4)?

 

kb

 

 

On 10/1/07, miracles28 <jellyphish wrote:

>

> > Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

>

> > tradition works...

> >

> > Juan

>

> That, among other things is the problem in my opinion. We are neither

> trained nor inclined to do research, we are content to allow others to

> dictate what is a proper research protocol and yet must defend the

> results.

> The difficulty has always been what is the control in the trials of

> acupuncture. I would say that all of the research from china has had

> both poor controls and for the most part terrible designs, never mind

> the fact that virtually %100 of the results are favorable.

> Control is the name of the game in research, you must know that an

> action taken against chance is statistically significant, if you can

> not prove this, then you can not prove anything and are therefore

> resigned to confer your practice as though on faith. Which again, in

> my humble opinion is very close to what i have seen in the profession

> and in the education. It works because it works.

> Perhaps with the onset of Doctoral programs more research will

> continue in the States with different protocols and trials that are

> worthy of peer review.

> In the end however, i would say that " sham " needling is biased and

> does not adequately confront the multiple variables present in any

> physical manipulation. Consider for instance that physical therapy has

> no controls in their research save individuals that do not do the

> prescribed activity.

> Tymothy

>

>

>

 

 

 

--

Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA

Oriental Medicine

Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

Asheville Center For

70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

kbartlett

www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

ok, that's an interesting way to spin it: even a junior practitioner can get

43-47%, an experienced one even more (double). the shallow needling was

done 5 cun off the outer ub line, ranging from about T3or T7 to L4. (i

believe 5 needles placed bilat). i find it astounding and inexplicable that

anyone could get 43% of patients' lumbar pain improved with this type of a

tx, let alone a weekend warrior MD who doesn't understand how to propagate

qi.

 

kb

 

 

On 10/1/07, Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote:

>

> Hi all, I don't think my first posting of this went through. Apologies

> if it did and I'm repeating myself.

>

> 3 interesting things from my point of view:

>

> 1. The study is actually showing that two different schools of

> Chinese Medical Acupuncture (let's call them deep-puncture vs

> shallow-puncture) both work equally well.

>

> 2. The study also shows that the already recognised and proven

> homeostatic effect of acupuncture was more important than competently

> chosen points.

>

> 3. It should be obvious that a patient- and observer- blinded trial

> removes much of acupuncture's effectiveness (i.e. assessment cannot be

> fully carried out in double-blinded situations). This by itself would

> explain why the homeostatic effect seems to be central in this study.

>

> In my practice I use both deep puncture and shallow puncture (as described

> in the study) as they are called for.

>

> In my practice I also find that it is difficult to make people sick

> with acupuncture. The issue becomes one of efficacy over time instead

> of simple efficacy - in other words, can I get the same job done in a

> shorter period of time with a stable result? The issue of competence

> comes down to that - the more experienced the practitioner, the faster

> and more stable the results. Otherwise, even a junior practitioner can

> get good results from the homeostatic effect that the needles exert.

>

> Hugo

>

>

> " " <acukath <acukath%40gmail.com>>

> To:

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

> Monday, 1 October, 2007 10:27:28 AM

> Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

>

> juan:

>

> you raise a thoughtful point about points being all over the body,

> according

>

> to different systems, not merely those catalogued and widely used on the

> 12

>

> primary meridians.

>

> but for the sake of discussing why similar results were achieved in the

> sham

>

> & true groups in the German study, i'm not sure that is a fair explanation

>

> of why the sham group did so well. the points used in other systems, as

> you

>

> mention [korean hand, facial, Mst. Tong, and so forth] are all utilized

>

> based on applying the theory of that particular system. the sham points in

>

> this study were not chosen according to the theory of any system or ahshi.

>

> they chose the points by location: 5 cm lateral to the outer ub line and

>

> several points in the legs that did not correspond to point locations on

> the

>

> 12 primaries. they purposefully chose locations that did not correspond to

>

> meridians, TCM theory, or any other system, and yet still elicited an

>

> effective rate only 4% lower than the true group.

>

> i'm wondering if the results of the study could be duplicated?

>

> k

>

> On 9/29/07, aramis1971@netscape .net <aramis1971@netscape .net> wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Hi acukath

>

> >

>

> > If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

>

> > and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the " standarized

>

> > ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

>

> > reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

>

> > that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

>

> > also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

>

> > points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps (just

>

> > look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

>

> > system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

>

> > needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

>

> > acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

>

> > treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

>

> > authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good results.

>

> > Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element tradition,

>

> > we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

>

> > elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an excellent

>

> > therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

>

> > " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent results.

>

> >

>

> > All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human body

>

> > is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

>

> > and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with a

>

> > person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

>

> > and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

>

> > absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't work.

>

> >

>

> > Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

>

> > tradition works...

>

> >

>

> > Juan

>

> >

>

> > acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com> escribió:

>

> > >

>

> > > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be

> well

>

> > > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

>

> > > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to

>

> > why

>

> > > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also,

>

> > the

>

> > > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that

> in

>

> > > clinic). something seems askew.

