To help follow discussions, the most recent ten comments on blog posts are shown below with the latest comments first.

Older/newer comments can be viewed by clicking on the links at the bottom.

Clicking on the post title will take you to that blog post page and clicking on the comment author and date will take you straight to that comment.

by Barrie Lee 'Wellness' Thorpe - Monday 27 February 2017 12:20
He was good in 'Wayne's World' though, to be fair.

by Europe.ian - Monday 27 February 2017 11:15
I understand that his column at the Huffington Post is one of those free-to-post-with-no-renumeration numbers (sorry, shouldn't have mentioned numbers - The Dullman struggles when they're mentioned). So basically he uses it to peddle his sugar pills* by advertising without charge and with no editorial meddling, unencumbered by science or reality (*disclaimer - may contain extract of bullsh*t). He was all over #alternativefacts waaaaay before it became fashionable.

by Björn Geir - Monday 27 February 2017 11:06
A technical term for Dana's debility is Belief perseverance

by Edzard - Monday 27 February 2017 09:52
an alternative title of the post could have been LIES, DAMNED LIES AND THE HUFFINGTON POST. Dullman has a regular column in the HP, I understand.

by Lighthorse - Monday 27 February 2017 09:44
What happened here? Why is he publishing in the Huffington Post (HP), of all places? Could it be that his article would have been rejected had he submitted it to a peer-reviewed journal, or is he just a shill for manufacturers of homeopathic notions and potions hoping to get in on the popular "detox" craze? And why is the HP publishing such nonsense in the first, as technical and boring for the readership of the HP as it is? Maybe he thought it would be an ideal audience for his nano crap? If detox doesn't grab them, nano surely will. Who knows what sort of machinations his imagination gets up to. While he's at it, he might be better off to take a remedy for self-delusion, assuming one can be found or concocted by a homeopath in just the right potency.

by Lenny - Monday 27 February 2017 09:38
I never know if Dana lies deliberately or is just such a zealot that he is physically incapable of seeing negative evidence for the supposed effectiveness of his pet quackery.

by Logos-Bios - Sunday 26 February 2017 18:50
Why would Geir believe that I dislike him? He is a wonderfully pleasant, opinionated-albeit-seldom-perspicatious Icelander whose comments on subjects, which fail to reconcile to his biased, personal meta-narrative, are typically nonsensical. He makes me smile when he feigns knowledge regarding mainstream chiropractic.

by Björn Geir - Sunday 26 February 2017 10:29
The L-B really dislikes me 😀 Its rants make me proud but it would of course be more interesting and entertaining if it had something to clever to contribute, not only childish attempts at personal insults.

by Logos-Bios - Saturday 25 February 2017 21:59
@Geir As always, I'm amused by Geir's inevitable walk-backs when confronted with the fallaciousness or disrespectfullness of his often sub-cogent comments. At least here he has admitted(er, sort of) his faux pas. Geir claimed that he withheld using the correct and respectful term "Doctor" when he referred to Dr. Cassidy so as to avoid confusion. While I agree that many posters who support Geir on this site share his propensity to become confused easily, I don't think that he needed to"dumb down" his comments to facilitate understanding; rather, it's obvious that he is attempting to clean up his gaffe. BTW, Geir, it's not you who gets to decide how countries license and title professionals within various disciplines: it's the countries and their licensing boards who have this responsibility. I appreciated Psychologist-wannabe Geir's assessment that Dr. Cassidy's current, well supported position regarding stroke and CMT has been affected by a past negative event which supposedly compromised "his work and deductive reasoning." Actually, I more than appreciated it....I'm still LMAO over the ridiculous speculation. Leave it to Geir: when he is unable to successfully argue against a brilliant researcher's conclusions, he resorts to a bogus pseudo-psychological reason as to why the researcher's particular conclusion had been reached. Priceless!

