I used to think that there might be something to acupuncture. I really did. But the more I evaluated the evidence, the more underwhelmed I was. Acupuncture is a theatrical placebo, nothing more. Harriet Hall agrees.https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/false-claims-for-acupuncture/ …
-
-
No sir, listening to opinion that agrees with your life view is an easy way to a comfortable life. If you care, read credible peer review publications.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Well that publication may be peer reviewed but that doesn't not necessarily mean it's good quality (impact factor .8). Also please read up on problematic sham controls in acupuncture studies (nearly all of which were present in the studies included in this meta)...
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I'd like to think that I have spent enough time in sensory stimulation research to explore sham controls at length...it does not negate the fact that specific physiological effects do occur. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24322588 And the impact factor you quote beats the hell of any opinion...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You want to play that game? OK, I'll play. I realize IF ≠ quality, but you wanted this... Anesthesiology impact factor = 5.163 Nature Reviews Cancer impact factor = 37.147 Trends in Molecular Medicine impact factor = 10.732 https://www.nature.com/articles/nrc3822 … http://www.cell.com/molecular-medicine/abstract/S1471-4914(14)00103-8 …
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @EdzardErnst
Sure, but low IF journals are unfortunately full of journals that got rejected by peers from better ones (I stumbled upon some papers I reviewed, which were rejected, published in lower journals with not so much as a word changed...).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I reviewed a paper or a fairly high IF journal. It was absolute crap. I flat-out rejected it. Obviously I was over-ruled because it was accepted with a few changes. Last author was a pretty big deal...
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
I don't disagree, but some fields are relatively small, and reviewers can be fairly accurately guessed at by their comments, as can authors by the content of their papers.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.