>

> > >

>

> > > kath

>

> > >

>

> > > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes@pacificcolle ge.edu<sgomes%40pacificco

> llege.edu>

>

> > > <sgomes% <sgomes%25> <sgomes%25>40pacifi ccollege. edu>> wrote:

>

> > > >

>

> > > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

>

> > discussion

>

> > > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

>

> > > across 340

>

> > > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

>

> > > research class

>

> > > > this week.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

>

> > > description of

>

> > > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

>

> > > " placebo "

>

> > > > differently its important to understand the specific description of

>

> > the

>

> > > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used

> " the

>

> > > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted

> superficially

>

> > > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They

>

> > > were

>

> > > > studying *specificity* .

>

> > > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

>

> > > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

>

> > > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

>

> > > used as a

>

> > > > test of specificity. "

>

> > > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical

> eye

>

> > > > would hopefully catch.

>

> > > > **

>

> > > > ------------ --------- ---------

>

> > > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

>

> > > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

>

> > > > Academic Dean - San Diego

>

> > > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

>

> > > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

>

> > > > www.pacificcollege. edu

>

> > > >

>

> > > > *

>

> > > >

>

> > > >

>

> > > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what

>

> > the

>

> > > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to

>

> > do

>

> > > > that . . .

>

> > > >

>

> > > > k

>

> > > >

>

> > > >

>

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ ________

>

> > > > Alumni-sd mailing list

>

> > > > Alumni-sd@pacificco llege.edu <Alumni-sd%40pacifi ccollege. edu>

> <

>

> > Alumni-sd%40pacific college.edu>

>

> > > > http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd

>

> > > <http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd>

>

> > > >

>

> > > >

>

> > > >

>

> > >

>

> > > --

>

> > >

>

> > > Oriental Medicine

>

> > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> > >

>

> > > Asheville Center For

>

> > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

>

> > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

>

> > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett%40Acupun

> ctureAsheville. com>

>

> > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> 40AcupunctureAsh

> eville.com>

>

> > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/

>

> > > <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/>>

>

> > >

>

> > > --

>

> > >

>

> > > Oriental Medicine

>

> > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> > >

>

> > > Asheville Center For

>

> > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

>

> > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

>

> > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett%40Acupun

> ctureAsheville. com>

>

> > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> 40AcupunctureAsh

> eville.com>

>

> > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com

>

> > >

>

> > >

[Guest guest]

Hi Tymothy, here's a thought

 

What i am saying is that i have enough work treating my patients. 5

element and excess-deficiency styles are logical for me, that is just

the way i see all physical manifestations when i am trying to look for

the source of a problem, there is either too much energy or too

little, or the fine balance between the elements has been disrupted. I

don't need an MD to tell me if something works or doesn't work because

i KNOW it works, and why do i know that? first of all, traditional

medicines have been around since the beginning of mankind, they have

withstood the passing of time, nothing that doesn't work is able to

last through time; second i have been practising for around 5 years

now and people HEAL. Why do i have to worry about what happens

according to western thinking? If they don't like the " classical "

reasons...too bad for them, let them pick their brains out...As i said

before 5 element and excess-deficiency is logical even from an

engineering point of view (if a component of a circuit has too much

energy, it will blow up - if it has too little, it won't work to it's

full potential). Look around you, look at mother nature and you will

find all you answers regarding TCM and much more, for example, i live

in Caracas, Venezuela, it's a very humid place, i treat people with

tumors and women with policystic ovaries and breasts, i have seen

people die from cancer, they end up dry inside, brittle, just like a

tree i have outside my house that is infected with a parasite plant

that it is eating it up, and the resemblance is more than stunning. In

my humble opinion, i believe modern society has lost it's compass (if

it ever had one), and the new religion is science, if it cannot be

" proved scientifically " it is false and all those people practising

and upholding them are fools and should be illegal, what is the

difference with that and the dark ages? The Catholic Church had it's

Inquisition, how was it? if it goes against our teachings, it is

heresy, and all those who practice it are heretics and witches (oops,

that was Salem) should be burnt at the stake. Same idea, different

actors.

In the end, why should we let them dictate anything? As long as you

are good in what you are doing and you help as many people as you can,

you are doing your own research, you have clinical trials every time

you treat a patient, and that is valuable data, imagine if all

traditional doctors around the world set up a data bank with their

clinical experiences and thoughts derived, and with the data from

ancient doctors...Just imagine all that evidence, all those thought on

why some worked faster and more efficient than others, we would need

all the computers in this planet to hold such treasure, maybe then

" scientists " would stop poking around and let live...

 

Just a thought

 

By the way, if you want some scientific data on acupuncture, there are

lots around the web from china to korea, to cuba to the u.s. Here's

one link:

 

http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijam/vol1n1/koryo.xml

 

 

Chinese Medicine , " miracles28 "

<jellyphish wrote:

>

> > Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this

splendid

> > tradition works...

> >

> > Juan

>

> That, among other things is the problem in my opinion. We are neither

> trained nor inclined to do research, we are content to allow others to

> dictate what is a proper research protocol and yet must defend the

> results.

> The difficulty has always been what is the control in the trials of

> acupuncture. I would say that all of the research from china has had

> both poor controls and for the most part terrible designs, never mind

> the fact that virtually %100 of the results are favorable.

> Control is the name of the game in research, you must know that an

> action taken against chance is statistically significant, if you can

> not prove this, then you can not prove anything and are therefore

> resigned to confer your practice as though on faith. Which again, in

> my humble opinion is very close to what i have seen in the profession

> and in the education. It works because it works.

