Acupuncture Pseudoscience in the New England Journal of Medicine

Citation

Evidence Type: Blog Post (Pro Science)
Acupuncture Pseudoscience in the New England Journal of Medicine, Science Based Medicine, 4 August 2010 - Acupuncture Pseudoscience in the New England Journal of Medicine – Science-Based Medicine Score: 0.0/0.0

Discussion

This article discusses the research Acupuncture for chronic low back pain. including how the research itself is flawed, the fact that it made it into a reputable journal is bad, and how acupuncture in general is ineffective This article points out that when there is no difference between a placebo treatment and the "real" treatment, then the treatment obviously does not work

To quote the article:
"What the authors of this article have done is something that is increasingly common in CAM (when it is trying to infiltrate academia and peer-reviewed journals like the NEJM) – reviewing the evidence, admitting that the CAM treatment does not work, then making an elaborate and misleading appeal to placebo effects, and ending with a recommendation to use the treatment that does not work Specifically, they not only recommend using the treatment, but in its fullest magical form, complete with all the disproven claims (that is what “medical acupuncture” is) It’s a bait and switch con game, nothing more Come for the placebo effect, then be treated with magical nonsense"

Strengths/Weaknesses

Conclusions

No strengths or weaknesses have yet been added to this evidence

Conclusion 1

This articles helps to point out that even in a research paper which claims to show acupuncture is effective, the evidence still shows it does not.


Bad text to replace:
Correct text:
Close This is a proper word Ignore word on this page Apply
Close Popup
Follow Reasoned Discussions on Facebook
Share this page on Facebook
Follow Reasoned Discussion on Google+
+1 this page on Google+
Close
Terms of Use | Site Map | Privacy