 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / June 2008Acupuncture at Tufts Medical School
This website is proof that at least some federal money is well spent. This venture project was funded by an NCCAM grant. http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/index.html This site was created by Tufts University School of Medicine in partnership with the New England School of Acupuncture to support the development of an evidence-based medicine (EBM) curriculum. The curriculum is designed to teach medical students EBM skills that can be applied to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and to allopathic medicine. The EBCAM project was made possible by Grant Number 5 R25 AT00714 from NCCAM. And, here is a link to their page on the science behind acupuncture http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/acupunctureOverview.html Acupuncture: Scientific Theories of Mechanisms On Jun 8, 6:33 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > This website is proof that at least some federal money is well spent. > This venture project was funded by an NCCAM grant. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Acupuncture: Scientific Theories of Mechanisms Thanks for the article, Andrew. I've been noticing of late, you have posted a lot of good acupuncture articles. This is nice. You will laugh at this, my doctor prescribed acupuncture to me, and never has seen an acupuncturist, so her doctor prescribed acupuncture, and she asked me if it hurt! I said only if they hit the meridians sometimes!! I'd be interested in discussing what kind of herbs you have studied, and learning more about the herbal end of acupuncture. Can you recommend any good books for study? My acupuncturist treats herself for colds, and they disappear like lightning! Bam---and it is gone! : This venture project was funded by an NCCAM grant. Have you read the original article that reported the results of the 2004 osteoarthritis study? Have you read any of the citations that I posted in February? Have you read either of the citations that I posted that present evidence that acupuncture is no more effective than a placebo in treating people addicted to smoking? Have you read the article that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not effective against constipation? <crickets chirping> ----- 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 ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" <snip the repeated, repeated, over, and over repeatedly> This website is proof that at least some federal money is well spent. This venture project was funded by an NCCAM grant. http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/index.html This site was created by Tufts University School of Medicine in partnership with the New England School of Acupuncture to support the development of an evidence-based medicine (EBM) curriculum. The curriculum is designed to teach medical students EBM skills that can be applied to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and to allopathic medicine. The EBCAM project was made possible by Grant Number 5 R25 AT00714 from NCCAM. And, here is a link to their page on the science behind acupuncture http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/acupunctureOverview.html Acupuncture: Scientific Theories of Mechanisms : And, here is a link to their page on the science behind acupuncture : : http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/acupunctureOverview.html And what do you know? No mention of "Chi" or "meridians." And you accuse *me* of suffering from cognitive dissonance. Is there some reason that you failed to cite http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/AcuSmoke.html ? Could it be because that page cites the review that Dr. Moran and I have cited that "concluded that there is little evidence to support the hypothesis that active acupuncture is superior to sham acupuncture in facilitating smoking cessation"? Or could it be because the page says that "Further well designed studies are needed to better determine the efficacy of acupuncture as part of a comprehensive program for smoking cessation"? ----- 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 ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" > In article <6c4eac96-bfdd-4d08-a575-768a91757...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > designed studies are needed to better determine the efficacy of acupuncture > as part of a comprehensive program for smoking cessation"? Let's see, 34% of smokers try to quit each year and only 2.5% succeed. True Acupuncture, along with educating the patient has 40% of them quiting. Perhaps you're disappointed with an improvement of 17X, but it more than exceeds the level of statistical significance. It also exceeds any conventional form of smoking cessation treatment. Yes, the efficacy is there, in spades. Developing an optimal protocol takes time, so for now, you'll have to settle for a mere 17x improvement. http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/AcuSmoke.html Smoking cessation can be very difficult due to the addictive qualities of nicotine. While it is estimated that 70% of smokers want to stop, and 34% try to stop each year, only 2.5% succeed. A recent study by Bier and colleagues [5] was based on a rigorous design that addressed a number of the methodological concerns raised by White and colleagues. They designed and conducted a randomized, quasi-factorial design to examine the efficacy of auricular acupuncture and education on smoking cessation. Treatments included true acupuncture + education, sham acupuncture + education, and true acupuncture alone. They found that all three groups showed significant reductions in smoking and post-treatment cigarette consumption; however, the true acupuncture + education group showed the highest cessation rates (40%), which were maintained at 18 months post- treatment. Further well designed studies are needed to better determine the efficacy of acupuncture as part of a comprehensive program for smoking cessation > ----- > Richard Schultz schu...