[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
September 9, 1974


Author Affiliations

Queens College Flushing, NY

JAMA. 1974;229(11):1421. doi:10.1001/jama.1974.03230490023010

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor.—  Given the public clamor for acupuncture therapy that John Bonica mentions in his overview (228:1544, 1974), the need for rigorous, clinical studies is clear. Frequently, acupuncture is the treatment modality of last resort, as is shown in the reports of six case studies of complications of acupuncture in patients whose chronic states had not responded adequately to conventional therapies and who, therefore, "resorted" to acupuncture (228:1552, 1974). While case studies of abuses are, of course, worth noting, they do not provide the invaluable evidence generated by more broad statistical analyses of larger samples, under carefully controlled conditions, as your EDITORIAL (228:1577, 1974) points out, that are required now.In his review of acupuncture therapy, Bonica makes a historical error that, in fact, illuminates some of the current public and professional interest in acupuncture. Bonica says that the Kuomintang banned acupuncture in particular, and Chinese medicine in general, in