Guest guest Report post Posted February 25, 2007 what is red clover recommended for? - Anne Saturday, February 24, 2007 10:49 AM Re: Herbs " Back to Eden by Jethro Kloss; try to find the orig. version; 1939. Dr. Kloss was recommending *Red-Clover long before anyone else. *Red-Clover is a Plant-Estrogen used for as a Tea or Tincture. ps Various universities have Herbal Depts. in this country and others. , DB <solema97 wrote: > > Does anyone know of a good book for herbs and mixing them without them interacting and the ones you dont want to mix together in your system. Want to try some others but not sure how they do with other herbs. Thanks for reading! > D~ > > Ieneke <ienvan wrote: > That was really nice! I still have a big bag of it that I > harvested and dried a few years ago. It must have been > exactly the right Moon or so, for it still smells fresh > and looks purple. I'd better start using it. It is quite nice > added to Red Clover blossom with a bit of Peppermint and > Alfafa mixed in. > > Thanks for the inspiration. I just love herbs, both the local > ones and the exotics. > > Ien in the Kootenays, still under 2 feet of snow > http://freegreenliving.com > > > > > > > > No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go > with Mail for Mobile. Get started. > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 28, 2007 Judging by the fact that it is a plant estrogen, I'd hazard the guess that it is used for a number of " woman's issues, " probably ranging from PMS to reducing hotflashes and the like during menopause. , " Monique " <hrd2hldrls wrote: > > what is red clover recommended for? > > > - > Anne > > Saturday, February 24, 2007 10:49 AM > Re: Herbs > > > " Back to Eden by Jethro Kloss; try to find the orig. version; 1939. > > Dr. Kloss was recommending *Red-Clover long before anyone else. > > *Red-Clover is a Plant-Estrogen used for as a Tea or Tincture. ps > Various universities have Herbal Depts. in this country and others. > , DB <solema97@> wrote: > > > > Does anyone know of a good book for herbs and mixing them without > them interacting and the ones you dont want to mix together in your > system. Want to try some others but not sure how they do with other > herbs. Thanks for reading! > > D~ > > > > Ieneke <ienvan@> wrote: > > That was really nice! I still have a big bag of it that I > > harvested and dried a few years ago. It must have been > > exactly the right Moon or so, for it still smells fresh > > and looks purple. I'd better start using it. It is quite nice > > added to Red Clover blossom with a bit of Peppermint and > > Alfafa mixed in. > > > > Thanks for the inspiration. I just love herbs, both the local > > ones and the exotics. > > > > Ien in the Kootenays, still under 2 feet of snow > > http://freegreenliving.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go > > with Mail for Mobile. Get started. > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 28, 2007 monica, more on red clover from herbs 2000. APPLICATIONS FLOWERS: FRESH - Crush the flowers, and apply to _insect bites and stings_ (http://www.herbs2000.com/disorders/insect_bites_sti.htm) . TINCTURE - Take internally for _eczema_ (http://www.herbs2000.com/disorders/eczema.htm) and psoriasis. COMPRESS - Use for _arthritic pains_ (http://www.herbs2000.com/disorders/arthritis.htm) and _gout_ (http://www.herbs2000.com/disorders/gout.htm) . OINTMENT - For lymphatic swellings, cover fresh flowers with water and simmer in a slow cooker for 48 hours. Strain, evaporate the residue to semi-dryness, and combine with an equal amount of ointment base. EYEWASH - Use 5 - 10 drops tincture in 20 ml water (a full eyecup) or a well-strained infusion for _conjunctivitis_ (http://www.herbs2000.com/disorders/conjunctivitis_adult.htm) . DOUCHE -Use the infusion for vaginal _itching_ (http://www.herbs2000.com/disorders/itching.htm) . SYRUP - Take a syrup made from the infusion for stubborn, dry coughs. from botanical.com below: ---Medicinal Action and Uses---The fluid extract of Trifolium is used as an alterative and antispasmodic. An infusion made by 1 OZ. to 1 pint of boiling water may with advantage be used in cases of bronchial and whooping-cough. Fomentations and poultices of the herb have been used as local applications to cancerous growths. ---Dosages---1 drachm of fluid extract, 1 to 2 drachms of infusion. peace, thyme <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 1, 2007 The best way to view Red Clover Blossoms is as a: General Tonic for the system. Red-Clovers are a " Phyto-Hormone. This measn Red-Clover contains Natural Hormones which regulate the system's Hormones. Red_Clover is used for everything from Stomach Cancer to Menopause. a. , " Monique " <hrd2hldrls wrote: > > what is red clover recommended for? > > > - > Anne > > Saturday, February 24, 2007 10:49 AM > Re: Herbs > > > " Back to Eden by Jethro Kloss; try to find the orig. version; 1939. > > Dr. Kloss was recommending *Red-Clover long before anyone else. > > *Red-Clover is a Plant-Estrogen used for as a Tea or Tincture. ps > Various universities have Herbal Depts. in this country and others. > , DB <solema97@> wrote: > > > > Does anyone know of a good book for herbs and mixing them without > them interacting and the ones you dont want to mix together in your > system. Want to try some others but not sure how they do with other > herbs. Thanks for reading! > > D~ > > > > Ieneke <ienvan@> wrote: > > That was really nice! I still have a big bag of it that I > > harvested and dried a few years ago. It must have been > > exactly the right Moon or so, for it still smells fresh > > and looks purple. I'd better start using it. It is quite nice > > added to Red Clover blossom with a bit of Peppermint and > > Alfafa mixed in. > > > > Thanks for the inspiration. I just love herbs, both the local > > ones and the exotics. > > > > Ien in the Kootenays, still under 2 feet of snow > > http://freegreenliving.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go > > with Mail for Mobile. Get started. > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 25, 2007 Most of the medicinal medicine is made with the echi roots, which should be at least 3 years old before you dig them to tincture. Some people do add the flowers and some leaves to their tincture though, so if you don't have enough plants (or they are not old enough) to dig up the roots, you might try making tea out of leaves and flowers--even seeds (though you might want to keep the seeds to spread into your yard so more plants grow). The flower tea won't be as strong as a root tincture, but it will have it's own power. Samala, Renee ---- I am new in this interesting group. I have a question regarding herbs.. 2 summers ago I planted echinae Flowers, and would like to ask you what can one do with them in order To use their useful health qualities ? Can you the whole flower or Only the leaves ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 8, 2009 I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun Ten/Brion. Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, is that true? Anyone tried several lines and thinks they differ? I am using Evergreen right now, and I am not happy with the results I am getting, but I used to have a raw herb pharmacy and of course the powders won't match the efficacy, but I thought they would come close. Regards, Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. angelapfa www.InnerhealthSalem.com Phone: 503 364 3022 - yehuda frischman ; TCM Thursday, May 07, 2009 8:21 PM Re: Terminology and Etymology My dear friend Z'ev, In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak a foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point where one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and sometimes make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in Hebrew nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would suggest that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to develop a Chinese mindset. That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a new Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that evolves in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " We live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There is tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the foolishness of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its roots come from paganism. I don't think it will last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which we adapt is our birthright. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would have a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and different from anesthetizing. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said earlier, when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is essential the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action is meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. Respectfully, --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe wrote: <zrosenbe Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 8, 2009 There is nothing like that written on the package; that is the problem. Here is another concern I have: Do different herbs result in the same ratios, meaning if 100 gr of Xin Yi is equivalent to 500 gr of the raw substance, is 100 gr of Mu Li equivalent to 500 gr of raw substance? It seems counter-intuitive to me that flowers and minerals and roots all extract in the same way and end up in the same ratio in powder form. AND, if you use 10 gr of KPC Mu Li is it the same as 10 gr of Evergreen Mu LI? Regards, Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. angelapfa www.InnerhealthSalem.com Phone: 503 364 3022 - Chinese Medicine Friday, May 08, 2009 9:47 AM R: Herbs Dear Angela, on the paclage should be written the ratio between Drug and Extract. In Europe we use D:E, then the value. In example: D:E = 5:1 means that one gram of extract coincide with five grams of the herb. So, Shu Di Huang D:E 5:1 means that 1 gram of the powder is the same of 5 grams of the herb. Thus the problem: raw herb or dried herb (Drug)? Since a dried extract from raw herb at a ratio 5:1 means that 1 gram is as 5 grams of the raw herb, is very different from a dried extract from dried herb (that is one fifth of the raw herb): 1 gram in this case, is the same as about 25 grams of raw herb! Hence a low or excessive dosage! Not so simple, but with a bit of patience... Second problem: often raw vegetables has not the active principle we wish to give. I.e.: fresh, raw tomatoes have not lycopene, but dried or cooked tomatoes have it; Qing hao, Artemisia annua, has no artemisine when harvested; it forms itself only dried from (6 to 20%; but over one minute in decoction destroy it!). This is the question: we manage raw or dried herbs? It's a really great difference. Regards and big hugs, _____ Da: Chinese Medicine Chinese Medicine Per conto di Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. Inviato: venerdì 8 maggio 2009 17.56 A: Chinese Medicine Oggetto: Re: Herbs I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun Ten/Brion. Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, is that true? Anyone tried several lines and thinks they differ? I am using Evergreen right now, and I am not happy with the results I am getting, but I used to have a raw herb pharmacy and of course the powders won't match the efficacy, but I thought they would come close. Regards, Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. angelapfa (AT) comcast (DOT) <angelapfa%40comcast.net> net www.InnerhealthSalem.com Phone: 503 364 3022 - yehuda frischman @ <%40> ; TCM Thursday, May 07, 2009 8:21 PM Re: Terminology and Etymology My dear friend Z'ev, In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak a foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point where one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and sometimes make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in Hebrew nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would suggest that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to develop a Chinese mindset. That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a new Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that evolves in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " We live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There is tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the foolishness of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its roots come from paganism. I don't think it will last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which we adapt is our birthright. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would have a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and different from anesthetizing. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said earlier, when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is essential the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action is meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. Respectfully, --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com> rr.com> wrote: <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com> rr.com> Re: Terminology and Etymology @ <%40> Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Angela Pfaffenberger wrote: I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun Ten/Brion. Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, is that true? ----------------------- Hi Angela, I had the pleasure to work at Min Tong Pharmaceutical Co. in Taichung, Taiwan (while employed by Min Tong in the U.S.) at what at that time (1993) was a recently certified GMP (international under Australian authority) factory. All of the companies you mentioned above also have their own factories though I have not worked at those. They have been better at marketing in the U.S. and Europe than my company was. Min Tong had a larger share of the market in Taiwan and especially in Japan. From working in the extract rooms and in the chemistry labs (I'm a biochemist), I came to appreciate that all dry-dosage extracts are each their own work of art. Most have been produced by water-based, spray-dried and granulating methods. The art comes in cooking them as a formula and selecting a base on to which you spray dry. Some companies simply combine the numerous single-herb extracts into a formula and call it bu zhong yi qi tang or xiao yao wan. They present them unabashed with many differently colored granules in the formula bottle show you that they did not cook the herbs together. If you add single herb extracts to an already produced formula, then this is a different matter. At least the root formula was cooked with all of the those particular herbs present. That would be my own preference if I wanted to take a dry dosage formula. Importation of herbs into Taiwan from mainland China is orders of magnitude larger of an enterprise than Chinese herb importation in to the U.S. The U.S. does not have a pharmacopoeia that relates to CM herbs or formulas whereas Taiwan and Japan both do. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Thanks for the reply, Emmanuel, in short, you believe that Min Tong formulas are is produced/cooked " as formulas " before being dried, which I agree would make it a superior product. What whole sale outlet do you use to buy Min Tong herbs in the US? Do you think the screening for harmful byproducts is adequate with this company? Regards, Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. angelapfa www.InnerhealthSalem.com Phone: 503 364 3022 - Emmanuel Segmen Chinese Medicine Friday, May 08, 2009 5:23 PM Re: Herbs Angela Pfaffenberger wrote: I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun Ten/Brion. Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, is that true? ----------------------- Hi Angela, I had the pleasure to work at Min Tong Pharmaceutical Co. in Taichung, Taiwan (while employed by Min Tong in the U.S.) at what at that time (1993) was a recently certified GMP (international under Australian authority) factory. All of the companies you mentioned above also have their own factories though I have not worked at those. They have been better at marketing in the U.S. and Europe than my company was. Min Tong had a larger share of the market in Taiwan and especially in Japan. From working in the extract rooms and in the chemistry labs (I'm a biochemist), I came to appreciate that all dry-dosage extracts are each their own work of art. Most have been produced by water-based, spray-dried and granulating methods. The art comes in cooking them as a formula and selecting a base on to which you spray dry. Some companies simply combine the numerous single-herb extracts into a formula and call it bu zhong yi qi tang or xiao yao wan. They present them unabashed with many differently colored granules in the formula bottle show you that they did not cook the herbs together. If you add single herb extracts to an already produced formula, then this is a different matter. At least the root formula was cooked with all of the those particular herbs present. That would be my own preference if I wanted to take a dry dosage formula. Importation of herbs into Taiwan from mainland China is orders of magnitude larger of an enterprise than Chinese herb importation in to the U.S. The U.S. does not have a pharmacopoeia that relates to CM herbs or formulas whereas Taiwan and Japan both do. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Andy Ellis wrote " Notes from South Mountain " which has a lot of information about extracts. Eric Brand and others have wriiten about this on the CHA . You can get Eric's articles here: http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/search?xSearch=eric+brand & submit=Search It's a very good question that is not taught at most TCM schools, but is crucial in this day and age. Short answer... some of the companies do utilize the same manufacturing company. But, the quality of herbs that are used can vary. Not all of the single herb extracts are 5:1... some minerals for instance are 1:1. Some companies spray onto potato starch, some use maltose dextrin and other starches. Some spray-dry with minimal fillers, but clump easier. More in-depth labeling of powder extraction ratios would definitely be nice. For some reason, that is available for MDs in Japan that use kampo, but not for us in the states. Happy reading, K On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. < angelapfa wrote: > > > There is nothing like that written on the package; that is the problem. > Here is another concern I have: Do different herbs result in the same > ratios, meaning if 100 gr of Xin Yi is equivalent to 500 gr of the raw > substance, is 100 gr of Mu Li equivalent to 500 gr of raw substance? It > seems counter-intuitive to me that flowers and minerals and roots all > extract in the same way and end up in the same ratio in powder form. > > AND, if you use 10 gr of KPC Mu Li is it the same as 10 gr of Evergreen Mu > LI? > > Regards, > Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. > > angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net> > > www.InnerhealthSalem.com > > Phone: 503 364 3022 > - > > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > Friday, May 08, 2009 9:47 AM > R: Herbs > > Dear Angela, on the paclage should be written the ratio between Drug and > Extract. In Europe we use D:E, then the value. In example: D:E = 5:1 means > that one gram of extract coincide with five grams of the herb. So, Shu Di > Huang D:E 5:1 means that 1 gram of the powder is the same of 5 grams of the > herb. Thus the problem: raw herb or dried herb (Drug)? Since a dried > extract > from raw herb at a ratio 5:1 means that 1 gram is as 5 grams of the raw > herb, is very different from a dried extract from dried herb (that is one > fifth of the raw herb): 1 gram in this case, is the same as about 25 grams > of raw herb! Hence a low or excessive dosage! Not so simple, but with a bit > of patience... Second problem: often raw vegetables has not the active > principle we wish to give. I.e.: fresh, raw tomatoes have not lycopene, but > dried or cooked tomatoes have it; Qing hao, Artemisia annua, has no > artemisine when harvested; it forms itself only dried from (6 to 20%; but > over one minute in decoction destroy it!). This is the question: we manage > raw or dried herbs? It's a really great difference. Regards and big hugs, > > _____ > > Da: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > [Chinese Medicine <Traditional_Chinese_Medicin\ e%40>] > Per conto di Angela > Pfaffenberger, PH.D. > Inviato: venerdì 8 maggio 2009 17.56 > A: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > Oggetto: Re: Herbs > > I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price > between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun > Ten/Brion. > Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, > is > that true? Anyone tried several lines and thinks they differ? I am using > Evergreen right now, and I am not happy with the results I am getting, but > I > used to have a raw herb pharmacy and of course the powders won't match the > efficacy, but I thought they would come close. > > Regards, > Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. > > angelapfa (AT) comcast (DOT) <angelapfa%40comcast.net<angelapfa%2540comcast.net>> > net > > www.InnerhealthSalem.com > > Phone: 503 364 3022 > - > yehuda frischman > @ <%40<%2540.