You are too kind. I will post up my side of the argument and link to Pulse – I’m sure they will be cool about it.

Obviously, I had no idea of who was writing the other piece or what would be in it but there were a couple of nice symmetries. I liked the fact we had both been to the same BMAS course and the ‘thousands of years’ gambit was not unanticipated.

A casual and selective approach to evidence, allied to vigorous self-promotion, is a hallmark of the acupuncture lobby’s approach to the literature.

Acupuncture relies on the faith-based collusion of expectation between acupuncturist and patient.

Beautifully put. And how many “fringe medical” CAM therapies could we apply that too? (All of them?).

Your opponent Dr Hamilton’s “No” (pro-acupuncture) piece cracked me up. At times I though I was reading a spoof, so happily did it trot out all the usual hand-waves, platitudes and non-sequiturs.

That acupuncture is still regarded, by some, as a form of quackery is, to me and other GPs who use it, a matter of some surprise and amazement. It’s a form of traditional medicine that has been practised and indeed raised to a fine art in China over thousands of years. Surely no treatment would persist if it was not effective?

Hmm. Surely no argument would hang around if it had been repeatedly and comprehensively debunked?

Sadly the reality is otherwise.