by Logos-Bios - Saturday 25 February 2017 20:44
Review question noted in Cochrane database for systematic reviews "What are the effects of weight loss (bariatric) surgery for overweight or obese adults? Background Obesity is associated with many health problems and a higher risk of death. Bariatric surgery for obesity is usually only considered when other treatments have failed. We aimed to compare surgical interventions with non-surgical interventions for obesity (such as drugs, diet and exercise) and to compare different surgical procedures. Bariatric surgery can be considered for people with a body mass index (BMI = kg/m²) greater than 40, or for those with a BMI less than 40 and obesity-related diseases such as diabetes. Study characteristics We included 22 studies comparing surgery with non-surgical interventions, or comparing different types of surgery. Altogether 1496 participants were allocated to surgery and 302 participants to non-surgical interventions. Most studies followed participants for 12 to 36 months, the longest follow-up was 10 years. The majority of participants were women and, on average, in their early 30s to early 50s. Key results Seven studies compared surgery with non-surgical interventions. Due to differences in the way that the studies were designed we decided not to generate an average of their results. The direction of the effect indicated that people who had surgery achieved greater weight loss one to two years afterwards compared with people who did not have surgery. Improvements in quality of life and diabetes were also found. No deaths occurred, reoperations in the surgical intervention groups ranged between 2% and 13%, as reported in five studies. Three studies found that gastric bypass (GB) achieved greater weight loss up to five years after surgery compared with adjustable gastric band (AGB): the BMI at the end of the studies was on average five units less. The GB procedure resulted in greater duration of hospitalisation and a greater number of late major complications. AGB required high rates of reoperation for removal of the gastric band. Seven studies compared GB with sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Overall there were no important differences for weight loss, quality of life, comorbidities and complications, although gastro-oesophageal reflux disease improved in more patients following GB in one study. One death occurred in the GB group. Serious adverse events occurred in 5% of the GB group and 1% of SG group, as reported in one study. Two studies reported 7% to 24% of people with GB and 3% to 34% of those with SG requiring reoperations. Two studies found that biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch resulted in greater weight loss than GB after two or four years in people with a relatively high BMI. BMI at the end of the studies was on average seven units lower. One death occurred in the biliopancreatic diversion group. Reoperations were higher in the biliopancreatic diversion group (16% to 28%) than the GB group (4% to 8%). One study comparing duodenojejunal bypass with SG versus GB found weight loss outcomes and rates of remission of diabetes and hypertension were similar at 12 months follow-up. No deaths occurred in either group, reoperation rates were not reported. One study found that BMI was reduced by 10 units more following SG at three years follow-up compared with AGB. Reoperations occurred in 20% of the AGB group and in 10% of the SG group. One study found no relevant difference in weight-loss outcomes following gastric imbrication compared with SG. No deaths occurred; 17% of participants in the gastric imbrication group required reoperation. Quality of the evidence From the information that was available to us about the studies, we were unable to assess how well designed they were. Adverse events and reoperation rates were not consistently reported in the publications of the studies. Most studies followed participants for only one or two years, therefore the long-term effects of surgery remain unclear. Few studies assessed the effects of bariatric surgery in treating comorbidities in participants with a lower BMI. There is therefore a lack of evidence for the use of bariatric surgery in treating comorbidities in people who are overweight or who do not meet standard criteria for bariatric surgery. Currentness of data This evidence is up to date as of November 2013." I wonder why such surgeries continued to be performed after this review was published? By Edzard's "standards" for EBM relative to paramedical disciplines, such procedures should be thrown into the dumper until there is no longer a "lack of evidence" for its use.

by Phil - Sunday 26 February 2017 17:50
I found the evidence! Gunnel Berry led an audit of members of ACPIRT (the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Reflextherapy). The audit assessed the usage and involvement of reflextherapy in physiotherapy treatments in the UK. All 94 respondents thought reflextherapy was a good intervention procedure for their patients. They recommended the treatment to be taught in physiotherapy schools and wider. They wanted more publicity and wider audience participation for inclusion of reflextherapy in physiotherapy training. 50% thought that 25% – 50% of patient improvement was due to the placebo effect but that the rest was an effect of physiological changes. The membership was divided whether to call it reflexology or reflextherapy in context of the treatment application. To purchase a copy of the audit please contact Gunnel.

by Tom Kennedy - Sunday 26 February 2017 12:16
I routinely offer these kinds of explanation to patients who express an interest in discussing it. I also discuss the idea of 'energy flow'/meridians, with skepticism, and talk about how the Neijing seemed to talk much more about blood flow than anything else. And I frequently recommend meditation! People come with various preconceptions, various experiences with conventional healthcare, and I try to give treat them as intelligent adults who can make up their own minds about what I offer - many of them conclude that's it's valuable to them.

by Richard Rawlins - Sunday 26 February 2017 08:03
But does Dr. Lehmann explain all that to his patients? Does any acupuncturist? If not, why not? If meditation is what is needed - that is what a patient should have. They should not be kidded that needles have any effect. That would be dishonest. Simple.

