Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 This is an important topic that needs to be addressed. You can learn from the experience the Chiropractors have gone thru. I graduated from Los Angles College of Chiropractic and also from Samra University of Oriental Medicine in Los Angles. Western Medicine has finally some what accepted Chiropractic, in a sense the Chiropractic profession fell between the the cracks. It is not always defined as alternative medicine but its also not completely accepted as a part of Western medicine. I believe a large part of the reason we have finally somewhat been accepted by the Western MD's is our effectiveness for treating low back pain. In my opinion this has not been the best for the profession because in a sense, certain members and organizations of the Chiropractic profession are excited to finally been accepted by western medicine and to be paid by the insurance companies. The problem with this is we are being put into a system for treating only a few aspects of a wide range of things that can be treated with spinal manipulation, etc. If the practioners of TCM and Acupuncture are not careful, I feel this will also happen. Right now we are not a real threat to western medicine because we are " good for pain " . What will happen once western medicine starts to notice that we are getting either the same or even better results with the same illnesses that they are treating. In my opinion this is what will happen. Western Medicine will educate the media who in turn educates the public about how unsafe and dangerous TCM and acupuncture is for any disorder or condition other than pain. Or they will take the TCM and acupuncture and " improve it to a higher standard " that only western medicine is now better to treat. The other problem that I see is happening in the TCM arena is a division in the profession in regards to which style of treatment is best. Five elements, 8-principles, TCM, Classical, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, you get the point. This is an area the Chiropractic profession really screwed up with. Instead of uniting ourselves to become a strong profession to help fight against the system and educate the politicians, media and the public concerning the effectivenss of Chiropractic we as a profession were to busy fighting amongst oursselves as to: (who had the better treatment, who should be treated, what kinds of conditions should be treated, etc " . So as a result of this and personal bias's there were different associations formed. This caused contention and lack of unity within the profession. Finally after all these years the profession is starting to become more united to address the issues that effects the profession as a whole. Hopefully the practioners of TCM and Acupuncture will learn from these terrible mistakes and become unified in order to protect the profession and to educate the politicians, media and the public. The other thing would be to fight any others that want to infringe upon our profession without the proper education requirements. I always had an interest in acupuncture and decided to go back to college and receive my masters degree in TCM. Although others find it easier to take the easy way out with a short course of acupuncture. Actually I have been helping the Utah Association of Acupuncturist to fight the Chiropractors from doing Acupuncture. This has alway amazed me. When it comes to spinal manipulation, it is my opinion that the best trained profession is the Chiropractic profession due to the fact we spend a large part of our training doing this in school. When it comes to other professions who want to do spinal manipulation, the Chiropractor's become outraged by this and do all they can so that others are unable to do this. I totally agree with this... But what makes certain Chiropractors feel they can do the same thing to another profession (Acupuncturist's) with a total lack of respect for the training that profession has gone thru. Now be sure not to group all the Chiropractors together because there are those who also disagree with what a few are doing in the profession. I can train any of you in 100-200 hours in spinal manipulation. Does this mean that you will be proficient, that you will not hurt others, that you are better the the Chiropractors, I don't think so. I am proud to be a Chiropractor but just as proud to be a practioner of TCM. In reality, the public would do well receving treatment in both professions. Now for my last point, do not get all caught up in letting insurance reimburse us for our treatment. There are both advantages and disadvantages. The biggest long term problem is all the disadvantages. Eventually the insurance company will tell you how to practice and what you can and cannot do to receive payment plus all the paper work. In the long run, its not worth it. Remember, people pay money for what they want, but not what they need... I see this in my own practice. A patient wants to come in for treatment because of severe head heads, etc. but they just cannot afford it. But at they same time they can afford to go to Starbuck 1-2 times per day, purchase the brand new car, etc. I also try to be compassionate for those patients that really have hardships and make it affordable for them. We should not discredit ourselves as a profession to feel lucky that we finally got insurance coverage for Acupuncture. Alternative, Integrated Medicine need to stand on it own and not get caught up in the insurance coverage. You can see what is happening now with coverage to other professions and its not only the HMO's that are doing this. It is happening to the Medical Doctor's, Chiropractors, Physical therapist's, etc. I would like to say in closing that it would be great to both the profession and the public if we become more of the Integrated Medicine movement, but it needs to be on terms as a profession and not be dictated to us by other professions or associations. All my best, Brian N Hardy, DC, LAc, DACBN, CCN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 You've hit it on the head. This is one of my problems with the present 'modernization' of TCM in mainstream Chinese practice, and the present integrative discussions. The thought that somehow Chinese medicine needs to 'modernize' to be effective. I have no problem with biomedicine, or its study, but I think classical Chinese medicine needs to be studied in depth to reveal the great knowledge base that already exists, rather than taught and practiced in a more superficial version. On May 10, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Brian Hardy wrote: > > Or they will take the TCM and acupuncture and " improve it to a higher > standard " that only western medicine is now better to treat. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 Following in the footsteps of Zhang Xichun, who wrote a great treatise on integration of Chinese and Western medicine in the early 20th century (Chinese at Heart, Western When Appropriate/Yixue zhongzhong canxilu), I have to disagree with you on one point below. I agree that we could benefit greatly from studying subjects such as endocrinology, immunology, and physiology, but not to change or 'refine' Chinese medical theory. Dr. Zhang encouraged the input of data from biomedicine, but only in concert with the deep study of classical Chinese medical theory. Changing the theory of Chinese medicine, which has been developed over a two thousand year period should be done cautiously, as the conclusions of biomedical data are constantly changing as the data accumulates over time. Also, despite the vast success of biomedicine on the world stage in dominating medical discourse in the last 100 years, it is still a very young system in comparison with Chinese medicine. Deke Kendall has done a very good job with his new book, and it took a long time to write. However, it is just one interpretation, a modern one, of Chinese medicine. There are others. His book should not be taken as gospel, but as a challenge to study, debate and engage with the topic. On May 10, 2004, at 11:24 AM, Ming H. Lee wrote: > agree that we should never let the allopaths define our profession. > However, TCM can benefit greatly by using current scientific > understanding of various subjects like endocrinology, immunology, and > physiology to help refine TCM theory. Although scientists, > physicians, and statisticians can help to refine TCM theory, it is us, > The TCM Professionals, who should take the lead and guide the effort, > because we have the most knowledge and understanding of our own > theories of healing. > > There is already a book by Donald E. Kendall called " Dao of Chinese > Medicine - Understanding An Ancient Healing Art " which I think is the > best book so far in the English language that explains how acupuncture > works to scientists and physician who are interested in TCM. I'm in > the process of reading it right now, and I am impress with it. Check > it out on Amazon or Barnes & Noble. