Talk:Dry needling

I

I see some tendentious edits being made to this article but no talk here. This won't do so I'm going to be bold and start talking. I am familiar with this matter as a term in UK physiotherapeutic practise and have some understanding of the medical theory behind it. Now we shall examine the sources and start editing the article accordingly. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Differences from acupuncture

Fyslee is trying to add a statement like but unlike acupuncture it isn't necessarily associated with a belief in meridians or acupuncture points.. This seems both tendenditious and incorrect. It is not supported by any source and so I shall continue to remove it. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

For a good source on the definition of acupuncture and the diversity of its practise, please see this report which I previously cited in the article. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

You know full well that acupuncture is normally based on a belief in acupuncture points and meridians, while dry needling isn't. What's the problem? Place a citation needed tag, instead of deleting factual and uncontroversial (except to you) information. If you dispute the accuracy of it, then discuss it here instead of edit warring. If you have sources that show that dry needling is usually based on such beliefs, then produce them. We know there are masses of refs that show that acupuncture does so, but that's not the subject here. This is about dry needling, and if it was based on those beliefs, then this would be an improper fork. Then it could just as well be a part of the acupuncture article, but it isn't because of those significant differences.

BTW, I have looked at your source above and wonder what relevance it has to this discussion. It only mentions dry needling once and doesn't address this dispute in any manner. If it does, please point me to the relevant page(s).

An interesting comment from a chiropractic source makes my point:

• "There are similarities, but also very significant differences between the TCM style of acupuncture and dry needling. Acupuncture follows rules and beliefs that have been established since ancient times, whereas dry needling ignores ancient acupuncture philosophy. Most, if not all of TCM, is based on pre-scientific ideas, whereas dry needling is totally based on modern scientific neurophysiology and anatomy. Dry needling is purely for pain relief and based on recent understandings in pain science. There is much less mystique surrounding dry needling for pain abatement." From: When Acupuncture Becomes "Dry Needling"

Most sources describe dry needling of trigger points, which are not the same as acupuncture points. I'm improving the article by including this source. -- Fyslee / talk 07:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Wait, I thought that the whole point of dry needling is that it is based on anatomy rather than meridians? Is the dispute that a practice can still call itself acupuncture without being credulous to all of TCM? - Eldereft (cont.) 09:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Something like that. The term acupuncture is certainly used by some therapists who don't follow the Chinese tradition. We can't be dogmatic or precise about the use of either term because both of them cover a variety of overlapping methods. The report I cited above, was written to try to make some sense out of the current confusion with a view to guiding regulation and/or self-regulation. YMMV depending upon the jurisdiction as the practise(s) are licensed in some places, I gather. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• The disputed version has been tagged for some time without improvement. I continue to find it poorly sourced and tendentious. I have reverted to an earlier version which seems better. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

And I reverted it back, since there is absolutely no consensus for you to do so. Just because no one seems to care about this article, doesn't mean that because you do, you can revert it back to your favorite version. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 17:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

There is consent to change this article. I placed a new link to the ashi points wiki page. Ashi needling has been around for thousands of years. Just because someone puts a little science behind it does not change the technique, what it is trying to accomplish, or it's origin. Let's be realistic here. trying to dupe folks into believing that dry needling is somehow different than acupuncture is simply rediculous. the only thing that is really different is that, in many states (in the US), you need >3000 hours of training to be licensed to perform acupuncture, but if you are a chiropractor, you only need a 100hour certification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flobmonster (talk • contribs) 07:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Meridians are based on anatomical relationships, as are many acupoints. ashi points are tender points. they can refer or not. your source for dry needling that I removed is unsubstantiated and written by a chiropractor, which is a conflict of interest. If I were a surgeon and decided I wanted to cut hair under my surgeons license, I can call it razoring and use a razor to do it. It is still a haircut. Hairstylists and barbers have been using razors for a long time. Now it is true that they have different training, but it is easy to see that pretty much no matter how I choose to cut hair, it has been done before. the outcome is the same - shorter hair. in the case of acupuncture and dry needling, the outcome is relief of pain, or THERAPY of any kind. the bit of text I cut is in direct contradiction of the definition that orange marlin provided. [[Flobmonster]] (talk) 21:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)