| Beach Runner |
In the recent issue of Newsweek it rported that both traditional and
treatment for specified migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo/
They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were set
up according to the scientific method.
Acupuncture should be an area of research. Other studies have shown
similar effects while practictioners have made wild claims.
|
|
|
| usual suspect |
Beach Runner wrote:
> In the recent issue of Newsweek
It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
> it rported that both traditional and
> treatment for specified migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo/
Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines and
acupuncture:
Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
But they do get relief.
That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
authors report.
Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
migraine attacks.
Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
treatment at all.
http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were set
> up according to the scientific method.
You don't comprehend the scientific method.
> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have demonstrated a
similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and improving "quality of
life" for patients of various illnesses:
LAUGHTER
http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
MUSIC
http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
ANIMALS/PETS
http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
> Other studies have shown
> similar effects
Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
"alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it says
about acupuncture:
Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
the existence of an "energy" per se.
http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
> while practictioners have made wild claims.
That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice. Its
effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and pets, as
noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't involve being
poked with needles that may be contaminated.
The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles. You
won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture unless
your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used sterile
needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've received
acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since you have a
Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is probably more
common in Florida than the rest of the country given the elderly
population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
|
|
|
| Beach Runner |
Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
For your information.
Time December 5,, page 63
usual suspect wrote:
> Beach Runner wrote:
>
>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>
>
> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>
>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified migrade
>> headaches worked compared to a placebo/
>
>
> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines and
> acupuncture:
> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
> relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>
> But they do get relief.
>
> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
> authors report.
>
> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
> migraine attacks.
>
> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
> treatment at all.
> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>
> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>
>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were
>> set up according to the scientific method.
>
>
> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>
>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>
>
> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have demonstrated a
> similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and improving "quality of
> life" for patients of various illnesses:
>
> LAUGHTER
> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>
> MUSIC
> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>
> ANIMALS/PETS
> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>
>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>
>
> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it says
> about acupuncture:
>
> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
> the existence of an "energy" per se.
> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>
>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>
>
> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice. Its
> effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and pets, as
> noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't involve being
> poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>
> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles. You
> won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture unless
> your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used sterile
> needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've received
> acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since you have a
> Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is probably more
> common in Florida than the rest of the country given the elderly
> population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
|
|
|
| usual suspect |
B-cup Bob wrote:
> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>
> For your information.
>
> Time December 5,, page 63
It refers to the German study I cited previously:
http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
to suffer as before.
http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise). Let me explain it to you,
eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third group
was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving fake
treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo (fake
acupuncture) effect.
That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
acupuncture. Take your pick.
Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because they
don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used needles
into patients.
> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>
>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>
>>
>>
>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>
>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified migrade
>>> headaches worked compared to a placebo/
>>
>>
>>
>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines and
>> acupuncture:
>
>
>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
>> relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>
>> But they do get relief.
>>
>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>> authors report.
>>
>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>> migraine attacks.
>>
>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>> treatment at all.
>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>
>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>
>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were
>>> set up according to the scientific method.
>>
>>
>>
>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>>
>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
>> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
>> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have demonstrated a
>> similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and improving "quality
>> of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>>
>> LAUGHTER
>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>
>> MUSIC
>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>
>> ANIMALS/PETS
>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>
>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>
>>
>>
>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it says
>> about acupuncture:
>>
>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>
>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice.
>> Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and
>> pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't
>> involve being poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>>
>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles.
>> You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture
>> unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used
>> sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've
>> received acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since you
>> have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is probably
>> more common in Florida than the rest of the country given the elderly
>> population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
|
|
|
| Beach Runner |
usual suspect wrote:
> B-cup Bob wrote:
>
>> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>>
>> For your information.
>>
>> Time December 5,, page 63
>
>
> It refers to the German study I cited previously:
> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>
> Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
>
> ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
> acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
> kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
> works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
> found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
> the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
> the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
> cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
> a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
> to suffer as before.
> http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
>
> So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise). Let me explain it to you,
> eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
> acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third group
> was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving fake
> treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
> acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo (fake
> acupuncture) effect.
>
> That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
> acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
> acupuncture. Take your pick.
>
> Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
> suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
> regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because they
> don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used needles
> into patients.
>
>
>> usual suspect wrote:
>>
>>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>>
>>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified migrade
>>>> headaches worked compared to a placebo/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines and
>>> acupuncture:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
>>> relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>>
>>> But they do get relief.
>>>
>>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>>> authors report.
>>>
>>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>>> migraine attacks.
>>>
>>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>>> treatment at all.
>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>
>>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>>
>>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were
>>>> set up according to the scientific method.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>>>
>>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
>>> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
>>> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have demonstrated
>>> a similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and improving
>>> "quality of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>>>
>>> LAUGHTER
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>>
>>> MUSIC
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>>
>>> ANIMALS/PETS
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>>
>>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it says
>>> about acupuncture:
>>>
>>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>>
>>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice.
>>> Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and
>>> pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't
>>> involve being poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>>>
>>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles.
>>> You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture
>>> unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used
>>> sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've
>>> received acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since
>>> you have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is
>>> probably more common in Florida than the rest of the country given
>>> the elderly population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
I've only seen sterile needles. Prove it. I just posted news no
insults I certainly would only accept sterile needles.
