哈佛医学院认为非穿刺针灸或者针灸是一种效果更好的“安慰剂”疗法

Acupuncture哈佛大学网站首页上今日刊登了一篇报道,是哈佛医学院的一项研究成果。文章标题是:

All Placebos Not Created Alike
In a Trial of Sham Acupuncture vs. Oral Placebo Pill, Patients Experienced Greater Pain Reduction From Sham Device Than Those Receiving Placebo Pill

文章认为,Sham Acupuncture(Sham 意思是不真实的,所以我认为仅仅是刺激穴位,而非传统的穿刺针灸)是一种效果更为明显的安慰剂(Placebo)。他们的二期研究结果表明,与服用安慰剂药丸的病人相比,接受非穿刺针灸的病人表示他们体验到了减少的痛楚和减轻的症状。

In the second phase of the study, patients receiving sham acupuncture reported a more significant decrease in pain and symptom severity than those receiving placebo pills for the duration of the trials. The results of this study show that the placebo effect varies by type of placebo used.

以为教授认为这一结果可能暗示,使用仪器进行医学仪式(翻译可能不太准确)可以增强安慰效果。原文如下:

“These findings suggest that the medical ritual of a device can deliver an enhanced placebo effect beyond that of a placebo pill. There are many conditions in which ritual is irrelevant when compared with drugs, such as in treatment of a bacterial infection,” said Kaptchuk, “but the other extreme may also be true. In some cases, the ritual may be the critical component.”

虽然他们作为科学的角度来讲没有完全否认这种“医学仪式”可能存在的真实治疗效果,但是我们可以看出他们基本上认为类似针灸一类的治疗方法仅仅是一种安慰剂疗法。

对于中医的很多治疗方法是否真的是科学,国内亦长期存在争论。例如方舟子就认为中医是不科学的。他的这一言论招来国内不少人,特别是中医工作者的讨伐。我不认为中医治疗方法是不科学的,至少不是完全不科学的。但是我们目前所处的科学时代确实需要一个能够让人信服的科学手段来证明中医的科学性。如果无法证明,我们将无法自信的声称中医是科学的。就算中医可以治疗好成千上万的人,但是科学是不能只看结果的。

1 comment

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.