Go to Top


From the moment that Acupuncture research has started in the late seventies of last century, debates about the legitimacy of the evidence base of this ancient and traditional medicine continue up to this day. The “it’s no more than a good placebo” being the main argument to disprove . The” it’s 4000 years old and therefore proven in itself’ the most cited counterargument.

What has surprised me most in this discussion is the unanswerable question that has to be solved in this debate. Generalistic statements as  ‘acupuncture works’ or Acupuncture doesn’t work’ are scientifically spoken unanswerable. Just consider what it implicates. Does it cover the whole diagnostics, intervention and prognostic dimensions. And does it state that when this all is proven that the whole TCM(Traditional Chinese Medicne) system with cupping, massage, lifestyle etc. also is proven. Same counts for the opponents: is it all placebo or are some parts valuable etc A generalisitc question like this one, could never be answered scientifically. From other disciplines in Healthcare who made their first steps in evidence based medicine gradually evolved. Some parts could be proven others had to be rejected. Thus evolving over time.

The issue didn’t simplify when in recent years other needling techniques very closely related to the acupuncture techniques evolved and became disciplines in their own sense. Thus causing new debates to whom the needling techniques belong.

Needling concepts aims to facilitate a scientific approach to acupuncture techniques and needling techniques in general. It hopes by the creation of this website to enable research in the field of therapeutic needling.