Does your hospital offer Reiki or therapeutic touch?

[Orrex]

I live near Pittsburgh PA and only recently learned that Allegheny General hospital offers both of these services under the guise of actual treatment. Additionally, the hospital offers acupuncture and espouses all three of these practices as "energy therapies," thereby declaring outright that the hospital endorses superstition in favor of actual medical treatment.

For the record, and as I've stated elsewhere, acupuncture has been shown to have some effect on nerve function and possibly on the release of endorphins, but that is entirely different from the hocus-pocus "energy channeling" claimed by some proponents of the practice.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

1. yes! In fact it paid for a Reiki class for me

to get ceu's. I use reiki on my pts. post-op
(work in a recovery room)

[Orrex]

2. Too bad it's not supported by empirical data

If it makes the patients feel better, well, that's nifty, but there's still no evidence (outside of personal testimony) that it works--certainly not via the mechanisms described by its advocates.

[freeplessinseattle]

8. the U of Wash is in the midst of a study

specifically looking at the effectiveness of Reiki for fibromyalgia, which is an extremely painful condition that has not been able to be allievated much at all by conventional methods.

[Orrex]

15. Super--I await the results

And I await the peer review that will follow.

It would be fundamentally world-changing if this study could prove the existence of whatever bio-energy that the revealed magic of Reiki is supposed to use.

Forgive my smart-assed tone, but Reiki is no different from a hundred other energy therapies that have likewise been debunked. If it turns out that Reiki really delivers the goods, then I will happily recant.

[varkam]

62. Go to...

www.pubmed.com and search for "reiki, efficacy, pain" and you should get 5 results. Of those studies (which is, admittedly few) the abstracts indicate that therapeutic touch therapies such as reiki might be beneficial. Just saying that there is at least some data to support it's use.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

13. My own data proves to me it works. I had a post-op colectomy/

colostomy- w/ signif heart hx. Her heart rate up in the 110's fresh post/op
and yeah I gave fluids and narcotics, however every spare minute I could
find I gave reiki to her abdominal area- 2-3 mins here and there. Every
single time I did this her rate would go down to the 80's, and every time
I stopped, it went back up.

Post-op spinal ORIF ankle- large cast-
She told me she could feel heat through the cast(spinal was at S-1)

neat stuff like that

[Orrex]

16. That's not data; that's testimony

A sample-size of one patient and one practitioner is hardly sufficient to claim success, especially considering the poorly-controlled nature of the study.

Let's have a longitudinal study with hundreds of patients receiving no treatment other than Reiki, and let's see how they do.

I'm glad that your patient felt heat through her cast, but that observation means nothing. I feel heat on my desk where my cubemate's coffee mug was setting. Does that mean that his mug is a Reiki master?

[Richard D]

19. The point of Reiki . . .

. . . and other of the energy based therapies, is not that they are the be-all and end-all. Hence the term "complementary medicine". They are not meant to stand on their own, but to aid in mobilizing the persons' healing process. Besides, the ethical implications of withholding other forms of care from people is pretty astounding.

I did post a couple of clinical studies below that show objective changes. I agree, it's just a couple of studies, not done on tons of people, but like I said, who's going to fund the studies? In case you don't know, doing DBPCS's is really expensive. Especially with hundreds of people. Of course if you have a few hundred thousand or better yet a million dollars hanging around that needs to be used, I'd be happy to design and implement such a study. It would be quite fascinating. Interested?

[Orrex]

21. Interested? Yes. Able to fund it? No.

Additionally, since I am clearly hostile to Reiki and other "energy therapies," it's not up to me to do the legwork. Let Andrew Weil or Deepak Chopra or any other fantastically wealthy new age healing guru cough up the dough.

Expensive or not, DBPCS's must be required of any assertion so revolutionary to our understanding of the universe. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, do they not?

[Orrex]

27. Great Feingold button, by the way (nt)

[Richard D]

28. Thanks! n/t

[Ian David]

3. Hey, if it's good enough for Iraq, it's good enough for American taxpayers

Freedom (but apparently not Western Medicine) is on the march!

Herbal remedies Preferred in Iraq

USA TODAY 3/10-11-12/06 Page13A
Herbal remedies fill void in traditional medicine

<snip>

Herbal remedies, which have a long history in the region, are becoming more
popular in Iraq now because of the rising costs of traditional medicine and
also because violence has prompted many physicians to leave Iraq.

Sixty-four doctors have been killed since the war and at least 300 have fled
the country in the face of assassination and kidnapping threats, says Sabah
al-Husseini, a deputy health minister. The violence has left a vacuum in
specialized medicine that is being filled partially by herbal remedies,
al-Husseini says.

The high costs at hospitals and clinics is another reason people turn to
herbal remedies, says Ibrahim al-Aaraji, whose family has owned the Dar
al-Shafa Herbal Pharmacy in central Baghdad for 120 years.

<snip>

Customers have steadily come in since the war began, he says, asking for
treatment for everything from infertility to migraines. "Business is better
than ever," says Bahjat, who opened the store in 1985.


More:
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060310/a_iraqweek10.art.htm

[Pharaoh]

4. Yes! There is a mind/body spirit connection

http://www.ghc-hmo.com/comp_med_main.asp

If it works, it works!

