Scientific American, March 30, 2017
Dr. King, regarding acupuncture, perhaps you can comment on this article:
Research Casts Doubt on the Value of Acupuncture, Scientific studies show that the procedure is full of holes, Scientific American, August 2016
The article makes these statements below, and it seems to me that because of the subjective nature of endpoints used in any clinical trial of pain or migraine treatment, whether acute or prophylactic treatment, that it seems a bit too early to make definitive conclusions about acupuncture worthy of a “True” or “False” in a quiz because there is no way to filter out bias of hope or expectation and/or researcher/treater bias effects on the subject even with masked raters as they only record the report of the patient:
1. effects of acupuncture are the same whether needles are placed along the meridians or at random locations around the body.
2. acupuncture studies are extremely difficult to double-blind—a methodological approach in which neither the researchers nor patients know who is receiving the treatment under investigation and who is receiving the placebo or sham.
3. researchers know which patients receive or do not receive real acupuncture, likely biasing the results.
For more information about Douglas Berger Psychiatrist Tokyo visit the following websites: