Here's a terrific webcomic exposing the silliness of acupuncture. People are always citing these awful studies at me that they claim support the efficacy of acupuncture, and like the comic says what I see when I read them is that the advocates have gone "anomaly hunting after any statistically relevant result, usually by cherry-picking data or creative interpretation. You'll never find a conclusive effect with acupuncture studies".
I'd really like to hook the traditional Chinese medicine freaks with the cannabinoid bozos who've lately been doing the same thing: citing weak results to prop up extravagant claims of near miraculous efficacy. A kookfight to the death!
(Also on FtB).
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I must say I've loved much of the writing at the new blog Science-Based Medicine. These guys are fighting the good fight and presenting very sophisticated aspects of evaluating the medical literature in a very accessible way. In particular I'd like to point out David Gorski's critique of NCCAM…
[Previous installments: here, here, here, here, here, here]
Last installment was the first examination of what "randomized" means in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We finish up here by calling attention to what randomization does and doesn't do and under what circumstances. The notion of…
I'd like to hear from some other sciencebloggers and science readers what they think reform of peer-review should look like. I'm not of the opinion that it has any critical flaws, but most people would like to see more accountability for sand-bagging and other bad reviewer habits. Something like…
How can environmental groups and media outlets maintain that they are advocates of science, and not ideology, when they engage in the anti-science Luddism of GMO fearmongering? The potential of this anti-science behavior to poison their credibility on global climate change is real, as there is an…