\ com> > > > ; TCM > Thursday, May 07, 2009 8:21 PM > Re: Terminology and Etymology > > My dear friend Z'ev, > > In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach you > are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the > term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete > liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically > why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of > the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may > have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very > appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I > would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with > action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. > > I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am > fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak > a > foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point > where > one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and > sometimes > make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew > conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all > Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually > realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we > age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought > process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in Hebrew > nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " > > The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would > suggest > that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign > language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language > is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. > And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to > develop a Chinese mindset. > > That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a new > Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that evolves > in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our > sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " We > live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There > is > tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic > blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop > viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a > wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be > connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise > it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the > foolishness > of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its roots > come from paganism. I don't think it will > last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health > consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as > well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to > continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which > we > adapt is our birthright. > > Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is > universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. > hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to > understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions > here in the West. > > As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms > are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that > understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. > Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would have > a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and > different from anesthetizing. > > The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the > beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It > shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term > misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still > using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains > with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately > understand the target language and culture (English or other Western > languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team > of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know > English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese > well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. > > I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not > enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said > earlier, > when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is essential > the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would > suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the > Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. > > Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several > languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical > Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term > choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going > to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . > > I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent > scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating > terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and > what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or > scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action is > meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, > both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, > then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word > proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. > > Respectfully, > > > > > > --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) > <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com <zrosenbe%2540san.rr.com>> rr.com> wrote: > > <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com<zrosenbe%2540san.rr.com>> > rr.com> > Re: Terminology and Etymology > @ <%40<%2540.\ com> > > > > > Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM > > Yehuda, > Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are > resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese > medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in > our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without > turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I > believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by > studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate > that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and > functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses > 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With > sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa > always circulates the qi. > > Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is > universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. > hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to > understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions > here in the West. > > The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the > beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It > shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term > misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still > using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains > with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately > understand the target language and culture (English or other Western > languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team > of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know > English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese > well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. > > Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several > languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical > Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term > choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going > to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . > > > On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > > > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > > hath > > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > > truth. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > Yehuda > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Emmanuel, I was under the impression that most companies cooked the herbs together as a tang before the granulation or spray-drying process. Is than incorrect? K On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. < angelapfa wrote: > > > Thanks for the reply, Emmanuel, in short, you believe that Min Tong > formulas are is produced/cooked " as formulas " before being dried, which I > agree would make it a superior product. What whole sale outlet do you use to > buy Min Tong herbs in the US? Do you think the screening for harmful > byproducts is adequate with this company? > > Regards, > Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. > > angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net> > > www.InnerhealthSalem.com > > Phone: 503 364 3022 > > - > Emmanuel Segmen > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > Friday, May 08, 2009 5:23 PM > Re: Herbs > > Angela Pfaffenberger wrote: > I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price > between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun Ten/Brion. > Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, is > that true? > ----------------------- > Hi Angela, > > I had the pleasure to work at Min Tong Pharmaceutical Co. in Taichung, > Taiwan (while employed by Min Tong in the U.S.) at what at that time (1993) > was a recently certified GMP (international under Australian authority) > factory. All of the companies you mentioned above also have their own > factories though I have not worked at those. They have been better at > marketing in the U.S. and Europe than my company was. Min Tong had a larger > share of the market in Taiwan and especially in Japan. > > From working in the extract rooms and in the chemistry labs (I'm a > biochemist), I came to appreciate that all dry-dosage extracts are each > their own work of art. Most have been produced by water-based, spray-dried > and granulating methods. The art comes in cooking them as a formula and > selecting a base on to which you spray dry. Some companies simply combine > the numerous single-herb extracts into a formula and call it bu zhong yi qi > tang or xiao yao wan. They present them unabashed with many differently > colored granules in the formula bottle show you that they did not cook the > herbs together. If you add single herb extracts to an already produced > formula, then this is a different matter. At least the root formula was > cooked with all of the those particular herbs present. That would be my own > preference if I wanted to take a dry dosage formula. > > Importation of herbs into Taiwan from mainland China is orders of magnitude > larger of an enterprise than Chinese herb importation in to the U.S. The > U.S. does not have a pharmacopoeia that relates to CM herbs or formulas > whereas Taiwan and Japan both do. > > Respectfully, > > Emmanuel Segmen > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Angela, Here's other links to the articles by Eric Brand. These are free access on that great site ; Times online http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/section/264/1/maximizing_the_clinical_effica\ cy_of_granule_preparations_understanding_dosage_regional_trends_and_unforeseen_c\ hallenges http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/section/312/1/the_granule_revolution K On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:09 PM, <johnkokko wrote: > Andy Ellis wrote " Notes from South Mountain " which has a lot of information > about extracts. > Eric Brand and others have wriiten about this on the CHA . > You can get Eric's articles here: > http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/search?xSearch=eric+brand & submit=Search > > It's a very good question that is not taught at most TCM schools, > but is crucial in this day and age. > > Short answer... some of the companies do utilize the same manufacturing > company. > But, the quality of herbs that are used can vary. > > Not all of the single herb extracts are 5:1... some minerals for instance > are 1:1. > > Some companies spray onto potato starch, some use maltose dextrin and other > starches. > Some spray-dry with minimal fillers, but clump easier. > > More in-depth labeling of powder extraction ratios would definitely be > nice. > For some reason, that is available for MDs in Japan that use kampo, but not > for us in the states. > > Happy reading, > > K > > > > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. < > angelapfa wrote: > >> >> >> There is nothing like that written on the package; that is the problem. >> Here is another concern I have: Do different herbs result in the same >> ratios, meaning if 100 gr of Xin Yi is equivalent to 500 gr of the raw >> substance, is 100 gr of Mu Li equivalent to 500 gr of raw substance? It >> seems counter-intuitive to me that flowers and minerals and roots all >> extract in the same way and end up in the same ratio in powder form. >> >> AND, if you use 10 gr of KPC Mu Li is it the same as 10 gr of Evergreen Mu >> LI? >> >> Regards, >> Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. >> >> angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net> >> >> www.InnerhealthSalem.com >> >> Phone: 503 364 3022 >> - >> >> To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> >> Friday, May 08, 2009 9:47 AM >> R: Herbs >> >> Dear Angela, on the paclage should be written the ratio between Drug and >> Extract. In Europe we use D:E, then the value. In example: D:E = 5:1 means >> that one gram of extract coincide with five grams of the herb. So, Shu Di >> Huang D:E 5:1 means that 1 gram of the powder is the same of 5 grams of >> the >> herb. Thus the problem: raw herb or dried herb (Drug)? Since a dried >> extract >> from raw herb at a ratio 5:1 means that 1 gram is as 5 grams of the raw >> herb, is very different from a dried extract from dried herb (that is one >> fifth of the raw herb): 1 gram in this case, is the same as about 25 grams >> of raw herb! Hence a low or excessive dosage! Not so simple, but with a >> bit >> of patience... Second problem: often raw vegetables has not the active >> principle we wish to give. I.e.: fresh, raw tomatoes have not lycopene, >> but >> dried or cooked tomatoes have it; Qing hao, Artemisia annua, has no >> artemisine when harvested; it forms itself only dried from (6 to 20%; but >> over one minute in decoction destroy it!). This is the question: we manage >> raw or dried herbs? It's a really great difference. Regards and big hugs, >> >> _____ >> >> Da: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> >> [Chinese Medicine <Traditional_Chinese_Medicin\ e%40>] >> Per conto di Angela >> Pfaffenberger, PH.D. >> Inviato: venerdì 8 maggio 2009 17.56 >> A: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> >> Oggetto: Re: Herbs >> >> I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or >> price >> between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun >> Ten/Brion. >> Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, >> is >> that true? Anyone tried several lines and thinks they differ? I am using >> Evergreen right now, and I am not happy with the results I am getting, but >> I >> used to have a raw herb pharmacy and of course the powders won't match the >> efficacy, but I thought they would come close. >> >> Regards, >> Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. >> >> angelapfa (AT) comcast (DOT) <angelapfa%40comcast.net<angelapfa%2540comcast.net>> >> net >> >> www.InnerhealthSalem.com >> >> Phone: 503 364 3022 >> - >> yehuda frischman >> @ <%40<%2540.\ com> >> > >> ; TCM >> Thursday, May 07, 2009 8:21 PM >> Re: Terminology and Etymology >> >> My dear friend Z'ev, >> >> In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach >> you >> are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the >> term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete >> liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically >> why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of >> the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may >> have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very >> appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I >> would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with >> action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. >> >> I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am >> fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak >> a >> foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point >> where >> one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and >> sometimes >> make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew >> conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all >> Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually >> realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we >> age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought >> process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in >> Hebrew >> nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " >> >> >> The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would >> suggest >> that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign >> language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language >> is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. >> And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to >> develop a Chinese mindset. >> >> That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a >> new >> Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that >> evolves >> in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our >> sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " >> We >> live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There >> is >> tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic >> blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop >> viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a >> wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be >> connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise >> it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the >> foolishness >> of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its >> roots >> come from paganism. I don't think it will >> last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health >> consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as >> well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to >> continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which >> we >> adapt is our birthright. >> >> Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is >> universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. >> hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to >> understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions >> here in the West. >> >> As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms >> are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that >> understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. >> Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would >> have >> a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and >> different from anesthetizing. >> >> The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the >> beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It >> shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term >> misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still >> using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains >> with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately >> understand the target language and culture (English or other Western >> languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team >> of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know >> English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese >> well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. >> >> I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not >> enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said >> earlier, >> when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is >> essential >> the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would >> suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the >> Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. >> >> Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several >> languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical >> Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term >> choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going >> to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . >> >> I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent >> scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating >> terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and >> what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or >> scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action >> is >> meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, >> both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, >> then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word >> proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. >> >> Respectfully, >> >> >> >> >> >> --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) >> <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com <zrosenbe%2540san.rr.com>> rr.com> wrote: >> >> <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com<zrosenbe%2540san.rr.com>> >> rr.com> >> Re: Terminology and Etymology >> @ <%40<%2540.\ com> >> > >> >> >> Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM >> >> Yehuda, >> Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are >> resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese >> medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in >> our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without >> turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I >> believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by >> studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate >> that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and >> functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses >> 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With >> sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa >> always circulates the qi. >> >> Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is >> universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. >> hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to >> understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions >> here in the West. >> >> The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the >> beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It >> shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term >> misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still >> using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains >> with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately >> understand the target language and culture (English or other Western >> languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team >> of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know >> English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese >> well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. >> >> Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several >> languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical >> Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term >> choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going >> to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . >> >> >> On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: >> >> > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: >> > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is >> > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The >> > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our >> > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, >> > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless >> > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a >> > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms >> > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look >> > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie >> > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look >> > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle >> > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir >> > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, >> > hath >> > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently >> > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so >> > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula >> > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " >> > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of >> > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared >> > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem >> > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I >> > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the >> > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes >> > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. >> > >> > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine >> > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective >> > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very >> > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally >> > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the >> > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern >> > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, >> > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so >> > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest >> > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating >> > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, >> > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original >> > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. >> > >> > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion >> > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has >> > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term >> > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I >> > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to >> > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. >> > >> > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree >> > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais >> > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and >> > truth. >> > >> > Respectfully, >> > >> > >> > Yehuda >> >> >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Angela Pfaffenberger wrote: " Thanks for the reply, Emmanuel, in short, you believe that Min Tong formulas are is produced/cooked " as formulas " before being dried, which I agree would make it a superior product. What whole sale outlet do you use to buy Min Tong herbs in the US? Do you think the screening for harmful byproducts is adequate with this company? " Hi Angela, I'm not marketing nor offering an evaluation of any company. I don't think that Min Tong or any of the other companies are necessarily