 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / May 2008Acupuncture Theory Outstanding Article
Morphological foundations of. acupuncture: an anatomical nomenclature of acupuncture. structures by claus c schnorrenberger from Acupuncture in Medicine, Nov. 1996, vol 14, #2 http://acupunctureinmedicine.org.uk/showarticle.php?artid=282 Goes into possible misinterpretation of Chinese terms by western acupuncturists leading to misunderstandings of "energy" theories. Interesting article for those on all sides of the controversy. Citizen Jimserac >Morphological foundations of. acupuncture: an anatomical nomenclature >of acupuncture. structures [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >terms by western acupuncturists leading >to misunderstandings of "energy" theories. 'energy' is the potential to do work. It's all new agey anyway, and total abuse of the word. It's nonsense any way or the other. >Interesting article for those on all sides of the controversy. There is no controversy Jimmy. Acupuncture is crap and there is no controversy about that.Using the same tactics as creationists ('teach the controversy!') is not going to change that. That article, while certainly interesting, is about as useful as an article on the words garden gnomes use for human tools. >Citizen Jimserac > On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:12:06 -0700 (PDT), Citizen Jimserac > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > >Citizen Jimserac I never liked the energy portion of the theory and was quite skeptical of the meridians at first. However to dismiss ALL Acupuncture as crap, is non-thinking and reflexive response. YOU may find it absurd but the person who has just been relieved of excruciating pain after every other kind of medical treatment FAILED will probably differ. I begin to wonder if you have EVER been really sick in your life. I have already offered you a wonderful link, in which most of the Acupuncture articles are freely downloadable, it is a peer reviewed journal and is indexed in medline: "Acupuncture in Medicine" is at http://acupunctureinmedicine.org.uk/volindex.php Read. I was going to disregard your comments but, as you are apparently sincere in your irrational but strongly held opinions, have made a variance in my usual policy. Citizen Jimserac : I never liked the energy portion of the theory : and was quite skeptical of the meridians at first. : : However to dismiss ALL Acupuncture as crap, is non-thinking and : reflexive response. This is known in the business as a "straw man." ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." > In article <6a2a3e0e-807f-4994-b245-55af3c0d5...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, CitizenJimserac<Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > ----- > "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." Posting ignored. Citizen Jimserac :> In article <6a2a3e0e-807f-4994-b245-55af3c0d5...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, CitizenJimserac<Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: :> : I never liked the energy portion of the theory :> : and was quite skeptical of the meridians at first. :> : However to dismiss ALL Acupuncture as crap, is non-thinking and :> : reflexive response. :> This is known in the business as a "straw man." : Posting ignored. Why? ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic." >> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:12:06 -0700 (PDT), Citizen Jimserac >> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >medical treatment FAILED will probably differ. I begin to wonder if >you have EVER been really sick in your life. Almost died of an infection 3 times in my life. And it wasn't any alt-med that saved me. >I have already offered you a wonderful link, in which most of the >Acupuncture articles are freely downloadable, it is a peer reviewed [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Citizen Jimserac > Morphological foundations of. acupuncture: an anatomical nomenclature > of acupuncture. structures [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Citizen Jimserac Tries to show that acupuncture points actually correspond to anatomical structures. Even if true in the few examples given (out of some hundreds of points described) , it doesn't show that needling does anything special. Apparently, also, no one knows what "chi" really meant to the ancient Chinese. No surprise there. PM > > Morphological foundations of. acupuncture: an anatomical nomenclature > > of acupuncture. structures [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > PM The article attempts to rectify mistaken thinking regarding the acupuncture points. Let's face it, the information we have is not genuine Chinese but based on centuries of hearsay, confusions, mistaken allusions and other impediments. It references acupunctures points as morphologically three dimensional - an intersting idea and YES, I too wish that more points had been discussed. Likewise, I find the concept of qi curious but considering that we are dealing with the unknown, am ready to consider it both skeptically and provisionally. There remains the thermographic, MRI and Electrical and Radiographic phenomena associated with the points, mentioned in numerous research articles by fully qualified researchers on which you remain curiously silent, other than to mention that the pheonomena in question are typical of normal adipose tissue (if I remember rightly your comment in an earlier post of a different thread) - something I find ... curious. Citizen Jimserac >> > Morphological foundations of. acupuncture: an anatomical nomenclature >> > of acupuncture. structures [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > genuine Chinese but based on centuries of hearsay, confusions, > mistaken allusions and other impediments. The biggest impediment to rational appraisal of acupuncture is the quaint belief that the ancient Chinese had the intellectual and technological tools needed to work out that sticking a needle in "here" had consistent medical effects "over there", something that other