Asma’s example of Chinese medicine’s claims about the existence of “Qi” energy, channeled through the human body by way of “meridians,” though, is a different matter. This sounds scientific, because it uses arcane jargon that gives the impression of articulating explanatory principles. But there is no way to test the existence of Qi and associated meridians, or to establish a viable research program based on those concepts, for the simple reason that talk of Qi and meridians only looks substantive, but it isn’t even in the ballpark of an empirically verifiable theory.While I am by no means even close to a professional amateur in the concepts of Qi, I find the authors of this piece quite incorrect in their discussion of it. So let me explain why Qi is in fact scientific and can in fact be tested. In physics we know that whenever a charge travels down a wire (or other conductor) a magnetic field results. Now out nerve cells operate in a similar fashion through a chemical process way to long to discuss here without losing a lot of people. Nerve impulses travel along the axon via a process called the Sodium Potassium pump which via an exchange of ions keeps a voltage gradient in an axon. If course where there are moving currents there are changes in magnetic fields. Which definitely means there is energy moving throughout the body and that energy can be “felt”. The science proves it. Furthermore when discussing Qi and the energy centers of the body, one will note that the basic Chakras happen to be points in the body where there are a lot of nerves. The groin, abdomen. Head, spine, etc. We already know that one can put a device on someone's head to “read” the changes in EM radiation coming from the brain as people think. How is this not a confirmation of Qi? How would knowing that we can “read” the energy being given off by the brain would we not think that the rest of the body also has “tell tale” signals? In the martial art of Wing Chun, practitioners are taught to develop sensitivity. When we come into contact with an opponent we feel for the slightest change in movement, muscle tension, etc. that for most people go unnoticed. How is it so unfathomable that there are people who have trained to become especially tuned to the various energies that are emanating from the human body? Lets discuss the merits of acupuncture or pressure. We already know that if we knock someone in the knee we can elicit a reflex action. We also know that if we block a nerve from being able to send a message we can prevent that same reflex action. So then, how is it that we can call acupuncture pseudoscience, simply because a placebo effect can be seen when random points are used? That people show, or believe they have improved symptoms simply because they have undergone some pin pricking that they believe in is no different from the mental effects of wearing a new outfit for a marathon or wearing lucky socks. It is also no different than a person who responds to a phobia. There is no actual threat yet the person still reacts physiologically to the stimulus as though there was. The belief in the effectiveness of a treatment is, in non-western cultures a part of the healing process. In Chinese medicine in particular a relaxed body (and mind) is part of the process. If one's mind is not relaxed, then it is impossible to control and manipulate Qi (Chi) I think the good writers ought to take seriously the words of Yoda in Star Wars The Empire Strikes Back: It is their disbelief why they cannot metaphorically raise the star ship.
In terms of empirical results, there are strong indications that acupuncture is effective for reducing chronic pain and nausea, but sham therapy, where needles are applied at random places, or are not even pierced through the skin, turn out to be equally effective (see for instance this recent study on the effect of acupuncture on post-chemotherapy chronic fatigue), thus seriously undermining talk of meridians and Qi lines. In other words, the notion of Qi only mimics scientific notions such as enzyme actions on lipid compounds. This is a standard modus operandi of pseudoscience: it adopts the external trappings of science, but without the substance.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
The Dangers of Being To “Informed” To See
On Oct 10, Massimo Pigliucci and Maarten Boudry penned a piece in the NY Times Opinionator in regards to the Dangers of Pseudosience in which they took a hard swipe at Chinese traditional medicine: