This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Edmund Y. M. Chein; Arthur K. Shapiro, MD
Cornell Medical College New York

JAMA. 1974;227(10):1122.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The controversial correspondence about double-blind studies of acupuncture began with Adler (222:833, 1972) who advocated wellcontrolled double-blind studies to determine efficacy of acupuncture. Mark (223:922, 1973) responded by stating that double-blind studies of acupuncture were not feasible because correct placement of acupuncture needles requires cooperation of the patient (subject) in reporting paresthesias, sensation of soreness, or mild discomfort, and hence, renders useless efforts to deceive the patient with placebo needles deliberately inserted elsewhere.

Chein and Shapiro (224:1533, 1973) agreed that this may be a problem with manually stimulated needles but not with needles inserted with concomitant electric stimulation. Since signs of correct needle placement could be obtained at correct and various placebo points on the meridian, double-blind studies were feasible.

Mark (225:1532, 1973) replied that the two steps in the application of acupuncture included: "first, the needles must be correctly placed [inserted], then they can be stimulated, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?