[Orrex]

5. But if it doesn't, it doesn't. And it doesn't.

That is, no empirical test has yet shown any validity to the functioning of Reiki as posited by its proponents. Heck, the functionally similar "therapeutic touch" therapy was utterly debunked by a nine-year-old!

Hospitals should be ashamed of themselves for buying into this bogus trend.

[Pharaoh]

7. you should try massage therapy

and see if you don't feel better,

[Orrex]

9. That's entirely different

If you're claiming that the physical manipulation of muscles (and organs, I guess) can yield positive recuperative benefits, then I have no problem with that.

Instead, I take issue with "energy therapies" that claim (despite a complete lack of evidence) to elicit healing through the manipulation of prana or mana or chi or qi or whatever. That is the claim of Reiki practitioners, and that is the practice that I decry as bullshit.

[Pharaoh]

12. I'm just saying

I'm open minded about the process of reikii, I know many who practice it and many who claim to benifit from it, I have had it myself because I'm willing to try anything that might help my fibromyagia and depression, so I try not to judge what may seem helpful to others,

[Orrex]

17. Keep in mind

Fibromyalgia and depression are nebulous, patient-subjective conditions that are poorly controlled in tests of this nature. A depressed patient might (as a very simple example) show an improvement simply because of the compassionate attention paid to him/her (witness the effects of the famous Hawthorne experiment).

And if Reiki works simply as a placebo, then it is horribly unethical to administer it under the guise of an actual treatment.

Believing in Reiki is fine if we accept that it's a purely faith-based belief. Lacking rigorous scientific data to back it up, it should not be admitted as a treatment in a hospital.

[havocmom]

14. It doesn't based on your opinion?

Or data using tools which may not be able to make the measurements you want to see to be convinced?

Wasn't that long ago that germs didn't exist either... so said the leading scientific minds, before somebody came up with the tools to enable them to SEE what was always there.

Just because we lack the proper yardstick, at present, to measure something does not prove something isn't going on.

Insistence that something doesn't exist because it cannot be proved YET is just as much a belief as any other belief.

[Orrex]

20. Heard this a thousand times before

Yes, yes. I'm a closed-minded acolyte of the religion of science. Whatever.

Or data using tools which may not be able to make the measurements you want to see to be convinced?

Excuse me, but there is no clear scientific data in support of Reiki or any other energy-based "therapy," and personal testimony is not evidence. Instruments exist that can detect energies far beyond the range of human perception, yet you're suggesting that some guy who paid $300 to become a "Reiki master" can trump the most sensitive scientific equipment? Sorry, but that's a statement of faith, and I don't buy it.

Wasn't that long ago that germs didn't exist either... so said the leading scientific minds, before somebody came up with the tools to enable them to SEE what was always there.

Sorry, but that analogy is flawed for a host of reasons. First, most of the "germs don't exist" crowd lacked rigorous scientific methods, so their observations are tainted, however sincerely undertaken. Additionally, the mechanism needed to see germs--the lens--existed but lacked the focal power to do so. Today, we have mechanisms that can detect individual photons, yet you're claiming that these machines can't detect Reiki-energy? Again, that's a statement of faith.

Just because we lack the proper yardstick, at present, to measure something does not prove something isn't going on.

But the yardstick currently used to "prove" that Reiki is going on is simple human perception. Are you suggesting that the human hand is more sensitive to energy flow than any scientific instrument? Once again, that's a statement of faith.

Insistence that something doesn't exist because it cannot be proved YET is just as much a belief as any other belief.

That is probably the most common claim made by true believers, and it's utterly worthless. I'm not claiming that Reiki is bogus because it hasn't been proved yet. Instead, I'm asserting that Reiki is bogus because no test to date has supported it whatsoever.

[havocmom]

25. No data YET, based on instruments NOW

Sorta like that germ thing a few years back

Just because something can't be proved NOW using what we have to work with NOW does not mean it doesn't exist. That's all I want to point out.

And, by the way, you make assumptions yet again by inferring I am a true believer because you don't like the points I use to agrue that we JUST DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING.

You have never met me and I dare say, you would be surprised if we sat down to chat about what I believe.

[Orrex]

26. But people are claiming that is HAS been proven NOW

The fact that a Reiki practitioner can claim to "feel" the "energy" is an explicit assertion of this proof. In your germ example, no one was claiming to see microscopic organisms and then decrying any who refused to believe. NO ONE could see bacteria. In stark contrast, practitioners of Reiki lay claim to some kind of acute power of perception exceeding even the power of the most sensitive mechanism.

Also, let me apologize--I didn't mean to call you a true believer. Instead, I was referring to diehard proponents of a poorly-supported claim who will never abandon that belief no matter what evidence is presented to the contrary.

[trotsky]

30. "We don't know everything"

does not, and never will, mean

"Anything is possible."

[niyad]

6. and WHAT, exactly, is your problem with alternative therapies?

[Orrex]

10. Browse any of a hundred threads in this forum, and you'll see my opinions

In summary, however, I offer this: No system of "energy healing" has ever been shown to be effective under controlled, scientific conditions. This includes Reiki, energy-based therapeutic touch, subluxion-based chiropractic, chi-based acupuncture, magnetic therapy, and all the rest.

