Placebo Needle

[Guest guest]

All,

 

> I was wondering if

> I'm missing something here... where's the Qi? Neither treatment stimulated

> the needle until 'de qi'.

 

I think it is acupuncture that is missing.

 

What a research trial tests is the " null hypothesis, " demonstrating that there

is a difference between treatment and not. To claim a treatment effect there

needs to be a statistically significant difference between the results

measured in the treatment group and the controls. To do needle controlled

acupuncture trials while actually performing acupuncture you need to test

an irrelevant treatment against a real treatment and a control. This

requires multiple groups, more patients, and acupuncturists who are

actually performing a treatment to the best of their ability. That is more

expensive, more time consuming, and requires a study design that involves a

significant level of treatment knowledge.

 

Keep in mind that I am discussing only " needle controls " (or so-called

" sham acupuncture " ) not " outcome studies " where the comparison is to a

known standard therapy.

 

Dr. Tiquia's post aside, " de qi " is described as either a patient-sensed

reaction or a clinician-sensed reaction and the Harvard placebo needle

protocol eliminates both. There's no " almost, " somebody feels something.

I'm not sure what they consider the blind in this, but it seems unreasonable

to think that someone believes they are actually being treated with washers!

 

What the Katpchuck approach does accomplish is a low-cost trial that is

independent of acupuncturists, or acupuncture. Indeed, I wonder if the

study design -- the absence of acupuncture in effect -- doesn't render it

impossible to " prove " anything other than that acupuncture is a placebo.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

 

 

bob Paradigm Publications

www.paradigm-pubs.com 44 Linden Street

Robert L. Felt Brookline MA 02445

617-738-4664

 

 

---

[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]