Patrick Burke writes:
> By evaluating Chinese medicine like acupuncture with deductive logic
> like RCTs, _we are really only saying how well it fits within that
> way of knowing_.
This is an interesting comment to make on a list about evidence based
health. I'm well aware of the limitations of clinical trials, and I got
a bit of flak when I wrote in my book that randomization is overrated. I
have also argued quite forcefully on this list that the hierarchy of
evidence is often applied too rigidly. But quite honestly, I worry about
what people have in mind when they talk about other ways of knowing.
If you propose that acupuncture might be evaluated without RCTs, what
did you have in mind? And would that method of evaluation apply only to
acupuncture, or would it be an appropriate way of evaluating traditional
medicine as well.
To ask the question in a different way, should acupuncture have a
different standard of proof than, say, the use of beta blockers. If so, why?
Steve Simon, [log in to unmask], Standard Disclaimer.
Sign up for the Monthly Mean, the newsletter that
dares to call itself average at www.pmean.com/news
|