major medical cultures seem to have missed altogether. . Have you ever considered the enormity of that task? > It references acupunctures points as morphologically three dimensional > - an intersting idea and YES, I too wish that more points had been [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > in an earlier post of a different thread) - something I find ... > curious. I have often responded to such material, explaining why it is a low quality evidence becasue of the opportunities of oserver input into the results, other selection biases and overinterpretation. For eample the reference to fatty tissue was to explain why some spots on the body will have different electrcial conductivity to other spots. PM > Citizen Jimserac : Have you ever considered the enormity of that task? I have given up on the possibility that you will make a habit of properly editing your posts, but could you please do me a personal favor and look up the word "enormity" the next time you are tempted to use it without knowing what it means? ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- The gardener plants an evergreen whilst trampling on a flower. . . Posting ignored. Citizen Jimserac > "CitizenJimserac" <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > in an earlier post of a different thread) - something I find ... > > curious. > I have often responded to such material, explaining why it is a low quality > evidence because of the opportunities of observer input into the results, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > PM Objections noted. Citizen Jimserac :> I have often responded to such material, explaining why it is a low quality :> evidence because of the opportunities of observer input into the results, :> other selection biases and over interpretation. For example the reference :> to fatty tissue was to explain why some spots on the body will have :> different electrical conductivity to other spots. : Objections noted. I take it from your lack of response to them, and your lack of interest in learning more about them, that you are aware that you have no response to them, and that learning more about them can only weaken your position. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." >> > Morphological foundations of. acupuncture: an anatomical nomenclature >> > of acupuncture. structures [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >There remains the thermographic, MRI and Electrical and Radiographic >phenomena associated with the points, Could you explain to me how to tell the difference between an acupuncture effect and an effect due to the fact that you're just sticking needles in people? > mentioned in numerous research >articles by fully qualified There that meaningless word 'qualified' again. > researchers on which you remain curiously >silent, other than to mention that the pheonomena in question are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Citizen Jimserac > On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:35:32 -0700 (PDT), CitizenJimserac > [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > acupuncture effect and an effect due to the fact that you're just > sticking needles in people? Could YOU explain to me how to tell the difference between a surgery effect and an effect due to the fact that you're just sticking knives in people? Citizen Jimserac Citizen Jimserac : Could YOU explain to me how to tell the difference between a surgery : effect and an effect due to the fact that you're just sticking knives : in people? Yes. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." >> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:35:32 -0700 (PDT), CitizenJimserac >> [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] >effect and an effect due to the fact that you're just sticking knives >in people? Yes, by doing fake surgery. Which in a few cases has produced interesting results. Which has led to the removal of those surgical procedures from the medical reportoire. Of course, if the same thing is demonstrated for acupuncture, alties like you use a double standard or resort to special pleading etc. And of course, there are other lines of evidence for efficacy than ramdomized double blind studies. If a ruptured appendix causes a patient to die in 100% of the cases where you do nothing, and death in only 0.5% of the cases where you perform surgery and remove the appendix, the evidence is very strong that the surgery works. No such evidence exists for any acupuncture intervention. It does for surgery. And note that while acupuncture is an intervention in and of itself, surgery is merely a method for an intervention, a tool. There are interventions where surgery has been replaced by other methods. You can not do that with acupuncture. Without needles being inserted, it's no longer acupuncture. The comparison is spurious. >Citizen Jimserac > On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:07:26 -0700 (PDT), CitizenJimserac > [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > > >CitizenJimserac Mixed up and confused response but still impressive that you are attempting some semblance of reasoning and therefore, deserving of some praise. Well done. Now try to abandon the double standard. You say some sham surgery has been tried and the procedures removed from the surgical repertoire. But you do not indict and condemn ALL of surgery because of it. It is the same with Acupuncture. Many points have been tried since the ancients mapped out the standard ones. Most do absolutely nothing. Some points were found to have some effect and, if confirmed by many practitioners are called "Extra" points. I'm not sure how they are integrated into the meridian system theories, or if they are at all, this would be a good aspect to criticize. > And of course, there are other lines of evidence for efficacy than > ramdomized double blind studies. If a ruptured appendix causes a > patient to die in 100% of the cases where you do nothing, and death in > only 0.5% of the cases where you perform surgery and remove the > appendix, the evidence is very strong that the