The medical
community has often cautioned the public that acupuncture is not fully
scientifically validated and although hundreds of peer reviewed
scientific studies have shown that acupuncture does work, its
operational mechanism is as yet unproven. The current scientific
explanation for the mechanism of acupuncture is that the insertion of
acupuncture needles into the body causes a cortical (brain) reaction
that releases certain neurotransmitters.
The neurotransmitters that have been proven in laboratory experiments to
be released by acupuncture stimulation are; endorphins, dopamine,
serotonin and histamine. Work is currently being done on the
relationship with amino acid and other peptide and biogenic amines and
acupuncture.
These neurotransmitters are released in a site specific manner, i.e.,
the stimulation of the point ST-36 releases serotonin. The particular
neurotransmitter is then attracted to the needle site along the most
direct neural pathway. Along the way the neurotransmitter stimulates
ancillary nerves and affects their function, as well as that of the
direct pathway.
For instance, a needle is placed in ST-36 (Susanli), one of the major
points for regulating the digestive function of the stomach. The actual
point is on the low leg but the neural pathway the serotonin has to
follow goes to and through the stomach. Thus, as the serotonin is being
drawn to the needle site on the low leg, it is able to affect the
stomach organ.
This mechanism is only partially proven, there may be other factors at
work and I will be the first to admit that we do not know the whole
story. But I would like to invite the medical community to turn their
laser like focus on themselves so that the public can get an idea of how
scientific their medicine is.
According to the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment "80-90%
of medical interventions practiced by (allopathic) physicians are not
scientifically proven". *1
In 1991 the British Medical Journal observed that "Only 15% of
(allopathic) medical interventions are supported by solid scientific
evidence...that is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical
journals are scientifically sound and partly because many treatments
have not been assessed at all". *2
Fewer than half the pharmaceutical drugs found in the Physicians Desk
Reference have a proven operational mechanism, most mechanisms are
presumed. This lack of scientific verification of allopathic medicine
does not seem to cause medical doctors or medical journalists much
concern.
I do not propose that we give up the life saving drugs and procedures
that are the wonder of modern medicine but I do suggest that blind faith
in allopathic medicine is as misguided as blind faith in alternative
medicine. Further research is needed in both allopathic and alternative
medicines but it is slow going because the expense of research is often
prohibitive. If we were to bring the cold eye of science to every aspect
of medicine, accepting and using only that which had been fully
scientifically validated and proven, we would have very little medicine
at all.
1 "Assessing the Efficacy and
Safety of Medical Technologies," Congressional Office of Technology
Assessment, 1978, p7.
2 "Where is the Wisdom...?", Richard Smith, British Medical Journal 303
(1991), pp798-99 |