@mail.biu.ac.il [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your > truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" : Let's see, 34% of smokers try to quit each year and only 2.5% : succeed. True Acupuncture, along with educating the patient has 40% : of them quiting. Perhaps you're disappointed with an improvement of : 17X, but it more than exceeds the level of statistical : significance. But it did *not* exceed the level of statistical significance of other therapies tried. You seem to have left out that part of the discussion. Nor have you made any effort to discuss the review that concluded that there is no evidence that acupuncture is effective as a therapy for addiction to smoking. The term that you are looking for is "intellectual dishonesty." Speaking of intellectual dishonesty, Have you read the original article that reported the results of the 2004 osteoarthritis study? Have you read any of the citations that I posted in February? Have you read either of the citations that I posted that present evidence that acupuncture is no more effective than a placebo in treating people addicted to smoking? Have you read the article that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not effective against constipation? <crickets chirping> ----- 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 ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" Richey baby...................... ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ > In article <6c4eac96-bfdd-4d08-a575-768a91757...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > And what do you know? No mention of "Chi" or "meridians." And you > accuse *me* of suffering from cognitive dissonance. Yet again, you've proven how your bias blinds you. When it comes to acupuncture your cognitive dissonance is astounding. If you don't want to see it, it simply must not be there. Sadly, this isn't an isolated incident. Do you remember how you repeatedly denied that the NIH stated that acupuncture was efficacious for any condition? Oddly, this works in reverse when it is something you need to believe in. Remember how you thought the AMA accredited medical schools? Remember how you thought that Stanford's acupuncture program was the result of one faculty member forcing it on the department? Yes, I accuse you of cognitive dissonance. Yes, I accuse you of being wrong when you are wrong, lying when you lie, and abandoning critical thinking in the discussion of acupuncture. The verdict, proven by your own words, is "Guilty, on all counts". http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/Theory.html :> : And, here is a link to their page on the science behind acupuncture :> : :> :http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/acupunctureOverview.html :> :> And what do you know? ?No mention of "Chi" or "meridians." ?And you :> accuse *me* of suffering from cognitive dissonance. : Yet again, you've proven how your bias blinds you. Are you telling me that the web page that you cited mentions "chi" and "meridians" and that I failed to notice it? Speaking of how "bias blinds you," why is it that not only do you refuse to *read* articles that provide evidence that you are wrong, you refuse even to *acknowledge their existence*? Have you read the original article that reported the results of the 2004 osteoarthritis study? Have you read any of the citations that I posted in February? Have you read either of the citations that I posted that present evidence that acupuncture is no more effective than a placebo in treating people addicted to smoking? Have you read the article that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not effective against constipation? <crickets chirping> ----- 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 ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" > In article <4a989a76-3be2-41fb-b459-b72687b92...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Are you telling me that the web page that you cited mentions "chi" > and "meridians" and that I failed to notice it? What you were telling me, as you have in the past, that if it isn't on the homepage or startpage, it might as well not exist. Since you were expecting the classical explanation of acupuncture on the page for the modern scientific explanation, you've got a peculiar way of reading English. As it is, the information is there for anyone who *is* able to read for comprehension and use a web browser. Don't worry, I haven't given up on you. In time, I'll have you able to use your web browser effectively, even when the topic is Acupuncture. :> In article <4a989a76-3be2-41fb-b459-b72687b92...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: :> :> : And, here is a link to their page on the science behind acupuncture :> :> : :> :> :http://www.tufts.edu/med/ebcam/eastAsianMed/acupunctureOverview.html :> :> And what do you know? ?No mention of "Chi" or "meridians." ?And you :> :> accuse *me* of suffering from cognitive dissonance. :> : Yet again, you've proven how your bias blinds you. ? :> Are you telling me that the web page that you cited mentions "chi" :> and "meridians" and that I failed to notice it? : What you were telling me, as you have in the past, that if it isn't on : the homepage or startpage, it might as well not exist. No I wasn't. Was this another "lie" on your part? I have said, on more than one occasion, that *if* acupuncture works, it almost certainly does *not* work by "balancing chi". Since the "science" page (which contains plenty of bogosity posing as science, but that's a different story entirely) contains no mention of "chi" or "meridians," I take that to mean that when Tufts attempts to present acupuncture as something that can be verified scientifically, they are careful to make sure that "chi" and "meridians" do not enter into the discussion. : Since you were expecting the classical explanation of acupuncture on the : page for the modern scientific explanation, you've got a peculiar way of : reading English. I was *not* expecting the classical explanation of acupuncture to appear on the "science" page -- and it does not. The point (one that in your psychological need to avoid the serious problems arising from the cognitive dissonance arising from a desire to appear to believe in science simultaneously with a desire to believe in the mystical notions behind TCM you tend to project on me) is that *if acupuncture works, it is almost certainly not because of "chi" or "meridians"* and that *the web site you cited appears to agree*. : As it is, the