B-cup Bob is STILL babbling:
>>>>>>> Are you so narrow minded
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm *open*-minded. I read the abstract and various mentions of the
>>>>>> study you discussed in the first post of this thread. I made up my
>>>>>> mind on the basis of that study that "real" acupuncture works no
>>>>>> better than "sham" acupuncture, which was the conclusion of the
>>>>>> researchers:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No argument.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then stop deluding yourself (and so utterly unpersuasively
>>>> suggesting to others) that this study showed benefits of acupuncture
>>>> when the placebo group received GREATER benefit. Acupuncture was
>>>> *no* *more* *effective* than sham acupuncture.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I disagree that using traditional points should be called "Sham"
>>> acupuncture.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's what it was.
>>
>>> And it was effective.
>>
>>
>>
>> Placebo effect, dummy.
>>
>>> A simple google search shows many AMA and research organizations
>>> researching acupuncture.
>>
>>
>>
>> AMA doesn't carry out research, dumb ass.
>>
>>> You're dismissal in this case is simply stupid.
>>
>>
>>
>> I've only repeated what the study said AND concluded. There was no
>> difference between the two groups -- just between them and the control
>> group that received no sham or "real" treatment.
>>
>>> http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/acupuncture
>>>
>>> is but one example.
>>
>>
>>
>> From it:
>> Acupuncture is used to treat a wide range of illnesses and
>> ailments; however, it is mainly used to control pain, including
>> cancer pain....
>>
>> The aim of most acupuncture clinical observation and clinical
>> trials in cancer patients has been to evaluate the effects of
>> acupuncture on symptom management.
>
> Those were the results.

That site offered NOTHING about specific tests or results. It gave
generalities which support what I've been saying: that acupuncture has
benefit only as a touch therapy -- relative to placebo effect.

>> That gets to its benefits as a *touch therapy*, not to it working as a
>> cure. I've already conceded that touch therapies have value in
>> reducing stress and the effects of stress on both sick and healthy
>> people. But touch therapies like reflexology, massage, and acupuncture
>> do NOT have curative powers as the superstitious true-believers in
>> them claim. I gave you links to other therapies which have similar
>> results to those: music, laughter, and pets. You probably didn't click
>> on those links, but they're to studies that show the same KIND of
>> benefit as was reported in the study you lied about finding in Time
>> magazine or as is typically reported in other studies. That's
>> important in improving a patient's quality of life, but it doesn't
>> cure cancer, migraines, etc.
>
> I never said it did. There are false claims.

Made by the superstitious sorts who think acupuncture "works" or has
some validity because it's been practiced for thousands of years.
However, when acupuncture has been put through the scrutiny of a double
blind study (like the one you offered as proof it works) it's only shown
a placebo effect.

That's what your own study showed. There were three groups. One group
received "real" acupuncture, a placebo group received sham acupuncture
treatment, and a control group received neither. The "real" and sham
acupuncture groups had almost identical benefits -- and, in fact, the
placebo group actually showed more benefit.

If there were any validity to acupuncture, the test group ("real"
acupuncture) should've received significantly *greater* benefit than
both the control (no treatment) or the placebo (sham treatment). The
problem for acupuncturists and true believers is that both placebo (53%
relief) and test (51%) groups benefited the same.

The placebo effect (placebo, translating from Latin as "I shall
please", is also known as non-specific effects and the
subject-expectancy effect) is the phenomenon that a patient's
symptoms can be alleviated by an otherwise ineffective
treatment, since the individual expects or believes that it will
work. Some people consider this to be a remarkable aspect of
human physiology; others consider it to be an illusion arising
from the way medical experiments were conducted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo_effect

>> Here are those links again. Tell me how acupuncture is qualitatively
>> diffrerent, especially with respect to the study you trotted out as
>> "proof" it "works" (when the researchers noted that the placebo group
>> received greater benefit than the "real" acupuncture group, dumb ass).
>
> They called it placebo,

Because it was a placebo, dumb ass. It was *sham* treatment. The "real"
treatment was marginally less effective than the bogus treatment --
WHICH IS NOT WHAT SHOULD'VE BEEN OBSERVED IF THERE WERE ANY VALIDITY TO
ACUPUNCTURE. IF THERE WERE *ANY* VALIDITY TO IT, THE TEST GROUP WOULD'VE
REPORTED A *SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER* AMOUNT OF RELIEF FROM MIGRAINES THAN
BOTH CONTROL AND PLACEBO GROUPS. BUT IT DIDN'T -- IT FARED SLIGHTLY
*WORSE* THAN THE PLACEBO GROUP. YOU INCOMPETENT DODDERING JACKASS.

> Do a controlled replicated study replicating it these other therapies.

This *was* a controlled study. It concluded that there were *no
differences* in relieving migraines between the placebo and test groups.
The evidence continues to mount that acupuncture is a sham; the relief
came from placebo effect, much as is the case with other touch therapies
as I've already noted.

In a study of a specific touch therapy on burn patients paid for by the
Department of Defense and conducted at the University of Alabama at
Birmingham, researchers likewise found no significant difference between
placebo and test groups and noted:
The greatest lesson learned from this process is that the
inclusion of a true control group in addition to a sham and
treatment group is required because a strong placebo effect
occurs from the special attention given to patients in the
'sham' treatment.
[cited in:]
http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...opics/tt2.html

There is no need for wasting more money on superstitions like
acupuncture, reflexology, astrology, numerology, etc. Touch therapies
have some benefit, but those benefits are chalked up to placebo effect.

>> 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