> Perhaps with the onset of Doctoral programs more research will

> continue in the States with different protocols and trials that are

> worthy of peer review.

> In the end however, i would say that " sham " needling is biased and

> does not adequately confront the multiple variables present in any

> physical manipulation. Consider for instance that physical therapy has

> no controls in their research save individuals that do not do the

> prescribed activity.

> Tymothy

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Kath, you can download the actual study, it's in the files section.

First off, the study showed that about 40% of the acu population had an

improvement in their condition. How much did their condition improve? Between a

paltry 12 to 33%.

Secondly, I can't help but compare these results to my personal experience.

Generally my patients need about 4 treatments to be three quarters improved.

Many of them have almost a full recovery with one needle, one treatment. In 2007

I have had ONE patient who has responded so slowly that we could say that there

is " no effect " . And yet he chooses to stay with me because I'm the only one who

has been able to give him ANY effect.

My experience leads me to judge that the study creates an incompetent effect,

or the practitioners are inexperienced / incompetent. A 10 to 33% improvement in

40% of a population after TEN TREATMENTS is the mark of a poor practitioner who

is relying on acupuncture's homeostatic effect to create an outcome.

Again, Kath, don't read the study wrong. I would be ashamed if those numbers

reflected my clinical efficacy. The study did NOT show even a meagre 43%

improvement in the back pain. 43% of the acu population had some result (10 to

33% improvement (after 10 to 15 treatments!!! yecch)).

Everyone here should try this (for no charge, of course), use the sham point

protocol on your back pain treatments so you can see the effect of acu

homeostasis and how it compares with a competently delivered acu tx.

Bye,

 

Hugo

 

 

" "

Chinese Medicine

Monday, 1 October, 2007 7:11:32 PM

Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ok, that's an interesting way to spin it: even a junior practitioner

can get

 

43-47%, an experienced one even more (double). the shallow needling was

 

done 5 cun off the outer ub line, ranging from about T3or T7 to L4. (i

 

believe 5 needles placed bilat). i find it astounding and inexplicable that

 

anyone could get 43% of patients' lumbar pain improved with this type of a

 

tx, let alone a weekend warrior MD who doesn't understand how to propagate

 

qi.

 

 

 

kb

 

 

 

On 10/1/07, Hugo Ramiro <subincor > wrote:

 

>

 

> Hi all, I don't think my first posting of this went through. Apologies

 

> if it did and I'm repeating myself.

 

>

 

> 3 interesting things from my point of view:

 

>

 

> 1. The study is actually showing that two different schools of

 

> Chinese Medical Acupuncture (let's call them deep-puncture vs

 

> shallow-puncture) both work equally well.

 

>

 

> 2. The study also shows that the already recognised and proven

 

> homeostatic effect of acupuncture was more important than competently

 

> chosen points.

 

>

 

> 3. It should be obvious that a patient- and observer- blinded trial

 

> removes much of acupuncture' s effectiveness (i.e. assessment cannot be

 

> fully carried out in double-blinded situations). This by itself would

 

> explain why the homeostatic effect seems to be central in this study.

 

>

 

> In my practice I use both deep puncture and shallow puncture (as described

 

> in the study) as they are called for.

 

>

 

> In my practice I also find that it is difficult to make people sick

 

> with acupuncture. The issue becomes one of efficacy over time instead

 

> of simple efficacy - in other words, can I get the same job done in a

 

> shorter period of time with a stable result? The issue of competence

 

> comes down to that - the more experienced the practitioner, the faster

 

> and more stable the results. Otherwise, even a junior practitioner can

 

> get good results from the homeostatic effect that the needles exert.

 

>

 

> Hugo

 

>

 

>

 

> " " <acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com>>

 

> <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> Monday, 1 October, 2007 10:27:28 AM

 

> Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

 

>

 

> juan:

 

>

 

> you raise a thoughtful point about points being all over the body,

 

> according

 

>

 

> to different systems, not merely those catalogued and widely used on the

 

> 12

 

>

 

> primary meridians.

 

>

 

> but for the sake of discussing why similar results were achieved in the

 

> sham

 

>

 

> & true groups in the German study, i'm not sure that is a fair explanation

 

>

 

> of why the sham group did so well. the points used in other systems, as

 

> you

 

>

 

> mention [korean hand, facial, Mst. Tong, and so forth] are all utilized

 

>

 

> based on applying the theory of that particular system. the sham points in

 

>

 

> this study were not chosen according to the theory of any system or ahshi.

 

>

 

> they chose the points by location: 5 cm lateral to the outer ub line and

 

>

 

> several points in the legs that did not correspond to point locations on

 

> the

 

>

 

> 12 primaries. they purposefully chose locations that did not correspond to

 

>

 

> meridians, TCM theory, or any other system, and yet still elicited an

 

>

 

> effective rate only 4% lower than the true group.

 

>

 

> i'm wondering if the results of the study could be duplicated?

 

>

 

> k

 

>

 

> On 9/29/07, aramis1971@netscape .net <aramis1971@ netscape .net> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Hi acukath

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

 

>

 

> > and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the " standarized

 

>

 

> > ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

 

>

 

> > reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

 

>

 

> > that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

 

>

 

> > also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

 

>

 

> > points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps (just

 

>

 

> > look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

 

>

 

> > system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

 

>

 

> > needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

 

>

 

> > acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

 

>

 

> > treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

 

>

 

> > authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good results.