I've already stated vCJD is minor compared to excess meat consumption.
But then we don't know the full extent due to the long gestation period.
I bet many vCJD patients were labeled with other diseases.
I pointed out an article from News week. I pointed it out to you since
you were unable to find it. You turned it into another yet insult of
me, yet Newsweek posted it as on the greatest contributions to medicine
this year. Frankly, I think the jury is out.
|
|
|
| Beach Runner |
Beach Runner wrote:
>
>
> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> B-cup Bob wrote:
>>
>>> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>>>
>>> For your information.
>>>
>>> Time December 5,, page 63
>>
>>
>>
>> It refers to the German study I cited previously:
>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>
>> Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
>>
>> ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
>> acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
>> kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
>> works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
>> found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
>> the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
>> the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
>> cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
>> a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
>> to suffer as before.
>> http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
No it meant traditional points were as effective as migraine specific
points. But non specific points had no effect. Read it again. You
missed the point.
>>
>> So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise).
No I did not. As explained above.
Let me explain it to you,
>> eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
>> acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third
>> group was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving
>> fake treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
>> acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo (fake
>> acupuncture) effect.
I'm aware of placebo, fake effect.
>>
>> That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
>> acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
>> acupuncture. Take your pick.
>>
>> Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
>> suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
>> regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because they
>> don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used needles
>> into patients.
>>
Actually it wasn't according to this study. Read it again.
>>
>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>
>>>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>>>
>>>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified
>>>>> migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo.
>>>>
Non specific point are the placebo. You may not like it but that was the
only way for the participants to be fooled.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines and
>>>> acupuncture:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
>>>> relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>>>
>>>> But they do get relief.
>>>>
>>>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>>>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>>>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>>>> authors report.
>>>>
>>>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>>>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>>>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>>>> migraine attacks.
>>>>
>>>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>>>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>>>> treatment at all.
>>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>>
>>>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>>>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>>>
>>>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were
>>>>> set up according to the scientific method.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>>>>
>>>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
>>>> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
>>>> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have demonstrated
>>>> a similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and improving
>>>> "quality of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>>>>
No, it is an ancient art. Even surgery has been performed under
accupuncture. It demands more research. BTW, though it doesn't meet
your standards, it was listed as one of the 50 major medical
breakthroughs in the last year. So scientists/jounalists disagree with you.
>>>> LAUGHTER
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>>>
>>>> MUSIC
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>>>
>>>> ANIMALS/PETS
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>>>
>>>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>>>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it says
>>>> about acupuncture:
>>>>
>>>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>>>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>>>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>>>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>>>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>>>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>>>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>>>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>>>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>>>
>>>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>>>
It means they don't understand it yet. Probably a lot of claims are pseudo.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice.
>>>> Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and
>>>> pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't
>>>> involve being poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>>>>
>>>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles.
>>>> You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture
>>>> unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used
>>>> sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've
>>>> received acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since
>>>> you have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is
>>>> probably more common in Florida than the rest of the country given
>>>> the elderly population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
>
>
> I've only seen sterile needles. Prove it. I just posted news no
> insults I certainly would only accept sterile needles.
>
> I've already stated vCJD is minor compared to excess meat consumption.
> But then we don't know the full extent due to the long gestation period.
> I bet many vCJD patients were labeled with other diseases.
>
> I pointed out an article from News week. I pointed it out to you since
> you were unable to find it. You turned it into another yet insult of
> me, yet Newsweek posted it as on the greatest contributions to medicine
> this year. Frankly, I think the jury is out.
|
|
|
| usual suspect |
Beach Runner wrote:
>
>
> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> B-cup Bob wrote:
>>
>>> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>>>
>>> For your information.
>>>
>>> Time December 5,, page 63
>>
>>
>>
>> It refers to the German study I cited previously:
>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>
>> Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
>>
>> ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
>> acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
>> kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
>> works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
>> found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
>> the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
>> the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
>> cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
>> a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
>> to suffer as before.
>> http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
>>
>> So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise). Let me explain it to you,
>> eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
>> acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third
>> group was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving
>> fake treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
>> acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo (fake
>> acupuncture) effect.
>>
>> That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
>> acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
>> acupuncture. Take your pick.
>>
>> Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
>> suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
>> regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because they
>> don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used needles
>> into patients.
>>
>>
>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>
>>>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>>>
>>>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified
>>>>> migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines and
>>>> acupuncture:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
>>>> relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>>>
>>>> But they do get relief.
>>>>
>>>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>>>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>>>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>>>> authors report.
>>>>
>>>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>>>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>>>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>>>> migraine attacks.
>>>>
>>>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>>>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>>>> treatment at all.
>>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>>
>>>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>>>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>>>
>>>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies were
>>>>> set up according to the scientific method.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>>>>
>>>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
>>>> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
>>>> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have demonstrated
>>>> a similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and improving
>>>> "quality of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>>>>
>>>> LAUGHTER
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>>>
>>>> MUSIC
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>>>
>>>> ANIMALS/PETS
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>>>
>>>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>>>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it says
>>>> about acupuncture:
>>>>
>>>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>>>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>>>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>>>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>>>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>>>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>>>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>>>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>>>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>>>
>>>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice.
