@Oddthinking I should have been more clear that the "needling" I had on my shoulder was "prolotherapy". A lidocaine and dextrose solution injected into the injury site. It works sometimes, from my research.

@Oddthinking I'm not sure what it matters to me, if I'm not taking them.

@Oddthinking For a separation, there's virtually no treatment that works really well, and I understood that going in.

Burning some money on an unproven treatment for chronic pain that strict "evidence based" docs won't do and have little else to suggest is perfectly reasonable. If it helps, great. If not, it helps you cope and move toward acceptance of an unchangeable misfortune.

@Oddthinking What's an opportunity cost, in this context?

As for risks, personal risk aversion varies from person to person, condition to condition. Caveat Emptor does have to apply in at least some measure. If it doesn't, or rather you'd like a system where it cannot, I'd view that as robbing me of my agency.

I'm not sure what healthcare situation they've got in AU, but "direct costs" is an odd thing to complain about, to me. People spend thousands on stuff they don't need and sometimes don't even use or want every year, but then bitch that their insurance doesn't cover $800 of something? The problem is people don't actually value their health that much.

@fredsbend Ah, so not dry needling. I don't know anything about prolotherapy.

@fredsbend Because they could be much more appropriate treatments.

@fredsbend Sure, and they can recommend leeches and blood-letting too, as long as they take down the big certificate on the wall saying "trained in a science at a university", so long as their medical association says "We support science-based medicine and this isn't it,", so long as my insurance premiums aren't higher because they are wasting money.

@fredsbend One of the indirect costs of alternative medicine is that people don't get effective treatment until the disease has progressed and/or they have been incapacitated with pain for a long time.

@fredsbend The agency that should be restricted is that of a clinician that relies on the certification and licensing of a medical professional to attract clients and then provides substandard care.

@fredsbend If am addressing the "oh there is no harm in acupuncture" argument. There is a direct cost. If a mechanic charges me $200 to realign the chakras in my car, and then makes some hammering noises and doesn't fix anything, it isn't okay. The law would offer me some forms of redress. If they did it while I was desperate, stranded on the side of the road, it would be considered even more wrong.

@Oddthinking For tendon and ligament injuries, it can sometimes strengthen and shorten stretched and partially torn injury types.

@Oddthinking I think people typically turn to "alternative" medicine after several rounds in "the standard of care" without satisfactory results. Sure, there's a few hippies that start there, but hippies are usually lost causes already.

@Oddthinking I think perhaps you view "medicine" as science that's dispensed from universities or some other orgs. That's not the correct view. Medicine is a practical item. Medicine is practiced by clinicians. The science serves them, not the other way around. In fact, the science starts with them (e.g. off label prescriptions).

They practice, observe things, try new stuff for difficult cases, share with each other, and eventually scientists catch on and decide to get to the bottom of it.

@fredsbend So what are the limits to what you can do before it isn't medicine? Acupuncture? Homeopathy? Leeches? Blood-letting? Psychic Surgery?