Can you imagine suffering a lifelong disability like permanent nerve damage, a collapsed lung, or chronic pain because someone with only three days of training inserted a needle into your body and dug around with it? Can you imagine a medical procedure where adverse effects are reported in half of all cases? This is the shocking reality of dry needling, acupuncture, and Intramuscular Stimulation being performed by physiotherapists in British Columbia. 

These invasive procedures, which involve inserting needles deep into muscle tissue near vital structures, carry serious risks of harm, including infections, organ puncture, and even life-threatening complications like pneumothorax (collapsed lung). In addition, there is strong scientific evidence that these techniques do not provide meaningful or lasting benefits. Despite these dangers, physiotherapists in BC are allowed to perform these techniques with minimal training and no standardized regulations, putting people at incredible unnecessary risk. This petition demands an immediate ban on needling in physiotherapy practice to protect public safety.

The risks of these procedures are not hypothetical—they are well-documented and devastating. Studies show that complications such as severe bleeding, nerve injuries, and infections are common, with some patients experiencing permanent damage like chronic pain syndromes or even organ perforation. Shockingly, physiotherapists in BC are not required to undergo rigorous, standardized training to perform these high-risk procedures. Practitioners learn needling in a weekend course, leaving them ill-equipped to handle emergencies or avoid critical errors. Would you trust someone with only a few days of training to insert a needle near your lungs, spine, or major nerves? The lack of oversight and accountability in this practice is unacceptable, and many people have and will continue to suffer irreversible harm.

Adding to the danger is the fact that these techniques lack robust scientific evidence to support their use. Research consistently shows that dry needling, IMS, and acupuncture are no better than a placebo and fail to deliver long-term benefits for pain or function. Why are we risking lives for treatments that don’t even work?

This petition calls on the College of Health and Care Professionals in BC to take urgent action by banning dry needling, IMS, and acupuncture from physiotherapy practice. These invasive techniques should only be performed by licensed acupuncturists or physicians who have undergone years of specialized training to ensure patient safety. By implementing this ban, BC can join jurisdictions like seven U.S. states that have already prohibited physiotherapists from performing these dangerous procedures. Sign this petition to demand an end to unsafe practices and protect British Columbians from preventable harm. Your safety, and the safety of your loved ones, depends on it. 

References Supporting the Ban:

Sum, B., & Quon, S. (2025): A scoping review found that there were adverse events reported up to 50% of the time after dry needling which ranged from minor issues (e.g., bruising, soreness) to serious complications including pneumothorax, deep infection, nerve injury, and spinal hematoma.

Gattie, E. E., Cleland, J. A., & Snodgrass, S. J. (2017): Found dry needling provides only short-term pain relief, with no robust evidence for long-term benefits.

Cummings, T. M., & White, A. R. (2001): Concluded dry needling offers limited efficacy beyond short-term relief, with no compelling evidence for sustained improvement.

Ernst, E., Lee, M. S., & Choi, T. Y. (2011): Highlighted weak and inconsistent evidence supporting acupuncture for pain relief.

Solomons et al. (2020): Found no significant difference between IMS and sham needling for chronic Achilles tendinopathy.

Mansfield et al. (2019): Concluded needling therapies produce minimal improvements in muscle force production.

Pérez-Palomares et al. (2017): Found dry needling added little benefit to physical therapy for shoulder pain.

Kalichman, L., & Vulfsons, S. (2010): Documented risks like pneumothorax, bleeding, and nerve damage from needling.

Boyce, D., Wempe, H., & Campbell, C. M. (2020): Reported major adverse events in 1 in 1,024 treatments, with minor events in 1 in 2 treatments.

Lao, L., Hamilton, G. R., Fu, J., & Berman, B. M. (2003): Highlighted risks of infections, pneumothorax, and nerve damage from acupuncture.

Jenkins et al. (2024): Found over half of physiotherapists reported minor adverse events, with 8-13% experiencing major complications.

Brady, S., McEvoy, J., Dommerholt, J., & Doody, C. (2014): This survey reported a high rate of minor adverse events, such as bruising and pain, and highlighted the need for better training and safety protocols.

Kietrys, D. M., Palombaro, K. M., Azzaretto, E., Hubler, R., Schaller, B., Schlussel, J. M., & Tucker, M. (2013): The study found limited evidence supporting dry needling for upper-quarter pain, with no significant long-term benefits compared to other treatments.

Dunning, J., Butts, R., Mourad, F., Young, I., Flannagan, S., & Perreault, T. (2014): This review emphasizes the lack of standardized protocols and the potential for adverse events, calling for stricter guidelines and better training for practitioners.

White, A., Cummings, M., & Filshie, J. (2008): While advocating for acupuncture in certain contexts, the authors acknowledge the risks of serious adverse events, particularly when performed by inadequately trained practitioners.

Furlan, A. D., van Tulder, M. W., Cherkin, D. C., Tsukayama, H., Lao, L., Koes, B. W., & Berman, B. M. (2005): This Cochrane review found limited evidence supporting acupuncture and dry needling for low back pain, with no significant long-term benefits.

Tough, E. A., White, A. R., Richards, S. H., & Campbell, J. L. (2007): This study found that the evidence for long-term benefits from needling is lacking, and the risks of adverse events remain a significant concern.

Cagnie, B., Dewitte, V., Barbe, T., Timmermans, F., Delrue, N., & Meeus, M. (2013): This review discusses the potential mechanisms of dry needling but concludes that the evidence for its effectiveness is inconsistent and that more research is needed.

Liu, L., Huang, Q. M., Liu, Q. G., Ye, G., Bo, C. Z., Chen, M. J., & Li, P. (2015): This meta-analysis found that dry needling provided no significant long-term benefits compared to other treatments.

Rho, M. E., & Spitznagle, T. M. (2018): This systematic review documented a wide range of adverse events, from minor bruising to severe complications like pneumothorax, emphasizing the need for better training and regulation.