surgery works. No such > evidence exists for any acupuncture intervention. WRONG. Before making sweeping statements of this kind, please check some research. If you persist in making such sweeping and ill considered assertions without even looking, you're going to look stupid and Citizen Jimserac will ignore your posts. > And note that while acupuncture is an intervention in and of itself, > surgery is merely a method for an intervention, a tool. There are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > >CitizenJimserac Mixed up and confused response but still impressive that you are attempting some semblance of reasoning and therefore, deserving of some praise. Well done. Now try to abandon the double standard. You say some sham surgery has been tried and the procedures removed from the surgical repertoire. But you do not indict and condemn ALL of surgery because of it. It is the same with Acupuncture. Many points have been tried since the ancients mapped out the standard ones. Most do absolutely nothing. Some points were found to have some effect and, if confirmed by many practitioners are called "Extra" points. I'm not sure how they are integrated into the meridian system theories, or if they are at all, this would be a good aspect to criticize. > And of course, there are other lines of evidence for efficacy than > ramdomized double blind studies. If a ruptured appendix causes a > patient to die in 100% of the cases where you do nothing, and death in > only 0.5% of the cases where you perform surgery and remove the > appendix, the evidence is very strong that the surgery works. No such > evidence exists for any acupuncture intervention. WRONG. Before making sweeping statements of this kind, please check some research. If you persist in making such sweeping and ill considered assertions without even looking, you're going to look stupid and Citizen Jimserac > And note that while acupuncture is an intervention in and of itself, > surgery is merely a method for an intervention, a tool. There are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > >CitizenJimserac Mixed up and confused response but still impressive that you are attempting some semblance of reasoning and therefore, deserving of some praise. Well done. Now try to abandon the double standard. You say some sham surgery has been tried and the procedures removed from the surgical repertoire. But you do not indict and condemn ALL of surgery because of it. It is the same with Acupuncture. Many points have been tried since the ancients mapped out the standard ones. Most do absolutely nothing. Some points were found to have some effect and, if confirmed by many practitioners are called "Extra" points. I'm not sure how they are integrated into the meridian system theories, or if they are at all, this would be a good aspect to criticize. > And of course, there are other lines of evidence for efficacy than > ramdomized double blind studies. If a ruptured appendix causes a > patient to die in 100% of the cases where you do nothing, and death in > only 0.5% of the cases where you perform surgery and remove the > appendix, the evidence is very strong that the surgery works. No such > evidence exists for any acupuncture intervention. WRONG. Before making sweeping statements of this kind, please check some research. If you persist in making such sweeping and ill considered assertions without even looking, you're going to look stupid and Citizen Jimserac will ignore your posts. I have already referenced two Acupuncture sites which focus on modern medical research and they are LOADED with positive results of Acupuncture for various conditions. They also report failures. Please go to them and READ before posting such obviously fallacious sweeping assertions! At this site, the past issues can be browsed and selected articles from the current issue: http://acupunctureinmedicine.org.uk/volindex.php Here is a few sample titles from http://www.medicalacupuncture.org/aama_marf/journal/index.html where you can browse past issues and READ, for example, these articles from Vol 16 #3: The Vital Importance Of The Triple Energizer In Traditional Chinese Medicine Steven K. H. Aung, MD 2005. 10-13 Acupuncture In The Treatment Of Patients With Chronic Obstructive Bronchitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial Vadim Buevich, MD; Iraida G. Menshikova, MD; Irina V. Skliar, MD; Elena E. Kalashnikova, MD; Elena A. Shevchenko, MD; Marina Loevets, MD 2005. 14-18 Accumulation/Depletion Syndrome: The Energetic Root Of Stress And Burnout Michael T. Greenwood, MB (MD) 2005. 19-23 Shenting And Yintang: Quantification Of Cerebral Effects Of Acupressure, Manual Acupuncture, And Laserneedle Acupuncture Using High-Tech Neuromonitoring Methods Gerhard Litscher, MDsc 2005. 24-29 An Acupuncture Protocol For Treatment Of Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Second Report Alston C. Lundgren, MD 2005. 33-35 Treatment Of Gallbladder Dyskinesia In Children With Acupuncture Ivan Figueroa Otero, MD and Jose Russe, MD 2005. 36-38 Finally, your post incorrectly asserts: > And note that while acupuncture is an intervention in and of itself, > surgery is merely a method for an intervention, a tool. There are > interventions where surgery has been replaced by other methods. You > can not do that with acupuncture. Without needles being inserted, it's > no longer acupuncture. The comparison is spurious. Please do read something about Laser Acupuncture and there are even people experimenting with acoustic stimulation of the points. Your statement "Without needles being inserted it's no longer acuupncture" is spurious. Thanks Citizen Jimserac : You say some sham surgery has been tried and : the procedures removed from the surgical repertoire. : But you do not indict and condemn ALL of surgery because of it. The technical term for this is a "straw man." I suggest that you take a good course on logic before you start accusing others of not being able to reason logically. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic." POSTING IGNORED. Citizen Jimserac >> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:07:26 -0700 (PDT), CitizenJimserac >> [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] >But you do not indict and condemn ALL of surgery >because of it. I already told you the comparison is nonsense. You're grasping at straws here. Surgery also isn't based on a completely false assumptions on how the human body works. Acupuncture is complete fantasy at every turn. The diagnosis are complete nonsense (evidence: the same patient will get totally different diagnoses from different TCM guys), the whole idea of Qi is based on the notion that there is air in your circulatory system that can get stale (or something like that), meridians simply do not exist (show they do and win a million dollars. No excuses please, just do it or shut up), the anatomy used by TCM has totally imaginary organs etc, and you get the same effects wether you use needles or not and real acupuncture points or not. And the only thing were there seems to be any effect at all is with health problems that have a very large psychosomatic component. Do the math. >It is the same with Acupuncture. Many points have >been tried since the ancients mapped out the standard ones. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >integrated into the meridian system theories, or if they >are at all, this would be a good aspect to criticize. Isn't the reason crystal clear to you? It's because *all* the points are meaningless. Only if the practioner really believes they work and conveys that believe to the patient, the point seems to work. It's classical placebo effect. The most important aspect of the placebo effect is the trust the practioner places in the method, whatever that is, and his/her ability to convey that trust to the patient. Using fake acupuncture points and/or fake needles leaves only that component, and it gets the same result as using 'real' points and real needles. If an acupuncturist tries out a new point but clearly sends the message to the patient that he isn't expecting much of it, there will come not much of it. Textbook placebo effect. >> And of course, there are other lines of evidence for efficacy than >> ramdomized double blind studies. If a ruptured appendix causes a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Before making sweeping statements of this kind, please >check some research. But Jimmy, I have. I found it quacks like a duck, it walks like a duck, therefor, I concluded it is an aquatic bird of the family anatidae. I even own a few books on acupuncture, they're in my library. I also have 3 acupuncture wallmaps for humans, which do not agree with eachother, and 2 for dogs, which also contradict eachother. I have read a number of original research papers on acupuncture, most about arthritis pain. And they're all totally crap. All you seem to have done so far is read claims on some pro acupuncture websites and cut and paste what they say is research supporting their claims, without bothering to check any of it. > If you persist in making such sweeping and ill considered assertions without >even looking, you're going to look stupid and Citizen Jimserac >will ignore your posts. I have looked. I'm not going to look again, unless something absolutely amazing pops up. And I am not going to check that myself untill some very reputable medical journals have published it and other people who are better qualified than me have checked it out and said there is something to it. >> And note that while acupuncture is an intervention in and of itself, >> surgery is merely a method for an intervention, a tool. There are [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Please do read something about Laser Acupuncture I have. Some seem to use real low power lasers (these are laserpointers in stead of real surgical lasers), but people who are simply using LEDs report the same results. They only use the word 'laser' because it sounds good to a certain clientele. 'Ancient wisdom' combined with 'state of the art technology'. That makes for some A-grade woo! And please note that real lasers are used in tattoo removal. Why don't we here any reports of interesting side-effects from the tattoo removal industry? No reports for instance of removal being painless because they happened to 'stimulate' the right acupuncture point. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. > and there are even people experimenting with acoustic stimulation >of the points. Your statement "Without needles being inserted it's no >longer acuupncture" is spurious. No it isn't. People are abusing the term acupuncture, just as the term homeopathy gets abused by people selling herbal remedies. And don't get me started on 'homeopathic' dentists. And please note, these approaches report the same successes as the 'real thing' does. So clearly, it's not about sticking needles in people. The needles don't matter. And 'modern' acupuncture has 'discovered' that there isn't a square inch on the body without acupuncture points either. Which means it's not about where you do it either. If none of these things matter, the only thing left is the placebo effect. >Thanks >Citizen Jimserac >The needles don't >matter. And 'modern' acupuncture [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >If none of these things matter, >the only thing left is the placebo effect. Display of total ignorance of Acupuncture. Logical fallacies - unsupported sweeping generalizations. This post is an example of a return to the dark ages in which a pretension of the appearance of scientific or rational argument is made without any substance and WITHOUT the argument, combined with an appeal to the absoulte "authority" of the status quo, supposedly represented by the poster. Additional postings by this individual must, unfortunately be IGNORED. Citizen Jimserac >>The needles don't >>matter. And 'modern' acupuncture [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >Additional postings by this individual >must, unfortunately be IGNORED. Yes, when you can't handle the facts anymore, run away. >Citizen Jimserac |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.