"Big pharma" isn't into the habit of testing the same medical intervention 3000+ times. The studies were actually done by a wide range of medical research establishments, including the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, and the vast majority involve trained acupuncturists who were eager to get results. Additionally, the studies are scientific, meaning that the methodology is published for all to review. Anyone who is suspicious of the outcomes are free to find fault in the studies and document the mistakes, or do their own studies. In fact, many, many studies are done by proponents of acupuncture.
The conclusion that acupuncture doesn't work is based on hard-won data that shows no difference between sham (pretend) acupuncture and real acupuncture. It's based on the body of knowledge we have obtained, not just a few select studies. Consider this quote from a recently published article in Scientific American:
"Whether investigators penetrate the skin or not, use needles or toothpicks, target the particular locations on the body cited by acupuncturists or random ones, the same proportion of patients experience more or less the same degree of pain relief." (
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/research-casts-doubt-on-the-value-of-acupuncture/?WT.mc_id=SA_FB_HLTH_FEAT)
So, if we insert needles into the specific places the acupuncturists instruct, or if we just randomly poke people with toothpicks, they report the same relief. Inserting needles into specific places is what defines acupuncture. If we can get the same relief while just pretending to do that, then acupuncture itself is inconsequential. What's important is that people "think" they are getting acpucnture, and in medicine that tells us something. It tells us that what people are reporting is a placebo response. This is backed up by other studies which compare acupuncture to other inert interventions, like relaxing to soft music or getting a foot massage, and found no difference.
You asked if acpucnture works for nerve pain, and the result of decades of carefully conducted scientific studies says no. That doesn't mean you can't try it yourself or that you have to look down upon it. You can have your own prerogative, but what you can't do is pretend that decades of research mean nothing because of the big pharma boogieman. That's what's known in psychology as a justification. It requires no real cognitive investment, and it is a spit in the face to all the honest people who spent their lives earning the qualifications needed to look at the data and interpret the results.