Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine Science

The Mystery of Acupuncture Partly Explained In Rat Study 159

Posted by Soulskill from the moving-the-needle dept.
hackingbear writes: A biological mechanism explaining part of the mystery of acupuncture has been pinpointed by scientists studying rats. The research showed that applying electroacupuncture to an especially powerful acupuncture point known as stomach meridian point 36 (St36) affected a complex interaction between hormones known as the hypothalamus pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis. In stressed rats exposed to unpleasant cold stimulation, HPA activity was reduced (abstract). The findings provide the strongest evidence yet that the ancient Chinese therapy has more than a placebo effect when used to treat chronic stress, it is claimed. "Some antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs exert their therapeutic effects on these same mechanisms," said lead investigator Dr Ladan Eshkevari, from Georgetown University medical center in Washington DC.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Mystery of Acupuncture Partly Explained In Rat Study More

The Mystery of Acupuncture Partly Explained In Rat Study

Comments Filter:

  • Not acupuncture (Score:5, Informative)

    by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @09:10AM (#50159581) Journal
    The research showed that applying electroacupuncture

    The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.

    Try again.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

      nerve connections use electricity. Acupuncture is the application of a needle into the nerve/bundle to interrupt or divert that impulse.

      • Actually, from what I can find there's not really any correlation between nerves and acupuncture points. Some points fall along nerves, but far from all of them.

      • nerve connections use electricity. Acupuncture is the application of a needle into the nerve/bundle to interrupt or divert that impulse.

        It's The Matrix!!!

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by PopeRatzo ( 965947 )

      The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.

      I like people who have strong opinions about things they know nothing about.

      http://www.acupuncturetoday.co... [acupuncturetoday.com]

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      http://www.news-medical.net/ne... [news-medical.net]

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by nitehawk214 ( 222219 )

        Acupuncture Today says acupuncture works? Oh well that convinces me!

        Also, your first article says that Electroacupuncture was developed until the 20th century, which kind of proves what the GP is saying.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by PopeRatzo ( 965947 )

          Also, your first article says that Electroacupuncture was developed until the 20th century, which kind of proves what the GP is saying.

          Let's see what the GP is saying,

          The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.

          OK, there are two statements there that we can evaluate.

          1) The Chinese did not have electricity. China first got electricity about five years after the US.

          2) "nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity." Every acupunctur

          • Re:Not acupuncture (Score:5, Insightful)

            by LeadSongDog ( 1120683 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @10:32AM (#50160287)
            Clearly what the poster intended was that When acupuncture first developed the Chinese did not have knowledge of electricity.
            Not everyone is writing with the intent of addressing an audience of pedants.

            • Clearly what the poster intended was that When acupuncture first developed the Chinese did not have knowledge of electricity.

              And at the time they also knew no anatomy because they didn't conduct dissections. So acupuncture was practised in China by people who didn't even know what muscles were. Any credible modern research on acupuncture is conducted on the Western version, which is totally different.

              • And at the time they also knew no anatomy because they didn't conduct dissections. So acupuncture was practised in China by people who didn't even know what muscles were. Any credible modern research on acupuncture is conducted on the Western version, which is totally different.

                Please define "anatomy" in your reply. If you don't know anything about Chinese history and/or medicines, you should at least research for some. Even though I am not a fan of acupuncture, I do not completely ignore and lump it up with other alternate medicines.

                • They weren't doing dissections and studying structure. i.e. no anatomy. I don't see a refutation of this in the other dude's link. I'm not lumping acupuncture in with other alternatives medicines, I agree it's likely different and there's probably more to it.

                  • They weren't doing dissections and studying structure. i.e. no anatomy.

                    Yet somehow, there are Chinese anatomical drawings from the third century C.E. that show "meridians" that are almost an exact replica of the human nervous system and "vessels" that are a near exact replica of the circulatory system.

                    You think they did that by guessing?

                    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... [nih.gov]

                    Though I suppose their backward understanding of health care is the reason there are so few Chinese left in the world.

              • And at the time they also knew no anatomy because they didn't conduct dissections.

                The Chinese were studying anatomy when people in England were still painting their faces blue and worshiping the Sun, and for at least 100 years before Galen in Greece.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

            • Re:Not acupuncture (Score:5, Insightful)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @12:04PM (#50161067) Homepage Journal

              The study is trying to determine if modern acupuncture works. Since this is the way most modern acupuncture is performed, the objection seems irrelevant.