by Dr. med. Hanjo Lehmann - Saturday 25 February 2017 22:46
When talking about acupuncture, it seems necessary to remind the reader of certain basic facts. Some of them are obvious, and I shall speak about them later. Another fact is not obvious, but nevertheless important. Without doubt, acupuncture theory plays a decisive role in the one book (more correctly, the two books) which till today are considered as the very foundation of TCM theory: the "Huangdi Neijing". However, as I showed in a recent essay ("Acupuncture in ancient China: How important was it really?", Journal of Integrative Medicine (Shanghai), January 2013, Vol.11, No.1, p. 45-53): There is no proof that clinical acupuncture was really broadly used in China even at the time when the "Huangdi Neijing" was compiled. There are some stories about acupuncture applied on two or three of about 400 emperors in China's history, but those stories may be legends. And different from today, we have reasons to suppose that acupuncture was hardly ever applied as a single therapy (without adding herbs). So we have to state: Acupuncture in China became widely used only after 1954 (not 1949!), and in the West partly after 1935 (based upon teachings of the impostor Soulié de Morant, who pretended having studied and practised acupuncture in China), and partly after Nixon's visit to China in 1972. So, what is really evident about acupuncture? Not very much, I'm afraid. Certainly not the existence of those strange conduits called "meridians". Even less the ridiculous assumption of a "flow of qi" within them (for which the swindler Soulié de Morant invented the concept and the terms of "energy" flowing in the "meridians" – whilst all Chinese sources speak of "qi and blood" flowing in the "jingluo", which makes the alleged existence of a separate circulation system outside arteries and veins even more improbable). Equally improbable, if not ridiculous, is the alleged existence of things like the "twelve divergent meridians" or the "fifteen collaterals". Without any clinical evidence is the alleged existence (or the clinical value) of functional point categories like "Yuan Points", "Luo Points", "Back-Shu-Points" or "Front-Mu-Points" (though teaching them is a basic source of income for the acupuncture societies). Without sufficient evidence is even the most important aspect of clinical acupuncture (including my own): Choosing points according to the assumption that certain points have specific qualities and abilities which other points do not have (like needling St36-Zusanli for stomach problems as well as for psychic aspects, or LI04-Hegu for any pain in the upper part of the body). Which leaves us with just two undeniable facts. First, that acupuncture causes micro-injuries – which is, in fact, not much, but nevertheless enough to believe that any result of those small injuries might not be explained merely as placebo. The other fact is the setting. With a dozen or more needles in different places of the body, the patient is obliged either to doze off for about half an hour, or to meditate. He HAS to calm down, which often is what he needs most. Moreover, he knows and feels that those needles represent the hand of the therapist (and do not forget that the German term for medical treatment is "BeHANDlung"). Considering that there is a branch of medical science called psychoneuroimmunology, it seems probable that those cases of migraine which have a clear psychosomatic component will show positive reactions after acupuncture treatment. One might object: If so, why not make the patient meditate without the needles? Well, you may try. But will he listen to you? And will his relaxation be as deep as the one enforced upon him by the needles? Enough reasons for me to consider acupuncture as a small but useful kind of therapy which surely offers something more than pure placebo. With my best regards to Skeptic Edzard Ernst and the kind readers of this blog, from Dr. med. Hanjo Lehmann Deutsches Institut für TCM Cranachstr. 1, D-12157 Berlin Tel. +49 - 175 - 644 9006 Mail:

by Leigh Jackson - Saturday 25 February 2017 19:57
I should have mentioned that the 2009 Cochrane review found no difference between acupuncture and sham. Swapping 5 trials from the first review, for 5 new trials, reversed the result. Given the contradictory results of the two Cochrane reviews I would say that the available evidence is: Contradictory!

by Edzard - Sunday 26 February 2017 07:20
probably not - but it easily could be what we call NATURAL HISTORY OF THE CONDITION!

by conception - Saturday 25 February 2017 17:42
I use dry cupping. My mom 83 had water in her knee (French translation of "de l'eau dans le genou") and was going for infiltrations at the hospital every 3 months with no much result but pain. Her right knee was pretty much double size than the left. I take pictures (am a photographer also) so I took pictures of her knees using same light same angle each time. Obviously pictures are no scientific evidence... however they remain a type of evidence. After 6-7 months she returned to her doctor who noticed on her chart that my mom did not went for her last 2 infiltration appointments but that her knee size was back to normal (no more water). The doctor asked my mom how that was possible. Is that what you call placebo?

by Howard Wu - Saturday 25 February 2017 16:21
Björn, alchohal turns out to be a very poor antiseptic on the skin or in a glass. It's continued use while giving injections on cotton swabs may only be promoting a placebo effect.

by Howard Wu - Saturday 25 February 2017 16:01
A journalistic article of a MRSA study in a hospital setting, The orginal may be behind a firewall somewhere. Petri dishes are useless for cupping being too shallow but might be used in gua sha cause they have a nice steriliable edge. They are kind of large though.

by jm - Saturday 25 February 2017 15:58
"Coins used for Guasha were recyclable." As is that quote (I'll credit my source, of course).

← Older comments
Recent Comments

Note that comments can now be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted.

Click here for a comprehensive list of recent comments.