And from the: “get a load of this!” file…. A commentary from Science-based medicine webpage regarding CAM

“Many MDs have relied heavily on the American Academy of Family Physicians for continuing medical education via the American Family Physician and the AAFP home study programs. The AAFP prides itself on its evidence-based approach to medicine. In general, it delivers. But the recent FP Essentials Number 432 on “Chronic Pain Management” fell short. It recommended treating chronic pain with acupuncturechiropractic, touch therapy, and S-adenosyl methionine (SAM-e), presenting them in a way that misled readers into thinking that the recommendations were based on good scientific evidence. They were not”.

“With 6,500 peer reviewed journals and over two million papers published every year, it is easy to find a study to support pretty much any point of viewJohn Ioannidis taught us that most published research findings are false, with preliminary studies frequently being overturned by larger, better follow-up studies (see Cochran collaboration). When evaluating the evidence for a treatment, it is not enough to find one or two positive studies. It is essential to also look for negative studies and for systematic analyses that weigh all the published evidence, and to put all the available evidence into perspective. The authors failed to do that”.  Yepper!

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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