In fact, most (perhaps all) of these) have been shown to have no effect at all, yet they are still the darling of the uncritical mass media and a legion of devoted true believers.

Please cite the study that shows that these energy therapies work as described, meaning that they actually work through the manipulation of energy.

[niyad]

18. not that you would pay attention to any studies that don't match your

biases, apparently. testimony from people who have experienced benefits doesn't count with you. Tell me, when people are finding benefit from this, WHY do you wish to deprive them of such benefit? Nobody is forcing you into such treatments. I object to most western treatment, but I am not going to stop anybody from receiving such treatment.

Your closed mind is very unscientific, by the way.

[Orrex]

23. Oh yeah, I forgot. I'm closed-minded.

In essence, you're saying that, because I don't accept-on-faith the assertions of Reiki proponents, none of which can offer peer-reviewed scientific studies to support their wild claims, I am somehow the one guilty of intellectual dishonesty. What a load of crap.

I suspect that you object to western treatments because of anecdotal exposure to unfortunate side-effects and failed treatments. That's your right, of course. But western medicine enjoys many decades of support through rigorous scientific study and mountains upon mountains of consistent, corroborating data.

"Traditional" "alternative" "medicine" has no such data to offer. Personal testimony represents the entirety of the support for these bogus practices, and that's frankly insufficient.

The inability to distinguish a closed mind from a mind open to empirical evidence betrays your own ignorance of science and the scientific method.

[Richard D]

11. A couple clinical studies.

Well, here's a couple studies done on Reiki that showed objective and positive changes. Only two, of course, and the number of published DBPCS's on Reiki are sparse, but it is an interesting start that shows that something is going on.

Biological correlates of Reiki Touch(sm) healing.
J Adv Nurs. 2001; 33(4):439-45 (ISSN: 0309-2402)

Wardell DW; Engebretson J
School of Nursing, University of Texas Houston Health Science Center, Houston, Texas, USA. [e-mail]

BACKGROUND: Despite the popularity of touch therapies, theoretical understanding of the mechanisms of effect is not well developed and there is limited research measuring biological outcomes. AIMS: The aim of this study was to test a framework of relaxation or stress reduction as a mechanism of touch therapy. METHODS: The study was conducted in 1996 and involved the examination of select physiological and biochemical effects and the experience of 30 minutes of Reiki, a form of touch therapy. A single group repeated measure design was used to study Reiki Touch'ssm effects with a convenience sample of 23 essentially healthy subjects. Biological markers related to stress-reduction response included state anxiety, salivary IgA and cortisol, blood pressure, galvanic skin response (GSR), muscle tension and skin temperature. Data were collected before, during and immediately after the session. RESULTS: Comparing before and after measures, anxiety was significantly reduced, t(22)=2.45, P=0.02. Salivary IgA levels rose significantly, t(19)=2.33, P=0.03, however, salivary cortisol was not statistically significant. There was a significant drop in systolic blood pressure (SBP), F(2, 44)=6.60, P < 0.01. Skin temperature increased and electromyograph (EMG) decreased during the treatment, but before and after differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest both biochemical and physiological changes in the direction of relaxation. The salivary IgA findings warrant further study to explore the effects of human TT and humeral immune function.

Changes in the isoprenoid pathway with transcendental meditation and Reiki healing practices in seizure disorder.
Neurol India. 2003; 51(2):211-4 (ISSN: 0028-3886)

A RK; Kurup PA
Department of Neurology, Medical College Hospital, Trivandrum 695-003, Kerala, India.

A quantal perceptive model of brain function has been postulated by several groups. Reiki-like healing practices in seizure disorder (ILAE classification-II E-generalized seizures-tonic clonic), involving transfer of life force or low level of electromagnetic force (EMF) from the healer to the recipient patient, may act via quantal perceptive mechanisms. Increased synthesis of an endogenous membrane Na+-K+ ATPase inhibitor digoxin and a related tyrosine / tryptophan transport defect has been demonstrated in refractory seizure disorder (ILAE classification-II E-generalized seizures-tonic clonic). Reiki-like healing practices in refractory epilepsy results in a reduction in seizure frequency. Reiki-like healing practices produce membrane stabilization and stimulation of membrane Na+-K+ ATPase activity by quantal perception of low levels of EMF. The consequent intracellular hypermagnesemia inhibits HMG CoA reductase activity and digoxin synthesis resulting in the alteration of the neutral amino acid transport (tryptophan / tyrosine) defect. A hypothalamic digoxin-mediated quantal perception model of brain function is proposed. The phenomena of biological transmutation and consequent hypermagnesemia occurring in the resultant neuronal quantal state is also discussed.

* * * * * *

[greenman3610]

22. you're suggesting that "regular" hospital treatments are proven

by double blind studies, "scientifically".

The Office of Technology Assessment did a study
quite a few years ago that showed 85 percent
of common hospital medical treatments had
never been subjected to double blind trials.
People just did them because they were
told to.
If you've been in health care long enough, someone
will have said to you, "you know that xxxxx we've been
giving patients? well, it causes brain damage."....

[Richard D]

24. I'm neither . . .

. . . suggesting nor implying anything like that. If it seems I did so, please disregard.

I'd say that much of what goes on in "modern medicine" will be looked upon by future generations much as we look upon techniques like blood letting, leeches (though there is actually some good medical use for the little dears), giving of mercury, torturing the devil out of the mentally ill, etc.

