NeiKung Masters Powers

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

BTW, there are standard Western medical practices that would almost certainly fail to demonstrate benefit if subjected to RCT. This is just as disturbing to me as homeopathy, in fact moreso because these practices tend to be accepted without question and widely used.


[/ QUOTE ]

Besides something obvious like circumcision, I can't think of any. Name some?

[latefordinner]

Snowball:

The jury is still somewhat out on SSRIs in relationship to depression for example, especially certain types of depression. Much research is still somewhat contradictory. Same with Ritalin. While it's clear that both SSRIs and amphetamine-like compounds are statistically significant in reducing some symptoms, there is contradictory evidence from double-blind studies over the entire range of symptom profiles they are prescribed for.

http://www.srmhp.org/0201/media-watch.html

Evidence is also out on diet/nutrition as far as they relate to certain risk factors

--

I'm not as much concerned with common WM techniques not being proven to work as I am with the possible iatrogenic effects of many of them.

--

VHawk: I also think we could have a lively discussion about medicine/context - that is if it is possible for a type of medicine to work in one cultural context and fail a double-blind study in another context.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

BTW, there are standard Western medical practices that would almost certainly fail to demonstrate benefit if subjected to RCT. This is just as disturbing to me as homeopathy, in fact moreso because these practices tend to be accepted without question and widely used.


[/ QUOTE ]

Besides something obvious like circumcision, I can't think of any. Name some?

[/ QUOTE ]

X-rays as diagnostic for lung cancer is a commonly discussed one. There have been studies done recently, I think, that show no improvement in outcomes for x-ray screening, yet this was standard procedure and assumed effective without support for decades. A large minority of surgical procedures are done with no support in the literature for their efficacy. Its likely that most of these ARE beneficial, but they haven't been demonstrated to be so, and some small number of them are very likely non-beneficial. Yet they continue to be done.

The shift to evidence-based medicine is a fairly recent one, even in the United States, and there is plenty of holdover from the older way of doing things.

Circumcision, while a hot-button issue in some circles, at least HAS a lot of research and data, on both sides. The issues I'm talking about have generally never been studied, or were studied for the first time after decades of use and found to be useless.

[Metric]

Magic trick = cheap entertainment

Magic trick + explanation in terms of "chi" = serious SMP discussion?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
VHawk: I also think we could have a lively discussion about medicine/context - that is if it is possible for a type of medicine to work in one cultural context and fail a double-blind study in another context.

[/ QUOTE ]

We probably could. I will admit my bias upfront, and say that I think the idea of a treatment working in one cultural context and not another is extremely strong evidence of placebo effect and placebo effect only. Of course there are cultural differences in compliance and risk factors, but these can be corrected for in double-blind studies. I see no fundamental reason why homeopathy is diametrically opposed to RCTs, and the same goes for crystal healing, energy healing, Reiki, prayer and a host of other alternative theories. My anti-alternative theory bias has nothing to do with the 'hippie, touchy-feely anti-establishment' aspect of the treatments, and everything to do with the consistent refusal to subject their treatments to controlled experiments, and the failure of those modalities every single time they ARE examined experimentally.

IOW, I think it is thousands of times more likely that the practitioners know they don't really do anything than that there is some key component that is resistent to objective observation. It is still POSSIBLE that this is the case, but extremely unlikely, IMO. Just look at how quick the acupuncture and chiropracty people are to jump on RCTs and other studies that show measurable benefits to their treatments for back pain, etc. They love scientific rigor then!

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
i agree with latefordinner....this may seem humanly impossible here in the west but in the east...they have a completely diffrent view of medicine and sure i would like nothing beter but to see this dude tested at MIT or other controlled settings...but its hard for me to say its fake based on the fact that there are magicians that can do the same

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont think it's a fake because there are magicians that can do the same. I think it's a fake because it seems the best answer to the question "How come this guy demonstrated his powers by reproducing a whole bunch of effects you can buy from a magic shop?"

In other words, it seems unlikely to me that the mystic powers he has just happen to correlate with the magic tricks that you can buy. (I confess I havent seen the electric shock trick in a catalog - I put that down to my lack of encyclopedic knowledge of purchaseable magic tricks).