Acupuncture and back pain in the news! How do I get the study?!?

September 28, 2007

so can someone please tell me how to get this study, or cut and paste it

into an email to this list.

thanks,

kath

On 9/25/07, Calalb, Mihail <mihail.calalb wrote:

>

> Apologies to the group for having forgotten the restrictions. Here

> is the link:

> Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:1892-1898.

> Regards,

> Mihail Calalb

>

> mihail.calalb <mihail.calalb%40uchsc.edu>

> Tue 9/25/2007 3:26 PM

> To:

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

> RE: Acupuncture and back pain in the news!

>

> Attached you will find the " study " in question. I believe this is a, not

> surprisingly, mish-mash of Western diagnostic physiatric criteria

> sprinkled with an unacceptably unverifiable acupuncture method (e.g.

> points from a " prescribed list " ?- The paper merits a critical look.

>

> ________________________________

>

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

>

[Chinese Medicine <Traditional_Chinese_Medicin\

e%40>]

> On Behalf Of

> acuman1 <acuman1%40aol.com>

> Tuesday, September 25, 2007 3:08 PM

> To:

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

> Re: Acupuncture and back pain in the news!

>

> What this means is that sham acupuncture is just as good as acupuncture

> done

> by those who do not know how to do it. German MD's and Heilpraktikers

> are

> Euro-wide famous for making sure there are little or no requirments on

> their

> training for acupuncture.

> Wait a minute. Isn't that sham treatment?

> Has anyone actually looked at the study to see how the " practitioners "

> actually picked the points, or did differentiation?

>

> David Molony

>

> In a message dated 9/25/07 12:30:08 PM, acukath<acukath%40gmail.com>

> <acukath% <acukath%25>40gmail.com> writes:

>