[Celebration]

29. Great!!

And here is an example of alternative medicine taking its cue from allopathic, as, guess what, in this study it worked in rats.

J Altern Complement Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;12(1):15-22.
Personal interaction with a reiki practitioner decreases noise-induced microvascular damage in an animal model.

Baldwin AL, Schwartz GE.

Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.

Objective: To determine whether Reiki, a process of transmission of healing energy, can significantly reduce microvascular leakage caused by exposure to excessive noise using an animal model. Rationale: Reiki is beginning to be used in hospitals to accelerate recovery. Despite many anecdotes describing Reiki's success, few scientific studies are reported and none of those use animals. Animal models have the advantage over human subjects in that they provide well-controlled, easily interpretable experiments. The use of noise is relevant to hospital patients because of the excessive ambient noise in hospitals in the United Kingdom and United States. Loud noise can lead to several nonauditory disorders in humans and animals that impair recovery. In the rat, stress from noise damages the mesenteric microvasculature, leading to leakage of plasma into the surrounding tissue. Design: One group of four rats simultaneously received daily noise and Reiki, while two other groups received "sham" Reiki or noise alone. A fourth group did not receive noise or additional treatment. The experiment was performed three times to test for reproducibility. Outcome Measures: Average number and area of microvascular leaks to fluorescent albumin per unit length of venule. Results: In all three experiments, Reiki significantly reduced the outcome measures compared to the other noise groups (sham Reiki and noise alone) (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Application of Reiki significantly reduces noise-induced microvascular leakage in an animal model. Whether or not these effects are caused by Reiki itself, or the relaxing effect of the Reiki practitioner, this procedure could be useful for minimizing effects of environmental stress on research animals and hospital patients.

PMID: 16494564

[trotsky]

33. Well, "something" might have worked.

But even the study authors admit they don't know.

Whether or not these effects are caused by Reiki itself, or the relaxing effect of the Reiki practitioner, this procedure could be useful for minimizing effects of environmental stress on research animals and hospital patients.

I would also like to know if they used the same four groups of rats the same way in each of their three trials - i.e., the first group always got Reiki, the second always sham Reiki, etc., or if they shook it up a bit. Otherwise they might be accused of selection bias. You wouldn't happen to have a link to the complete study, would you?

[trotsky]

31. Let me know if I'm reading these wrong, but...

How are the first study's conclusions any different than what we might expect from normal, regular massage or touching? Both of those can help us relax. Did anything in this study point out something specific about Reiki that couldn't be explained by other factors?

And with the second, um, what the heck is a "quantal perceptive mechanism"? I just did a search and I can't find anyone outside of the original authors of this study using that terminology. Has anyone peer-reviewed it?

[Orrex]

32. "Quantal perceptive mechanism" is the ability to see Austrailian airplanes

Oh, wait--that's Qantas Perceptive Mechanism

[Richard D]

34. hmmmmm

In regards to the first point, the relaxation response may be what is happening with touch therapies. Don't know yet. Personally, I wonder if it isn't just the power of human touch that is at work here, and that all of the various trainings are just ways to establish rapport between the giver and the receiver. To get a real double blind test here, you'd have to have the patient get touched by an artificial hand, while neither the patient nor the person who placed the hand on the person knew if it was artifical or not. No idea how that could be done.

As to quantal perception, that is an idea from the book Mind, Brain and Quantum by M. Lockwood. I haven't read it.

BTW, here is the full article: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:dqOT_5iQxHIJ:www.neurologyindia.com/article.asp%3Fissn%3D0028-3886%3Byear%3D2003%3Bvolume%3D51%3Bissue%3D2%3Bspage%3D211%3Bepage%3D214%3Baulast%3DKumar+%22quantal+perception+%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[trotsky]

35. Yikes.

That second study seems to rest on the assumption that if high-temperature (i.e., body temp) conductivity is possible, then the brain is a superconductive quantum computer. A lot of unsupported guessing going on, and being referred to as fact. Is that a peer-reviewed journal?

[Richard D]

36. It is pretty yikes-y

It is in the realm of "interesting ideas". Time will tell.

Sometimes something works, but the explanation for why it works is bogus. I'm thinking of all of the herbal remedies that came out of a folkloric tradition with folkloric explanations as to why they work that have been shown to have constituents that are physiologically active. They worked, worked for what they were said to work for, but the reason they worked was wrong.

[RedOnce]

37. "...as I've stated elsewhere, acupuncture has been shown....

to have some effect on nerve function and possibly on the release of endorphins"

Yep, you sure did; http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=222x4899 right after you called it a quack pseudo-remedy.

[beam me up scottie]

38. A little disingenuous, isn't it, to neglect the context?

However, the underlying premise of acupuncture--that the insertion of needles alters the flow of one's chi or prana or mana or mojo or whatever--has absolutely not been documented in any rigorous study.

That's why acupuncture, in its energy-healing incarnation, is pseudoscientific quackery.

I suppose you just forgot to cut and paste the entire statement.

Funny, that happens a lot in this forum.

[RedOnce]

39. Disingenuous? Not at all. A link was provided to allow anyone...

to read the entire exchange.

