I’ll start by saying that this is going to be long.
The article we talk about here is 7 pages long, and- well, we had a lot to say about it. So this will be a two part post.
******************************************************
We surf the net in search of more information about Chinese Medicine on a regular basis.
We found this article on a website called Quack Watch.
At first we went through the article, thinking this is yet another person who thinks he knows something about CM (but really doesn’t), but we saw that the person writing the article has very strong opinions in regards of the CM, how effective and what stands behind it. When we come across a text which puts down, insults and disrespects CM, we make it a point to read it carefully, thinking that the text is based on ignorance and a negative pre-disposition regarding CM and Alternative Medicine in general.
Dr. Stephen Barrett did not fail us, and indeed, his article is based on more false things than true.
Let’s read it together shall we?

The 2 opening phrases clearly show that the distinguished doctor did not do his research properly.
If he had, he would know that there is more to CM than just TCM, and that Chinese Medicine doesn’t necessarily mean TCM. Also, there is no mention of Chinese herbs, which is ancient, in-depth and has very clear evidence to it’s effects. There is no mention of Tuina either. In the second paragraph we are witnessing complete lies and misguidance of the public. There is no “injection of sterile water, procaine, morphine, vitamins or homeopathic solutions through the needles”. Of course he fails to mention that the needles are sterile and are not to be used more than once.
Between you and me, if he would have done his homework properly, he would know better than to mention homeopathy, because than he would know that you don’t mix CM with homeopathy.
Throughout the article, Dr. Barrett fails to mention that the Chinese Medicine is based on Chinese philosophy, which just might be important to mention when you remember that the Western Medicine and science is basically based on Greek philosophy. Did he fail to mention this because he didn’t want to show something that both medicines have in common? After all, if he mentioned the Chinese philosophy, the “mess” that reflects from his article regarding Qi and acupuncture points could have been avoided, the reader would know that there’s something behind it all.

Dr. Barrett makes many generalizations.
For some reason, all of us who practice Qi Gong, for example, are healers with energies that come out of our finger tips. He mentions the Falun Gong and the fact that China banns Falun Gong’s practice in the country, but he doesn’t write about the reason why. It seems that Dr. Barrett chooses to  misguide his readers on purpose.
He goes on.
He says that in the pulse we can tell which organ is in deficiency of Qi. He doesn’t know that this is just one of the things we can tell by feeling the pulse. He immediately goes on to tell about the pulse in Western Medicine, and says that there are other places in the body where you can feel the pulse. Ah, but we know better, don’t we? If Dr. Barrett would have read a bit about the history of the pulse in CM, he would have read on the first page- more or less- about how in the past Chinese doctors felt the pulse in the ankle, in the neck- just like Western doctors…

Does CM puts certain species in the animal kingdon in danger? The answer is- yes.

As the sworn medicine man that he is, the writer of this article is looking at studies research.
The problem is the research he chose to talk about- a study which looks at the effect of electro-acupuncture in the ear for chronic pain and Chinese studies.
If Dr. Barrett would have talked to professionals, they would tell him that there are better points to use while treating chronic pain. Also, we tend not to base our knowledge on Chinese studies but on Western studies, and there are plenty to choose from. If the good doctor really wanted to paint a fair picture, he would have chosen one of those studies and not Chinese ones.
When he talks about addictions, he neglects to mention NADA, in which the acupuncture sessions are given as a part of a treatment plan that includes psychology and support groups.
When Dr. Barrett talks about the placebo effect, he doesn’t say anything about the fact that the same effect is being used in Western medicine as well, and he talks about “external suggestion” as some kind of hypnosis that is being used by the CM practitioner. As a psychiatrist himself, Dr. Barrett should acknowledge the power of words in therapy and should be fair to write about the “external suggestion” that is present not only in CM but also in psychology, psychiatry and Western Medicine in general.