Sceptic corner
Sceptics have said that any benefits gained from acupuncture are merely down to a person's expectation that the treatment will work.
Current international research on acupuncture demonstrate that this negative attitude is far removed from the reality.
The main argument used by sceptics is that only Randomized Controlled Trials are the only way to prove or disprove the effectiveness of acupuncture.
RCTs have already demonstrated the effectiveness of acupuncture for a number of conditions, and scientists in many countries have used a various levels of evidence to demonstrate the validity of acupuncture treatment for a wide range of conditions
The debate will certainly continue for the foreseeable future, but meanwhile people will continue to vote with their feet and rely on acupuncture and other CAM treatment to maintain their good health.
It is estimated that between 6.6% and 20% of the population use CAM
The average number of visits ranges from 2.8 to 5.3 per year,
leading to an extrapolation that around 5.3 million people over
the age of 18 made 31.7 million visits to practitioners of one of
eight therapies. This is considered to be a conservative
estimate.
These numbers speak for themselves
Current international research on acupuncture demonstrate that this negative attitude is far removed from the reality.
The main argument used by sceptics is that only Randomized Controlled Trials are the only way to prove or disprove the effectiveness of acupuncture.
RCTs have already demonstrated the effectiveness of acupuncture for a number of conditions, and scientists in many countries have used a various levels of evidence to demonstrate the validity of acupuncture treatment for a wide range of conditions
The debate will certainly continue for the foreseeable future, but meanwhile people will continue to vote with their feet and rely on acupuncture and other CAM treatment to maintain their good health.
It is estimated that between 6.6% and 20% of the population use CAM
The average number of visits ranges from 2.8 to 5.3 per year,
leading to an extrapolation that around 5.3 million people over
the age of 18 made 31.7 million visits to practitioners of one of
eight therapies. This is considered to be a conservative
estimate.
These numbers speak for themselves
The true sceptic is a welcome asset to real research. He says: "Maybe its true, but possibly not". The pseudo-sceptic contributes nothing to research. Before examining or discussing he shoots out: "This is bunk. Nothing to see here!" For some pseudo-sceptics this has become daily routine in the medias. Zero contribution, much destruction.
Pseudo-sceptics as those who take "the negative rather than an agnostic position but still call themselves 'sceptics'
Scientism is what happens when you get large groups of scientifically-inclined men together who think in aching naive black and white terms.
"If society then offers them up a sacrificial common enemy, then irrationality and dogmatic fervour is almost certainly guaranteed:
- The tendency to deny, rather than doubt
-Double standards in the application of criticism
-The making of judgments without full inquiry
-Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate
-Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments
-Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.'
-Presenting insufficient evidence or proof
-Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof
-Making unsubstantiated counter-claims
-Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence
- Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it."
Marcello Truzzi
Pseudo-sceptics as those who take "the negative rather than an agnostic position but still call themselves 'sceptics'
Scientism is what happens when you get large groups of scientifically-inclined men together who think in aching naive black and white terms.
"If society then offers them up a sacrificial common enemy, then irrationality and dogmatic fervour is almost certainly guaranteed:
- The tendency to deny, rather than doubt
-Double standards in the application of criticism
-The making of judgments without full inquiry
-Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate
-Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments
-Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.'
-Presenting insufficient evidence or proof
-Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof
-Making unsubstantiated counter-claims
-Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence
- Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it."
Marcello Truzzi