massage and bodywork professionals

a community of practitioners

Don't Throw Out Acupuncture Just Yet!!!

Research is proving that Acupuncture is Curing Chronic Sinus Congestion.

See details at http://www.healthcmi.com

 

And according to the World Health Organization (WHO), acupuncture is a safe and effective treatment for the following conditions:

  1. Lungs - Some bronchial asthmas.
  2. Ears, Nose, and Throat - Toothaches, pain after tooth extraction, ear aches, sinus inflammation, nasal inflammation or dryness.
  3. Eyes - Central retina and conjunctiva inflammation, nearsightedness (in children), and some cataracts.
  4. Stomach and Intestines - Digestive tract problems, hiccups, inflammation of the stomach, chronic duodenal ulcers, inflammation of the colon, constipation, diarrhea, dysentery caused by certain bacteria.
  5. Nerves - Headaches, migraines, some facial paralyses and nerve pain, post-stroke weakness, nerve ending inflammation, and sciatica.
  6. Muscles - Tennis elbow, frozen shoulder, lower back pain, osteoarthritis, knee pain, sprains and strains.
  7. Miscellaneous - Incontinence (including bed wetting) and many gynecological problems.

Views: 377

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Hinkle on May 2, 2011 at 1:51pm

From articles written for public comsumption? No, I do not. Nor will I. I am not the authority... you are. If a researcher puts out improper information, then they should be policed by their own.

Have you contacted the publisher of the magazine about this since you have the knowledge to prove it wrong? Have you written a rebuttal?

Should your profession publish inaccurrate information?

Permalink Reply by Vlad on May 2, 2011 at 1:52pm

Your group of four or so are the one's challeging that

 

Are you saying that if someone want to look at a study and appraise it then they are in "a group" and is it supposed to be "Doc's group"? 

I'm not in anyone's "group".  I don't even consider myself evidence based. 

 

When you go identifying "groups" what you're doing is creating an us and them situation, which is never good since people feel that they're expected to pick a side.  Do you think that's a good thing? 

Does anyone regard that as disempowering?  Or is it empowering?  Bear in mind that this whole thread was started by a link to a website that cited a study and then the study was questioned.  That's all. 

 

 

Permalink Reply by Ravensara Travillian on May 2, 2011 at 1:58pm
me: Do you, as a professional, have any responsibility at all to ensure the validity of information you pass along?

Mike: From articles written for public comsumption? No, I do not. Nor will I.

Wow. This explains a lot.

Permalink Reply by Mike Hinkle on May 2, 2011 at 2:05pm

I know how it starts each time and anyone reviewing my discussions do also. If I put something up and it is positive about one of the 10 modalities "Doc" wants quashed - the same group is negative against it. Easily checked.

 

In many cases it is I against them. People pick sides in everything. Not all sides are the same all the time, but everyone does it. They read each side and decide who they agree with. And I'm sure I am the minority many times. Won't change a thing. But that's okay. I believe in Acupuncture and will continue to promote it and energy modalities. It "cured" my lower backpain that western medicine could not even figure out. I don't do energy work either, but will still highlight positive news concerning it when I come across it.

 

 

 

 

Permalink Reply by Vlad on May 2, 2011 at 2:07pm

 

Was the original study *inaccurate*?  The discussion of it on the site you listed wasn't an accurate representation of the study - but it's not peer reviewed, is it?  Anyone can pretty much write anything the want on a site and it people want to not question that, then so what? I don't even know if the journal that study was put in is peer-reviewed.  Even if it is peer-reviewed, the standards of the journal need to be taken into account. 

Also, this is acupuncture we're talking about here.  I don't really care that much about it since I don't practice it. 

I thought this would be interesting from "let's look at this in more detail" since what happened here happens A LOT in society in general - "Here's research that shows that x works!!! Yayy!! (oh - and if you want to buy CE classes/pills/juice/leprechauns/Bushmills to learn x - you can purchase it online through this gorgeous website that has captured you - like a spider - give me your money, honey).

