RT Journal
A1 Avins AL
T1 Needling the status quo: Comment on “acupuncture for chronic pain”
JF Archives of Internal Medicine
JO Archives of Internal Medicine
YR 2012
FD October 22
VO 172
IS 19
SP 1454
OP 1455
DO 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.4198
UL http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2012.4198
AB 
Passions on both sides of the CAM debate remain high, with ardent supporters extolling its perceived benefits and detractors equally vehement in dismissing most CAM interventions as “mere placebos.” Acupuncture, for example, evokes fervent support among its adherents who cite clinical studies employing usual-care controls. At the same time, acupuncture provokes equally impassioned dismissal from the “quack-hunter” community, who cite the lack of clear biological plausibility and the results of placebo-controlled trials that demonstrate little superiority to sham controls. In an attempt to bring clarity to this debate, no fewer than 60 meta-analyses have appeared in the literature.1