information is there for anyone who *is* able : to read for comprehension and use a web browser. I found the page with the traditional explanation of acupuncture, which is carefully kept separate from any page dealing with science. I note that while their explanation of "chi" seems to differ from yours, both your definition of chi as "homeostasis" and their more lengthy one fail to explain why acupuncture cannot cure cancer. I also note that their differentiation between "chemical drugs" and "natural herbs" is a classic example of a false dichotomy, as well as a fundamental misunderstanding of what a "chemical" is and how drugs actually work (as opposed to the moonshine explanation of how they work that you seem to be partial to). In the meantime, if you want to show us your ability to read for comprehension and use a web browser, why don't you find the original article reporting the results of the 2004 osteoarthritis study and see if you can find the table giving the actual results, which turn out not to be nearly as impressive as the press release claimed they were? ----- 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 ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" > In article <0903dc35-b0ae-4a04-ba22-63b7d1b1c...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > :> In article <4a989a76-3be2-41fb-b459-b72687b92...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your > truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" Have you heard about the 45 Homeopathy Facts?? Ok, just kidding Doc Rich, just kidding... Citizen Jimserac : Have you heard about the 45 Homeopathy Facts?? And what precisely does that have to do with acupuncture or with Tufts Medical School? ----- 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 ----- "Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time." -- The French Knight > In article <0903dc35-b0ae-4a04-ba22-63b7d1b1c...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > :> In article <4a989a76-3be2-41fb-b459-b72687b92...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > No I wasn't. Was this another "lie" on your part? No, it was a clear reference to your repeated, bizarre behavior. You seem to think that if you don't find something on the front page or the first page you look, it isn't there or it doesn't matter. A perfect example is the NIH's list of conditions and the Stanford Acupuncture page. If you don't find something, you'll say it doesn't exist. When its shown to be clearly on the site, even with its own link, you say it must be suspect because of its location. Weird. I have said, on more > than one occasion, that *if* acupuncture works, it almost certainly > does *not* work by "balancing chi". Finally, the third time is the charm. After nearly a year, you've finally characterized your position properly. That is a mighty long time for you to be able to even put your beliefs into words that mean what *you* actually believe. That, and the realization that acupuncture is much more accepted in mainstream medicine than you could envision or tolerate are signs of progress. Lets see if you can pick up the pace a bit henceforth. Since the "science" page (which > contains plenty of bogosity posing as science, but that's a different > story entirely) contains no mention of "chi" or "meridians," I take that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I was *not* expecting the classical explanation of acupuncture to appear > on the "science" page -- and it does not. So, do explain your disappointment at not finding it there. The point (one that in your > psychological need to avoid the serious problems arising from the > cognitive dissonance arising from a desire to appear to believe in > science simultaneously with a desire to believe in the mystical notions > behind TCM you tend to project on me) is that *if acupuncture works, it > is almost certainly not because of "chi" or "meridians"* and that *the > web site you cited appears to agree*. And your point is? I've always maintained that Qi is not a separate substance. > : As it is, the information is there for anyone who *is* able > : to read for comprehension and use a web browser. > > I found the page with the traditional explanation of acupuncture, which > is carefully kept separate from any page dealing with science. This is hilarious. You make the most bizarre assumptions based on the fact that websites have more than a single page. Most people attribute this to organization while you twist it in a vain attempt to discredit. Just like with the NIH's list of conditions for which their is clear evidence of efficacy, you seem to think it goes away if it isn't on the front page or every page. Weird. I note > that while their explanation of "chi" seems to differ from yours, both > your definition of chi as "homeostasis" and their more lengthy one fail > to explain why acupuncture cannot cure cancer. My definition of Qi is not homeostasis. I'd love to see what your basis was for that statement. "Richard Schultz" does not know when it is time to shut up. : "Richard Schultz" does not know when it is time to shut up. Does this mean that you have finally read the passage from Leviticus that I cited several months ago? ----- 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 ----- "an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience" Point made! > : "Richard Schultz" does not know when it is time to shut up. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ----- > "an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience" : Point made! Apparently not -- since it appears that you have not read the passage that I cited. Nor has the message that including a personal name in a Subject: line is a violation of netiquette sunk in. ----- 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 ----- "Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time." -- The French Knight AK: Thanks for the links. PA On Jun 8, 8:33 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > This website is proof that at least some federal money is well spent. > This venture project was funded by an NCCAM grant. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Acupuncture: Scientific Theories of Mechanisms |
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
|
©2009 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.