The Claims of a Typical Adelaide Acupuncturist
02May. 09
The ‘City of Churches’ is perhaps not the best place for an Atheist to live, a place where one quickly becomes resigned to seeing at least one church every few streets on the way to work or school. However, the topic of this post is not the sheer volume of steepled worship-dens for which my city is famous, but rather its faux-oriental cousin which is becoming almost as prevalent. I pass at least three of these every morning on my way to 9AM Psychology lectures. They are Acupuncture Clinics.
What concerns me most about these clinics are the bold advertising claims which appear on the building facades. In this post, I consider the claims of one such advertisement and argue that they are ill-referenced, possibly or probably false and worded, whether intentionally or not, in a way that is irresponsible and exploitative. As it is not necessary for the purposes of this article, I have withheld the particular business name.
The quotes below appear on the bottom-left of the advertisement, which was the part that caught my eye as I traveled past.
“Every woman is a unique and special person.”
So far, we agree. Men, too, are unique, but this is irrelevant in a section regarding Women’s Health.
“The root cause of reproductive conditions needs to be assessed on an individual basis.”
I’ll grant them that. Makes sense, a one-on-one consultation with an obstetrician, surely. Reproductive conditions are not to be taken lightly.
“Each woman has the potential to restore her balance and reproductive wellness”
It’s unclear what is meant by ‘balance’. Neither confirm nor deny.
“Acupuncture has been found very effective in treating the following conditions; Premenstrual Syndrome [PMS], Menstrual Cramps and irregularities, Breast tenderness and Fibrocystic breasts, Chronic pelvic pain, Endometriosis, Uterine fibroids, Abnormal bleeding, Pregnancy problem; Morning sickness (nausea), Miscarriage, Menopause; Hot flashes, Irregular bleeding, Mood Swing, Vaginal Atrophy Ovarian Cysts, Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome”
(Emphasis mine)
Ahem. Oh dear.
The authority for this bold, eye catching statement appears to be the now-infamous paper published by the World Health Organization in 2003, entitled ‘Acupuncture; Review and Analysis of Reports on Controlled Clinical Trials’. This paper did list some of these conditions as treatable by Acupuncture. The authority of the WHO is not to be underestimated, but in this case was notoriously misinformed. The review and analysis was almost comically broad, selecting a vast proportion of extremely poor quality trials, including some fairly suspect data from Chinese studies (Almost 100% positive, almost 100% of the time). (Ernst; Singh 2008, p. 71).
The majority of trials being extremely low quality, dissent by properly performed trials was therefore diluted. A more thorough review of properly performed trials yields a much less promising viewpoint and one that is not often proclaimed in Acupuncture Clinic windows:
“Reliable conclusions from systematic reviews make it clear that acupuncture does not work for a whole range of conditions, except as a placebo. Hence, if you see acupuncture being advertised by a clinic, then you can assume that it does not really work, except possibly in the treatment of some types of pain and nausea” (ibid, pp. 82 – 83)
Furthermore,
“Beware of misleading and untrue statements made for acupuncture. Some states do not regulate such claims. Because laws are political tools, not scientific ones, the political process often responds to pressures independent of scientific evidence. Acupuncture cures nothing. It may relieve symptoms with the frequency of a placebo. It may be harmful. Consumers wishing to try acupuncture should discuss their situation with a knowledgeable physician who has no commercial interest.” (NCAHF 1990)
It is not my place to claim that these acupuncturists are intentionally deceiving their clients, nor would I make such a libelous claim without proper evidence. Nonetheless, I argue that it is irresponsible, cruel and exploitative to list such items as miscarriage as a medical problem which can be treated with Acupuncture. It has been demonstrated that Acupuncture’s efficacy is far from unanimously accepted. A lack of medical consensus on the matter, whether it is effective or not, makes advancing such claims (complete with official-sounding jargon) a serious dereliction of duty on the part of any medical practitioner, alternative or otherwise. As the above cited NCAHF report states: “acupuncture should not be offered without full informed consent, reminding patients that acupuncture is experimental, has not been proven more effective than a placebo, and has some risk of complications.” (ibid)
It was the section regarding Women’s Health and Reproductive issues which caught my attention on this advertisement. Pregnancy complications are a terrifying idea, even for myself, despite my not being equipped with a womb and therefore my unlikelihood of suffering them first-hand. The idea that scared and vulnerable parents-to-be might consider an unproven and potentially dangerous treatment based on such advertisements frightens and disgusts me. I am uncertain of Australian laws regulating this variety of advertising, but I argue that advancing these faux-medical claims without sufficient evidence to support them is profoundly wrong, exploitative and irresponsible.