 

>

 

> > Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element tradition,

 

>

 

> > we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

 

>

 

> > elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an excellent

 

>

 

> > therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

 

>

 

> > " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent results.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human body

 

>

 

> > is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

 

>

 

> > and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with a

 

>

 

> > person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

 

>

 

> > and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

 

>

 

> > absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't work.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

 

>

 

> > tradition works...

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Juan

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com> escribió:

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be

 

> well

 

>

 

> > > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used (lumber

 

>

 

> > > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as to

 

>

 

> > why

 

>

 

> > > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups. also,

 

>

 

> > the

 

>

 

> > > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double that

 

> in

 

>

 

> > > clinic). something seems askew.

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > kath

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes@pacificcoll e ge.edu<sgomes% 40pacificco

 

> llege.edu>

 

>

 

> > > <sgomes% <sgomes%25> <sgomes%25>40pacifi ccollege. edu>> wrote:

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

 

>

 

> > discussion

 

>

 

> > > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

 

>

 

> > > across 340

 

>

 

> > > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

 

>

 

> > > research class

 

>

 

> > > > this week.

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

 

>

 

> > > description of

 

>

 

> > > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

 

>

 

> > > " placebo "

 

>

 

> > > > differently its important to understand the specific description of

 

>

 

> > the

 

>

 

> > > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used

 

> " the

 

>

 

> > > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted

 

> superficially

 

>

 

> > > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy. They

 

>

 

> > > were

 

>

 

> > > > studying *specificity* .

 

>

 

> > > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does not

 

>

 

> > > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to test

 

>

 

> > > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

 

>

 

> > > used as a

 

>

 

> > > > test of specificity. "

 

>

 

> > > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical

 

> eye

 

>

 

> > > > would hopefully catch.

 

>

 

> > > > **

 

>

 

> > > > ------------ --------- ---------

 

>

 

> > > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

 

>

 

> > > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

 

>

 

> > > > Academic Dean - San Diego

 

>

 

> > > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

 

>

 

> > > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

 

>

 

> > > > www.pacificcollege. edu

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > *

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out what

 

>

 

> > the

 

>

 

> > > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how to

 

>

 

> > do

 

>

 

> > > > that . . .

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > k

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ ________

 

>

 

> > > > Alumni-sd mailing list

 

>

 

> > > > Alumni-sd@pacificco llege.edu <Alumni-sd%40pacifi ccollege. edu>

 

> <

 

>

 

> > Alumni-sd%40pacific college.edu>

 

>

 

> > > > http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd

 

>

 

> > > <http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd>

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > --

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > Oriental Medicine

 

>

 

> > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > Asheville Center For

 

>

 

> > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

 

>

 

> > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

 

>

 

> > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett% 40Acupun

 

> ctureAsheville. com>

 

>

 

> > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> 40AcupunctureAsh

 

> eville.com>

 

>

 

> > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/

 

>

 

> > > <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/>>

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > --

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > Oriental Medicine

 

>

 

> > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > > Asheville Center For

 

>

 

> > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

 

>

 

> > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

 

>

 

> > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett% 40Acupun

 

> ctureAsheville. com>

 

>

 

> > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> 40AcupunctureAsh

 

> eville.com>

 

>

 

> > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> > >

[Guest guest]

Oh yah, and from the study:

 

" First, the unexpected finding of similar effectiveness of

sham and verum acupuncture forces us to question the

underlying action mechanism of acupuncture and to ask

whether the emphasis placed on learning the traditional

Chinese acupuncture points may be superfluous. "

 

The gall! The gall!!

Should have read:

 

" [...] to ask whether the practitioners were competent

and at all coginizant of what they were doing. "

 

Hugo

 

 

 

_________

Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it

now.

http://uk.answers./

 

 

[Guest guest]

maybe - more importantly one might first ask.......why did the so-called

experienced acupuncturists (142 hrs of education over 8 years of practice)

applying something they called verum acupuncture ONLY got 47% benefit when more

likely it should have been much higher?

 

Richard

 

 

In a message dated 10/1/2007 9:01:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,

acukath writes:

 

 

 

 

i have to agree with questioning the value of including sham acu in a

study. what's the point? why not just have an acu group and a no therapy

group or a conventional med group as a control? to answer my own question,

i'm thinking they put in the sham group because they still are wondering

whether acu is mere placebo, so they use the sham group as a control for

placebo effect. this is why the press looked at the german study and said

if the sham and true group got similar results, is acu placebo?

 

somewhere back in time, i was told that placebo is about 35%. can anyone

confirm that? if that is true, then both the acu and the sham groups out

preformed placebo.

 

but the question still remains, why did 43% of back pain patients improve

with shallow acupuncture 5cm off the outer ub line (if i recall correctly, 5

points placed beginning at T3 or T7 evenly spaced down to about L4)?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

hugo:

 

i agree that the results in the true group were much lower than what we see

in clinic, we get double the 47% effective rate. my surprize is that the

sham group got 43%, i would have thought they'd get 0%. i think 43% is

pretty good for the tx they gave: 5cm off the outer ub line.

