Research Update September 2026

COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH RESEARCH

Acupuncture and tinnitus: could the brain hold some of the answers?

Tinnitus can be notoriously difficult to treat, and acupuncture continues to attract interest as a potential supportive approach.

A new randomised controlled trial published in Complementary Therapies in Medicine, investigated electroacupuncture for subjective tinnitus, comparing it with sham treatment. The researchers reported improvements in tinnitus outcomes, with some benefits maintained at three-month follow-up. Brain imaging also suggested changes in activity and connectivity involving the insula — an area involved in sensory processing and the emotional response to sensations.

The study is interesting because it brings together two questions that are often separated: does the intervention appear to help, and might we be able to identify measurable changes in the nervous system alongside those improvements?

That doesn’t establish a mechanism, or mean acupuncture has been proven as a treatment for tinnitus. Larger and better-powered studies will be needed. But it adds to an expanding research literature exploring how acupuncture may influence both symptoms and brain function.

For practitioners: this is a useful reminder that complementary therapies are increasingly being investigated using sophisticated neurological and physiological measures — while the distinction between an observed association, a plausible mechanism and established clinical efficacy remains important.

Herbal medicine and IBS: a promising pilot trial

Traditional herbal medicine is receiving increasing attention in clinical research, and a new Korean trial offers an interesting example.

Researchers investigated modified Gwakjeongtang, a traditional herbal preparation, in people with diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D).

The double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, published in Integrative Medicine Research, randomised 60 participants to receive either the herbal preparation or placebo for four weeks. The overall response rate was 55.2% with the herbal medicine compared with 26.7% with placebo. No intervention-related adverse events were reported in the study.

The results are encouraging — but this was explicitly a pilot study with a small sample, conducted at a single academic centre. The authors themselves call for a larger definitive trial.

That distinction matters. A promising pilot isn’t the same as established efficacy, but it is an important step in building a stronger evidence base.

For practitioners: this is a good example of traditional medicine being evaluated using the same rigorous methodology applied to conventional interventions.

Does a four-second breath hold change the stress response?

Breathing exercises are widely used in complementary and mind-body practice — but how much do the details actually matter?

A new randomised crossover pilot study, published the International Journal of Psychophysiology, compared two slow-paced breathing patterns:

4 seconds in / 6 seconds out
4 seconds in / 4-second hold / 6 seconds out

The 32 participants completed both conditions. Researchers measured salivary cortisol, heart-rate variability and skin conductance, alongside subjective measures such as stress and mood.

The inhalation-hold condition produced a greater decrease in cortisol than the no-hold condition. However, the physiological findings were not uniformly consistent, and neither breathing pattern produced a significant difference in self-reported stress, arousal or mood.

So, should practitioners immediately start prescribing four-second breath holds?

Not on the basis of this study alone.

What it does provide is something arguably more interesting: evidence that small changes in the structure of a breathing exercise can produce different physiological responses, and a reminder that physiological markers and how people actually feel don’t always move together.

Research takeaway: sometimes the interesting question isn’t whether an intervention “works”, but which component of the intervention might be doing what.

Meet your exposome: the hidden force shaping how you age

We tend to talk about health in terms of genes, diet, exercise and perhaps a few individual environmental exposures.

The concept of the exposome asks us to think much bigger.

Your exposome is, broadly, the totality of environmental and lifestyle exposures you encounter across your life. That includes air pollution and chemicals, food, physical activity, stress, sleep, light, social environment and many other factors.

Dr Frank Lipman’s introduction to the subject provides an accessible overview of why the exposome is attracting so much attention — particularly in the context of ageing.

The concept fits naturally with a whole-person approach to health. Rather than asking “What single thing caused this?”, it encourages us to consider the combined influence of multiple exposures over time.

There is also a practical message here. Thinking about the exposome doesn’t mean becoming anxious about every environmental exposure. It means identifying the areas where meaningful changes may be possible.

For practitioners, it offers another useful framework for asking patients about their wider health environment — rather than focusing exclusively on symptoms.

Genes may load the gun, but the exposome helps shape the trajectory.

Read: Meet Your Exposome – Dr Frank Lipman

When “clean” air isn’t quite so clean

We tend to think of cleaning products as making our indoor environment healthier. But new research presented at the American Chemical Society’s 2026 meeting raises an interesting question about what happens to some of the chemicals released by fragranced cleaning products once they’re in the air.

Researchers investigated how fragrance compounds can react with ozone indoors, generating ultrafine particles and other secondary pollutants.

Of particular interest for complementary practitioners is that the chemistry isn’t limited to conventional synthetic fragrances. Some products containing botanical ingredients and essential-oil compounds can also participate in these reactions.

This isn’t an argument that essential oils or botanical products are inherently harmful. Rather, it is a reminder that “natural” doesn’t mean “chemically inactive” — and that context, dose, ventilation and route of exposure all matter.

The practical message is refreshingly simple: ventilate when cleaning, avoid unnecessary fragrancing, and think about indoor air quality as part of the overall health environment.

THE THERAPEUTIC RELATIONSHIP

Does gentleness belong in healthcare?

What does it actually mean to provide good care?

A thought-provoking opinion piece in the BMJ argues that gentleness, listening, empathy and respect are not simply pleasant additions to healthcare — they are fundamental to the experience of being cared for.

Author Susannah Darling Khan draws on her experiences of supporting both parents through serious illness, describing the striking difference between care that felt attentive and respectful and care that felt rushed or brusque.

For complementary practitioners, this is particularly relevant.

Much complementary practice involves touch, close attention and one-to-one interaction. The practitioner’s manner, tone, presence and ability to listen can therefore become an important part of the therapeutic encounter.

The article is an opinion piece rather than clinical evidence, so its claims should not be interpreted as proof that gentleness itself produces particular health outcomes. But it raises a valuable professional question:

How does it feel to be on the receiving end of our care?

That may be one of the most useful questions any practitioner can ask.

NUTRITION & METABOLIC HEALTH

Ultra-processed food meets the glucose monitor

The debate around ultra-processed foods (UPFs) continues — but a new study, published in Diabetes Research & Clinical Practice, offers a slightly different perspective.

Researchers looked at adults with type 2 diabetes and examined ultra-processed food consumption alongside data from continuous glucose monitors (CGMs).

Higher food-level UPF energy was associated with less time spent in the target glucose range, more time above range and a higher glucose management indicator.

The study is observational, so it cannot establish that UPFs caused the poorer glucose measures. But the use of continuous glucose monitoring is interesting because it allows researchers to look at dietary patterns alongside glucose regulation in much greater detail than a single blood glucose measurement.

For practitioners working in nutrition and lifestyle health, this is another piece of the increasingly complex UPF picture.

Rather than asking simply “Are UPFs bad?”, a more useful question may be: Which foods, eaten in which quantities and in which dietary contexts, have the greatest impact on an individual’s metabolic health?

How much disease can be attributed to ultra-processed food?

The UPF debate gets even bigger when researchers move from individual health outcomes to population-level estimates.

A comparative risk assessment published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition examined the potential global burden associated with UPF consumption across 47 country or regional estimates, with attributable burden calculated for 45 estimates where corresponding WHO data were available. The analysis considered eight non-communicable disease outcomes, with type 2 diabetes as the prespecified primary outcome.

This kind of research can generate some very large numbers — but it is important to understand what those numbers represent.

A comparative risk assessment is a modelling exercise. It estimates what might happen if an exposure were reduced, based on existing evidence and assumptions about the relationship between exposure and disease. It isn’t the same as observing that removing UPFs from people’s diets prevented a specific number of deaths.

That doesn’t make the research unimportant. Far from it. But it means the assumptions behind the model deserve as much attention as the headline figure.

For practitioners, this is a useful example of why critical appraisal matters even when research appears to confirm what we already believe.