It's easy to be an average acupuncturist

Ok, the title is a little tongue-in-cheek.  Actually, it involves a lot of work to become a qualified acupuncturist - all my previous studies were a doddle in comparison.  But my point is (no pun intended) that once qualified, it is relatively 'easy' to get decent results, regardless of which model of understanding is applied (TCM, 5 Element, Japanese Meridian, Dry Needling etc.)   There are many sceptics that claim 'it doesn't matter where you put the needles', and I don't wish to add fuel to that fire, but at the same time I think it's important to be honest.  The fact is, I and my fellow students got some very good results in our student clinic, despite having only a beginner's grasp of diagnosis, point location etc.

There are many rather disappointing studies which compare 'real' acupuncture with needles placed in supposedly inactive areas, showing very little difference in results.  Why is this?  I believe it's because inserting needles almost anywhere does have a beneficial effect, whether you understand this in terms of hormone release, or increasing the flow of Qi.

However, I also strongly believe that these studies are misleading.  Not only do they imply that the 'random' needling is inert, but they often don't explain the thinking behind the 'real' acupuncture.  What logic was used to choose the points?  Was careful palpation applied?  What technique was used to needle the points?  Was the practitioner properly trained?  All these factors - and more - are important, and will effect the outcome of any study.

I see the improvements gained from 'random' needling as a useful bonus!  It means you can often be quite wrong with your diagnosis, and still the patient often feels an improvement, even if just in terms of general well being.  But it also means it's easy to become complacent.  I'm currently about 4 and a half years into my practice, and I feel as though I'm only beginning to scratch the surface.  However, my results are gradually improving as I learn new techniques and approaches suitable for particular situations, which to me makes it clear that it does matter where you stick the needles!

Please note: this blog is intended for educational and general interest purposes only. If you have any health concerns, please discuss them with your doctor.

www.tomtheacupuncturist.co.uk

Can acupuncture 'treat' anything?

Unfortunately I can't really answer that question.  The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have recently introduced new rules for healthcare practitioners, essentially meaning we are now unable to imply that we can 'treat' any specific conditions that haven't been 'scientifically proven'.  The problem is deciding what constitutes valid proof.  As I discuss on my website, acupuncture research is highly controversial, mainly due to the problem (impossibility?) of producing a truly inert placebo needle.  This means we are only permitted to discuss a very small number of conditions, despite very strong evidence - both anecdotal and scientific - suggesting many more conditions respond favourably to acupuncture.  Unfortunately much of this evidence is not placebo controlled, and therefore it is dismissed as worthless.  What is more, we aren't allowed to present testimonials from satisfied patients if they mention specific conditions.

I completely support the idea of deterring false claims by practitioners of any form of medicine, but it seems a great shame - and maybe even an infringement of basic rights - to restrict the free sharing of honest information.  Surely, as long as this information is presented responsibly, the public should be able to make up their own mind about the various treatment options available to them?

Sadly, it seems as though certain sections of the medical establishment are so worried about the growth of complementary medicine that they insist on Draconian measures such as this.  But why are they worried?  Is acupuncture dangerous?  A large scale study published in the British Medical Journal revealed no serious adverse events in over 34,000 treatments undertaken by members of the British Acupuncture Council (BAcC), so if objections are evidence-based, it shouldn't be that.  Is it because patients are mislead into thinking they don't need important operations or drug treatments?  All BAcC members have to undergo a minimum 3 years full-time training, which includes modules on western medical diagnosis, anatomy and physiology.  Of course, we do not have the same levels of knowledge on these matters as doctors, but we are trained to spot 'red flag' signs and symptoms, and will always send patients to their GPs if there is any doubt.  However, almost all my patients have already seen their GP about their complaint, and are coming to me - sadly - as a 'last resort'.

Of course, there are some very forward-thinking GPs who are willing to refer patients to acupuncturists and other complementary practitioners.  Those that have referred to me have continued to do so, so I can only conclude they are happy with the results their patients have received.  I sincerely believe that this kind of cooperation can be hugely beneficial for all concerned.  In an ideal world, GPs would be able to refer certain patients to a qualified acupuncturist at no cost to the patient, before they administered expensive drugs with potential side-effects.  This would save the NHS money, free up GP waiting lists, and give patients the chance to avoid drugs.

But sadly at the moment at least, it seems as though we are moving away from this possibility rather than towards it.

Please note: this blog is intended for educational and general interest purposes only. If you have any health concerns, please discuss them with your doctor.

www.tomtheacupuncturist.co.uk