>>>> Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and
>>>> pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't
>>>> involve being poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>>>>
>>>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles.
>>>> You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture
>>>> unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used
>>>> sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've
>>>> received acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since
>>>> you have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is
>>>> probably more common in Florida than the rest of the country given
>>>> the elderly population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
>
>
> I've only seen sterile needles.
How would you know the difference?
> Prove it.
Red Cross:
Donors who have undergone acupuncture treatments are acceptable
as long as the donor can confirm that the needles used in the
treatment were sterile. Donors who cannot confirm that sterile
needles were used in the acupuncture treatment are deferred from
donating for 12 months.
http://www.redcross.org/services/bi...57_,00.html#acu
Also:
Is acupuncture safe?
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved acupuncture
needles for use by licensed practitioners in 1996. The FDA
requires that sterile, nontoxic needles be used and that they be
labeled for single use by qualified practitioners only.
Relatively few complications from the use of acupuncture have
been reported to the FDA in light of the millions of people
treated each year and the number of acupuncture needles used.
STILL, COMPLICATIONS HAVE RESULTED FROM INADEQUATE STERILIZATION
OF NEEDLES AND FROM IMPROPER DELIVERY OF TREATMENTS.
Practitioners should use a new set of disposable needles taken
from a sealed package for each patient and should swab treatment
sites with alcohol or another disinfectant before inserting
needles. When not delivered properly, acupuncture can cause
serious adverse effects, including infections and punctured
organs.
http://nccam.nih.gov/health/acupuncture/#safe
(my emphasis)
> I just posted news
You got it wrong. As usual.
> I certainly would only accept sterile needles.
How the **** would you know if the needles were sterile or not?
> I've already stated vCJD is minor compared to excess meat consumption.
Risks of vCJD, hepatitis, etc., are much greater from contact with body
fluids -- i.e., needles -- than from eating meat. You'd have to eat
specific parts (e.g., brain or spinal cord tissue) from an infected
animal to even be at risk. Acupuncture with re-used needles is no
different than sharing a hypodermic syringe with others.
> But then we don't know the full extent due to the long gestation period.
It's not a "gestation" period, dumb ass. It's a *window* from the period
of infection to manifestation of symptoms. What we *do* know about vCJD
is that there is a steep decline in reports of new cases -- which
coincides with measures adopted once there was an observed problem. We
also know the "epidemic" -- under 200 cases thus far -- is regionally
concentrated in one region (UK).
> I bet many vCJD patients were labeled with other diseases.
Doubtful. Look at the chart on the following link to see the number of
BSE cases reported from 1987-2000. Note that the steep decline in the
new cases of vCJD, from links I've provided you previously, fit that
same pattern. There is no pandemic.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/st...e/bse_cases.stm
> I pointed out an article from News week.
TIME. Dumb ass.
> I pointed it out to you since
> you were unable to find it.
I would've been able to find it had you not been inaccurate about which
magazine you read it. Twat.
> You turned it into another yet insult of me,
The fact that you continue to say Newsweek insults yourself.
> yet Newsweek
*TIME*! You ******* goof.
> posted it as on the greatest contributions to medicine
> this year.
Logical fallacy of appealing to authority. Time magazine isn't a medical
journal, nor did that blurb -- not an article -- suggest it's a
contribution to medicine. All it said was those who received the placebo
received the same benefit as those who received "real" acupuncture. That
doesn't make acupuncture appear particularly "good" -- it just shows it
to be a fraud.
> Frankly, I think the jury is out.
Acupuncture group: benefit.
Placebo group: benefit.
Control group: no benefit.
The jury's verdict is IN and acupuncture has *no* benefit beyond placebo
effect.
|
|
|
| usual suspect |
B-cup Bob wrote:
>>>> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>>>>
>>>> For your information.
>>>>
>>>> Time December 5,, page 63
>>>
>>> It refers to the German study I cited previously:
>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>
>>> Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
>>>
>>> ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
>>> acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
>>> kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
>>> works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
>>> found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
>>> the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
>>> the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
>>> cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
>>> a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
>>> to suffer as before.
>>> http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
>
> No
*YES*. The placebo group and the acupuncture group had the SAME results.
There is nothing "special" about acupuncture aside from its benefits as
a touch therapy.
> it meant traditional points were as effective as migraine specific
> points.
Perhaps you should read it again after the medication wears off, dumb
ass. It's a placebo effect.
> But non specific points had no effect. Read it again. You
> missed the point.
I got the point -- you're the one who doesn't comprehend it.
>>> So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise).
>
> No I did not. As explained above.
Yes, you did.
> Let me explain it to you,
>
>>> eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
>>> acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third
>>> group was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving
>>> fake treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
>>> acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo
>>> (fake acupuncture) effect.
>
> I'm aware of placebo, fake effect.
Then stop peddling this as "proof" of acupuncture's claims when it
totally refutes them.
>>> That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
>>> acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
>>> acupuncture. Take your pick.
>>>
>>> Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
>>> suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
>>> regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because
>>> they don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used
>>> needles into patients.
>
> Actually it wasn't according to this study. Read it again.
You didn't read the study. You referred to a blurb about it in TIME
magazine. Here's what another site says about it:
Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
NOTE TO DUMMY: *SHAM* TREATMENT.
But they do get relief.
That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
authors report.
Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
migraine attacks.
Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
NOTE TO DUMMY: *MOCK* TREATMENT.
however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
treatment at all.
http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
Note the methodology given in the above link:
For the new study, Linde and his colleagues randomly assigned
302 migraine patients to receive acupuncture, sham acupuncture
or placement on a "waiting list" for acupuncture.
The real and bogus acupuncture treatments consisted of 12
30-minute sessions administered over an eight-week period by
specially trained physicians. In the sham procedure, needles
were placed at non-acupuncture points. Patients on the waiting
list served as the control group.
Nine to 12 weeks after a baseline assessment, patients in the
acupuncture and sham treatment groups experienced a similar
reduction in the average number of days that they suffered
moderate or severe headaches.
Furthermore,
The findings, published in the May 4 issue of the Journal of the
American Medical Association, seem to leave acupuncture's
usefulness for migraine relief *open to interpretation*.
That's not exactly a ringing endorsement. It was a placebo effect. The
placebo group -- receiving FAKE, SHAM, BOGUS acupuncture -- fared just
as well as the "real" acupuncture group. Acupuncture is complete
bull****, a waste of time and money. It can also be dangerous:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved acupuncture
needles for use by licensed practitioners in 1996. The FDA
requires that sterile, nontoxic needles be used and that they be
labeled for single use by qualified practitioners only.
Relatively few complications from the use of acupuncture have
been reported to the FDA in light of the millions of people
treated each year and the number of acupuncture needles used.
STILL, COMPLICATIONS HAVE RESULTED FROM INADEQUATE STERILIZATION
OF NEEDLES AND FROM IMPROPER DELIVERY OF TREATMENTS.
Practitioners should use a new set of disposable needles taken
from a sealed package for each patient and should swab treatment
sites with alcohol or another disinfectant before inserting
needles. When not delivered properly, acupuncture can cause
serious adverse effects, including infections and punctured
organs.
http://nccam.nih.gov/health/acupuncture/#safe
(my emphasis)
>>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>>>>
>>>>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified
>>>>>> migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo.
>>>>>
>
> Non specific point are the placebo.
BOGUS, SHAM, FAKE acupuncture treatments. Read the study. Here's what
the abstract says:
Interventions Acupuncture, *sham acupuncture*, or waiting list
control. Acupuncture and *sham acupuncture* were administered by
specialized physicians and consisted of 12 sessions per patient
over 8 weeks. Patients completed headache diaries from 4 weeks
before to 12 weeks after randomization and from week 21 to 24
after randomization.
Conclusion Acupuncture was no more effective than *sham*
acupuncture in reducing migraine headaches although both
interventions were more effective than a waiting list control.
http://tinyurl.com/9u76y
> You may not like it but that was the
> only way for the participants to be fooled.
Both the placebo (SHAM) and "real" acupuncture groups were "fooled."
Acupuncture's benefits are placebo effect. The researchers concluded,
"Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in reducing
migraine headaches..."
>>>>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines
>>>>> and acupuncture:
>>>>
>>>>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more
>>>>> pain relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>>>>
>>>>> But they do get relief.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>>>>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>>>>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>>>>> authors report.
>>>>>
>>>>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>>>>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>>>>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>>>>> migraine attacks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>>>>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>>>>> treatment at all.
>>>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>>>
>>>>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>>>>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies
>>>>>> were set up according to the scientific method.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
>>>>> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
>>>>> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have
>>>>> demonstrated a similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and
>>>>> improving "quality of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>
> No, it is an ancient art.
It's a con, as established by the reserachers in that study.
> Even surgery has been performed under
> accupuncture.
I've conceded it has value as a touch therapy. I don't think, though,
touch therapy is a suitable substitute for appropriate anasthesia.
> It demands more research.
Why? The study you boasted about shows a placebo effect -- consistent
with other touch therapies.
> BTW, though it doesn't meet
> your standards,
It doesn't meet *scientific* standards.
> it was listed as one of the 50 major medical
> breakthroughs in the last year.
In a popular news magazine -- not by a scientific or medical journal.
> So scientists/jounalists disagree with
> you.
*False*, and logical fallacy of appealing to authority -- Time magazine
is not the arbiter of science or truth. The study's authors concluded:
Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in
reducing migraine headaches although both interventions were
more effective than a waiting list control.
>>>>> LAUGHTER
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>>>>
>>>>> MUSIC
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>>>>
>>>>> ANIMALS/PETS
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>>>>
>>>>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>>>>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it
>>>>> says about acupuncture:
>>>>>
>>>>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>>>>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>>>>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>>>>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>>>>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>>>>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>>>>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>>>>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>>>>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>>>>
>
> It means they don't understand it yet. Probably a lot of claims are
> pseudo.
All of yours are.
>>>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice.
>>>>> Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and
>>>>> pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't
>>>>> involve being poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>>>>>
>>>>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles.
>>>>> You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture
>>>>> unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used
>>>>> sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've
>>>>> received acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since
>>>>> you have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is
>>>>> probably more common in Florida than the rest of the country given
>>>>> the elderly population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
>>
>> I've only seen sterile needles. Prove it. I just posted news no
>> insults I certainly would only accept sterile needles.
>>
>> I've already stated vCJD is minor compared to excess meat consumption.
>> But then we don't know the full extent due to the long gestation
>> period. I bet many vCJD patients were labeled with other diseases.