Btw, did you notice how providing a link (my post #3) to The Cleveland Clinic'c Pain Management Department's acupuncturist Michael Hunter, M.Ac., L.Ac. http://www.clevelandclinic.org/painmanagement/eval_treat/treat_acu.htm

changed the tune from:

"And before anyone invests another dime in chelation or acupuncture or reiki, you would do well to peruse www.skepdic.com for a critical overview of these and many other quack pseudo-remedies."

to "Time to split hairs"?

"There is indeed evidence that accupuncture is somewhat effective at relieving symptoms of pain, due perhaps to release of endorphins or disruption of nerve-conductivity. That much has been tentatively documented through scientific testing."

However, the underlying premise of acupuncture--that the insertion of needles alters the flow of one's chi or prana or mana or mojo or whatever--has absolutely not been documented in any rigorous study.

That's why acupuncture, in its energy-healing incarnation, is pseudoscientific quackery."

Time to split hairs?
What "hair splitting" point is he actually trying make here? That accupuncture needles in the hands of someone who studies endorphins and nerve-conductivity are more effective than the same accupuncture needles in the hands of someone who studies chi?

What practicle application could this "hair splitting" point possibly have?

Public Service Announcement:
CAUTION: Do not invest another dime with a 60 year old Chinese acupuncturist with 40 years experience who believes in chi. Your dimes are better spent with a 32 year old western doc. who took a class in acupuncture and studied endorphins and nerve-conductivity.

[Orrex]

40. Thanks for telling me what I think

BMOS got it exactly right. You deliberately omitted necessary context so that you could misrepresent my argument as being inconsistent.

I confess that my assessment of your ability to reason fluctuates wildly as I read your various posts. Sometimes you appear quite sharp and lucid, but other times you seem to be running for comfortable shadows wherein critical thought need not enter. It's puzzling, that's for sure.

But despite your deliberate mischaracterization of my position, I note that you do ask a legitimate question:

What "hair splitting" point is he actually trying make here? That accupuncture needles in the hands of someone who studies endorphins and nerve-conductivity are more effective than the same accupuncture needles in the hands of someone who studies chi?

The "hair splitting" occurs here: When a practitioner alleges that acupuncture "balances" or "unlocks" or "realigns" the recipient's "chi," then that practitioner is making an unsubstantiated statement based purely on faith, and such a statement has no place in empirical medicine. Therefore it should not be offered in a publicly-funded hospital. If you wish to patronize a privately-funded acupuncture clinic, then go for it.

Also, when someone claims that acupuncture can heal your ulcer or cure your sinus infection (as acupuncturists do commonly claim), that is likewise an unsubtantiated statement.

If acupuncture truly can release endorphins (as some studies suggest it can), then I leave it to you to explain how this is intended to cure an infection or to heal an ulcer. Several times now I have acknowledged that acupuncture appears to have some beneficial effect upon pain and endorphins, so I accept that there is evidence that acupuncture can indeed function in this way.

But if you claim that the same effect is achieved through the balancing of one's chi, then you must first do the following:

1. Prove that "chi" exists
(this has never been done)

2. Prove that an "imbalance" in one's "chi" can cause these health problems
(this has never been done either)

3. Prove that "chi" can be affected by acupuncture at all
(this has never been done either)

4. Prove that "chi" can be "balanced" by acupuncture
(this has never been done either)

5. Prove that "re-balancing" one's "chi" can cure these health problems
(this has never been done either)

Complete those five tasks and get back to me. Alternatively, you may post excerpts from and links to peer reviewed scientific studies that complete those five tasks.


And here's another point you should consider: The reason we must distinguish between "chi balancing" and "endorphin release" via acupuncture is that, if you accept that some mystical phenomenon is occurring beyond your ability to perceive (but which, conveniently, your 60 year old Chinese acupuncturist can apparently detect with ease), then you're paying for a service that you can't verify in any way.

Hell, give me a thousand dollars, and I'll tweak your mojo into harmony so that it never troubles you again. If you doubt my claim, then I ask what is the basis for your doubt?

[RedOnce]

42. Sorry but, asking questions is not, 'telling you what you think'.

I did not "deliberately omit" anything. I simply took the quote from your OP on this thread which, if you will notice, does not include the language that BMOS refers to.

In addition, I provided a link to the entire discussion. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=222x4899

Your assessment of my (or anyone else's) ability to reason is unimportant.

I am not offering a 'deliberate mischaracterization of your position'. I am clearly asking questions. If you will notice, both sentences that you quote end in question marks. Questions are used to help clarify a position.

Speaking of questions here is another one for you:
How does what a "practitioner alleges" effect the efficacy of a given treatment?

I claim nothing with respect to acupuncture.


You state:

"The reason we must distinguish between "chi balancing" and "endorphin release" via acupuncture is that, if you accept that some mystical phenomenon is occurring beyond your ability to perceive (but which, conveniently, your 60 year old Chinese acupuncturist can apparently detect with ease), then you're paying for a service that you can't verify in any way."

Why? I can go to the Cleveland Clinic and have them use acupuncture needles on my endorphins and nerve-conductivity or I can go to the Chinese guy and have him use acupuncture needles on my chi.

What difference does this make?

[Orrex]

43. Oh, please.

I did not "deliberately omit" anything. I simply took the quote from your OP on this thread which, if you will notice, does not include the language that BMOS refers to.

