As a doctor, I didn’t think much of acupuncture. Then the opioid crisis arrived

In medicine whether something ‘works’ refers to whether it outperforms placebo.

Try Googling:
"works better than a placebo" site:edu

I think maybe this is one area where direct personal experience trumps statistics. I have had astonishing results from acupuncture, for a condition that I was told would probably need surgery, and which recurred a couple of years later and was fixed immediately by a different acupuncturist.

This is the key issue I think.  There are enough people who can swear that it works and isn't a placebo to make it worthy of trying to understand, even if the statistics aren't promising.  Tens machines also stimulate the nervous system but with electricity rather than needles and there is good anecdotal evidence in their favour.  I had electronic "acupuncture" on my earlobe once to help me give up smoking but to no effect at all but I see no reason to make such certain negative statements as the article makes.

Or doing nothing.

Quite. A treatment works if it is more beneficial than doing nothing.

Quite. A treatment works if it is more beneficial than doing nothing.

Like an effective placebo for instance?

Like an effective placebo for instance?

Yes - that's what I was getting at in my first post in this thread. Novella's position is that acupuncture is a placebo, and that the question is whether it is effective enough to be useful. If the meta-analysis is correct that its effectiveness is similar to that of conventional drugs in treating post-operative nausea and vomiting, then the answer appears to be yes. 

In the journal article he has doubts about the meta-analysis and therefore says that perhaps the conclusion should be "more research needed."

In the blog post he just says acupuncture doesn't work and is "a lost cause".

Yes - that's what I was getting at in my first post in this thread. Novella's position is that acupuncture is a placebo, and that the question is whether it is effective enough to be useful. If the meta-analysis is correct that its effectiveness is similar to that of conventional drugs in treating post-operative nausea and vomiting, then the answer appears to be yes. 

In the journal article he has doubts about the meta-analysis and therefore says that perhaps the conclusion should be "more research needed."

In the blog post he just says acupuncture doesn't work and is "a lost cause".

Sorry, I remember reading that post now.

Yeah, i can see how spending some time with a a confident, caring practitioner can be better than "nothing". Suggestion and expectation are very powerful states; hence hypnotism.

Acupuncture is way more modern than I thought too:

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4431

And as for what Novella is actually telling us, his online article begins:
"Acupuncture still doesn’t work. We have thousands of studies collectively showing that it does not matter where you stick the needles or even if you stick the needles. Acupuncture is an elaborate placebo, and nothing else."

The "Acupuncture still doesn't work" line is nonsensical. I don't understand how one can say that and ignore the empirical evidence from say, hundreds of people that report benefits from Acupuncture. I do understand that placebo may be a larger factor in the healing process at work here, and for sure it seems like a factor in any-case, but if something works, it works, right? Or am I missing something here? 

I suppose that the need to prove that it works in a western materialist fashion is a reasonable thing. It's just that western materialistic mainstream mentality isn't very good at certain things and this seems to be a case in point.

Anyhow, Steve Novella seems biased against it (hello captain obvious!   ), so I think that should be a factor in the conclusion, as Chris alludes to.