>>
>> I pointed out an article from News week. I pointed it out to you
>> since you were unable to find it. You turned it into another yet
>> insult of me, yet Newsweek posted it as on the greatest contributions
>> to medicine this year. Frankly, I think the jury is out.
Still haven't figured out how NOT to respond to your own posts, have you.
|
|
|
| Beach Runner |
usual suspect wrote:
> Beach Runner wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> usual suspect wrote:
>>
>>> B-cup Bob wrote:
>>>
>>>> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>>>>
>>>> For your information.
>>>>
>>>> Time December 5,, page 63
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It refers to the German study I cited previously:
>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>
>>> Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
>>>
>>> ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
>>> acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
>>> kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
>>> works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
>>> found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
>>> the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
>>> the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
>>> cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
>>> a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
>>> to suffer as before.
>>> http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
>>>
>>> So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise). Let me explain it to
>>> you, eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
>>> acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third
>>> group was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving
>>> fake treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
>>> acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo
>>> (fake acupuncture) effect.
>>>
>>> That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
>>> acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
>>> acupuncture. Take your pick.
>>>
It means that traditional acupuncture points were as effective. Random
placement was ineffective.
>>> Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
>>> suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
>>> regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because
>>> they don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used
>>> needles into patients.
>>>
>>>
>>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>>>>
>>>>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified
>>>>>> migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines
>>>>> and acupuncture:
>>>>
>>>>
I referred to the article article you were unable to find.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more
>>>>> pain relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>>>>
>>>>> But they do get relief.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>>>>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>>>>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>>>>> authors report.
>>>>>
>>>>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>>>>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>>>>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>>>>> migraine attacks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>>>>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>>>>> treatment at all.
>>>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>>>
>>>>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>>>>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies
>>>>>> were set up according to the scientific method.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
I understand the scientific method.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it has
>>>>> limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been show,
>>>>> though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have
>>>>> demonstrated a similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and
>>>>> improving "quality of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>>>>>
>>>>> LAUGHTER
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>>>>
>>>>> MUSIC
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>>>>
>>>>> ANIMALS/PETS
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>>>>
>>>>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>>>>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it
>>>>> says about acupuncture:
>>>>>
>>>>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>>>>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>>>>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>>>>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>>>>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>>>>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>>>>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>>>>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>>>>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>>>>
I agree practitioners make wild claims. Pain studies are more interesting.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific practice.
>>>>> Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter, music, and
>>>>> pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy certainly don't
>>>>> involve being poked with needles that may be contaminated.
>>>>>
The scientific method can certainly be applied to studies.
>>>>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use needles.
>>>>> You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive acupuncture
>>>>> unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he or she used
>>>>> sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY donors who've
>>>>> received acupuncture). This should be of further concern you since
>>>>> you have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD (and normal CJD is
>>>>> probably more common in Florida than the rest of the country given
>>>>> the elderly population) -- can you sterilize prions, dummy?
>>
>>
>>
>> I've only seen sterile needles.
>
>
> How would you know the difference?
>
>> Prove it.
>
>
> Red Cross:
> Donors who have undergone acupuncture treatments are acceptable
> as long as the donor can confirm that the needles used in the
> treatment were sterile. Donors who cannot confirm that sterile
> needles were used in the acupuncture treatment are deferred from
> donating for 12 months.
> http://www.redcross.org/services/bi...57_,00.html#acu
>
> Also:
> Is acupuncture safe?
> The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved acupuncture
> needles for use by licensed practitioners in 1996. The FDA
> requires that sterile, nontoxic needles be used and that they be
> labeled for single use by qualified practitioners only.
I would only use FDA needles and on muscle spasms, where I have found
they helped.
>
> Relatively few complications from the use of acupuncture have
> been reported to the FDA in light of the millions of people
> treated each year and the number of acupuncture needles used.
> STILL, COMPLICATIONS HAVE RESULTED FROM INADEQUATE STERILIZATION
> OF NEEDLES AND FROM IMPROPER DELIVERY OF TREATMENTS.
May I remind you that medical treatment is the 6th leading case of illness?
> Practitioners should use a new set of disposable needles taken
> from a sealed package for each patient and should swab treatment
> sites with alcohol or another disinfectant before inserting
> needles. When not delivered properly, acupuncture can cause
> serious adverse effects, including infections and punctured
> organs.
Proper training is essential. We don't understand it, yet we have
observed operations performed under acupuncture. Obviously we need more
training.
> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/acupuncture/#safe
> (my emphasis)
>
>> I just posted news
>
>
> You got it wrong. As usual.
>
>> I certainly would only accept sterile needles.
>
>
> How the **** would you know if the needles were sterile or not?
FDA regulations.
>
>> I've already stated vCJD is minor compared to excess meat consumption.
>
>
> Risks of vCJD, hepatitis, etc., are much greater from contact with body
> fluids -- i.e., needles -- than from eating meat. You'd have to eat
> specific parts (e.g., brain or spinal cord tissue) from an infected
> animal to even be at risk. Acupuncture with re-used needles is no
> different than sharing a hypodermic syringe with others.
>
>> But then we don't know the full extent due to the long gestation period.
