Article Text

PDF

The Emperors sham – wrong assumption that sham needling is sham
  1. Thomas Lundeberg, professor1,
  2. Iréne Lund, lecturer2,
  3. Jan Näslund, registered physiotherapist2,
  4. Moolamanil Thomas, physician2
  1. 1
    Foundation for Acupuncture and Alternative Biological Treatment Methods, Sabbatsbergs Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
  2. 2
    Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
  1. Thomas Lundeberg, thomas.lundeberg{at}faab.to

Abstract

During the last five years a large number of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been published on the efficacy of acupuncture in different conditions. In most of these studies verum is compared with sham acupuncture. In general both verum and sham have been found to be effective, and often with little reported difference in outcome. This has repeatedly led to the conclusion that acupuncture is no more effective than placebo treatment. However, this conclusion is based on the assumption that sham acupuncture is inert. Since sham acupuncture evidently is merely another form of acupuncture from the physiological perspective, the assumption that sham is sham is incorrect and conclusions based on this assumption are therefore invalid. Clinical guidelines based on such conclusions may therefore exclude suffering patients from valuable treatments.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.