 

C'est la vie.

 

 

Permalink Reply by Christopher A. Moyer on May 2, 2011 at 2:07pm

You are right, I don't understand your work.

 

Then make the effort to understand it.  I take great care to write accessibly, not strictly for an audience of researchers.

 

And if you're not prepared to make that effort, stop making assertions that you cannot back up.

 

You say you are a researcher.

 

I am a researcher.  I do research.

 

I have read some of your work online. Great! Now you are an authority on all research.

 

Stop right there.  I have never said that or anything like it.  There is stuff about research that I know, and stuff that I do not.  I do not offer a scientific opinion on stuff I do not know.  Just about an hour ago in a different thread I pointed out that I don't know enough about anatomy and physiology to answer a question based on those disciplines.

 

Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

So if fellow researchers are printing false information, why not approach them?

 

As I noted, I do exactly this in my publications.  That is primarily how scientists communicate.  One of my publications is *nothing but* a critique of the common mistakes made in massage therapy research.

 

So again, stop saying things that are not true, and try to avoid speaking confidently on things that, by your own admission, you are not familiar with.  And if you want to enter into such conversations, then do the background work.  Read the research (not just mine, any and all of it - the real research, not someone's personal testimony as posted on their commercial website) and then be specific in your questions and criticisms.

 

You are an authourity.

 

Perhaps, but as we've pointed out over and over again, science isn't about authority.  One either has the evidence, or they don't.

 

Cause they will tell you where to get off...

 

As this site proves, some people have no problem telling me just that. 

 

So you try to interject why the information is wrong to us? You offer no research, you just say their method was flawed or didn't take this or that into consideration. And we are just supposed to accept your word? 

 

Ridiculous.  I've made scores of posts to this site which detailed aspects of specific research issues, which carefully addressed specific questions made by posters, and which attempted to make an educational contribution.  Of the hundreds of total posts I've made to this site, I'd be surprised if there is a single one that says or strongly implies that one should just take my word on anything important.  And I know for a fact I've often said the opposite - i.e., 'I know X to be true, but don't take my word on it, see the evidence available at Y.'

 

I do not care a whit what you think of me personally, but do not call my integrity or the integrity of my work into question if you cannot be specific and cannot back up your assertions.


 

Permalink Reply by Mike Hinkle on May 2, 2011 at 2:07pm
I don't police my profession so I won't police your profession. I am glad you understand.

Ravensara Travillian said:
me: Do you, as a professional, have any responsibility at all to ensure the validity of information you pass along?

Mike: From articles written for public comsumption? No, I do not. Nor will I.

Wow. This explains a lot.

Permalink Reply by Ravensara Travillian on May 2, 2011 at 2:12pm

Should your profession publish inaccurrate information?

There you go trying to other me again ("your profession"). It's not going to work--you are not the gatekeeper for who is an MT.

 

It's not my journal, and I'm not a clinical acupuncturist.

 

Massage therapy is my industry. We've still got a long way to go to be a profession. One of those major steps is developing a professional ethic around claims we make.

 

 

Permalink Reply by Mike Hinkle on May 2, 2011 at 2:22pm

Your fellow researcher is calling into question my professionalism for not checking research writings and yet you say you do. All I hear you say is that it is flawed.

 

Where is your rebuttal to the WHO about this and Reiki in over 800 hospitals in the US that they are sending research out about.?

 

And we return to square one with ..... Perhaps, but as we've pointed out over and over again, science isn't about authority.  One either has the evidence, or they don't. And You don't have the evidence to prove they are bunk!) So it comes down to your word versus an entire industry... think I'll stay with them.

Christopher A. Moyer said:

You are right, I don't understand your work.

 

Then make the effort to understand it.  I take great care to write accessibly, not strictly for an audience of researchers.

 

And if you're not prepared to make that effort, stop making assertions that you cannot back up.

 

You say you are a researcher.

 

I am a researcher.  I do research.