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 Hi, I believe that Mark Seem and his bodyenergetics approach suugest a way that Eastern and Western thoughts can support each other's growth. In particular, it appears to me that Eastern - and most particularly Chinese - thought and writings is remarkably devoid of " emotion " . I have noticed that this suppression of emotions is very much part of the Chinese culture that is no doubt a result of centuries of cultural " habits " which reached its acme during the Chinese Cultural Revolution when it was attempted to suppres and destroy " reactionary " ideas. The result, as I see it, has been a rather spiritless culture that bears a small resemblance to the original ideas spawned by the Daoists and Buddhists - which seeks to understand how the spirit/mind (Shen) manifests the body, as opposed to the other way around. In this regard, Western concepts and the way the West embraces emotions can re-awakend the spirit in Chinese medicine. As the Yellow Emperor's Canon suggests, the soul of the body lies in the heart/liver and from here flows all life. The emotions flow and create the environment and terrain that manifests itself as the physical body. A tense and hard muscle that is injured in a fall is the result of the a Kidney that is full of grief and unable to direct the qi of life. An " angry " liver that suppresses the function of the Spleen which in turn undermines the transformation and transportation of qi which manifests itself as weakness in the bones that can crack or break so easily when compared to those of a baby that are soft and subtle. Or a Heart (soul sprit) that is so unhappy that it wreaks havoc on the organs that surrounds it. As a result, suppress Wei Qi that allows external pathogens to more readily enter our body's terrain and injure it. I believe that it is by embracing the openness that the West has towards emotions, spirit, and soul - the French, the Italians, my friends in South America and Africa - Chinese medicine can go to the next layer of the onion in understanding the nature of the human condition. Regards, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 Rich, On what basis have you noticed " centuries of 'habits' " that lead to the remarkable devoid of emotion? Do you read/speak Chinese? If not, you, at best, " noticed " it through translated material, which is far and few, IMHO. Mike L. Rich <rfinkelstein wrote: Hi, I believe that Mark Seem and his bodyenergetics approach suugest a way that Eastern and Western thoughts can support each other's growth. In particular, it appears to me that Eastern - and most particularly Chinese - thought and writings is remarkably devoid of " emotion " . I have noticed that this suppression of emotions is very much part of the Chinese culture that is no doubt a result of centuries of cultural " habits " which reached its acme during the Chinese Cultural Revolution when it was attempted to suppres and destroy " reactionary " ideas. The result, as I see it, has been a rather spiritless culture that bears a small resemblance to the original ideas spawned by the Daoists and Buddhists - which seeks to understand how the spirit/mind (Shen) manifests the body, as opposed to the other way around. In this regard, Western concepts and the way the West embraces emotions can re-awakend the spirit in Chinese medicine. As the Yellow Emperor's Canon suggests, the soul of the body lies in the heart/liver and from here flows all life. The emotions flow and create the environment and terrain that manifests itself as the physical body. A tense and hard muscle that is injured in a fall is the result of the a Kidney that is full of grief and unable to direct the qi of life. An " angry " liver that suppresses the function of the Spleen which in turn undermines the transformation and transportation of qi which manifests itself as weakness in the bones that can crack or break so easily when compared to those of a baby that are soft and subtle. Or a Heart (soul sprit) that is so unhappy that it wreaks havoc on the organs that surrounds it. As a result, suppress Wei Qi that allows external pathogens to more readily enter our body's terrain and injure it. I believe that it is by embracing the openness that the West has towards emotions, spirit, and soul - the French, the Italians, my friends in South America and Africa - Chinese medicine can go to the next layer of the onion in understanding the nature of the human condition. Regards, Rich Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. http://babel.altavista.com/ and adjust accordingly. If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being delivered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 Completely disagree with you. The Western guys are going to look at Acupuncture from a western perspective. They will understand it from a limited frame work, but they won't know that. They will think they understand it, categorize the simplicity of it and make sure everyone can perform this function with a few hours as possible. Cook book acupuncture in 200hrs. Pretty soon nurses will do it. Prison guards will do auricular, , possibly psychologists, for mood altering, then social workers, then social worker helpers in the public clinic. Linear western minds won't take the time to understand the balance of life. They will tend to look for the quick explanation, then think that is the answer. It will distort and distroy our profession, as it will be devalued by the majority because anyone can do it. Because so many people will think they understand it, and won't, results will be limited and after a while it will be written off as a minor therapy. But few will care because by that time there will be western studies poorly done with misinterpreted data that will prove that drugs work better. It is easy to underestimate the power of the few who think they understand the lot, who make policy that shapes a nation. Chris In a message dated 5/10/2004 12:16:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mikeliaw writes: Haven't we already realized a similar situation with Osteopathy? I don't even think TCM will go as far as Osteopathy if it's INTEGRATED with WM. Mike L. <zrosenbe wrote: It's already happened in China, judging by the reports Attilio is sending back. On May 10, 2004, at 8:03 AM, John Garbarini wrote: > If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us > and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us, > " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR > ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be > compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what > will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking > otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 Z'ev, Right on!! Mike L. <zrosenbe wrote: You've hit it on the head. This is one of my problems with the present 'modernization' of TCM in mainstream Chinese practice, and the present integrative discussions. The thought that somehow Chinese medicine needs to 'modernize' to be effective. I have no problem with biomedicine, or its study, but I think classical Chinese medicine needs to be studied in depth to reveal the great knowledge base that already exists, rather than taught and practiced in a more superficial version. On May 10, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Brian Hardy wrote: > > Or they will take the TCM and acupuncture and " improve it to a higher > standard " that only western medicine is now better to treat. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 Chris, Perhaps I should've been more explicit. I am against being integrated into the WM framework! We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing out the good result of TCM treatments. The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, subjects at microscopic level with the assumption that when all parts are " visible " with microscopic view everything is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the fundamental problems with this approach are: 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell the causal-effect. Don't we see tons of medical research paper worked on the " association " possible reasons with a problem, but not the actual cause. 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so far is probably way less than 1% of all truth!! TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with inter-related subsystems. TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level models (5 phase, meridians, etc.) and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse reading, palpation, etc) to assess the behavior under these models. When multiple models are applied and multiple metrics are measured the practitioner has a better opportunity to identify the causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better treatment result. Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the unknowns better. Having microscopic level knowledge is great, but before sufficient amount of microscopic level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very dangerous to apply them as if the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the problem with WM so far. (Well, it's got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any modeling and simulation, such as designing a large scale circuit, having a time-tested model is the key to success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which is why it can do wonder healings. So, until WM evolves to know just about everything at microscopic level and figure out the relationships of how they work together (macroscopic level) TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but don't count on its correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! Mike L. Musiclear wrote: Completely disagree with you. The Western guys are going to look at Acupuncture from a western perspective. They will understand it from a limited frame work, but they won't know that. They will think they understand it, categorize the simplicity of it and make sure everyone can perform this function with a few hours as possible. Cook book acupuncture in 200hrs. Pretty soon nurses will do it. Prison guards will do auricular, , possibly psychologists, for mood altering, then social workers, then social worker helpers in the public clinic. Linear western minds won't take the time to understand the balance of life. They will tend to look for the quick explanation, then think that is the answer. It will distort and distroy our profession, as it will be devalued by the majority because anyone can do it. Because so many people will think they understand it, and won't, results will be limited and after a while it will be written off as a minor therapy. But few will care because by that time there will be western studies poorly done with misinterpreted data that will prove that drugs work better. It is easy to underestimate the power of the few who think they understand the lot, who make policy that shapes a nation. Chris In a message dated 5/10/2004 12:16:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mikeliaw writes: Haven't we already realized a similar situation with Osteopathy? I don't even think TCM will go as far as Osteopathy if it's INTEGRATED with WM. Mike L. <zrosenbe wrote: It's already happened in China, judging by the reports Attilio is sending back. On May 10, 2004, at 8:03 AM, John Garbarini wrote: > If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us > and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us, > " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR > ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be > compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what > will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking > otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 This is only what I've seen with my limited exposure in just two hospitals in Beijing. I've heard and I'm sure it's better in other parts of the country and hospitals. What have other members who've been to China noted about the parallel use of WM and TCM? Attilio " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > It's already happened in China, judging by the reports Attilio is > sending back. > > > On May 10, 2004, at 8:03 AM, John Garbarini wrote: > > > If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us > > and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us, > > " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR > > ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be > > compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what > > will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking > > otherwise? > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 In your final sentences, you suggest, " We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! " I agree that it should work that way, but in reality, it doesn't. That fact is an inherent problem we get to deal with. There has been a dozens of complete failures regarding advice given by western medicine. They are currently the third killer in the states. Is that news plastered all over the news? No. Are the people rioting in the streets? NO. Are the people even questioning their doctors prescriptions? A little here and there, but people generally believe they need their drugs to live. This is a huge image problem that stands in the face of the facts. No matter how many people die unnecessarily from drugs, people continue to believe they are good for them. People generally will not wake from their propaganda induce slumber until the facts of death by drugs and the real alternative is brought into the light of day by respected physicians, again and again nad again. Bringing this truth into the public view consistently with documentation and offering alternatives that will actually save lives is a tremendous service we can offer our society. The powers at large are cleaning up the dangerous herbs and limiting dose of vitamins, but allowing slick advertising of killer drugs in such a perverse way, all you have to do is ask your doctor is the pretty purple pill is " Right for you. " This contradiction must be brought to the public. We must stand apart as the true healers. Anything else will eventually bring our profession down. Chris In a message dated 5/11/2004 2:49:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mikeliaw writes: Chris, Perhaps I should've been more explicit. I am against being integrated into the WM framework! We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing out the good result of TCM treatments. The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, subjects at microscopic level with the assumption that when all parts are " visible " with microscopic view everything is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the fundamental problems with this approach are: 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell the causal-effect. Don't we see tons of medical research paper worked on the " association " possible reasons with a problem, but not the actual cause. 