 

kb

 

 

On 10/2/07, Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote:

>

> Hi Kath, you can download the actual study, it's in the files section.

> First off, the study showed that about 40% of the acu population had an

> improvement in their condition. How much did their condition improve?

> Between a paltry 12 to 33%.

> Secondly, I can't help but compare these results to my personal

> experience. Generally my patients need about 4 treatments to be three

> quarters improved. Many of them have almost a full recovery with one needle,

> one treatment. In 2007 I have had ONE patient who has responded so slowly

> that we could say that there is " no effect " . And yet he chooses to stay with

> me because I'm the only one who has been able to give him ANY effect.

> My experience leads me to judge that the study creates an incompetent

> effect, or the practitioners are inexperienced / incompetent. A 10 to 33%

> improvement in 40% of a population after TEN TREATMENTS is the mark of a

> poor practitioner who is relying on acupuncture's homeostatic effect to

> create an outcome.

> Again, Kath, don't read the study wrong. I would be ashamed if those

> numbers reflected my clinical efficacy. The study did NOT show even a meagre

> 43% improvement in the back pain. 43% of the acu population had some result

> (10 to 33% improvement (after 10 to 15 treatments!!! yecch)).

> Everyone here should try this (for no charge, of course), use the sham

> point protocol on your back pain treatments so you can see the effect of acu

> homeostasis and how it compares with a competently delivered acu tx.

> Bye,

>

> Hugo

>

>

> " " <acukath <acukath%40gmail.com>>

> To:

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

> Monday, 1 October, 2007 7:11:32 PM

> Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

>

> ok, that's an interesting way to spin it: even a junior practitioner can

> get

>

> 43-47%, an experienced one even more (double). the shallow needling was

>

> done 5 cun off the outer ub line, ranging from about T3or T7 to L4. (i

>

> believe 5 needles placed bilat). i find it astounding and inexplicable

> that

>

> anyone could get 43% of patients' lumbar pain improved with this type of a

>

> tx, let alone a weekend warrior MD who doesn't understand how to propagate

>

> qi.

>

> kb

>

> On 10/1/07, Hugo Ramiro <subincor > wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Hi all, I don't think my first posting of this went through. Apologies

>

> > if it did and I'm repeating myself.

>

> >

>

> > 3 interesting things from my point of view:

>

> >

>

> > 1. The study is actually showing that two different schools of

>

> > Chinese Medical Acupuncture (let's call them deep-puncture vs

>

> > shallow-puncture) both work equally well.

>

> >

>

> > 2. The study also shows that the already recognised and proven

>

> > homeostatic effect of acupuncture was more important than competently

>

> > chosen points.

>

> >

>

> > 3. It should be obvious that a patient- and observer- blinded trial

>

> > removes much of acupuncture' s effectiveness (i.e. assessment cannot be

>

> > fully carried out in double-blinded situations). This by itself would

>

> > explain why the homeostatic effect seems to be central in this study.

>

> >

>

> > In my practice I use both deep puncture and shallow puncture (as

> described

>

> > in the study) as they are called for.

>

> >

>

> > In my practice I also find that it is difficult to make people sick

>

> > with acupuncture. The issue becomes one of efficacy over time instead

>

> > of simple efficacy - in other words, can I get the same job done in a

>

> > shorter period of time with a stable result? The issue of competence

>

> > comes down to that - the more experienced the practitioner, the faster

>

> > and more stable the results. Otherwise, even a junior practitioner can

>

> > get good results from the homeostatic effect that the needles exert.

>

> >

>

> > Hugo

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > " " <acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail.

> com>>

>

> > <Traditional_

> Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

>

> > Monday, 1 October, 2007 10:27:28 AM

>

> > Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

>

> >

>

> > juan:

>

> >

>

> > you raise a thoughtful point about points being all over the body,

>

> > according

>

> >

>

> > to different systems, not merely those catalogued and widely used on the

>

> > 12

>

> >

>

> > primary meridians.

>

> >

>

> > but for the sake of discussing why similar results were achieved in the

>

> > sham

>

> >

>

> > & true groups in the German study, i'm not sure that is a fair

> explanation

>

> >

>

> > of why the sham group did so well. the points used in other systems, as

>

> > you

>

> >

>

> > mention [korean hand, facial, Mst. Tong, and so forth] are all utilized

>

> >

>

> > based on applying the theory of that particular system. the sham points

> in

>

> >

>

> > this study were not chosen according to the theory of any system or

> ahshi.

>

> >

>

> > they chose the points by location: 5 cm lateral to the outer ub line and

>

> >

>

> > several points in the legs that did not correspond to point locations on

>

> > the

>

> >

>

> > 12 primaries. they purposefully chose locations that did not correspond

> to

>

> >

>

> > meridians, TCM theory, or any other system, and yet still elicited an

>

> >

>

> > effective rate only 4% lower than the true group.

>

> >

>

> > i'm wondering if the results of the study could be duplicated?

>

> >

>

> > k

>

> >

>

> > On 9/29/07, aramis1971@netscape .net <aramis1971@ netscape .net> wrote:

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > Hi acukath

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

>

> >

>

> > > and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the

> " standarized

>

> >

>

> > > ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

>

> >

>

> > > reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

>

> >

>

> > > that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

>

> >

>

> > > also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

>

> >

>

> > > points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps

> (just

>

> >

>

> > > look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

>

> >

>

> > > system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

>

> >

>

> > > needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

>

> >

>

> > > acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

>

> >

>

> > > treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

>

> >

>

> > > authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good

> results.

