OPP Publishes Position Paper Criticizing Government Funding of Acupuncture

June 8, 2010

CFI's Office of Public Policy today published a position paper examining the evidence for and against acupuncture therapy and the effects of government funding of acupuncture treatment through "integrative medical clinics."

In recent decades, public interest in acupuncture has grown dramatically. Proponents of acupuncture repeatedly make the unjustified claim that acupuncture is an efficacious and cost effective complement to conventional medicine. These claims rely on dubious and discredited research data. During the past ten years, however, an increasingly robust body of research has accumulated showing that acupuncture has no intrinsic clinical value. Despite mounting empirical evidence against it, however, acupuncture has become increasingly embedded within the American healthcare system, in part through government funding of integrative medical clinics.

The Center for Inquiry's paper on acupuncture, written by Robert Slack, Jr., offers compelling evidence that the uncritical adoption of acupuncture adds significant costs to the United States' already overburdened healthcare system, lowers standards of medical training and treatment, and lends dangerous and undue authority to pseudoscience, ultimately degrading respect for science in the public realm.

CFI's paper was authored by Robert Slack, Jr. a writer living and working in Maryland. Mr. Slack was assisted by biophysicist Eugenie V. Mielczarek, emeritus professor of physics at George Mason University.

Click here to access a copy of CFI's paper in PDF format.

Creative Commons License


#1 Bette on Friday June 11, 2010 at 1:31pm

If you can’t be part of the solution, do you have to keep being part of the problem of closed-minded thinking?  CAM is real, it requires less over-head, it works, and it does not kill people like many pharmaceuticals do. This will save money for health care when it continues into mainstream because IT WORKS. 

By the way, “skepticism” doesn’t mean going in trying to prove things wrong, and that is what you all do.  Skepticism along with having a logical open mind creates new solutions to old problems that thinking like you all do over there, like hive mentality that is what you DO NOT do causes, and is the new thinking we need to solve old problems.

Think, before it becomes illegal. Open-minded skepticism, not being done here.
Bette S Baysinger

#2 David (Guest) on Saturday June 12, 2010 at 10:56am

Remember that the scientific foundation lies within the limited scope of the five senses. The human mind can’t even logically incur the source of our beginning without reverting to mysticism. Interesting huh? Think about it for a second. If we use logic to explain beginnings we quickly get into an endless regression. What does this suggest? The only logical conclusion is that beginnings have mystical origins whether we choose to accept it or not. With such obvious human limitations how are we to know that acupuncture doesn’t work? We have already established that humans don’t even know where they came from. Perhaps “accepted science” lacks the proper foundation or missing information needed to explain why acupuncture works. Do you think humans know everything? hmmm.

Here’s an idea that maybe you “thinkers” have not thought of. If you don’t know, just leave people alone. I don’t think I have ever seen a case where acupuncture hurt someone (there may be a few, but they are far and few between). I have seen plenty of cases where it helped people. Before you comment remember that placebo effect is not science. It’s basically saying you don’t know, but it worked. (!!!NOT SCIENCE!!!).

Open minded skepticism is the only way to go in my opinion. This means save judgement until you have your facts straight and keep your mind open to the possiblity until you know. Stop being so arrogant, I have personally seen acupuncture work and know hundreds of others who agree. It obviously works, you all are just to scared to think on you own.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.