 

I have read some of your work online. Great! Now you are an authority on all research.

 

Stop right there.  I have never said that or anything like it.  There is stuff about research that I know, and stuff that I do not.  I do not offer a scientific opinion on stuff I do not know.  Just about an hour ago in a different thread I pointed out that I don't know enough about anatomy and physiology to answer a question based on those disciplines.

 

Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

So if fellow researchers are printing false information, why not approach them?

 

As I noted, I do exactly this in my publications.  That is primarily how scientists communicate.  One of my publications is *nothing but* a critique of the common mistakes made in massage therapy research.

 

So again, stop saying things that are not true, and try to avoid speaking confidently on things that, by your own admission, you are not familiar with.  And if you want to enter into such conversations, then do the background work.  Read the research (not just mine, any and all of it - the real research, not someone's personal testimony as posted on their commercial website) and then be specific in your questions and criticisms.

 

You are an authourity.

 

Perhaps, but as we've pointed out over and over again, science isn't about authority.  One either has the evidence, or they don't.

 

Cause they will tell you where to get off...

 

As this site proves, some people have no problem telling me just that. 

 

So you try to interject why the information is wrong to us? You offer no research, you just say their method was flawed or didn't take this or that into consideration. And we are just supposed to accept your word? 

 

Ridiculous.  I've made scores on posts to this site which detailed aspects of specific research issues, which carefully addressed specific questions made by posters, and which attempted to make an educational contribution.  Of the hundreds of total posts I've made to this site, I'd be surprised if there is a single one that says or strongly implies that one should just take my word on anything important.  And I know for a fact I've often said the opposite - i.e., 'I know X to be true, but don't take my word on it, see the evidence available at Y.'

 

I do not care a whit what you think of me personally, but do not call my integrity or the integrity of my work into question if you cannot be specific and cannot back up your assertions.


 

Permalink Reply by Vlad on May 2, 2011 at 2:22pm

 

In many cases it is I against them. People pick sides in everything. Not all sides are the same all the time, but everyone does it. They read each side and decide who they agree with. And I'm sure I am the minority many times. Won't change a thing. But that's okay.

 

Are you against me?  I'm a MT who isn't a researcher and I'm not evidenced based.  What side am I supposed to pick here?

Can someone please tell me?  I need someone to tell me what to think.

 

Dear God.  Here we go again.  OK - I'm off to do something productive.

Permalink Reply by Mike Hinkle on May 2, 2011 at 2:30pm

We make claims on information that is taught to us in school and in continuing education classes. We have a certifying board that certifies the modalities "Doc" wants to do away with. You are also a researcher, right? I think it is a profession. That is my reference. I did not say it was your only profession.

 

I made no claim or assertion. I simply shared an article with my fellow therapists. I am in no way resposible to make sure everything in it is accurate. Try to create such ethics and try to police it. Good luck!

Ravensara Travillian said:

Should your profession publish inaccurrate information?

There you go trying to other me again ("your profession"). It's not going to work--you are not the gatekeeper for who is an MT.

 

It's not my journal, and I'm not a clinical acupuncturist.

 

Massage therapy is my industry. We've still got a long way to go to be a profession. One of those major steps is developing a professional ethic around claims we make.

 

 

Permalink Reply by Ravensara Travillian on May 2, 2011 at 2:32pm

I quote you here, so that you cannot claim that I have misquoted you. This was your answer to the direct question I asked:

me: Do you, as a professional, have any responsibility at all to ensure the validity of information you pass along?

Mike: From articles written for public comsumption? No, I do not. Nor will I.

Then you say:
Your fellow researcher is calling into question my professionalism for not checking research writings
Does that really surprise you, though? I asked if you, personally, had any responsibility to make sure you passed on accurate information, and you said you had none at all (quoted above).
Professionalism means raising your behavior to meet increased ethical standards. Can you think of any profession in the world with such a low bar on professional ethics and responsibility to the client?

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2024   Created by ABMP.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Sign in to chat!