>

> >

>

> > > Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element

> tradition,

>

> >

>

> > > we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

>

> >

>

> > > elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an

> excellent

>

> >

>

> > > therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

>

> >

>

> > > " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent

> results.

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human

> body

>

> >

>

> > > is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

>

> >

>

> > > and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with

> a

>

> >

>

> > > person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

>

> >

>

> > > and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

>

> >

>

> > > absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't

> work.

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

>

> >

>

> > > tradition works...

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > Juan

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com> escribió:

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be

>

> > well

>

> >

>

> > > > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used

> (lumber

>

> >

>

> > > > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as

> to

>

> >

>

> > > why

>

> >

>

> > > > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups.

> also,

>

> >

>

> > > the

>

> >

>

> > > > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double

> that

>

> > in

>

> >

>

> > > > clinic). something seems askew.

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > kath

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes@pacificcoll e ge.edu<sgomes%

> 40pacificco

>

> > llege.edu>

>

> >

>

> > > > <sgomes% <sgomes%25> <sgomes%25> <sgomes%25>40pacifi

> ccollege. edu>> wrote:

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

>

> >

>

> > > discussion

>

> >

>

> > > > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

>

> >

>

> > > > across 340

>

> >

>

> > > > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

>

> >

>

> > > > research class

>

> >

>

> > > > > this week.

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

>

> >

>

> > > > description of

>

> >

>

> > > > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

>

> >

>

> > > > " placebo "

>

> >

>

> > > > > differently its important to understand the specific description

> of

>

> >

>

> > > the

>

> >

>

> > > > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used

>

> > " the

>

> >

>

> > > > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted

>

> > superficially

>

> >

>

> > > > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy.

> They

>

> >

>

> > > > were

>

> >

>

> > > > > studying *specificity* .

>

> >

>

> > > > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does

> not

>

> >

>

> > > > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to

> test

>

> >

>

> > > > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

>

> >

>

> > > > used as a

>

> >

>

> > > > > test of specificity. "

>

> >

>

> > > > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical

>

> > eye

>

> >

>

> > > > > would hopefully catch.

>

> >

>

> > > > > **

>

> >

>

> > > > > ------------ --------- ---------

>

> >

>

> > > > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

>

> >

>

> > > > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

>

> >

>

> > > > > Academic Dean - San Diego

>

> >

>

> > > > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

>

> >

>

> > > > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

>

> >

>

> > > > > www.pacificcollege. edu

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > *

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out

> what

>

> >

>

> > > the

>

> >

>

> > > > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how

> to

>

> >

>

> > > do

>

> >

>

> > > > > that . . .

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > k

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ ________

>

> >

>

> > > > > Alumni-sd mailing list

>

> >

>

> > > > > Alumni-sd@pacificco llege.edu <Alumni-sd%40pacifi ccollege. edu>

>

> > <

>

> >

>

> > > Alumni-sd%40pacific college.edu>

>

> >

>

> > > > > http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd

>

> >

>

> > > > <http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd>

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > --

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > Oriental Medicine

>

> >

>

> > > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > Asheville Center For

>

> >

>

> > > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

>

> >

>

> > > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

>

> >

>

> > > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett% 40Acupun

>

> > ctureAsheville. com>

>

> >

>

> > > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25>

> 40AcupunctureAsh

>

> > eville.com>

>

> >

>

> > > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com <http://www.acupunct ureasheville.

> com/

>

> >

>

> > > > <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/>>

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > --

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > Oriental Medicine

>

> >

>

> > > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > > Asheville Center For

>

> >

>

> > > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

>

> >

>

> > > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

>

> >

>

> > > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett% 40Acupun

>

> > ctureAsheville. com>

>

> >

>

> > > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25>

> 40AcupunctureAsh

>

> > eville.com>

>

> >

>

> > > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> > > >

[Guest guest]

the CEO of one of the largest phara-companies in Europe several years ago

was quoted as saying that prescription medications ONLY work in 35% of the

population due to genetic differences in people.

might that also be PLACEBO?

 

And if it is mostly placebo which more than likely it is....... then where

is the other than placebo value of much of allopathic contemporary or standard

of care treatment??

 

Richard

 

 

 

************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Kath, I somewhat disagree. The homeostatic effect of acupuncture is very

very strong. " Placebo " is in there too.

 

Hugo

 

 

" "

Chinese Medicine

Tuesday, 2 October, 2007 11:24:20 AM

Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hugo:

 

 

 

i agree that the results in the true group were much lower than what we see

 

in clinic, we get double the 47% effective rate. my surprize is that the

 

sham group got 43%, i would have thought they'd get 0%. i think 43% is

 

pretty good for the tx they gave: 5cm off the outer ub line.

 

 

 

kb

 

 

 

On 10/2/07, Hugo Ramiro <subincor > wrote:

 

>

 

> Hi Kath, you can download the actual study, it's in the files section.

 

> First off, the study showed that about 40% of the acu population had an

 

> improvement in their condition. How much did their condition improve?

 

> Between a paltry 12 to 33%.