The OP explicity decries "energy therapies," so I clearly distinguish between magical chi-based acupuncture and empirically-supported nerve/endorphin-based acupuncture.

Your assessment of my (or anyone else's) ability to reason is unimportant.

I disagree. My assessment of your apparently deliberate rejection of empirical data thereby requires me to articulate my arguments in a way that can breach your impressively impervious barriers against reason.

I am not offering a 'deliberate mischaracterization of your position'. I am clearly asking questions. If you will notice, both sentences that you quote end in question marks. Questions are used to help clarify a position.

Or to obscure that position, when the questioner is attempting to blur the issue. If you were asking these questions in a PM, then I would believe that you are really seeking clarification. Instead, you broadcast your misleading inquiry in a way that makes it seem as though my position is inconsistent. I call that intellectually dishonest of you.

Speaking of questions here is another one for you:
How does what a "practitioner alleges" effect the efficacy of a given treatment?

Can you possibly be serious? You see nothing unethical about offering a medical procedure that has no basis in empirical evidence? You would see nothing wrong with opening a cancer clinic guaranteeing a 100% cure rate?

[RedOnce]

44. Talk about obscuration! Let's get back to the main question...

Let's assume I have neck pain.

I can go to the Cleveland Clinic and have them use acupuncture needles on my endorphins and nerve-conductivity or I can go to the Chinese guy and have him use acupuncture needles on my chi.

What difference does this choice make if my pain is gone when I leave?

Are you asserting that the Chinese guy's 5,000 year old chi explanation makes him unethical? If so, does this mean that ethics are only possible through modern science?

Even if it did make him unethical, what practical effect does the choice of the Cleveland Clinic vs. the Chinese guy have on the consumer?

[Orrex]

45. Once again, I have trouble believing that you are serious

Let's assume I have neck pain.

I can go to the Cleveland Clinic and have them use acupuncture needles on my endorphins and nerve-conductivity or I can go to the Chinese guy and have him use acupuncture needles on my chi.

What difference does this choice make if my pain is gone when I leave?

*****snip*****

Even if it did make him unethical, what practical effect does the choice of the Cleveland Clinic vs. the Chinese guy have on the consumer?


You've proposed a simplistic hypothetical, but I'm willing to run with it.

Let's further assume that your neck pain developed after a fall from your motorcycle.

Distrustful of conventional western medicine, (beholden as it is to the evil, driven-solely-by-profit AMA) you go instead to an acupuncturst, because some friend of yours said that acupuncture once cleared up his fibromyalgia (which, like many people, he diagnosed all by himself). You visit Mr. Acupuncturist, who jabs a handful of tiny needles into various places around your body. In the course of the treatment the pain seems somewhat reduced, and you leave Mr. Acupuncturist's clinic. You don't care whether the pain was relieved through chi or endorphins; all you know is that you feel better, so everything is peachy. Right?

Well, two weeks later you wake up to find that you're paralyzed from the neck down because your cervical disc has ruptured, damaging your spinal cord. If only you'd visited an actual practitioner of actual medicine; perhaps you might have been treated in time.

Is this example extreme? Maybe. Is it inconsistent with reality? Not at all.

The problem is that the acupuncture practitioner is working under false pretenses, even if he (or she) really believes in the magical powers of chi. Someone might seek the services of the acupuncturist or Reiki master or therapeutic toucher or whatever, when actual medical treatment is called for. Does the patient have the "right" to ignore actual medical problems because of fears or mistrust of western medicine? Of course. Is it ethical for an "alternative" "medicine" practitioner to prey on people who harbor these fears or distrust? No.

Are you asserting that the Chinese guy's 5,000 year old chi explanation makes him unethical?

I am asserting three things:

1. The age of the "chi explanation" is irrelevant to its (lack of) efficacy.
2. The selling of any medical service under the guise of touchie-feelie "universal energy" bullshit is flatly unethical.

If a procedure works via a certain mechanism, then that mechanism should be fully disclosed. Injecting beliefs about "chi" into a procedure is nothing but an attempt to make the procedure more attractive to the desperate and the credulous.

If so, does this mean that ethics are only possible through modern science?

Thereby you clearly refute the adage that there is no such thing as a dumb question.

[RedOnce]

48. Thank you for answering. Yes, I see the advantage of...

having your acupuncture done at a hospital due to the possibility that additional allopathic services might be needed.

Of course, part of this advantage comes from proximity - similar to going to the ER with the flu instead of the "doc in the box".

The problem is that the acupuncture practitioner is working under false pretenses, even if he (or she) really believes in the magical powers of chi. Someone might seek the services of the acupuncturist or Reiki master or therapeutic toucher or whatever, when actual medical treatment is called for. Does the patient have the "right" to ignore actual medical problems because of fears or mistrust of western medicine? Of course. Is it ethical for an "alternative" "medicine" practitioner to prey on people who harbor these fears or distrust? No.

"Someone might seek the services of the acupuncturist...when actual medical treatment is called for." Yes, this is certainly possible.

"Is it ethical for an "alternative" "medicine" practitioner to prey on people who harbor these fears or distrust? No." I'm not sure where this question came from, "prey on people" is a pretty loaded phrase. I did not pose this question.

