Reflexology may or may not be credible BUT
Quoted message said:For a summary of why reflexology is not credible see
quackwatch.orgreflex.htmlOpen ↗
for an example of why Quackwatch is NOT credible just take a look at their "unbiased" analysis of
reflexology-- let's just say that rather than doctors I consider them "spin" doctors.
Have you carefully read their take on reflexology? Obviously there are both positive and negative
studies on the modality. Why not report that fairly and honestly, rather than selective reporting,
and selective quoting, adding their own spin, etc.?
And, if this study had been negative, it certainly WOULD have been added to the Quackwatch site--
Mult Scler. 2003 Aug;9(4):356-61.
Reflexology treatment relieves symptoms of multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled study.
Siev-Ner I, Gamus D, Lerner-Geva L, Achiron A.
Complementary Medicine Clinic, Department of Orthopedic Rehabilitation, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-
Hashomer, Israel.
CONCLUSIONS: Specific reflexology treatment was of benefit in alleviating motor; sensory and urinary
symptoms in MS patients.
PMID: 12926840
(Yes it was blinded, look it up). And no, it is selectively NOT reported as a study of reflexology
on Quackwatch.
And for a positive study that was noted--
Quackwatch: "In another study, 35 women with premenstrual syndrome (PMS) were randomly assigned to
ear, hand, and foot reflexology or to placebo therapy done on sham reflex points. The women kept a
daily record of 38 possible symptoms selected from previous PMS research questionnaires. The
treatment group reported significantly fewer symptoms than the placebo group, and these improvement
persisted for 2 months after treatment. Many women in this group fell asleep during the 30-minute
sessions and reported feeling more energetic during the next day. The placebo group reported that
they thought they were receiving genuine reflexology, The authors note, however, that it was very
difficult to develop a credible placebo control group, which may have been the study's flaw.
Normally, reflexology is soothing, but the placebo treatment was described as "either overly light
or very rough." [13] Thus the differences could have been differences in the quality of the massage
being administered. The study suggests that massage may relieve PMS symptoms, but it does not
validate the alleged connection between reflex points and body organs."
First of all, even if the organ connection part of reflexology isn't valid or proven, the person
suffering from PMS could care less about that.
He is picking apart the study, and he *could* be correct, but all negative studies he accepts
without such nitpicking, or pointing out of possible flaws in the design. All part of the spin,
of course.
He is NOT an unbiased source of alternative treatments, although he does purport to be.
Oh, here is another interesting MEDLINE study (not quoted)
Anesth Analg. 2003 Mar;96(3):885-90,
Pressure applied on the extra 1 acupuncture point reduces bispectral index values and stress in
volunteers.
Fassoulaki A, Paraskeva A, Patris K, Pourgiezi T, Kostopanagiotou G.
Department of Anesthesiology, Aretaieion Hospital, Athens, Greece.
............snip.......................
IMPLICATIONS: This crossover study investigated the effect of pressure application on the
acupuncture "extra 1" point in healthy volunteers. Acupressure applied for 10 min on the extra 1
point significantly reduced the BIS values and the verbal stress score when compared with
acupressure applied on a control point.
PMID: 12598279
PLEASE MAKE NOTE: My point is NOT that reflexology is proven. My point is that Quackwatch can
completely be written off as an unbiased source of information.
BL
"As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed. There is a hologram of the rock within the wave
that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there's a reflected wave back." Ralph Abraham
"I'd like to learn to windsurf." BL