It has long been noted that there is a discrepancy in outcomes of Traditional Chinese Pseudo-Medicine (TCMP) between those studies that have been done in China and those done in the US and Europe.
99% of acupunctures studies in China for acupuncture are postive and
No trial published in China or Russia/USSR found a test treatment to be ineffective.
This odd result has always been ascribed to a comination of culture bias and, perhaps,
An evaluation by the Chinese government found
more than 80 percent of clinical data is "fabricated,"
It seems that making up data is de rigeur in China:
"Clinical data fabrication was an open secret even before the inspection," the paper quoted an unnamed hospital chief as saying. academic ethics is also an underdeveloped field in China, leading to an academic culture that is accepting of manipulation of data. "I don't think that the 80 percent figure is overstated,"
I grew up a science fiction fan and a follower of
It looks like Chinese medical researchers use it as a commandment rather than a warning.
Unfortunately when it comes to the medical literature from China, since the information can't be verified, you have to
The medical literature and clinical trials from China has to be considered persona non grata unless it can demonstrate otherwise.
It would be interesting, and perhaps required, if all meta-analyses of acupuncture and TCPM that have included studies from China, be repeated without the Chinese studies. I bet the conclusions are even less impresssive.