Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Mystery of Acupuncture Partly Explained In Rat Study

Posted by Soulskill on from the moving-the-needle dept.

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.

26 of 159 comments (clear)

  1. Not acupuncture by smooth+wombat · · Score: 5, Informative

    The research showed that applying electroacupuncture

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

    Try again.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Not acupuncture by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Informative

      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...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Not acupuncture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Plus another problem is that this is one "accupuncture pressure point". IIRC, there are scores, if not hundreds of the bastard things on a human body.

      This study proves accupuncture is valid about as much as the fact that pork can transfer inimical biotic agents from pigs to humans causing the latter to become sick or even die is proof that the Old Testament is valid knowledge.

      You know, not at all.

      It may have gotten lucky. Or it may have extrapoleted a complete fiction out of a few observed facts and then felt fine with living with that "explanation".

    3. Re:Not acupuncture by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even if it's just luck, that doesn't mean it doesn't merit study, especially if some portion of the practices show promise. Imagine if we were able to turn acupuncture into a practice that actually has some science behind it. Real medicine could gain a new tool and people in general can be better protected from Charlatans.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    4. Re:Not acupuncture by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Acupuncture Today says acupuncture works? Oh well that convinces me!

      Also, your first article says that Electroacupuncture was developed until the 20th century, which kind of proves what the GP is saying.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    5. Re:Not acupuncture by Immerman · · Score: 2

      If nerves were simple copper wires you'd undoubtedly be correct, but they're not, they're sophisticated biological computation and communication devices whose poorly-understood functioning might be disrupted in any number of ways.

      Also, there's not actually any correlation between nerves and acupuncture points - *some* points are located at nerve clusters, or where nerves enter muscles, but far from all of them.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    6. Re:Not acupuncture by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also, your first article says that Electroacupuncture was developed until the 20th century, which kind of proves what the GP is saying.

      Let's see what the GP is saying,

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

      OK, there are two statements there that we can evaluate.

      1) The Chinese did not have electricity. China first got electricity about five years after the US.

      2) "nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity." Every acupuncturist now uses some amount of electroacupuncture

      Also, your first article says that Electroacupuncture was developed until the 20th century

      Electricity wasn't really all that widely available until the 20th century.

      Acupuncture Today says acupuncture works? Oh well that convinces me!

      My comment had nothing to do with whether or not acupuncture "works". It was just pointing out that the GP's comment was incorrect.

      It amazes me that so many fans of pop skepticism still are unable to unpack a simple argument.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:Not acupuncture by LeadSongDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clearly what the poster intended was that When acupuncture first developed the Chinese did not have knowledge of electricity.
      Not everyone is writing with the intent of addressing an audience of pedants.

      --
      Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
    8. Re:Not acupuncture by zedaroca · · Score: 2

      Wrong on the second part. I know plenty of acupuncturists who does use electricity. In fact, I've never met one who wouldn't use it in certain cases. Just go to any university's doctor in China and you'll see it.
      To explain, I lived almost 3 years in Beijing Sport's University and did spend some time in their nursery treating injuries, I have been to the Haidian Hospital and did an introduction to acupuncture course in Brazil. In all of those places there are people claiming to be acupuncturists using electricity.

    9. Re:Not acupuncture by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The study is trying to determine if modern acupuncture works. Since this is the way most modern acupuncture is performed, the objection seems irrelevant.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Not acupuncture by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

      The problem in this case is when those practices interfere with further scientific evolution. The placebo effect is a wonderful thing, and exploiting it when you've got no other choices is a great idea. But when it starts interfering with the development of things that actually work better, it is a problem. Not to mention the other negative effects of a significant portion of a modern society believing in woo.

    11. Re:Not acupuncture by Chalnoth · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    12. Re:Not acupuncture by snowgirl · · Score: 2

      Sticking needles in people at random locations around the body does not...

      Actually, that's precisely the problem with acupuncture working better than placebo. Acupuncture works whether you're following their "rules" or just randomly sticking needles into people...

      Basically, it turns out, that forcing a person to lay still for a long time has the same benefits of destressing as just laying on a sofa and chilling... or a massage, or any other relaxing activity...

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  2. Re:Confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Press a needle into your hard drive at the 0x542d4123 address and apply a small electric current. This should protect you from all unwanted internet content.

  3. I see what you did there by mwn3d · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Pinpointed". Nice.

  4. antidepressants? by ihtoit · · Score: 2

    you mean they actually figured out how SSRIs fuck the body up aside the claimed (and still not proven) therapeutic effects?

    I could tell you. HPA misalignment is just the beginning.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  5. Re:Ohh Ohh, do a rat study with healing crystals! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    "why are people throwing money at obvious bunk"?

    I ask myself that every time I drive past the Apple Store.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  6. Re:Mystery by ThatsDrDangerToYou · · Score: 2

    Someone using a chiropractor is getting actual short-term pain relief (not treatment) at the risk of permanent injury or death.

    Have you compared insurance rates for chiropractors to medical doctors? Those numbers would be a reliable indicator of the relative risk of chiropractic treatment.

  7. Rubbish by mynamestolen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hate rubbish research and I hate rubbish research on slashdot.
    Stick needles in anyone and you affect HPA axis. Doh!
    Blast adrenal glands with electricity and you affect HPA axis. Another no brainer.
    The real test, if these woo believers wanted to test the magic scientific meridian whacko superpoint stomach meridian point 36 (St36) [help me stop laughing], is to do the magic at various points on the poor bloody rats and see what happens (including the little itty bitty points close to the magic St36).
    I sincerely hope no taxpayer money went into this particular egregious piece of flam. Check out this for NZ subsidy of this religion:
    https://kmccready.wordpress.co...

    --
    work in progress
    1. Re:Rubbish by Smidge204 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Fake acupuncture, where the skin isn't penetrated at all, was found to be much more effective than real penetrative acupuncture and acupuncture improperly applied (needles in the "wrong" locations).

      And the tests were done on human volunteers. Citations in the video description.
      =Smidge=

  8. Re:Mystery by ibpooks · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  9. I'm laughing by sjames · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So, the demand is show proof or go home. Proof shown and people fall all over themselves to ignore it. Still wonder why nobody bothers to look for proof?

    This isn't even the first evidence found.

    1. Re:I'm laughing by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, at a point that "just happens" to be what that ancient practice declared to be just the right point. Much like earlier FMRI studies showed that the visual cortex was affected by needles into the foot, but only at a point that "just happened" to be exactly the point the acupuncturists said was related to vision.

      So how many "just happens" will it take for you? Will you continue to heap derision on each study that moves closer to proof?

  10. Re:Mod parent up! by Martin+Blank · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  11. Re:Mystery by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

    You were right until you got to the end. The placebo effect works incredibly well, which is why the only medical study that's credible at all is a placebo controlled, double blind one. Placebos can shrink tumours and cure real, physically verifiable diseases. Billions aren't spent recruiting twice the number of subjects so you can administer placebos because people somehow haven't figured out how to use objective outcome measures.

  12. Re:Ohh Ohh, do a rat study with healing crystals! by david_thornley · · Score: 2

    C'mon, I'd bet that homeopathic remedies can cure dehydration.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes