Cobblestones are Good for You

pin_gween writes "Need to lose weight, lower blood pressure, help your balance? The Oregon Research Institute reports that walking on 'cobblestone mat surface resulted in significant reductions in blood pressure and improvements in balance and physical performance.' The benefits may have foundations in 'the principles of reflexology, in that the uneven surface of the cobblestones stimulate and regulate "acupoints" located on the soles of the feet.' Although the study was conducted with elderly patients, no reason to think it can't help most folks."

Comments

Re:I expect more out of people

[ziekke]

Pretty simply, because it doesn't work. The reason they explain it using divine or unexplained phenomenons is because they are not scientifically provable. The most likely explanation for this "cobblestone" bunk is that it's pure placebo or something that doesn't involve "reflexology" is at work. I'd like to see double-blind placebo-controlled studies that prove the validity of this practice. Also, if you can prove reflexology works, you can win $1,000,000USD from the James Randi Educational Foundation (http://randi.org./

Re:Quack! Don't waste your time/money!

[Mr. Slippery]

RTFA. Excerpt: "Cobblestone-like walking paths are common in China. The activity is rooted in traditional Chinese medicine and relates to some of the principles of reflexology, in that the uneven surface of the cobblestones stimulate and regulate "acupoints" located on the soles of the feet."

Then TFA is blowing smoke. There is only one TCM acupoint located on the sole of the foot, Kidney 1; and CM has no relation at all to reflexology.

But what about all the times that it doesn't work? And there are many. The trouble with things like this is people focus more on the times they succeed and tend to forget about all the times that things failed.

Of course. The same is true for any treatment, conventional or complementary. Western physicians aren't immune to believing in treatments that don't work. Hell, just a few decades ago your doctor would be telling you to take up smoking to help lose weight.

There is a huge difference between a medical doctor prescribing you a treatment that has been properly scientifically and medically proven and tested...

But very few of the treatments used in standard Western medicine have been so tested! Please show me a controlled double-blind study of coronary bypass surgery.

You simply have to submit the practice to a real scientific double blind-placebo controlled test. Fancy that, here is an example: http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/abstract/143/1/1 0

A study with only two fatal flaws:

• "A prescription of acupuncture at fixed points may differ from acupuncture administered in clinical settings". In other words, what was tested was nothing like acupuncture as it is actually applied.
• part of the control group received "noninsertive simulated acupuncture", which will also stimulate points - in some cases, as effectively as needle insertion. Those of us who practice acupressure and ABT stimulate points without needle insertion all the time

So you've cited a study that has no bearing on clinical acupuncture.

A better example of a double-blind controlled methodology for acupuncture research is that developed by Allen and Schnyer, where the control is geniune acupuncture adminstered for a condition other than that under investigation. They found:

Thus, based on a small outpatient sample of women with major depression, it appeared that acupuncture provided significant symptom relief at rates comparable to standard treatments such as psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy. The effect sizes observed in this small sample were at least as large or larger than those seen in trials of antidepressant medication or psychotherapy, and they suggest that a larger clinical trial is warranted.

(Here is another study using that methodology.)