              • Re:Not acupuncture (Score:4, Informative)

                by Chalnoth ( 1334923 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @07:30PM (#50164671)

                Passing electrical currents through living tissue has real biological effects. Sticking needles in people at random locations around the body does not (aside from the possibility of infection and other complications).

                Real therapies that use electricity are Electroconvulsive Therapy and Electric Muscle Stimulation. There's no need to puncture the skin. These quacks are just adding some risk of infection to what would otherwise be an almost perfectly safe therapy.

                • Sticking needles in people at random locations around the body does not...

                  Actually, that's precisely the problem with acupuncture working better than placebo. Acupuncture works whether you're following their "rules" or just randomly sticking needles into people...

                  Basically, it turns out, that forcing a person to lay still for a long time has the same benefits of destressing as just laying on a sofa and chilling... or a massage, or any other relaxing activity...

            • Not everyone is writing with the intent of addressing an audience of pedants.

              I thought this was slashdot... when did the target audience STOP being pedants.

              TL;DR: THIS... IS... SLASHDOT!!!

        • How does the study using newer techniques used by modern acupuncturists debunk the study or the technique with regard to the mechanism by which acupuncture would function if treated with it today?

          The GP's point is he is anti-acupuncture and making up criteria that must be met randomly. Which "then" is it he's referring to and which Chinese? There isn't even a single consistent set of points over time, just like we've adjusted treatments in western medicine. And just like we used to bleed patients and doctor

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        If electricity is required to make acupuncture work it kind of shoots down the "credibility" provided by "used for thousands of years by the Chinese!"

        It would be interesting to see if the electricity is necessary or not.

        • If electricity is required to make acupuncture work it kind of shoots down the "credibility" provided by "used for thousands of years by the Chinese!"

          Electricity can be made lots of ways. Even a lowly potato can make electricity. The way I understand it, an acupuncture needle of the proper metal, along with moxabustion, can give off a very low electrical charge.

          According to practitioners, the electric charge that is now commonly applied to the needles is just to make it work faster. Fewer people these da

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

            Wikipedia says moxibustion is treatment with dried mugwort. I'm not sure how that helps you create an electric current.

            Regardless of whether the Chinese may have made some small currents by accidentally using dissimilar metals or something, this study doesn't have anything to say about ancient Chinese acupuncture because the ancient Chinese didn't have the ability to create controlled currents of this kind, and there's no evidence they even tried. You can't do a study of prayer combined with chemotherapy

            • Wikipedia says moxibustion is treatment with dried mugwort. I'm not sure how that helps you create an electric current.

              Well, the mugwort (whatever that is) is treated and place in a ball on top of the needle and then burned, heating the needle.

              Again, I don't endorse acupuncture. But if you're going to do the pop skeptic routine, you should at least know what you're talking about.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

                Lighting some dried up weed on fire doesn't make electricity. Perhaps you should be a little more cautious with your last sentence?

                • Lighting some dried up weed on fire doesn't make electricity. Perhaps you should be a little more cautious with your last sentence?

                  It's back to high school physics for you, son. We;re talking about tiny levels of current (which according to acupuncture theory is all that's needed, I've learned), but heating one end of a piece of metal (like a needle) can definitely produce electricity. (See "Seebeck effect" and "Peltier effect") If you watch traditional acupuncture being performed, you'll see right awa

                • Lighting some dried up weed on fire doesn't make electricity. Perhaps you should be a little more cautious with your last sentence?

                  Insert medical marijuana humorous reference here.

            • Sure you can do such a study. You have a bunch of people using chemo, and you select half randomly to be prayed for. It's been done, and the results seem to be that prayer doesn't help (however, telling a patient people are praying for him or her can have an adverse result). If the prayed-for people did significantly better on their chemo, it would be evidence that praying for someone helps them get better.

              FWIW, I don't regard this as evidence against any helpful effects of prayer, since the protocols

              • Sure you can do such a study. You have a bunch of people using chemo, and you select half randomly to be prayed for. It's been done, and the results seem to be that prayer doesn't help (however, telling a patient people are praying for him or her can have an adverse result). If the prayed-for people did significantly better on their chemo, it would be evidence that praying for someone helps them get better.

                FWIW, I don't regard this as evidence against any helpful effects of prayer, since the protocols that I glanced at seemed to be pretty cold-hearted in effect. I don't think the experiments should affect one's estimation of whether prayer works in any way.

