the debate has begun.
There used to be a nice clean pattern where in
odd-numbered years opinion swung in favour of acupuncture and in
even-numbered years it swung against.
But in 2008, annoyingly, two reports came out in the same year, one against and one in favour.
This seems to have disrupted the trend because, since then, it has been the other way round: in
even-numbered years opinion swings in favour of acupuncture, while in
odd-numbered years it swings against.
~~~wiki:
In
2003 the World Health Organization's Department of Essential Drugs and Medicine Policy produced a report on acupuncture. The report was drafted, revised and updated by Zhu-Fan Xie, the Director for the Institute of Integrated Medicines of Beijing Medical University. It contained, based on research results available in early 1999, a list of diseases, symptoms or conditions for which it was believed acupuncture had been demonstrated as an effective treatment, as well as a second list of conditions that were possibly able to be treated with acupuncture.
A
2004 Cochrane Review initially concluded that acupuncture appeared to be more effective than antiemetic drugs in treating postoperative nausea and vomiting, but the authors subsequently retracted this conclusion due to a publication bias in Asian countries that had skewed their results.
A poll of American doctors in
2005 showed that 59% believe acupuncture was at least somewhat effective for treatment of pain.
In
2006, a BBC documentary Alternative Medicine filmed a patient undergoing open heart surgery allegedly under acupuncture-induced anesthesia. It was later revealed that the patient had been given a cocktail of weak anesthetics that in combination could have a much more powerful effect.
Professor of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Edzard Ernst and his colleagues have produced regular systematic reviews of the acupuncture literature. In
2007, they concluded that "the emerging clinical evidence seems to imply that acupuncture is effective for some but not all conditions."
A
2008 review examined randomized controlled trials on the effects of the PC6 point, as well as points thought to rely on the same meridian, at preventing PONV within the first 24 hours of surgery. Three of the ten studies found statistically significant evidence that acupuncture could prevent PONV though comparison of the studies is difficult due to the use of varied methodologies (different patient groups, different ways of stimulating the PC6 point such as a needle versus finger pressure versus a special bracelet, timing and length of application of pressure, the use of one versus both arms, whether a general anaesthetic was used, and the mixture of men and women in the studies). The reviewer ultimately concluded that "due to the lack of robust studies, [this review] found that neither acupressure nor acupuncture was effective in preventing or managing PONV in adults" and suggested further research to clarify issues such as the length and type of stimulation applied, training of those applying stimulation and gathering data, risk factors for PONV, inclusion of proper placebos, and the analysis of specific population. The author also suggested disagreement with previous systemic reviews were due to their inclusion of older studies with poorer methodologies, while the more recent, better quality studies included in the review offered more negative results.
The Osteoarthritis Research Society International released a set of consensus recommendations in
2008 that concluded acupuncture may be useful for treating the symptoms of osteoarthritis of the knee.
A
2009 review, however, concluded that the specific points chosen to needle does not matter, and no difference was found between needling according to "true" points chosen by traditional acupuncture theory and "sham" acupuncture points unrelated to any theory.
A
2010 systematic review ... suggested that acupuncture is more than a placebo for commonly occurring chronic pain conditions, but the authors acknowledged that it is still unknown if the overall benefit is clinically meaningful or cost-effective.
A
2011 assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials on TCM, including acupuncture, concluded that the methodological quality of most such trials (including randomization, experimental control and blinding) was generally poor, particularly for trials published in Chinese journals (though the quality of acupuncture trials was better than the drug-related trials).
A
2012 meta-analysis found significant differences between true and sham acupuncture, which indicates that acupuncture is more than a placebo when treating chronic pain (even though the differences were modest and non-specific effects were still considered an important part of the therapeutic effect).
:wiki~~~
So will 2013 continue the recent trend whereby odd-numered years highlight the forces of reaction, or will it revert to the earlier trend according to which odd-numbered years are favourable to acupuncture? Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets. Maybe forum4 should open a betting section.
