Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> The article doesn't say that sham acupuncture is just as effective.

Maybe I'm misreading the second sentence, which says
"""
But the results also suggest that faked procedures, in which needles are 
incorrectly inserted, can be just as effective.
"""

> LiveScience isn't a journal, 

I thought I saw a link there to the actual study, but I see I'm wrong. 
However, google is still your friend.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/114/5/1242

http://www.google.com/search?q=accupuncture+double-blind

http://www.google.com/search?q=sham+acupuncture+study


so I will give them the benefit of doubt
> that they didn't misquote things, but still take their opinion with salt.
> 
> If that article is referring to
> http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab007587.html then it doesn't say
> that acupuncture to the wrong points was just as effective. From the
> abstract of "Acupuncture for tension-type headache", Linde K et al:
> 
>> Main results
>> Eleven trials with 2317 participants (median 62, range 10 to 1265) met the
inclusion criteria. Two large trials compared acupuncture to treatment of acute
headaches or routine care only. Both found statistically significant and clinically
relevant short-term (up to 3 months) benefits of acupuncture over control for
response, number of headache days and pain intensity. Long-term effects (beyond 3
months) were not investigated. Six trials compared acupuncture with a sham acupuncture
intervention, and five of the six provided data for meta-analyses. Small but
statistically significant benefits of acupuncture over sham were found for response as
well as for several other outcomes. Three of the four trials comparing acupuncture
with physiotherapy, massage or relaxation had important methodological or reporting
shortcomings. Their findings are difficult to interpret, but collectively suggest
slightly better results for some outcomes in the control groups.
>>
>> Authors' conclusions
>> In the previous version of this review, evidence in support of acupuncture for
tension-type headache was considered insufficient. Now, with six additional trials,
the authors conclude that acupuncture could be a valuable non-pharmacological tool in
patients with frequent episodic or chronic tension-type headaches.
> 
> And for migraine headaches, it seems that the placebo effect is strong
> enough that real needles are not needed. But, same authors, so perhaps
> that speaks more about migraine headaches than it does about acupuncture.
> (http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab001218.html)
> 
>> Authors' conclusions
>> In the previous version of this review, evidence in support of acupuncture for
migraine prophylaxis was considered promising but insufficient. Now, with 12
additional trials, there is consistent evidence that acupuncture provides additional
benefit to treatment of acute migraine attacks only or to routine care. There is no
evidence for an effect of 'true' acupuncture over sham interventions, though this is
difficult to interpret, as exact point location could be of limited importance.
Available studies suggest that acupuncture is at least as effective as, or possibly
more effective than, prophylactic drug treatment, and has fewer adverse effects.
Acupuncture should be considered a treatment option for patients willing to undergo
this treatment.


-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message