[Marxism] Acupuncture has been validated (was Re: More detail on the homeopathic vaccine in Cuba)

[Nick Fredman]

Paul Flewers quotes Dr Stephen Barrett:

>>Like acupuncture, shiatsu is based upon criteria
which are not scientifically validated.<<

Barrett is wrong. According to World Health Orgnisation:

"While evidence [i.e. evidence from clinical double blind trials] shows that
acupuncture, some herbal medicines and some manual therapies (e.g. massage)
are effective for specific conditions, further study of products and
practices is needed"
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/print.html

I note Paul's article doesn't refer to a single study, merely the opinions
of several doctors, who may or may not have some evidence about *some*
therapies under the wide rubric of complementary medicine, or may be
expressing ignorant prejudice about CAMs as a whole. I.e. pretty worthless.

Also WHO's summary doesn't exhaust the matter of validation. Anyone who
thinks the only form of validation in health is a double blind randomised
controlled trial should suggest how to conduct such a trial for a new
technique in heart surgery. As I and my partner wrote in a Socialist
Alliance discussion article entitled 'Towards a socialist approach to
complementary and alternative medicine', in which we aimed to neither
uncritically accept nor smugly "debunk" CAMs, but argued for a scientific
and regulatory approach as part of a community-focused public health system:

"In orthodox western medicine the strongest form of validation for a medical
therapy is seen as a double blind randomised controlled trial. Many
traditional remedies have empirical validation from centuries of use and
documentation in classical medical literature, however until recently there
has been little funding available for clinical double blind trials into
alternative medicine, generally due to lack of potential profits. So far
evidence of efficacy from such trials is strong for many uses of
acupuncture, some herbal medicines and some of the manual therapies[i] .
 
"In any case double blind trials are not necessarily the best form of
validation in every instance. Such trials did not prevent the marketing of
the harmful drugs mentioned above. They can be effective in measuring the
actions of specific remedies on specific systems, but not necessarily for
validating preventative and holistic care (or for that matter surgical
techniques). 
 
"Recently, the idea of a 'whole systems approach' to research design has
been put forward by a group of Canadian scientists, practitioners, and
policy makers as a way of validating CAM [ii]. With such techniques and also
further double blind testing we can expect a greater range of such therapies
to be validated". 


[i] World Health Organisation. Traditional medicine. Fact Sheet No 134.
2003. [Online]. Available:
www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/print.html

[ii] Ritenbaugh C, Verhoef M, Fleishman S, Boon H, Leis A Whole systems
research: a discipline for studying complementary and alternative medicine.
Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine. 2003. Jul-Aug;9(4):32-6.

The whole article is at
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w23/msg00016.htm

I make further points relevant to what I've seen of the recent discussion
here, at:

On the utter irrelevancy of 'CAMs are for profit' arguments:
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w24/msg00061.htm

On the need for *us* to discuss a *political* approach to CAMs
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w24/msg00112.htm

On how the more rigorously trained and more independent practitioners favour
tighter public regulation:
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w24/msg00064.htm

Including an article on how conventional drug trials are distorted by the
profit motive: 
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w24/msg00065.htm

Also an article on Vietnam's acupuncture program is included at:
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w24/msg00066.htm