To argue for complementarity or integrativeness implies that the knowledge bases of the paradigms are commensurable — that’s, they don’t seem to be logically inconsistent. For example, in the paradigm that we now name typical scientific medicine, dilution of a therapeutic substance weakens its efficiency. However, within the homoeopathic paradigm, dilution — even a number of times in order that few molecules of the original substance remain — actually will increase its efficiency.
For efficacy studies to determine whether or not acupuncture has specific effects, “sham” types of acupuncture the place the patient, practitioner, and analyst are blinded seem the most acceptable approach. Sham acupuncture uses non-penetrating needles or needling at non-acupuncture factors, e.g. inserting needles on meridians not related to the specific condition being studied, or in places not associated with meridians. The under-performance of acupuncture in such trials may point out that therapeutic results are due totally to non-particular effects, or that the sham treatments usually are not inert, or that systematic protocols yield less than optimal remedy. The results do, nonetheless, provide robust help for the philosophical/value congruence theory in several methods. First, as hypothesized, having a holistic philosophy of well being (“The well being of my …