–
References:
Ernst, E & Singh, S 2008, Trick or Treatment: Alternative Medicine on Trial, Bantam Press, London.
National Council Against Health Fraud 1990, NCAHF Position Paper on Acupuncture, NCAHF, viewed 30 April 2009, <http://www.ncahf.org/pp/acu.html>
Quackwatch 2009, Acupuncture Watch, viewed 30 April 2009, <http://www.acuwatch.org/>
Tags: acupuncture, advertising, Alternative Medicine, medicine, pregnancy, Women's Health
May 4th, 2009 at 12:37 am
Having recently toured outback SA be content that at least half of the churches I saw were collapsing from misuse or being used as residences or art galleries
May 20th, 2009 at 4:48 am
Hello,
I just came across your article. I have been an acupuncturist in the USA for almost thirty years. I appreciate your skepticism. I see you are using Quackwatch and NCAHF. I would argue that these two sources are actually one source. They are one in the same. These are far from objective sources. They are in fact an agenda oriented group that has as its main focus the elimination of any health care that is not approved by them. They are not scientifically grounded although they do cherry pick negative article about acupuncture and try to sound like they are the voice of reason. These groups have continually lobbied against all natural health care for as long as I have been viewing their propaganda.I remember Linus Pauling, the only person ever to receive two unshared Nobel Prizes coming under fire from these groups-at the time Dr, Victor Herbert was in the lead– for Dr, Paulings research. They were so off base that it was really shameful.If you are really looking for truth please consider searching PUBMED and looking at original research on acupuncture. There is one article today that is a totally controlled gold standard study that shows that acupuncture is significantly helpful for migraines. Regarding your concern for the use of acupuncture and miscarriage, I have personally treated more that a dozen cases of threatened miscarriage over the years, all referred to me by obstetricians with curative results. Acupuncture does stimulate uterine function and regulate hormonal levels. Hey you sound like a reasonable person. Look up the information yourself. Don’t let me or any other person determine your mindset on acupuncture. There are over 25,000 studies on acupuncture. Read some of them please. Thanks, Kimball Chatfield, Doctor of Oriental Medicine, Board Certified Acupuncturist
May 20th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Hi Kimball, you may be interested in this most recent, and very comprehensive, study that supports the growing body of evidence that acupuncture has no effect beyond that of a placebo:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=492
(by the way, I would think that if it did work, it would have been demonstrated convincingly within the ’25,000′ studies that you mention)
May 20th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Hello Kimbal.
I see you stated there was one article today at pubmed which is “totally controlled gold standard study that shows that acupuncture is significantly helpful for migraines”, could you link to this article or give us some details so we can track it down? The only things even remotely relevant aren’t from the last day let alone the last week, come from very biased sources such as the Institute of Traditional Medicine in Taiwan, and/or are anything but “totally controlled gold standard”.
May 20th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Cheers to Fuller and Bastard Sheep for fielding this one. I saw the wall of text and said “I’ll deal with this later,” but by the time I’d come back, it was done. Just one of the many benefits of being part of the YAS.
December 15th, 2009 at 6:40 am
Well I haven’t looked at this site since I wrote a reply in May regarding acupuncture.
So bastard sheep says that any study coming out of a Chinese research hospital is biased toward acupunture. Would you say that any study from a research Hospital in USA or Australia is also biased toward pharmaceuticals because they receive funding from these companies? Anyway here is some info to check. Since I wrote my reply I count seven studies with acupuncture and headaches. The study I mentioned in my May reply was from the journal Headache Epublished on April 27. It is a multicenter randomized controlled study on real acupuncture versus sham. (Acupuncture for treating acute attacks of migraine: a randomized control trial-Headache. 2009 June;49(6):805 – 16.Epub 2009 Apr 27. Li, et al). Look also at: Effects of acupuncture preventive treatment on the quality of life in patients of no-aura migraine. Zhongguo Zhen Jui 2009 June;29(6):431 – 5 Zhang et al. Acupuncture at points of the liver and gallbladder meridians for treatment of migraine: a multi-center randomized and controlled study Zhongguo Zhen Jui 2009 apr:29(4); 259 – 63 Zhang et al. There are others as well, one on needle design and migraines, another on design and protocol for migraine prophylaxis, another on researching sham versus real acupuncture points. Look them up on PUBMED — run by the National Institutes of Health and the National Library of Medicine in the USA. I’m thinking that you will find them all biased because they come from China. But they are there.