                To be complete you should also have a group where somebody is diligently praying for them to get sicker.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Plus another problem is that this is one "accupuncture pressure point". IIRC, there are scores, if not hundreds of the bastard things on a human body.

      This study proves accupuncture is valid about as much as the fact that pork can transfer inimical biotic agents from pigs to humans causing the latter to become sick or even die is proof that the Old Testament is valid knowledge.

      You know, not at all.

      It may have gotten lucky. Or it may have extrapoleted a complete fiction out of a few observed facts and then fe

      • Re:Not acupuncture (Score:5, Interesting)

        by king neckbeard ( 1801738 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @10:01AM (#50160009)
        Even if it's just luck, that doesn't mean it doesn't merit study, especially if some portion of the practices show promise. Imagine if we were able to turn acupuncture into a practice that actually has some science behind it. Real medicine could gain a new tool and people in general can be better protected from Charlatans.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          It looks like there may be some relation between the Chinese idea of "chi", energy flowing through the body, and mitochondria, the little guys in our bodies that are responsible for delivering energy where it needs to go. Mine are broken so I feel tired all the time, and get a variety of problems stemming from that.

          It really looks like they were on to something, even though they probably had no idea what it really was.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

            Prophets use the same technique. Say something sufficiently vague, find a sufficiently credible audience, and all of a sudden you can't help but be right.

            The Chinese concept of chi doesn't really match mitochondria very well. Except in very specific cases, mitochondria don't flow anywhere, and they aren't energy. The energy that does flow is in the form of glucose in the blood, and you can't change it much, nor the functioning of the mitochondria, by traditional methods of affecting chi.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              Sure, but we are now starting to understand that a lot of issues are caused by malfunctioning mitochondria. While you are correct that they don't migrate or flow, the basic idea that there is a problem with energy reaching certain parts of the body matches the poor operation of mitochondria in that area.

            • Religious laws in the past were actually subject to a lot of the same kinds of evolutionary pressures as genes themselves, and thus societies often end up with a set of practices that are by and large neutral or helpful. Sure, you have a lot of useless crap and even some harmful crap, but it's a pretty clever way of figuring out the world absent rigorous scientific models. The problem is when those practices interfere with further cultural evolution.

              • Re: (Score:3)

                by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

                The problem in this case is when those practices interfere with further scientific evolution. The placebo effect is a wonderful thing, and exploiting it when you've got no other choices is a great idea. But when it starts interfering with the development of things that actually work better, it is a problem. Not to mention the other negative effects of a significant portion of a modern society believing in woo.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by cstacy ( 534252 )

              The Chinese concept of chi doesn't really match mitochondria very well.

              He meant midichlorians.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

                Yeah, that one matches up a little closer to chi all right. All except for the little tester device.

                • I keep trying to forget this whole midichlorian thing, so I can go back to enjoying Star Wars, but people keep reminding me.

                  • I keep trying to forget this whole midichlorian thing, so I can go back to enjoying Star Wars, but people keep reminding me.

                    How many mitochondria could a midichlorian chlorinate if a midichlorian could chlorinate mitochondria?

            • Prophets use the same technique. Say something sufficiently vague, find a sufficiently credible audience, and all of a sudden you can't help but be right.

              The Chinese concept of chi doesn't really match mitochondria very well. Except in very specific cases, mitochondria don't flow anywhere, and they aren't energy. The energy that does flow is in the form of glucose in the blood, and you can't change it much, nor the functioning of the mitochondria, by traditional methods of affecting chi.

              Or Midi-chlorians

          • It looks like there may be some relation between the Chinese idea of "chi", energy flowing through the body, and mitochondria, the little guys in our bodies that are responsible for delivering energy where it needs to go. Mine are broken so I feel tired all the time, and get a variety of problems stemming from that.

            It really looks like they were on to something, even though they probably had no idea what it really was.

            It sounds like you could use some alternative therapies actually. Basically, it boils down to finding what works for you. Find a really good practitioner who will work with you on: diet, exercise, posture, and hopefully including some hands-on bodywork. You could have a sleep disorder, some dietary/digestion issues, or .. any number of things going on. Anyway, my overall advice is to find someone willing to take the time to effectively diagnose your condition(s).

            (Disclosure: my wife is a chiropracto

    • Wrong on the second part. I know plenty of acupuncturists who does use electricity. In fact, I've never met one who wouldn't use it in certain cases. Just go to any university's doctor in China and you'll see it.
      To explain, I lived almost 3 years in Beijing Sport's University and did spend some time in their nursery treating injuries, I have been to the Haidian Hospital and did an introduction to acupuncture course in Brazil. In all of those places there are people claiming to be acupuncturists using electr
    • "The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity. "

      Didn't have, did they go somewhere? It is still in routine use throughout China for the successful treatment of many illnesses. What I still don't understand is why so much time is still spent trying to beat placebo when the placebo effect is very powerful medicine even getting better over time vs drugs that crushed it in controlled trials previously. Provided it has the raw materials the cells in the bod

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.

      The "science" of acupuncture is not sticking needles in the body, it's sticking needles in the body and stimulating them. Traditionally, it was done by sticking the needles in your body and then using a candle to heat the needle.

      More modern acupuncture uses needles with a bit of flammable material opposite the pointy end - the needle Is inserted into the body, and the material lit, which channels the heat t

    • The research showed that applying electroacupuncture The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity. Back then they had to use Steamacupuncture. Try again.

  • Electroacupuncture != acupuncture (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Electroacupuncture is not the same thing as Ancient Chinese Acupuncture, unless the ancient Chinese invented batteries and didn't tell us.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sjames ( 1099 )

      Or if the metal in the needles reacted with the interstitial fluids in the body and generated a small current. If you don't think that can happen, chew on some aluminum foil.

  • I see what you did there (Score:3, Funny)

    by mwn3d ( 2750695 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @09:34AM (#50159761)
    "Pinpointed". Nice.

  • antidepressants? (Score:3)

    by ihtoit ( 3393327 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @09:36AM (#50159781)

    you mean they actually figured out how SSRIs fuck the body up aside the claimed (and still not proven) therapeutic effects?

    I could tell you. HPA misalignment is just the beginning.

  • I thought it was all about controlling the "flow of energy" through the "Body's meridians"...

  • Rubbish (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mynamestolen ( 2566945 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @10:32AM (#50160283)

    I hate rubbish research and I hate rubbish research on slashdot.
    Stick needles in anyone and you affect HPA axis. Doh!
    Blast adrenal glands with electricity and you affect HPA axis. Another no brainer.
    The real test, if these woo believers wanted to test the magic scientific meridian whacko superpoint stomach meridian point 36 (St36) [help me stop laughing], is to do the magic at various points on the poor bloody rats and see what happens (including the little itty bitty points close to the magic St36).
    I sincerely hope no taxpayer money went into this particular egregious piece of flam. Check out this for NZ subsidy of this religion:
    https://kmccready.wordpress.co... [wordpress.com]

    • Exxxzzzaaaaaccccttttllllyyyy!!! A proper test on "St-36" would include stabbing of nearby non-"St-36" points. Randomly select which stab to electrify. Vary over time. Cross-correlate the measured response series to each of the stabs' selection series. Repeat until p=.05. The experiment may have to be prematurely terminated if the supply of rat chow (or grant money) is extinguished.

      • Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Martin Blank ( 154261 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @11:10AM (#50160631) Homepage Journal

        They did use non-St-36 locations. There were four groups, three of which were given the same stressors, with a fourth given no stressors and no treatment. The stressor groups received either St-36 treatment, treatment where needles were not inserted into any meridian point, or no treatment. I imagine an argument could be made for a group given treatment but not stressors.

        I don't know if this provides any vindication for acupuncture (or even electroacupuncture)--something like this really needs to be repeated before I'll believe it--but the research was a little more robust than you imply.

        • The "meridian points" are imaginary locations on the body that have literally zero basis in biology. There is no conceivable way that they'll have a statistically significant impact on any therapy compared to biologically-similar points elsewhere.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by sjames ( 1099 )

            And yet, that one did. Perhaps the rats didn't read the same books you did?

            • Yeah, call me when the study is replicated. I guarantee you it won't be.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by sjames ( 1099 )

                And you base that on what evidence?

                This is one of many studies of acupuncture with positive results. Sorry if the evidence conflicts with your worldview.

              • What are you putting up for your guarantee?

                (Mind you, I don't know how replicable the results may be, and I won't be at all surprised to find them not replicated, but I'm not the one stating that they're absolutely false.)

    • For how many years have you studied acupuncture?
    • "There's no scientific proof that acupuncture actually works, the whole idea is rubbish!"
      *Study is done, finds correlation between acupuncture and hormones / stress*
      "What is this shit study? We all know acupuncture doesn't work, why waste time studying this rubbish"?

