― kingfish prætor (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 06:14 (nineteen years ago)
― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 06:27 (nineteen years ago)
― C J (C J), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 06:49 (nineteen years ago)
― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 07:16 (nineteen years ago)
― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 07:44 (nineteen years ago)
― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 07:47 (nineteen years ago)
(From www.etymonline.com, which also says "Until at least the 1880s, even some medical men still believed piercing the ear lobes improved one's eyesight", heh heh]
― ledge (ledge), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 07:50 (nineteen years ago)
― salexandra (salexander), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 07:55 (nineteen years ago)
I have a fact. Rabbits are not native to Ireland, I found out last night.
― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 08:14 (nineteen years ago)
First of all, surely pirates didn't know about acupuncture. Secondly, there's no medical proof that acupuncture can do any of the things it claims to do. It certainly doesn't improve eyesight.
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:14 (nineteen years ago)
― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:33 (nineteen years ago)
Who says? They spent a lot of time hanging around major trading routes with some fairly widely-travelled people. They may not have known any of the thinking behind acupuncture, but there's nothing to suggest they didn't hear bullshit stories about sticking an earring in your ear improving your eyesight.
I can't help thinking that pirates wore earrings because it was jus the bling of the time. It's all about portable wealth, and nothing makes you look harder (well, okay, some things) than being able to pay for your meal by ripping your earring out without flinching.
Secondly, there's no medical proof that acupuncture can do any of the things it claims to do. It certainly doesn't improve eyesight.
If it can do anything at all, I don't see why it can't improve eyesight. I know a guy who claimed it made him function properly again after a massive stroke he had when he was 25.
― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:35 (nineteen years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:37 (nineteen years ago)
Most objective studies have found that it can relieve tension, and that's about it. Any claims that puncturing one part of body with small needles will somehow help to heal some other part of the body is totally against what we know about human physiology.
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:40 (nineteen years ago)
I still think it's a bunch of hippie crap with no scientific basis, but it cured my hayfever (my regular doctor could only agree that I wasn't allergic anymore, and he asked how the hell I did it, after none of the various methods he had tried had failed).
― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:40 (nineteen years ago)
― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:41 (nineteen years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:43 (nineteen years ago)
I actually agree with you, but the way in which you're arguing makes me want to say "totally against what you think you know about human physiology, you mean".
Anyway, it doesn't matter whether it actually worked 100% of the time or not. The fact is that enough people can point to it having worked for them (coincidence? Some relief of tension that then had a knock-on effect? Who knows?) for it to be accepted by a large number of people. As long as your medical service isn't trying to offer it to you instead of treatment you do believe in, then I'd say you've no reason to worry about it.
― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:45 (nineteen years ago)
pirates, being sailors, would presumably, if nothing else, have experiences of performing acupuncture on each others' anii, with their penes, and found that it relieved tension
― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:45 (nineteen years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:51 (nineteen years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 09:53 (nineteen years ago)
Yes, x 2.
― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 10:53 (nineteen years ago)
― benrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 10:54 (nineteen years ago)
― Hoosteen (Hoosteen), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 11:05 (nineteen years ago)
― Hoosteen (Hoosteen), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 11:11 (nineteen years ago)
You called?
― Yanni (dog latin), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 11:28 (nineteen years ago)
― kingfish prætor (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 14:33 (nineteen years ago)
― autovac (autovac), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 14:36 (nineteen years ago)
― elmo argonaut (allocryptic), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 14:42 (nineteen years ago)
― kingfish prætor (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 14:45 (nineteen years ago)