If a procedure works via a certain mechanism, then that mechanism should be fully disclosed.

Sure, if it is known. But, allopathic medicine works with things who's mechanism is not (or not well) known. Why not other systems?


Perhaps the solution is being pre-screened by the allopathic system and then on to the Chinese guy if you so choose.

[HuckleB]

41. Does insurance pay for this?

Acupuncture has been shown to be beneficial in many situations. While we don't necessarily know why, the same is true of many practices, including the mechanism of some regularly used medications.

Still, it would disgruntle me further to note that insurance pays for Reiki or "healing touch," when I must argue with insurance co's for my patients to recieve proven therapies on a daily basis.

[Odin2005]

46. "Hocus-Pocus" is pretty much what it is.

I am an Atheist, so I don't fall for all the "spiritual energy" boloney.

[Orrex]

47. Clearly you're a pawn of the AMA

If you don't accept every statement by every new age guru, then you're obviously working for evil Big Pharma that's trying to poison the nation and keep down the wisdom of five millennia.

Obviously if a medical practice predates any understanding of the functioning of neurology, it must be completely safe and effective. Shame on your closed-mindedness.

[Dover]

49. Purely flame bait with an agenda attached........n/t

.

[beam me up scottie]

50. Right, because anything that challenges your worldview is flamebait.

Now run along home so you can complain about how mean we all are for questioning the motives of quacks in the HEALTH forum.

[Crunchy Frog]

51. I don't see what the problem is.

You certainly don't HAVE to utilize those services when your in the hospital, but I don't see a problem with providing them to people who want them. Even if it's nothing more than compassionate attention paid to patients that's making them feel better, and they are only operating through the placebo effect, they could still be a valuable service. I can't imagine that they're very costly to use, and they're pretty much non-invasive and safe.

As for scientific proof of their efficacy, well, as someone pointed out, that is lacking in many far more expensive and risky hospital procedures, so I don't see why these ones in particular should be the focus of people's wrath. I guess everyone is free to choose what they will get angered and offended by, but I think it's nice that it's offered to people as an option if they choose to utilize it.

I'd much rather be in a hospital that offers Reiki than in one where instruments tend to be left in people's body cavities.

[BuddhaGirl]

52. I LOVE the fact that a hospital is offering Reiki!

Hopefully the offering of complementary and alternative therapies will catch on in more hospitals.

I don't understand all the panties bunched up over this. Everyone has a choice regarding their medical treatment, be it Western or alternative. Use what works for you. It's as simple as that. :-)

[Crunchy Frog]

53. Panties bunched up is exactly the right expression.

I guess some people must enjoy the sensation.:evilgrin:

[beam me up scottie]

54. What hospital procedures lack efficacy?

Placebos are not valuable, they are a waste of time and money, not to mention unethical.

[Crunchy Frog]

55. I don't agree with you about the placebo effect.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=222x5598

I have no interest in debating with you, so I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree.

If you find yourself in a hospital that offers Reiki, I highly reccomend that you not utilize the service.

[beam me up scottie]

56. Lying to patients is unethical.

I cannot believe anyone would disagree with that.

Then again, it's not so surprising considering thousands of frauds make billions of dollars from unsuspecting patients every year.

[Crunchy Frog]

57. I agree that lying to patients is unethical.

I don't agree that the placebo affect always involves lying. If a patient already strongly believes in a treatment modality and the practitioner treats that belief with respect, without making any misrepresentations, that is IMO, and acceptable use of the placebo effect.

Studies are apparently showing that the placebo effect is a component in the effectiveness of all treatment modalities. Even drugs that are powerful in their own right, also have a placebo component to their effects, as do other forms of treatment.

I think that it is valid to take these psychological factors into consideration in medical treatment. I have no problem if your views differ from mine. I do not agree that what I'm talking about constitutes lying to patients, and hope that you will not misrepresent my views in that way.

[beam me up scottie]

58. I reread Warpy's post and

I understand where you're coming from, I think.

If we can harness that power, it would be an excellent resource.

I'm sorry I jumped your post, but I HATE snake oil salesmen as much as I hate the fundamentalists who are trying to hijack our government.

They prey on vulnerable patients who have more often than not, run out of legitimate medical options.

I don't dismiss all alternative medicine but I am a hard ass skeptic when it comes to evidence.

[Crunchy Frog]

59. Thank you for being fair.

I appreciate it.

[beam me up scottie]

61. Thanks for giving me a chance to explain.

I really enjoy your posts in R&T, btw.

[FM Arouet666]

60. Do you have a link to the AGH information?

I must admit, I am a bit surprised, I have worked at AGH in the past, in fact you can see me on 'Trauma, Life in the ER.' I am the asshole in the OR without the hat talking about the drunk driving bar tender. Sad case, I split his chest in the ER and the cardiac guys tried to fix his torn aorta. RIP

Anyway, I was not aware of an alternative medicine program when I was at AGH. Reiki and therapeutic touch are nonsense, zero scientific evidence. Why would a hospital have such a program. Answer. The money. The majority of alternative medicine is rooted in pseudoscience, yet it takes in billions a year. Looks like AGH went for the money.

And for the record, your correct, there is evidence that acupuncture has a clinical benefit.