      That's a nice no-win situation there for anyone trying to discover validity in acupuncture.

      "The real test, if these woo believers wanted to test the magic scientific meridian whacko superpoint stomach meridian point 36 (St36) [help me stop laughing], is to do the magic at various points on the poor bloody rats and see what happens (including the little itty bitty points close to the magic St36)."

      If you real the actual article (I know, crazy request for a slashdotter!) you'll see that "The study, reported in the journal Endocrinology, compa

      • Re:Rubbish (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Smidge204 ( 605297 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @02:38PM (#50162491) Journal

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

        Fake acupuncture, where the skin isn't penetrated at all, was found to be much more effective than real penetrative acupuncture and acupuncture improperly applied (needles in the "wrong" locations).

        And the tests were done on human volunteers. Citations in the video description.
        =Smidge=

      • So you are now claiming, unlike the authors of this bullshit, that EA is not A? Is so, this is not unusual. Woo merchants of acupuncture usually misquote and misunderstand "studies" dressed up as science which they claim support their brainless religion.

        • There was no such claim in anything that I said. There were three points being made here:

          1) The fact that you're pooh-poohing what appears to be a legitimate study (what you called "rubbish research") shows you're already biased and not going to take any study legitimately. Given that scientific research is really the only way to move anything in the realm of "alternative medicine" to actual medicine, that's a rather incredulous attitude.
          2) The "sham acupuncture" scenario appears to have been considere

  • How much scientific evidence there is to support this... There are better ways to relax than sticking me full of needles... As a matter of fact, I cannot think of anything that would raise my stress level more...

  • I'm laughing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sjames ( 1099 ) on Wednesday July 22, 2015 @11:05AM (#50160587) Homepage Journal

    So, the demand is show proof or go home. Proof shown and people fall all over themselves to ignore it. Still wonder why nobody bothers to look for proof?

    This isn't even the first evidence found.

    • Let me spell it out for you in the slightly modded words from LeadSongDog above. A proper test on "St-36" would include EA of nearby non-"St-36" points. Randomly select which EA to electrify. Vary over time. Cross-correlate the measured response series to each of the EA's selection series. Repeat until p=.05
      The real challenge will be to do a blind study even among the four authors to pinpoint the alleged St-36 points on a series of rats. LOL LOL LOL cry LOL cry weep, oh my fucking god this is unbelievable

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sjames ( 1099 )

        Sure, this is what is known as a preliminary study to see if a larger and more expensive study is warranted. Apparently, it is.

        What it is not is a good time for people to fall over themselves to deny that it shows anything at all. That's not skepticism.

    • So, the demand is show proof or go home. Proof shown and people fall all over themselves to ignore it. Still wonder why nobody bothers to look for proof?

      This isn't even the first evidence found.

      It's not proof.

      a) The electric current was critical and is not part of typical or historical acupuncture.

      b) They showed one effect related to a point, acupuncture claims many more.

      c) 42 rats in 4 groups. Not a huge sample size.

      d) Acupuncture is a controversial subject where one might expect dubious research to occasionally be published.

      At most this offers very mild evidence that is consistent with acupuncture being effective. Note this study is at odds with studies that find the points don't really matter [nih.gov].

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sjames ( 1099 )

        The study needs to be expanded upon, but it showed an effect. It was an effect that current models of physiology would call extremely unlikely (stimulate the shin, block stress hormones) but is predicted in the study of acupuncture.

        It doesn't go far enough, but it does provide evidence. The people I was talking about here can plug their ears and dribble about how this or that are not perfect, but nevertheless, it does provide evidence. That is, it contributes to proof.

        This is not skepticism. Skeptics accept

        • Honestly this is a case where I've learned to reason heuristically. I've seen many studies of this nature, I don't know what the specific flaws in the study might be (though I can think of many potential ones) and I would be very shocked if in a few years this led to a clinically validated form of something that's recognizable as acupuncture.

          Skepticism involves being skeptical about your own deductive abilities, this study shifts my beliefs slightly, but overall I realize I'm not qualified to accept this st

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by sjames ( 1099 )

            The people I was more or less chastising are the ones who were dismissing the study out of hand and steadfastly denying that there is any evidence at all for acupuncture.

  • Yeah 1 point seem to have an effect. But is it 1) the effect predicted by chinese acupuncture and 2) all other point do pretty much nothing from previous study and deliver effect with shame acupuncture (giving the impression of needle going in but not penetrating). Basically broken clock.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close