>
>
> It's not a "gestation" period, dumb ass. It's a *window* from the period
> of infection to manifestation of symptoms. What we *do* know about vCJD
> is that there is a steep decline in reports of new cases -- which
> coincides with measures adopted once there was an observed problem. We
> also know the "epidemic" -- under 200 cases thus far -- is regionally
> concentrated in one region (UK).
>
>> I bet many vCJD patients were labeled with other diseases.
>
>
> Doubtful. Look at the chart on the following link to see the number of
> BSE cases reported from 1987-2000. Note that the steep decline in the
> new cases of vCJD, from links I've provided you previously, fit that
> same pattern. There is no pandemic.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/st...e/bse_cases.stm
>
>
>> I pointed out an article from News week.
>
>
> TIME. Dumb ass.
>
>> I pointed it out to you since you were unable to find it.
>
>
> I would've been able to find it had you not been inaccurate about which
> magazine you read it. Twat.
>
>> You turned it into another yet insult of me,
>
>
> The fact that you continue to say Newsweek insults yourself.
>
>> yet Newsweek
>
>
> *TIME*! You ******* goof.
>
OK, I was i the hospital last week. A 1/2 day procedures turned into a
week. I'm glad, as a condition from when I was 5 caused scar tissue
which grew for 45 years, it was discovered after all these years. Guess
the doctor when I was 5 should have taken me to a hospital. It was a
medical mistakes. I was out of it this week, as any normal person would
have been. Major surgery. It should have been done right when I was 5
or fixed when I much younger. If I mixed the magazines I apologize.
That week I was out of it for a good reason.
>> posted it as on the greatest contributions to medicine this year.
>
>
> Logical fallacy of appealing to authority. Time magazine isn't a medical
> journal, nor did that blurb -- not an article -- suggest it's a
> contribution to medicine. All it said was those who received the placebo
> received the same benefit as those who received "real" acupuncture. That
> doesn't make acupuncture appear particularly "good" -- it just shows it
> to be a fraud.
It was listed as one of the top 50 findings. I agree more research is
necessary.
>
>> Frankly, I think the jury is out.
Not yet. It an area for research, but enough was shown to justify
further research.
>
>
> Acupuncture group: benefit.
> Placebo group: benefit.
> Control group: no benefit.
>
> The jury's verdict is IN and acupuncture has *no* benefit beyond placebo
> effect.
In that study it reduced migraines using traditional or specialized
points. Of course, like all scientific studies, they must be replicated.
|
|
|
| Beach Runner |
usual suspect wrote:
> B-cup Bob wrote:
>
>>>>> Excuse the top posting. It was made for you to be easy to find.
>>>>>
>>>>> For your information.
>>>>>
>>>>> Time December 5,, page 63
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It refers to the German study I cited previously:
>>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>>
>>>> Here's the BLURB from TIME (dummy):
>>>>
>>>> ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that
>>>> acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many
>>>> kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it
>>>> works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it
>>>> found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in
>>>> the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in
>>>> the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies
>>>> cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period;
>>>> a control group that did not receive either treatment continued
>>>> to suffer as before.
>>>> http://www.time.com/time/archive/pr...1134763,00.html
>>
>>
>> No
>
>
> *YES*. The placebo group and the acupuncture group had the SAME results.
> There is nothing "special" about acupuncture aside from its benefits as
> a touch therapy.
>
>> it meant traditional points were as effective as migraine specific
>> points.
>
>
> Perhaps you should read it again after the medication wears off, dumb
> ass. It's a placebo effect.
>
>> But non specific points had no effect. Read it again. You missed the
>> point.
>
>
> I got the point -- you're the one who doesn't comprehend it.
>
>>>> So you ****ed it up yet again (no surprise).
>>
>>
>> No I did not. As explained above.
>
>
> Yes, you did.
>
>> Let me explain it to you,
>>
>>>> eighth-wit. There were three groups. One group received "real"
>>>> acupuncture. The second group received fake acupuncture. The third
>>>> group was the control -- they received neither. The group receiving
>>>> fake treatment had similar results as the group that received "real"
>>>> acupuncture. So there is NO benefit above and beyond the placebo
>>>> (fake acupuncture) effect.
>>
>>
That's not accurate. The groups that both had effect used either
traditional acupuncture placement, or ones specialized for migraines.
Just needles regardless of placement had no effect. THAT was the
placebo. Read the article again, or if others wish to, verify what I
wrote is the truth.
Incidentally, you couldn't find it, and out of the kindness of my heart
I posted where it was. A polite person would say thank you.
>> I'm aware of placebo, fake effect.
>
>
> Then stop peddling this as "proof" of acupuncture's claims when it
> totally refutes them.
>
>>>> That means fake acupuncture is *just as beneficial* as "real"
>>>> acupuncture -- or that "real" acupuncture is *just as bogus* as fake
>>>> acupuncture. Take your pick.
>>>>
Your opinion.
>>>> Acupuncture is only as beneficial as any other touch therapy, as I
>>>> suggested before. Read the links to the abstracts about studies
>>>> regarding laughter, pets, and music. Those are much safer because
>>>> they don't require some nitwitted true believer to impale re-used
>>>> needles into patients.
>>
>>
>> Actually it wasn't according to this study. Read it again.
>
>
> You didn't read the study. You referred to a blurb about it in TIME
> magazine. Here's what another site says about it:
>
> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more pain
> relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>
> NOTE TO DUMMY: *SHAM* TREATMENT.