 

> Secondly, I can't help but compare these results to my personal

 

> experience. Generally my patients need about 4 treatments to be three

 

> quarters improved. Many of them have almost a full recovery with one needle,

 

> one treatment. In 2007 I have had ONE patient who has responded so slowly

 

> that we could say that there is " no effect " . And yet he chooses to stay with

 

> me because I'm the only one who has been able to give him ANY effect.

 

> My experience leads me to judge that the study creates an incompetent

 

> effect, or the practitioners are inexperienced / incompetent. A 10 to 33%

 

> improvement in 40% of a population after TEN TREATMENTS is the mark of a

 

> poor practitioner who is relying on acupuncture' s homeostatic effect to

 

> create an outcome.

 

> Again, Kath, don't read the study wrong. I would be ashamed if those

 

> numbers reflected my clinical efficacy. The study did NOT show even a meagre

 

> 43% improvement in the back pain. 43% of the acu population had some result

 

> (10 to 33% improvement (after 10 to 15 treatments!! ! yecch)).

 

> Everyone here should try this (for no charge, of course), use the sham

 

> point protocol on your back pain treatments so you can see the effect of acu

 

> homeostasis and how it compares with a competently delivered acu tx.

 

> Bye,

 

>

 

> Hugo

 

>

 

>

 

> " " <acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com>>

 

> <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> Monday, 1 October, 2007 7:11:32 PM

 

> Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

 

>

 

> ok, that's an interesting way to spin it: even a junior practitioner can

 

> get

 

>

 

> 43-47%, an experienced one even more (double). the shallow needling was

 

>

 

> done 5 cun off the outer ub line, ranging from about T3or T7 to L4. (i

 

>

 

> believe 5 needles placed bilat). i find it astounding and inexplicable

 

> that

 

>

 

> anyone could get 43% of patients' lumbar pain improved with this type of a

 

>

 

> tx, let alone a weekend warrior MD who doesn't understand how to propagate

 

>

 

> qi.

 

>

 

> kb

 

>

 

> On 10/1/07, Hugo Ramiro <subincor > wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Hi all, I don't think my first posting of this went through. Apologies

 

>

 

> > if it did and I'm repeating myself.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 3 interesting things from my point of view:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 1. The study is actually showing that two different schools of

 

>

 

> > Chinese Medical Acupuncture (let's call them deep-puncture vs

 

>

 

> > shallow-puncture) both work equally well.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 2. The study also shows that the already recognised and proven

 

>

 

> > homeostatic effect of acupuncture was more important than competently

 

>

 

> > chosen points.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 3. It should be obvious that a patient- and observer- blinded trial

 

>

 

> > removes much of acupuncture' s effectiveness (i.e. assessment cannot be

 

>

 

> > fully carried out in double-blinded situations). This by itself would

 

>

 

> > explain why the homeostatic effect seems to be central in this study.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > In my practice I use both deep puncture and shallow puncture (as

 

> described

 

>

 

> > in the study) as they are called for.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > In my practice I also find that it is difficult to make people sick

 

>

 

> > with acupuncture. The issue becomes one of efficacy over time instead

 

>

 

> > of simple efficacy - in other words, can I get the same job done in a

 

>

 

> > shorter period of time with a stable result? The issue of competence

 

>

 

> > comes down to that - the more experienced the practitioner, the faster

 

>

 

> > and more stable the results. Otherwise, even a junior practitioner can

 

>

 

> > get good results from the homeostatic effect that the needles exert.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Hugo

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > " " <acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail.

 

> com>>

 

>

 

> > <Traditional_

 

> Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

>

 

> > Monday, 1 October, 2007 10:27:28 AM

 

>

 

> > Re: Acupuncture in the news! study results

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > juan:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > you raise a thoughtful point about points being all over the body,

 

>

 

> > according

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > to different systems, not merely those catalogued and widely used on the

 

>

 

> > 12

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > primary meridians.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > but for the sake of discussing why similar results were achieved in the

 

>

 

> > sham

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > & true groups in the German study, i'm not sure that is a fair

 

> explanation

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > of why the sham group did so well. the points used in other systems, as

 

>

 

> > you

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > mention [korean hand, facial, Mst. Tong, and so forth] are all utilized

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > based on applying the theory of that particular system. the sham points

 

> in

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > this study were not chosen according to the theory of any system or

 

> ahshi.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > they chose the points by location: 5 cm lateral to the outer ub line and

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > several points in the legs that did not correspond to point locations on

 

>

 

> > the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 12 primaries. they purposefully chose locations that did not correspond

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > meridians, TCM theory, or any other system, and yet still elicited an

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > effective rate only 4% lower than the true group.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > i'm wondering if the results of the study could be duplicated?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > k

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > On 9/29/07, aramis1971@netscape .net <aramis1971@ netscape .net> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Hi acukath

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > If you insert a needle in someone you will have some sort of reaction

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > and not all the points are necessarily the ones we use, the

 

> " standarized

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > ones " , there are many points in tibetan moxibustion that are not

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > reflected in chinese acupuncture, koryo hand therapy also uses points

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > that are only shown in their graphs, but not in chinese ones, there is

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > also a kind of vietnamese facial acupuncture that has a map of 1000

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > points just in the face. There are so many kinds and so many maps

 

