I am sorry people feel that way about my comments. I do not intend to ridicule anyone, and don't actually believe I have done so. I clearly have a different philosophy about treatment to many on here and am trying to find a way to highlight a different type of thinking. What I did was try to use humour (always a bad idea, I know) to point up the fact that it is very easy to assert something is true, but much more difficult to provide some kind of proof that it is true. This forum offers advice that can affect the life and well-being of dogs. I think, therefore, that it is completely valid to question advice that is based purely on belief and not backed up by some form of evidence. (If, however, I am being criticised for suggesting that faith healing at a distance does not work, then we probably cannot communicate.)
The fact that I don't believe certain therapies are effective is immaterial, and if convincing evidence were produced tomorrow, I would be quite happy to change my mind. I don't actually think that belief should be a significant factor in medicine. The point I have been making in this thread is that although acupuncture is a reasonably popular form of treatment for many, and belief in it is relatively high, it is not backed by any strong positive evidence. Certainly there are many anecdotes about how individual dogs respond, and many professionals who support its use and sell it as a treatment. Also, although I do not doubt that owners are seeing a response in individual dogs it will not be clear what that response relates to, will be affected by bias and inconsistency, and will never constitute evidence for the treatment.
(Poppypuppy09 - with your scientific background, if you have looked at the design requirements, statistics, and sample sizes needed to put together a valid trial, you will realise that it is not possible to prove anything with one dog, no controls and no randomisation or blinding.)
I accept that most people on the forum will not be interested in what I am trying to say, and will be quite happy to spend money on alternative treatments that don't have scientific backing. However, given the implicit and explicit recommendations found on this forum for several types of alternative therapy, I feel that it is perfectly reasonable to give an opposing view, and in many ways an essential counterbalance to what appears to be the prevailing opinion. Not everyone is convinced by alternative medicine.
I have always tried to provide helpful replies to people that are based on logic and science. In this I sometimes find my genuine views in conflict with others and it is not easy. If I occasionally get the tone wrong I apologise.