[RedOnce]

63. AGH - Our Medical Specialties

Integrated Medicine

Mind/Body Medicine
- Biofeedback
- Gestalt Therapy – Mind/Body Psychology
- Holistic Medical Care
- Interactive guided imagery
- Meditation
- Relaxation techniques
- Stress management techniques

Traditional Chinese Medicine
- Acupuncture
- Chinese herbology
- Nutrition & lifestyle
- TaiChi & QiGong

Body Based Practices and Energy Work
- Somatic Therapy
- Therapeutic massage
- Reiki & therapeutic touch


http://www.wpahs.org/agh/services/index.cfm?sid=181

[BuddhaGirl]

64. awesome!

It's wonderful that all of those therapies are offered. Hope it spreads to other hospitals/medical groups!! :bounce:

[FM Arouet666]

65. Thanks for the link

Sad, they went for the cash. Reiki and therapeutic touch? Patients suffers when capitalism and popular pseudoscience collide.

[Orrex]

66. Yes--thanks for posting it, RedOnce!

I lost track of this thread for a few days and didn't catch FM Arouet666's question.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to AGH to have my chakras overhauled...

[salvorhardin]

67. Don't forget to ask for the karmic realignment

and the under chi wash and rust protection. Sure, it costs a couple bucks more but you'll be thanking me down the road.

[RedOnce]

68. Cool! What do they charge for a charka adjustment?

[Orrex]

69. I'm still under warranty, so it's free after the $50 deductable

[Celebration]

70. Bingo

I would love for someone to show me a financial motive for this..............it just doesn't sound like a money making proposition, other than making the hospital more attractive to patients. I can't see either insurance paying for this, or the patients being billed. They probably think it is effective, and is a marketing technique as well. I work with chakras all the time. My daughter had some high blood pressure, sans risk factors. The problem was in the third chakra. Once that got balanced and stayed that way, blood pressure declined. That is one less needless prescription for blood pressure medication in this country. The doctor was ready to prescribe!! Note that this is an anecdote and not scientific proof. I have anecdote after anecdote after anecdote in my family................ One reason why yoga is so good for you is that much of the time it will get the chakras aligned. Anyway it is mildly amusing to see people who have no experience with it making fun of it. It makes me feel quite smug--I know better. Note that nobody holds a gun at someone's head and forces them to get their chakras aligned. LOL. Live and let live.

[Orrex]

71. They do charge & many insurance companies cover "alternative" medicine

That's when it becomes a problem. If my carrier covers it, then I'm paying more so that someone else can have his chakras twiddled. It's not that I object to it on moral grounds (in the way that Conservative assholes object to insurance companies covering birth control); I object because empirical studies do not bear out the claims of alternative practitioners, your anecdotal bloodpressure story notwithstanding.

Again, this excludes acupuncture as it applies to endorphin-release (to the extent that this can be verified) or to chiropractic bone realignment (to the extent that that has been shown, in some cases, to ease back pain). But any treatment that claims to use "energy healing" is, to date, completely lacking in scientific support and should therefore be excluded from medical insurance coverage.

[Celebration]

73. none here

I know of no plans where I am that cover chakra balancing. In fact, as far as I know it has no insurance code. Insurance contracts are negotiated between the policyholder and the insurance company. If they cover chakra balancing, it is because the policyholder wants it to be covered. If you pay for your insurance premium through your employer, and you object to part of your insurance premium covering chakra balancing, you should probably take it up with your employer. Likewise, fellow employees that may want it to be covered can do the same.....I just don't see a problem--my insurance policy covers a bunch of stuff I would never use.

[Orrex]

74. Whoops! Sorry!

Thought we were still talking about Reiki/acupuncture/chiropractic, which are covered by some (many?) insurance plans.

But I correct myself and agree with you: I am aware of no insurance program that covers "chakra balancing," which I additionally admit to be a phrase of my coining that might not actually be used by believers in that practice.

To that end, if an informed consumer wishes to undertake "chakra balancing" or any other "alternative" "medical" practice, she or he is welcome to do so. But it's still wrong for the practitioner to claim greater efficacy than is borne out by empirical data in excess of selectively-chosen personal testimony and endorsements.

[Celebration]

75. Reiki

Reiki here includes chakra balancing, as you call it.........You may think it is people just touching you or whatever, but they are supposed to be clearing, aligning and spinning chakras. Not that everyone is equally adept at it. We pay nothing for all this as I can do it myself. In most states, reiki practitioners are not licensed. I think in a few they have to be massage therapists. It is possible that insurance would cover it in states where it is performed by licensed practitioners. They might even code it as massage, though it is not massage at all. Again, though, if you are paying insurance for things that you don't think should be covered, take it up with your insurance administrator.

I was lucky because all our NAET treatments were covered under chiropractic care. That saved me a ton of money. But in general insurance makes money off my family. Our insurance carrier and coverage seems to change every year and I can't even keep up with what it covers and doesn't cover. Right now I don't think that would be covered. No problem-- I can do that too, without even going to a workshop.

[RedOnce]

72. "...show me a financial motive..." Very good point!

I have had a little first hand chakra experience as well. Of course, none that I would attempt to share in this skeptic's forum. It would be seen and acted on as flame bait.

"...it is mildly amusing to see people who have no experience with it making fun of it." Yes indeed.