superior. I've learned to look at the granules in a formula to see that they are uniform in color meaning that they were cooked together. In modern factories the herbs are generally dried, some are fresh, others are prepared in some way. It's the same as in a TCM hospital setting. I tested two Min Tong formulas containing a total of 16 herbs back in 1994 fully expecting to see traces of pesticides. It was $350 back then to test a sample through the five panels of pesticide detection. The report from Anresco Labs in San Francisco came back clean, no pesticide residues detected. It gave me a good feeling. The owner of the company informed me that the same people in the mainland that had supplied his father before WWII were the same currently supplying his company. If you like this particular company's work, then buy from what ever distributor you live near. The cost of shipping may trump other pricing. Regarding harmful by products .... Any company that can show you International GMP certification is working at more stringent levels than American pharmaceutical companies under U.S. FDA standards. That said, detection levels have changed by many orders of magnitude from " noisy " parts per million in the 1990s to reliable parts per billion in recent years. The technology outstrips current law. My commentary was to assure you that each company works hard on the art of extraction. I prefer not to market on anyone's behalf on this august forum. I note that Min Tong and Sun Ten are older companies. Min Tong has a large share of the market and can be a well to do company in their sales to Taiwan and Japan alone. Other companies with less market share in Asia are more willing to work hard to develop market share in the U.S. and Europe. Back in 1995 when I moved to another company sourcing in mainland China, this was the case. My current company markets in America, but my current company's owner entertains a wide variety of guests who work all over China. One evening I met a guest from Taiwan who was the third largest importer from mainland China to Taiwan. He viewed himself as rather puny though he brought in hundreds of 40-foot containers per year of herbs to Taiwan. I was not inclined to ask how much the bigger companies brought in. My company's owners do all of their work in mainland China in where they feel at home. I feel at home in San Francisco. Seems to me that any LAc would be benefited by traveling at least to Taiwan or possibly to Shanghai to see how CM is practiced and what the hospital pharmacies look like. The Shanghai Medical University of TCM has a program where non-native speakers can be housed and can be guided by an interpreter for periods of weeks or months following master physicians. In 1993 I toured a hospital pharmacy in Taichung, Taiwan and was impressed by the presence of large areas of raw herbs, herb formula extracts, single herb extracts and WM pharmaceuticals each with their own distinct part of the pharmacy. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Chinese Medicine , " Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. " <angelapfa wrote: > > I keep being confused if there are any real differences in quality or price between the lines of available herbs, such as Evergreen, KCP, Sun Ten/Brion. Someone told me that they are coming out of the same factories in Taiwan, is that true? This is not true. They come from different factories. Eric Brand Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 Chinese Medicine , <johnkokko wrote: > > Angela, > > Here's other links to the articles by Eric Brand. Here, let me provide the proper links for the bulk of the articles. One of the articles is on CMT, but the rest are on other sites. All of my articles can be found on my website, at: http://www.legendaryherbs.com/professionalcorner.html I also have a blog at the Blue Poppy website, at: http://bluepoppy.com/blog/blogs/index.php I just tuned in to this discussion and it is late right now, but I think I can answer a lot of the granule questions in this thread. Actually, most of the answers are already in the various articles on the website, but I can hit some of the main topics over the next day or so on this forum. This topic has also been discussed extensively on Chinese Herbal Medicine . Eric Brand Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 k all the taiwanese companies cook formulas together. I actually wander if mineral are 1:1 because they probably also contain some starch so i would think they are less than 1:1. Eric is that correct? 400 29th St. Suite 419 Oakland Ca 94609 alonmarcus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 9, 2009 wrote: " Emmanuel, I was under the impression that most companies cooked the herbs together as a tang before the granulation or spray-drying process. Is than incorrect? K " ----------------------------- Hi K, Yes, normally the finished product (formula or single herb) is spray-dried and bottled ... not compounded as single her extracts. It came to my attention in about 1993 or 1994 when comparing the herbs of many companies that some of the formula products on the market had as many differently colored granules as there were herbs in the formula. When I brought that to the attention of my company president and general manager, they observed that also the dissolving of the various granules were individually different. They concluded that such products were compounded from single herb extracts. They figured that it was a quick way in America of maintaining one's " in-stock " formula line. Apparently some companies would take singles, compound them, and then rebottle them in formula bottles. Min Tong never considered doing this as it was the view of the president that such compounding did not represent classical CM. We always spoke about formulas in their complexity ... hundreds or thousands of interacting molecules ... some molecules in solution allowing for release of other molecules from other herbs in the decoction. Basic biochemistry stuff that we think about. It was a chance for me as a biochemist to speak with other biochemists who thought in terms of CM. One wonders if certain formula ingredients are not there for the human physiology but rather are there in solution for the correct " pull " on some other herb to release into solution. Even back when I was posting to CHA in the early 2000s I recall that we had this discussion. I haven't made any such comparisons in recent years, so I don't know what companies still compound singles into formulas. I haven't noticed this practice in recent years. Back the early 2000s I recall hearing the debate on CHA about practitioners doing this on their own in their own clinics. Since I'm not on CHA any more, perhaps you can let me know how that debate goes. Thanks. Respectfully and gratefully, Emmanuel Segmen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 29, 2009 What does purslane look like? Brenda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
