I am happy to address John Hepponstall's query to clarify that the
basis for acupuncture in TCM is the flow of Chi/Qi through meridians.
There is no anatomical or physiological evidence for the existence of
these meridians despite much research. The literature on acupuncture's
effectiveness has the overall pattern of a non-effective treatment, ie
small trials are promising but the higher quality the study, the smaller
the treatment effect, with the most rigorous studies being negative. My
comment was intended to highlight the logical fallacies used in defence of
acupuncture and other such treatments. Anecdotes, cultural appropriateness
and small unblinded trials are not the stuff of which a credible treatment
is made. Arguments from popularity or authority are also not scientific
and rational, as even the wisest authority can be mistaken on any
particular issue. Practitoners of TCM cannot simply retreat into their
practices whenever negative evidence emerges if they wish to be taken
seriously. If they don't wish to follow scientific method like the rest of
us, discussions such as this are essentially meaningless.
Rapid Response:
Reply
I am happy to address John Hepponstall's query to clarify that the
basis for acupuncture in TCM is the flow of Chi/Qi through meridians.
There is no anatomical or physiological evidence for the existence of
these meridians despite much research. The literature on acupuncture's
effectiveness has the overall pattern of a non-effective treatment, ie
small trials are promising but the higher quality the study, the smaller
the treatment effect, with the most rigorous studies being negative. My
comment was intended to highlight the logical fallacies used in defence of
acupuncture and other such treatments. Anecdotes, cultural appropriateness
and small unblinded trials are not the stuff of which a credible treatment
is made. Arguments from popularity or authority are also not scientific
and rational, as even the wisest authority can be mistaken on any
particular issue. Practitoners of TCM cannot simply retreat into their
practices whenever negative evidence emerges if they wish to be taken
seriously. If they don't wish to follow scientific method like the rest of
us, discussions such as this are essentially meaningless.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests