Possible Cause of Relief from Acupuncture Found, page 7

The point here would be understanding acupuncture and "chi practices" within the framework of a coming future civilization that is unifying the merits of Western science and freedom of thought with alternative or traditional treatments that work sometimes amazingly for some people. For such a worthy objective, the mentality of those traditions have to be studied.

Obviously, the Chinese theory of acupucnture will not satisfy a Western inquirer. However, it cannot be denied that there are good results for some people sometimes, and that they are partly specific - that is, they do relate to some "pathways" and not to others. In other works, acupuncture works sometimes and we do not know how. It will be an interesting attempt to find out how, and to separate reality from the mystic stuff. If anyone would do that unbiased, they would study the mentality of acupunturists together with what they do (and what it means at the micro-level, e.g. what sort of chemicals are triggered in the body when healing occurs.)

It would be unscientific to base the study of a practice that has had tremendous success merely upon the results on one doundle-blind study. This study and the other one about the arm pain only show that there is something missing in traditional explanations. Please do not throw the baby out with the bathwater! I respect the scientific scepticism of Dostupa, and I have to add that Chinese Taoists are also atheists, and that I personally think a lot of knowledge can be dug out from old Theocratic traditions without having to submit to backwards ancient idolatry.

The problem, logically, is generalization. It would be way too early to generalize these two studies of acupucnture to the entire practice. Thousands of studies are to be done if one wants to separate the wheat from the chaff. Various conditions have to be treated with only placebos and nothing and acupuncture as well as acupressure. Believe me, the modern Chinese are set out to do just that. Ever since Maoism swept though China and almost everything was destroyed from its traditions as far as writings and material objects go, the Chinese civilization has gone through a purge of these old mentalities. Maoism is a Western mentality, based in materialism and science, including Marxist sociology. Now Qigong was resurrected because it was found to increase health. The Chinese are in the best position to truly unify the merits of Western and traidtional approaches. Because of Maoism as well as the general forceful modernization of China, they tend to question and reevaluate everything. Because they have traditional practices stretching back to thousands of years, they have a lot of things to examine - including Tibetan practices (as Tibet is now regarded as part of China.)

I think a good scientist would avoid being dogmatic and biased as much as possible. There may be nothing but mumbo jumbo in some practices touted as alternative healing - such as the Guru's blessing or drinking urine etc. It would be a further obvious mistake of overgeneralization to spread the results from merely two clinical trials of trying to solve two particular problems by acupuncture to all and every medicine called "alternative" by Western medical practitioners. It would be also logically dogmatic. Such studies could be done on unsuccessful Western treatments as well, and one could - too early - draw the conclusion that Western medicine is no good at all, because it cannot cure certain problems in certain cases. This would eclipse the real results of Western medicine, the discovery of germs, the biological processes of chemicals and cells, evolution etc. Obviously, new agers who claim all Western medicine is trash and it is only driven by money-hungry pharma companies would again thrown the baby out with the bathwater. If it weren't for Semmelweis, for example, who insisted that obstetricians wash their hands with soap several times before moving on to the next patient, European mothers would still die of childbirth fever. The single greatest factor in raising the life expectancy of third world countries is introducing hygiene (which is based on the Western theory of germs) and not inoculations or their own medical practices.

Rife therapy is a thoroughly Western alternative treatment. I have experienced it to work on many things, including bacteria and viruses. Homeopathy is another Western alternative practice. They work sometimes, and they can work miracles in certain cases.

So in this whole interesting discussion I think we must remain open-minded if we want some good results. Another useful Occam's razor would be to scrap empty theorizing in favor of personal experience and studies.

If you have never experienced any good results from acupuncture yourself, and you start to theorize about it, it is only empty theory. If you participated in some studies, and want to think about things with more discernment than the Oriental practitioners, that is not empty - it would be attempting to create a useful hypothesis. Because then you have something to talk about.

If you have never experienced positive (and specific) results acupressure etc. yourself, go and find some people who have. Since this is a giant field of study, I do not think one could draw conclusions (such as ALL acupunture is a sham - or that acupunture ALWAYS works) without YEARS of studying cases, acupuncturists, people and animals who have undergone treatments etc. And, you would have to investigate the traditional theories and place yourself into them for the time being (otherwise there is no chance of real understanding, as Western psychology shows, by the way) to separate the wheat from the chaff.