the Center For Inquiry states, in "Acupuncture: A Science-Based Assessment":
001. per the synopsis:
"in recent decades, public interest in acupuncture has grown dramatically. Proponents of acupuncture repeatedly make the unjustified claim that acupuncture is an efficacious and cost effective complement to conventional medicine. These claims rely on dubious and discredited research data [ouch!...] acupuncture has no intrinsic clinical value [ouch!...there is] mounting empirical evidence against it [...] acupuncture has become increasingly embedded within the American healthcare system, in part through government funding of integrative medical clinics. The Center for Inquiry's paper on acupuncture, written by Robert Slack, Jr., offers compelling evidence that the uncritical adoption of acupuncture adds significant costs to the United States' already overburdened healthcare system, lowers standards of medical training and treatment, and lends dangerous and undue authority to pseudoscience, ultimately degrading respect for science in the public realm."
Note: hear, hear. The same could be said for naturopathy overall, which, at least when I was in school, taught a required course in acupuncture. I can't count how many NDs also are LAcs!
002. the main paper is available here. Highly recommended.