@Varallo How do we know accupuncture is not better than placebo? Care to post some links? I am under the impression that accupuncture is quite well established as effective for various things. Thanks!
I don't have links, but as an acupuncturist, I can share personal experiences. First and foremost, it's like this:
With acupuncture, maybe the wrong things are attempted to be measured such as muscle quality and tension release.....
The problem with Chinese medicine is that successful treatment relies on a proper
Chinese medical diagnosis – not a Western one. If you're in the camp of Western medical consensus reality, and you apply your perceptual and cognitive bias towards the practice of acupuncture, it simply will not work. You won't pick up the correct diagnostic cues of your patients and will choose a set of points that do nothing.
Those who approach their acupuncture schooling like learning a new language always get amazing results. Those who continually try to reframe the ancient Chinese way of assessing the body to fit their "more scientific" perspectives are rotten practitioners who do the profession a disservice.
It's a matter of what reality you consent to. If you approach the Western and Chinese medical paradigms simply as a language rather than an absolute reality, then your ability as a practitioner will be stellar.
It’s not that science can’t measure acupuncture. It has been measured many times, with reproducible methods, and the results consistently show no effect beyond placebo.
"Studies" often like to use "placebo" points. This points to a
complete lack of proper schooling. There are -5- channel systems – not just the one represented in multiple diagrams and statues. Two of these channel systems are quite wide and completely envelope the body – they are
not distinct lines. Basically anywhere you place a needle activates one of the 5 channels. If you know what you're doing, you know what channel system to activate, what points to needle, and in what order.
"TCM" – a system created in Maoist-era China – further muddies the water. It basically condensed
several schools of thought into one tenuous system of practice. Diagnostic approach is based on assessment of the organs (internal,
i.e., herbal medicine) rather than the channels (physical medicine). In large part, TCM is responsible for poor clinical outcomes due to diagnostic confusion and use of only one channel system. In other words, unless you get taught by someone who comes from a lineage, you're like a 3 year old walking around Grand Central Station at rush hour.
As far as acupuncture being "placebo" – 狗屁!
You need to take a dump? Three points:
St-25 (regulates the large intestine according to CM)
St-36 (scientific studies have shown this increases peristalsis)
GB-41 (opens up the so-called "Belt Vessel", or 帶脈)
I needle those points, you will poop within 25 minutes.
Bone fracture? No problem. 2-5 treatments, and I'll see you later. Go to your doc, get an X-ray or MRI or whatever. The proof is in the pudding.
9-months pregnant and you're as big as a 1970s land-yacht? Come see me, and in 18 hours you'll pop that bun outta ya' oven.
Want to get pregnant? Why would you ever want to do
that? OK – I like your reasons. I'm gonna poke you in places your stud can't and in ways he don't know how to and badda bing, badda BOOM: honey – you pregnant. 2-4 treatments.
Multiple people, multiple times. And the students who listened to me – they had the same results.
If you want point combinations and techniques, PM me. =D
My point is: different cognitive models are necessary when trying to get a desired result. Some work for certain things while others don't. If you're flexible mentally and willing to learn, you'll see places where paradigms overlap, and can use these things to your advantage.....
. I think the real challenge is when we don’t know what we’re testing or what would count as evidence, that moves from empirical work into speculation, only evidence makes theory obtainable and stronger. 