>
>
> But they do get relief.
>
> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
> authors report.
>
> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
> migraine attacks.
>
> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>
> NOTE TO DUMMY: *MOCK* TREATMENT.
>
> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
> treatment at all.
> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>
>
> Note the methodology given in the above link:
> For the new study, Linde and his colleagues randomly assigned
> 302 migraine patients to receive acupuncture, sham acupuncture
> or placement on a "waiting list" for acupuncture.
>
> The real and bogus acupuncture treatments consisted of 12
> 30-minute sessions administered over an eight-week period by
> specially trained physicians. In the sham procedure, needles
> were placed at non-acupuncture points. Patients on the waiting
> list served as the control group.
>
> Nine to 12 weeks after a baseline assessment, patients in the
> acupuncture and sham treatment groups experienced a similar
> reduction in the average number of days that they suffered
> moderate or severe headaches.
>
> Furthermore,
>
> The findings, published in the May 4 issue of the Journal of the
> American Medical Association, seem to leave acupuncture's
> usefulness for migraine relief *open to interpretation*.
>
> That's not exactly a ringing endorsement. It was a placebo effect. The
> placebo group -- receiving FAKE, SHAM, BOGUS acupuncture -- fared just
> as well as the "real" acupuncture group. Acupuncture is complete
> bull****, a waste of time and money. It can also be dangerous:
>
> The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved acupuncture
> needles for use by licensed practitioners in 1996. The FDA
> requires that sterile, nontoxic needles be used and that they be
> labeled for single use by qualified practitioners only.
>
> Relatively few complications from the use of acupuncture have
> been reported to the FDA in light of the millions of people
> treated each year and the number of acupuncture needles used.
> STILL, COMPLICATIONS HAVE RESULTED FROM INADEQUATE STERILIZATION
> OF NEEDLES AND FROM IMPROPER DELIVERY OF TREATMENTS.
> Practitioners should use a new set of disposable needles taken
> from a sealed package for each patient and should swab treatment
> sites with alcohol or another disinfectant before inserting
> needles. When not delivered properly, acupuncture can cause
> serious adverse effects, including infections and punctured
> organs.
> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/acupuncture/#safe
> (my emphasis)
>
>>>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the recent issue of Newsweek
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not on their site or in the issue I received this past week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it rported that both traditional and treatment for specified
>>>>>>> migrade headaches worked compared to a placebo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>> Non specific point are the placebo.
>
>
> BOGUS, SHAM, FAKE acupuncture treatments. Read the study. Here's what
> the abstract says:
>
> Interventions Acupuncture, *sham acupuncture*, or waiting list
> control. Acupuncture and *sham acupuncture* were administered by
> specialized physicians and consisted of 12 sessions per patient
> over 8 weeks. Patients completed headache diaries from 4 weeks
> before to 12 weeks after randomization and from week 21 to 24
> after randomization.
>
> Conclusion Acupuncture was no more effective than *sham*
> acupuncture in reducing migraine headaches although both
> interventions were more effective than a waiting list control.
> http://tinyurl.com/9u76y
>
>> You may not like it but that was the only way for the participants to
>> be fooled.
>
>
> Both the placebo (SHAM) and "real" acupuncture groups were "fooled."
> Acupuncture's benefits are placebo effect. The researchers concluded,
> "Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in reducing
> migraine headaches..."
>
>>>>>> Not according to the latest article I could find about migraines
>>>>>> and acupuncture:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Migraine headache sufferers who use acupuncture get no more
>>>>>> pain relief than those who undergo a sham treatment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But they do get relief.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is the result of a randomized, multi-center trial, one of
>>>>>> the largest and most rigorous studies yet to examine
>>>>>> acupuncture's effectiveness for migraine, the study's German
>>>>>> authors report.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both treatments reduced the number of days that patients
>>>>>> experienced moderate to severe pain, with more than half of each
>>>>>> treatment group reporting at least a 50 percent reduction in
>>>>>> migraine attacks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whether patients received real acupuncture or a mock procedure,
>>>>>> however, their outcomes were better than those receiving no
>>>>>> treatment at all.
>>>>>> http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/ne...sp?docID=525507
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See also re: Newsweek's "reporting" on CAM:
>>>>>> http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consume...n/newsweek.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They don't know why but the results defied chance, the studies
>>>>>>> were set up according to the scientific method.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Acupuncture should be an area of research.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's been thoroughly researched. Like other touch therapies, it
>>>>>> has limited value in reducing stress and anxiety. It hasn't been
>>>>>> show, though, to be a cure for anything. Other therapies have
>>>>>> demonstrated a similar measure of benefit for reducing stress and
>>>>>> improving "quality of life" for patients of various illnesses:
>>
>>
>> No, it is an ancient art.
>
>
> It's a con, as established by the reserachers in that study.
>
>> Even surgery has been performed under accupuncture.
>
>
> I've conceded it has value as a touch therapy. I don't think, though,
> touch therapy is a suitable substitute for appropriate anasthesia.
>
>> It demands more research.
>
>
> Why? The study you boasted about shows a placebo effect -- consistent
> with other touch therapies.
>
>> BTW, though it doesn't meet your standards,
>
>
> It doesn't meet *scientific* standards.
>
>> it was listed as one of the 50 major medical breakthroughs in the last
>> year.
