The Mystery of Acupuncture Partly Explained In Rat Study

hackingbear writes: A biological mechanism explaining part of the mystery of acupuncture has been pinpointed by scientists studying rats. The research showed that applying electroacupuncture to an especially powerful acupuncture point known as stomach meridian point 36 (St36) affected a complex interaction between hormones known as the hypothalamus pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis. In stressed rats exposed to unpleasant cold stimulation, HPA activity was reduced (abstract). The findings provide the strongest evidence yet that the ancient Chinese therapy has more than a placebo effect when used to treat chronic stress, it is claimed. "Some antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs exert their therapeutic effects on these same mechanisms," said lead investigator Dr Ladan Eshkevari, from Georgetown University medical center in Washington DC.

Comments

Not acupuncture

[smooth wombat]

The research showed that applying electroacupuncture

The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.

Try again.

Re:Not acupuncture

[ihtoit]

nerve connections use electricity. Acupuncture is the application of a needle into the nerve/bundle to interrupt or divert that impulse.

Re:Not acupuncture

[PopeRatzo]

The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.

I like people who have strong opinions about things they know nothing about.

http://www.acupuncturetoday.co...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

http://www.news-medical.net/ne...

Re:Not acupuncture

[Chalnoth]

Passing electrical currents through living tissue has real biological effects. Sticking needles in people at random locations around the body does not (aside from the possibility of infection and other complications).

Real therapies that use electricity are Electroconvulsive Therapy and Electric Muscle Stimulation. There's no need to puncture the skin. These quacks are just adding some risk of infection to what would otherwise be an almost perfectly safe therapy.

Re:Mystery

[ibpooks]

The question of whether acupuncture (in any of its hundred or thousands of forms) is more effective than control (a.k.a. "placebo effect") has been answered conclusively -- it is not. Acupuncture is indistinguishable from sham acupuncture in numerous, well controlled studies. It is the theatre, not the treatment that has any effect; and those effects are only measurable in the short-term against subjective outcomes. In other words, it's risky (infection, organ/vessel piercing), has no more benefit than just talking to someone or sitting quietly for a half hour, and does not improve health in any known objective measure.

The placebo effect "works" for a very narrow definition of "works", which is far less than what practitioners of these worthless treatments claim.

Re:Mod parent up!

[Martin Blank]

They did use non-St-36 locations. There were four groups, three of which were given the same stressors, with a fourth given no stressors and no treatment. The stressor groups received either St-36 treatment, treatment where needles were not inserted into any meridian point, or no treatment. I imagine an argument could be made for a group given treatment but not stressors.

I don't know if this provides any vindication for acupuncture (or even electroacupuncture)--something like this really needs to be repeated before I'll believe it--but the research was a little more robust than you imply.