This article under the banner Discover Magazine is discussing a new phone app that claims to cure headaches by placing the phone on recognised acupuncture points in the head. now that’s silly. But the article writer goes on to lambast acupuncture for real with some lazy referencing and frankly silly comments that shows how lazy bloggers can be. The author Phil Plait is pictured with a fake i-Phone to his head and a rather sardonic smile on his face. Phil dismisses the app as likely to be quackery, but then says it is supported by acupuncturists. Queue an opportunity to have a go at the whole of acupuncture. in fact all the blurb for the app says is that the points used are ‘selected by acupuncturists’. There is no specific link between an app developer reading in a learned Chinese Medicine text which points relieve headache and sticking them into the app. nowhere does the app claim that it is supported or endorsed by acupuncturists. However, the real victim of our thoughtful friend Phil is the whole of acupuncture:
“Having this stuff supported by acupuncturists doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence either. Acupuncture is the idea that sticking needles at certain locations in your body can restore the balance of this energy flow. If that’s true, acupuncture can be tested to see if it works. Surprise! It has been, and it doesn’t. Or, to be more precise, it doesn’t work any better than the placebo effect.”
These highlighted sections take the reader not to a series of research papers published after peer review – but to another blog! This time it is called Science Based Medicine. The blogger “Dr N” makes wild statements about a single trial and concludes that acupuncture doesn’t work. No references, no date, no author – in fact no real way of finding out what this blogger in turn is quoting at all. More lazy blogging, no evidence base, no foundation in real scientific writing. Poor show all round.