>
>
> In a popular news magazine -- not by a scientific or medical journal.
>
>> So scientists/jounalists disagree with you.
>
>
> *False*, and logical fallacy of appealing to authority -- Time magazine
> is not the arbiter of science or truth. The study's authors concluded:
>
> Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in
> reducing migraine headaches although both interventions were
> more effective than a waiting list control.
>
>
>>>>>> LAUGHTER
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mn
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2mv
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MUSIC
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nb
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ANIMALS/PETS
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2nn
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/e2ns
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other studies have shown similar effects
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hogwash. The entire page below, from a pro-complementary and
>>>>>> "alternative medicine" center, is worth reading. Here's what it
>>>>>> says about acupuncture:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of these approaches, acupuncture is the most prominent therapy
>>>>>> to promote qi flow along the meridians. Acupuncture has been
>>>>>> extensively studied and has been shown to be effective in
>>>>>> treating some conditions, particularly certain forms of pain.1
>>>>>> However, its mechanism of action remains to be elucidated. The
>>>>>> main threads of research on acupuncture have shown regional
>>>>>> effects on neurotransmitter expression, but have not validated
>>>>>> the existence of an "energy" per se.
>>>>>> http://nccam.nih.gov/health/backgrounds/energymed.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> while practictioners have made wild claims.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>> It means they don't understand it yet. Probably a lot of claims are
>> pseudo.
>
>
> All of yours are.
>
>>>>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific
>>>>>> practice. Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter,
>>>>>> music, and pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy
>>>>>> certainly don't involve being poked with needles that may be
>>>>>> contaminated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The last issue is germane since most acupuncturists re-use
>>>>>> needles. You won't be allowed to donate blood after you receive
>>>>>> acupuncture unless your acupuncturist can confirm and validate he
>>>>>> or she used sterile needles (some blood centers won't accept ANY
>>>>>> donors who've received acupuncture). This should be of further
>>>>>> concern you since you have a Chicken Little complex about vCJD
>>>>>> (and normal CJD is probably more common in Florida than the rest
>>>>>> of the country given the elderly population) -- can you sterilize
>>>>>> prions, dummy?
>>>
>>>
>>> I've only seen sterile needles. Prove it. I just posted news no
>>> insults I certainly would only accept sterile needles.
>>>
>>> I've already stated vCJD is minor compared to excess meat consumption.
>>> But then we don't know the full extent due to the long gestation
>>> period. I bet many vCJD patients were labeled with other diseases.
>>>
>>> I pointed out an article from News week. I pointed it out to you
>>> since you were unable to find it. You turned it into another yet
>>> insult of me, yet Newsweek posted it as on the greatest contributions
>>> to medicine this year. Frankly, I think the jury is out.
>
>
> Still haven't figured out how NOT to respond to your own posts, have you.
Well, according to News week it was one of the medical discoveries of
the year.
I invite other's to read the page specified for accuracy.
|
|
|
| usual suspect |
B-cup Bob wrote:
> It means that traditional acupuncture points were as effective. Random
> placement was ineffective.
Bull****, you ******* imbecile. From the study's abstract:
Interventions Acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or waiting list
control. Acupuncture and sham acupuncture were administered by
specialized physicians and consisted of 12 sessions per patient
over 8 weeks. Patients completed headache diaries from 4 weeks
before to 12 weeks after randomization and from week 21 to 24
after randomization....
Conclusion Acupuncture was no more effective than sham
acupuncture in reducing migraine headaches although both
interventions were more effective than a waiting list control.
http://tinyurl.com/9u76y
What part of "Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in
reducing migraine headaches" do you not comprehend?
> I referred to the article article you were unable to find.
How the **** is anyone supposed to find a *blurb* -- not a full article
-- when you say it's in one magazine one day and another the next, you
bumbling twit?
>>>>>> You don't comprehend the scientific method.
>
> I understand the scientific method.
No, you do not, nor do you seem to appreciate the difference between a
blurb about a study and the study itself. The study's authors concluded,
"*Acupuncture* *was* *no* *more* *effective* *than* *sham* *acupuncture*."
> I agree practitioners make wild claims.
So do you, asshole.
>>>>>> That's the whole problem with it -- it's NOT a scientific
>>>>>> practice. Its effects are identical to those measured in laughter,
>>>>>> music, and pets, as noted above; those other forms of therapy
>>>>>> certainly don't involve being poked with needles that may be
>>>>>> contaminated.
>
> The scientific method can certainly be applied to studies.
And when the scientific method was applied to the question of the
benefits of acupuncture in treating migraines, the study's authors
concluded, "*Acupuncture* *was* *no* *more* *effective* *than* *sham*
*acupuncture*." There was only a placebo effect -- just as one would
expect in any other touch therapy.
>>> I've only seen sterile needles.
>>
>> How would you know the difference?
>>
>>> Prove it.
>>
>> Red Cross:
>> Donors who have undergone acupuncture treatments are acceptable
>> as long as the donor can confirm that the needles used in the
>> treatment were sterile. Donors who cannot confirm that sterile
>> needles were used in the acupuncture treatment are deferred from
>> donating for 12 months.
>> http://www.redcross.org/services/bi...57_,00.html#acu
>>
>> Also:
>> Is acupuncture safe?
>> The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved acupuncture
>> needles fo | | | |