> (just

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > look at the ear according to the chinese and compare it to the french

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > system) that it is very irresponsible to catalog an insertion of a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > needle as " sham " . According to ancient texts, a painful point is an

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > acupuncture point, regardless where it is. So, if these people were

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > treated for backpain with the insertion of needles, who has the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > authority to declare it as " sham " , specially when they got good

 

> results.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Just to cite another example, you must be aware of 5 element

 

> tradition,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > we use the 5 shu points in order to balnce the interaction of the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > elements, most people i know, use the same map, but i know an

 

> excellent

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > therapist who uses different correlations of the 5 shu points to their

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > " native element " depending on the season, and he gets excellent

 

> results.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > All i know is that traditional medicines are so rich and the human

 

> body

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > is so complex that we should keep an open mind as to be able to learn

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > and not to judge what's going on in order to be able to sit down with

 

> a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > person and talk hopefully with the knowledge and wisdom to figure out

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > and understand what he/she is doing. Noone is the beholder of the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > absolute truth thus noone can say that something works or doesn't

 

> work.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Remember Newton laws, and let them try to figure out why this splendid

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > tradition works...

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Juan

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > acukath (AT) gmail (DOT) com <acukath%40gmail. com> escribió:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > i just glanced through the study. on a first look, it appears to be

 

>

 

> > well

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > designed. After looking at where the point were that were used

 

> (lumber

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > region for true, 5 cm off the lat ub line for sham) i'm curious as

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > why

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > they got they got similar results for the true and sham groups.

 

> also,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > true group should have gotten a much higher success rate (double

 

> that

 

>

 

> > in

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > clinic). something seems askew.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > kath

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > On 9/25/07, Stacy Gomes <sgomes@pacificcoll e ge.edu<sgomes%

 

> 40pacificco

 

>

 

> > llege.edu>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > <sgomes% <sgomes%25> <sgomes%25> <sgomes%25>40pacifi

 

> ccollege. edu>> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > As the CRDS teacher in San Diego I'm thrilled to see so much

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > discussion

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > about one of the world's largest acupuncture studies (n= 1162)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > across 340

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > trial centers. This " GERAC " study has been the topic for our

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > research class

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > this week.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > If you read the original study design you can see what the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > description of

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > their sham design is. Because almost every study uses " sham " and

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > " placebo "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > differently its important to understand the specific description

 

> of

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > " sham " protocol. In this study the " invasive sham " technique used

 

>

 

> > " the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > same kind, size, and number of needles and was inserted

 

>

 

> > superficially

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > (maximum 3mm) at defined non-meridian points " .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Look at the original design. They were *not *studying efficacy.

 

> They

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > were

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > studying *specificity* .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > " A non-invasive pr placebo acupuncture in which the needle does

 

> not

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > actually penetrate the skin can be used in a trial designed to

 

> test

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > efficacy. The sham on invasive acupuncture with insertion would be

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > used as a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > test of specificity. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > *This is what the media failed to report but what a good critical

 

>

 

> > eye

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > would hopefully catch.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > **

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > ------------ --------- ---------

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Stacy Gomes, Ed.D.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Vice President of Academic Affairs

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Academic Dean - San Diego

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > 619-574-6909 ext. 105

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > www.pacificcollege. edu

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > *

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > this is an assoc. press piece. is there anyway we can find out

 

> what

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > study is they were quoting and get a copy of it? i'm not sure how

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > do

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > that . . .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > k

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ ________

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Alumni-sd mailing list

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Alumni-sd@pacificco llege.edu <Alumni-sd%40pacifi ccollege. edu>

 

>

 

> > <

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Alumni-sd%40pacific college.edu>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > <http://mail. pacificcollege. edu/mailman/ listinfo/ alumni-sd>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > --

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Oriental Medicine

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Asheville Center For

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett% 40Acupun

 

>

 

> > ctureAsheville. com>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25>

 

> 40AcupunctureAsh

 

>

 

> > eville.com>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com <http://www.acupunct ureasheville.

 

> com/

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > <http://www.acupunct ureasheville. com/>>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > --

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Oriental Medicine

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Asheville Center For

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > kbartlett@Acupunctu reAsheville. com<kbartlett% 40Acupun

 

>

 

> > ctureAsheville. com>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > <kbartlett% <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25> <kbartlett%25>

 

> 40AcupunctureAsh

 

>

 

> > eville.com>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > www.AcupunctureAshe ville.com

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

[Guest guest]

" but the question still remains, why did 43% of back pain patients improve

with shallow acupuncture 5cm off the outer ub line (if i recall correctly, 5

points placed beginning at T3 or T7 evenly spaced down to about L4)? "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The design of this study looked poor, how do they know they weren't

triggering endorphin release? A natural pain killer, how did they control

for the care and concern and the ability to speak with the provider of the

'sham acupuncturist'? Certainly whoever placed the needles had some training

or they wouldn't be allowed to place the needles! You want to tell me there

is no way they hit any pathway? Released no chemical reaction at all? Got no

therapeutic benefit from the care and concern of the people caring from

them? I don't buy it for a moment!!! Care and concern for who you are

taking care of, the belief on the part of the patient that they are going to

feel better, couple with the fact that any kind of needle/pain is going to

release some kind of endorphin reaction and you are going to have pain

relief!!