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so far is probably way less than 1% of all truth!! TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with inter-related subsystems. TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level models (5 phase, meridians, etc.) and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse reading, palpation, etc) to assess the behavior under these models. When multiple models are applied and multiple metrics are measured the practitioner has a better opportunity to identify the causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better treatment result. Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the unknowns better. Having microscopic level knowledge is great, but before sufficient amount of microscopic level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very dangerous to apply them as if the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the problem with WM so far. (Well, it's got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any modeling and simulation, such as designing a large scale circuit, having a time-tested model is the key to success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which is why it can do wonder healings. So, until WM evolves to know just about everything at microscopic level and figure out the relationships of how they work together (macroscopic level) TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but don't count on its correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! Mike L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 Chris An arrogant example specifically showing the allopathic extremely limited perspective... is the book on what they try to propagandize and monoplize upon which they 'Medical Acupuncture' as the end-all of acupuncture......which if it wasn't so insidious it would almost be laughable. Not a bad try....it's got many sidetracked.....but to believe that acupuncture is ONLY about or even PRIMARILY about neuropathways is ludicrous. Richard In a message dated 5/10/2004 10:12:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Musiclear writes: Completely disagree with you. The Western guys are going to look at Acupuncture from a western perspective. They will understand it from a limited frame work, but they won't know that. They will think they understand it, categorize the simplicity of it and make sure everyone can perform this function with a few hours as possible. Cook book acupuncture in 200hrs. Pretty soon nurses will do it. Prison guards will do auricular, , possibly psychologists, for mood altering, then social workers, then social worker helpers in the public clinic. Linear western minds won't take the time to understand the balance of life. They will tend to look for the quick explanation, then think that is the answer. It will distort and distroy our profession, as it will be devalued by the majority because anyone can do it. Because so many people will think they understand it, and won't, results will be limited and after a while it will be written off as a minor therapy. But few will care because by that time there will be western studies poorly done with misinterpreted data that will prove that drugs work better. It is easy to underestimate the power of the few who think they understand the lot, who make policy that shapes a nation. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 Amen. Education of patients is key. There's too much brainwashing out in the media already. --- Musiclear wrote: > > > In your final sentences, you suggest, " We don't > have to disgard them, as > they will continue to correct themselves by proving > wrong year after year, > generation after generation; the stories similar to > the HRT (Hormone Replacement > Therapy) will continue to show > up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous > discipline to serve > mankind, > as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! " > > I agree that it should work that way, but in > reality, it doesn't. That > fact is an inherent problem we get to deal with. > > There has been a dozens of complete failures > regarding advice given by > western medicine. They are currently the third > killer in the states. Is that > news plastered all over the news? No. Are the > people rioting in the streets? > NO. Are the people even questioning their doctors > prescriptions? A little > here and there, but people generally believe they > need their drugs to live. > > This is a huge image problem that stands in the > face of the facts. No > matter how many people die unnecessarily from drugs, > people continue to believe > they are good for them. > > People generally will not wake from their > propaganda induce slumber until > the facts of death by drugs and the real alternative > is brought into the > light of day by respected physicians, again and > again nad again. > > Bringing this truth into the public view > consistently with documentation > and offering alternatives that will actually save > lives is a tremendous > service we can offer our society. > > The powers at large are cleaning up the > dangerous herbs and limiting dose > of vitamins, but allowing slick advertising of > killer drugs in such a > perverse way, all you have to do is ask your doctor > is the pretty purple pill is > " Right for you. " > > This contradiction must be brought to the > public. We must stand apart as > the true healers. Anything else will eventually > bring our profession down. > > Chris > > > > In a message dated 5/11/2004 2:49:44 AM Eastern > Daylight Time, > mikeliaw writes: > Chris, > > Perhaps I should've been more explicit. > I am against being integrated into the WM framework! > > We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing > out the good result of > TCM treatments. > > The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, > subjects at microscopic level > with the assumption that when all parts are > " visible " with microscopic view > everything > is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the > fundamental problems > with this > approach are: > 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell > the causal-effect. Don't > we see > tons of medical research paper worked on the > " association " possible > reasons > with a problem, but not the actual cause. > 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so > far is probably way less > than > 1% of all truth!! > > TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with > inter-related subsystems. > TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level > models (5 phase, > meridians, etc.) > and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse > reading, palpation, etc) to > assess > the behavior under these models. When multiple > models are applied and multiple > metrics are measured the practitioner has a better > opportunity to identify the > causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better > treatment result. > > Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the > unknowns better. Having > microscopic level knowledge is great, but before > sufficient amount of microscopic > level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very > dangerous to apply them as if > the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the > problem with WM so far. (Well, > it's > got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any > modeling and simulation, such > as designing a large scale circuit, having a > time-tested model is the key to > success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which > is why it can > do wonder healings. > > So, until WM evolves to know just about everything > at microscopic level > and figure out the relationships of how they work > together (macroscopic level) > TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but > don't count on its > correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard > them, as they will continue > to correct themselves by proving wrong year after > year, generation after > generation; > the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement > Therapy) will continue to > show > up. > TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous > discipline to serve mankind, > as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! > > Mike L. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./careermakeover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 To clarify, I did not think the meaning of the word 'refine' was equivalent to the word 'change'. To me the word ‘refine’ means fine tuning and the word ‘change’ means complete radical transformation from the inside out, and the latter was definitely not what I had in mind. Actually, what I should have said was that the application of WM data and experimentation methods can potentially be valuable to help refine the interpretation of TCM theories. I personally believe that they can help us sort out conflicting or ambiguous interpretations of TCM texts, theories, and practices. To be sure, we don’t want to be integrated into WM, but I don’t see why TCM can’t incorporate the research methods used by the allopaths to further our understanding of the human body in depth. It’s beneficial to our understanding of TCM theories to constantly question our interpretation (and maybe our translation) of TCM theories, and these data and research methods are good tools to keep our brains going. As for Kendall’s book, I agree with you that no interpretation of TCM theories should be taken as gospel as that concept implies infallibility. I believe that the reason I like his book is that his book succeeded, at least with me, as a challenge to study and a stimulation to engage the topic for discussion with people who are interested in TCM. I hope that this book is only the first edition. Ming <zrosenbe wrote:Following in the footsteps of Zhang Xichun, who wrote a great treatise on integration of Chinese and Western medicine in the early 20th century (Chinese at Heart, Western When Appropriate/Yixue zhongzhong canxilu), I have to disagree with you on one point below. I agree that we could benefit greatly from studying subjects such as endocrinology, immunology, and physiology, but not to change or 'refine' Chinese medical theory. Dr. Zhang encouraged the input of data from biomedicine, but only in concert with the deep study of classical Chinese medical theory. Changing the theory of Chinese medicine, which has been developed over a two thousand year period should be done cautiously, as the conclusions of biomedical data are constantly changing as the data accumulates over time. Also, despite the vast success of biomedicine on the world stage in dominating medical discourse in the last 100 years, it is still a very young system in comparison with Chinese medicine. Deke Kendall has done a very good job with his new book, and it took a long time to write. However, it is just one interpretation, a modern one, of Chinese medicine. There are others. His book should not be taken as gospel, but as a challenge to study, debate and engage with the topic. On May 10, 2004, at 11:24 AM, Ming H. Lee wrote: > agree that we should never let the allopaths define our profession.? > However, TCM can benefit greatly by using current scientific > understanding of various subjects like endocrinology, immunology, and > physiology to help refine TCM theory.?Although scientists, > physicians, and statisticians can help to refine TCM theory, it is us, > The TCM Professionals, who should take the lead and guide the effort, > because we have the most knowledge and understanding of our own > theories of healing. > > There is already a book by Donald E. Kendall called " Dao of Chinese > Medicine - Understanding An Ancient Healing Art " which I think is the > best book so far in the English language that explains how acupuncture > works to scientists and physician who are interested in TCM.?I'm in > the process of reading it right now, and I am impress with it.?Check > it out on Amazon or Barnes & Noble. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 It takes ~10 years for WM to correct the HRT issue, it will take generations, if at all, for them to correct the fundamental model issue. While some energy of the TCM community should be spent on pointing out how wrong the WM model has been, our main job is to keep TCM thriving, which, inconveniently includes fighting the threats from these wrong models, in addition to making the efficacy of TCM known. Mike L. Musiclear wrote: In your final sentences, you suggest, " We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! " I agree that it should work that way, but in reality, it doesn't. That fact is an inherent problem we get to deal with. There has been a dozens of complete failures regarding advice given by western medicine. They are currently the third killer in the states. Is that news plastered all over the news? No. Are the people rioting in the streets? NO. Are the people even questioning their doctors prescriptions? A little here and there, but people generally believe they need their drugs to live. This is a huge image problem that stands in the face of the facts. No matter how many people die unnecessarily from drugs, people continue to believe they are good for them. People generally will not wake from their propaganda induce slumber until the facts of death by drugs and the real alternative is brought into the light of day by respected physicians, again and again nad again. Bringing this truth into the public view consistently with documentation and offering alternatives that will actually save lives is a tremendous service we can offer our society. The powers at large are cleaning up the dangerous herbs and limiting dose of vitamins, but allowing slick advertising of killer drugs in such a perverse way, all you have to do is ask your doctor is the pretty purple pill is " Right for you. " This contradiction must be brought to the public. We must stand apart as the true healers. Anything else will eventually bring our profession down. Chris In a message dated 5/11/2004 2:49:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mikeliaw writes: Chris, Perhaps I should've been more explicit. I am against being integrated into the WM framework! We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing out the good result of TCM treatments. The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, subjects at microscopic level with the assumption that when all parts are " visible " with microscopic view everything is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the fundamental problems with this approach are: 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell the causal-effect. Don't we see tons of medical research paper worked on the " association " possible reasons with a problem, but not the actual cause. 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so far is probably way less than 1% of all truth!! TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with inter-related subsystems. TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level models (5 phase, meridians, etc.) and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse reading, palpation, etc) to assess the behavior under these models. When multiple models are applied and multiple metrics are measured the practitioner has a better opportunity to identify the causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better treatment result. Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the unknowns better. Having microscopic level knowledge is great, but before sufficient amount of microscopic level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very dangerous to apply them as if the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the problem with WM so far. (Well, it's got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any modeling and simulation, such as designing a large scale circuit, having a time-tested model is the key to success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which is why it can do wonder healings. So, until WM evolves to know just about everything at microscopic level and figure out the relationships of how they work together (macroscopic level) TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but don't count on its correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! Mike L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 That's right- The WM profession has fought ALL other modalities, and we know that. They fought the Chiros for YEARS, and it was proven in court that the MDs planned and executed a series of events DESIGNED to destroy the chiros. What about laetrile, and other cancer remedies? You're not even allowed to DISCUSS laetrile in public ANYWHERE in the U.S. I live and practice in NJ, and that state in particular used to actively discourage the practice of acup. until recently. They gave an exam that would fail up to 95% of applicants. I know it's not PC to go and criticize our " brethren, " and I would NEVER go off on this subject in front of patients, since it wrecks their " qi, " but let's not fool ourselves. Even in local hospitals, where new " holistic " programs are touted, the acups/chiros in these programs only work 1 day/week on average. The WM world perceives us nice, charming, helpful people as THREATS to their business, and in the past they used tactics that would make Al Capone cringe. If you meet MDs who like OM, wonderful. Cherish these friends. They may be instrumental in our " arriving " some day. But remember where the medical establishment is at. Our best bet is to educate the public, stay active in our communities, make friends in politics, (even though politicians sicken me personally), contribute to state/national orgs. that help us, and gear ourselves to every once in a while, fight the conflicts that WM will DEFINITELY throw our way. Don't let all this bluster ruin your Qi. John Garbarini --- Mike Liaw <mikeliaw wrote: > It takes ~10 years for WM to correct the HRT issue, > it will take generations, if at all, > for them to correct the fundamental model issue. > While some energy of the TCM > community should be spent on pointing out how wrong > the WM model has been, > our main job is to keep TCM thriving, which, > inconveniently includes fighting the > threats from these wrong models, in addition to > making the efficacy of TCM known. > > Mike L. > > Musiclear wrote: > > > In your final sentences, you suggest, " We don't > have to disgard them, as > they will continue to correct themselves by proving > wrong year after year, > generation after generation; the stories similar to > the HRT (Hormone Replacement > Therapy) will continue to show > up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous > discipline to serve > mankind, > as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! " > > I agree that it should work that way, but in > reality, it doesn't. That > fact is an inherent problem we get to deal with. > > There has been a dozens of complete failures > regarding advice given by > western medicine. They are currently the third > killer in the states. Is that > news plastered all over the news? No. Are the > people rioting in the streets? > NO. Are the people even questioning their doctors > prescriptions? A little > here and there, but people generally believe they > need their drugs to live. > > This is a huge image problem that stands in the > face of the facts. No > matter how many people die unnecessarily from drugs, > people continue to believe > they are good for them. > > People generally will not wake from their > propaganda induce slumber until > the facts of death by drugs and the real alternative > is brought into the > light of day by respected physicians, again and > again nad again. > > Bringing this truth into the public view > consistently with documentation > and offering alternatives that will actually save > lives is a tremendous > service we can offer our society. > > The powers at large are cleaning up the > dangerous herbs and limiting dose > of vitamins, but allowing slick advertising of > killer drugs in such a > perverse way, all you have to do is ask your doctor > is the pretty purple pill is > " Right for you. " > > This contradiction must be brought to the > public. We must stand apart as > the true healers. Anything else will eventually > bring our profession down. > > Chris > > > > In a message dated 5/11/2004 2:49:44 AM Eastern > Daylight Time, > mikeliaw writes: > Chris, > > Perhaps I should've been more explicit. > I am against being integrated into the WM framework! > > We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing > out the good result of > TCM treatments. > > The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, > subjects at microscopic level > with the assumption that when all parts are > " visible " with microscopic view > everything > is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the > fundamental problems > with this > approach are: > 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell > the causal-effect. Don't > we see > tons of medical research paper worked on the > " association " possible > reasons > with a problem, but not the actual cause. > 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so > far is probably way less > than > 1% of all truth!! > > TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with > inter-related subsystems. > TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level > models (5 phase, > meridians, etc.) > and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse > reading, palpation, etc) to > assess > the behavior under these models. When multiple > models are applied and multiple > metrics are measured the practitioner has a better > opportunity to identify the > causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better > treatment result. > > Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the > unknowns better. Having > microscopic level knowledge is great, but before > sufficient amount of microscopic > level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very > dangerous to apply them as if > the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the > problem with WM so far. (Well, > it's > got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any > modeling and simulation, such > as designing a large scale circuit, having a > time-tested model is the key to > success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which > is why it can > do wonder healings. > > So, until WM evolves to know just about everything > at microscopic level > and figure out the relationships of how they work > together (macroscopic level) > TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but > don't count on its > correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard > them, as they will continue > to correct themselves by proving wrong year after > year, generation after > generation; > the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement > Therapy) will continue to > show > up. > TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous > discipline to serve mankind, > as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! > > Mike L. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > > > Membership requires that you do not post any > commerical, swear, religious, spam messages,flame > another member or swear. > > To translate this message, copy and paste it into > this web link page, http://babel.altavista.com/ > > > > and adjust accordingly. > > If you , it takes a few days for the > messages to stop being delivered. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 I now see better where my reply got you worried. When I said " We don't have to disgard them " I don't mean the killing effect, I meat the microscopic level understanding of physiology and pathology, not the treatment (and the killings) of it. The reason I said don't disgard, rather than USE it, is the microscopic level physiology and pathology as is perceived by WM so far makes a lot of fundamental assumptions that they never go back to validate. So, I'd view the insight from current WM discipline as A (but not ALL) view to the truth, knowing that had certain assumptions are changed, there will be a different view and different physiological and pathological interpretation. For example, one of the key metrics in WM about the health of the heart is CO (Cardiac Output), which is supported by the power rating and actual flow volume of blood pumped out of the heart. What's ironical is, based on that model, artificial hearts have been built and evolved for ~30 years. The power of the an artifical heart has been increased to 30+ watts, way beyond a real one's (which is ~2 watts), yet one still cannot survive long with an artificial heart. One then has to question whether the fundamental assumptions are valid at all!! Another example is the simplistic blood pressure measurement, we PROBABLY all agree this microscopic metric CAN be useful, but we have to say BP alone doesn't convey really a lot of useful information. However, the public seem to have been brain washed to just key off of BP for their health condition. If I may roughly categorize WM as microscopic viewers and CM as macroscopic views, I have to confess that doesn't matter how hard the macroscopic viewers tell the world how dangerous/wrong the pure microscopic view can be, the latter will keep digging and digging.... They will stopped only by a huge social movement, I think, but I am not very sure if it will change it all. Being science/engineer oriented, I have nothing against utilizing microscopic knowledge, but the knowledge is useful only if the underlying model can explain things well. So far, WM's model can't explain a lot of fundamental stuff, which is an entirely different subject. Therefore, the knowledge from WM should be used judiciously. Unfortunately, we don't have the wisedom to point out the problems they have one by one right at the beginning, it takes time coupled with experience (read: mistakes, killings:() Mounting problems aside, shouldn't we dream? Why not? How about a fundamental model at microscopic level that can point out where current WM assumptions are wrong and yet is able to explain TCM well? Mike L. Musiclear wrote: In your final sentences, you suggest, " We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! " I agree that it should work that way, but in reality, it doesn't. That fact is an inherent problem we get to deal with. Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 That would be great. In the end, it will be that way. Microscopic understanding proving TCM, the real definition of chi and the rest of the worlds most important questions. The question is, how long will it take, how many people will have to die because they put their faith in the Western model of chronic disease control, and how many Acupuncturists, would be denied the money they deserve because people put their faith elsewhere? I know I have come off pretty hard with my latest posts, but it pains me to see the condition our society is in, and I see so clearly, what I believe must be done to save lives, and change the way the world views healing. We can all work together and embrace our power to bring humanity back to health care in this world. Enlist the help of all you know to bring truth to the forefront. Start by helping to lift the veil of delusion woven by the drug companies. Then we give them a real alternative. All the best, Chris In a message dated 5/11/2004 1:44:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mikeliaw writes: Mounting problems aside, shouldn't we dream? Why not? How about a fundamental model at microscopic level that can point out where current WM assumptions are wrong and yet is able to explain TCM well? Mike L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 Hi Mike, Yes, I can certainly confirm that from the point of view of Western science, that the " microscopic level " of knowledge has had applications to human physiology for a very short period of time. Your " less than 1% " of the truth level of information from the microscopic or molecular view is in my estimation accurate. A good test is to see if surgical intervention (the macroscopic view) has been greatly changed or guided by the molecular view. The epidemiological truth is that surgical intervention has been little changed or, if anything, actually misguided. Back in 1985 and again in 1998 major epidemiological studies showed that radical mastectomy was an unnecessary action as compared to lumpectomy and radiation with regard to breast cancer. The current standard of treatment at major medical centers is now radical mastectomy, vascular surgery, and major reconstructive surgery, utilizing at least two surgical teams (can you hear the cash register in the background?). If you add the prophylactic surgeries going on for both breast cancer as well as prostate cancer, you begin to see in small measure how healthcare costs have tripled over the last few years. Prescription drugs, of course, is an even bigger part of that. From the research point of view where I stand as a Western scientist, we are at the equivalent time in WM as the Yellow Emperor was at his time with CM. We're just beginning. I personally would not bet my life on 20, 30 or even 50 years worth of Western culture. CM is my primary care healthcare. Attilio, there are indeed masters of CM that you can train with. I associate with Dr. Ping Qi Kang here in San Francisco. His insight is enormous. He refers to masters back in Shanghai that he studied with and keeps threatening to bring several of them to the U.S. Apparently they are forced to retire at age 55 just when they are hitting their prime (as you've just alluded to the time it takes to attain mastery.) Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Chris, Perhaps I should've been more explicit. I am against being integrated into the WM framework! We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing out the good result of TCM treatments. The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, subjects at microscopic level with the assumption that when all parts are " visible " with microscopic view everything is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the fundamental problems with this approach are: 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell the causal-effect. Don't we see tons of medical research paper worked on the " association " possible reasons with a problem, but not the actual cause. 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so far is probably way less than 1% of all truth!! TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with inter-related subsystems. TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level models (5 phase, meridians, etc.) and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse reading, palpation, etc) to assess the behavior under these models. When multiple models are applied and multiple metrics are measured the practitioner has a better opportunity to identify the causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better treatment result. Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the unknowns better. Having microscopic level knowledge is great, but before sufficient amount of microscopic level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very dangerous to apply them as if the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the problem with WM so far. (Well, it's got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any modeling and simulation, such as designing a large scale circuit, having a time-tested model is the key to success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which is why it can do wonder healings. So, until WM evolves to know just about everything at microscopic level and figure out the relationships of how they work together (macroscopic level) TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but don't count on its correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! Mike L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 12, 2004 Report Share Posted May 12, 2004 Emmanuel, Thanks for echoing with more examples! Those are very good examples. Where does Dr. Ping Qi Kang hold his office/clinic or teach? What's the most valuable things you learned from him? Mike L. Emmanuel Segmen <susegmen wrote: Hi Mike, Yes, I can certainly confirm that from the point of view of Western science, that the " microscopic level " of knowledge has had applications to human physiology for a very short period of time. Your " less than 1% " of the truth level of information from the microscopic or molecular view is in my estimation accurate. A good test is to see if surgical intervention (the macroscopic view) has been greatly changed or guided by the molecular view. The epidemiological truth is that surgical intervention has been little changed or, if anything, actually misguided. Back in 1985 and again in 1998 major epidemiological studies showed that radical mastectomy was an unnecessary action as compared to lumpectomy and radiation with regard to breast cancer. The current standard of treatment at major medical centers is now radical mastectomy, vascular surgery, and major reconstructive surgery, utilizing at least two surgical teams (can you hear the cash register in the background?). If you add the prophylactic surgeries going on for both breast cancer as well as prostate cancer, you begin to see in small measure how healthcare costs have tripled over the last few years. Prescription drugs, of course, is an even bigger part of that. From the research point of view where I stand as a Western scientist, we are at the equivalent time in WM as the Yellow Emperor was at his time with CM. We're just beginning. I personally would not bet my life on 20, 30 or even 50 years worth of Western culture. CM is my primary care healthcare. Attilio, there are indeed masters of CM that you can train with. I associate with Dr. Ping Qi Kang here in San Francisco. His insight is enormous. He refers to masters back in Shanghai that he studied with and keeps threatening to bring several of them to the U.S. Apparently they are forced to retire at age 55 just when they are hitting their prime (as you've just alluded to the time it takes to attain mastery.) Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Chris, Perhaps I should've been more explicit. I am against being integrated into the WM framework! We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing out the good result of TCM treatments. The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, subjects at microscopic level with the assumption that when all parts are " visible " with microscopic view everything is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the fundamental problems with this approach are: 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell the causal-effect. Don't we see tons of medical research paper worked on the " association " possible reasons with a problem, but not the actual cause. 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so far is probably way less than 1% of all truth!! TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with inter-related subsystems. TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level models (5 phase, meridians, etc.) and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse reading, palpation, etc) to assess the behavior under these models. When multiple models are applied and multiple metrics are measured the practitioner has a better opportunity to identify the causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better treatment result. Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the unknowns better. Having microscopic level knowledge is great, but before sufficient amount of microscopic level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very dangerous to apply them as if the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the problem with WM so far. (Well, it's got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any modeling and simulation, such as designing a large scale circuit, having a time-tested model is the key to success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which is why it can do wonder healings. So, until WM evolves to know just about everything at microscopic level and figure out the relationships of how they work together (macroscopic level) TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but don't count on its correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! Mike L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2004 Report Share Posted May 14, 2004 In effect TCM and WM cannot have a common point of origin in terms of theory because one speaks of designs and the other of symptom profiles. Anything created out of a forced amalgam of the two may look workable but will in essence be Frankenstinistic. The monstrosity looked like a man and to an extent felt like a man, but ended up killing the most delicately profound thing in his short life, the trust of a little girl child. Unless this disparity of origin is understood, by healers of both kinds, and worked around in one manner or another, what will result will be a hotch- potch of modalities, which will pretend to be hedonistic, but will end up tasting much like the old, unpalatable WM soup. And the public will not appreciate this, and will end up by placing TCM on a rung similar to that which it has marked for WM these days. In TCM we begin with a set of dissimilar extremes, and using subsets we arrive at a loosely constructed picture which is changing even as one speaks. In WM one collects the various symptoms and signs in random order and identifies the same against given norms in texts. With the former system one, as an example, comes up with: a. Heat rising into head, more to the sides. b. Redness following suit in same orientation. c.i. Stagnation at midriff under ribs, esp. R side. c.ii. ST turns upwards with Heat and Fire in its maw. d. Cold in lower extremities, more towards the feet. With the latter system one, for the same example, item by item, comes up with: a. History of episodic pain in temples. b. [There is no recognition of this variable]. c.i. Pain on deep pressure under R subcostal margin. c.ii. There are gastric symptoms of acid reflux etc. d. [There is no recognition of this variable]. The former, TCM, calls this Heat and Fire in Head because of LV Heat Rising. The latter calls it Migraine, differentiating a Cluster variety as acute. In treating it TCM follows qi, Blood, thermal gradient and leads these to the opposite poles, using exact pathways and points thereon known for given effect. WM allays symptoms with analgesics and vasoconstrictors. In terms of the present discussion, it would be wrong for a TCM practitioner to name the condition Migraine, because this will generate symptomatic identificators and approach. In terms of the present discussion, it would be wrong for a WM practitioner to name the condition Heat Rising, because the treatment will still be analgesics and vasoconstrictors, with an occasional needle thrown in. In the end each will sleep at night with a feeling of something being wrong somewhere but hey who the heck cares the woman got rid of the pain didn't she? Actually, the woman may have had pain limitation, all for the wrong reasons, and will have carried home another emerging problem which would surface later, because one can't move the qi and not have the consequences come home to roost. Dr. Holmes Keikobad MB BS DPH Ret. DIP AC NCCAOM LIC AC CO & AZ www.acu-free.com - 15 CEUS by video. NCCAOM reviewed. Approved in CA & most states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2004 Report Share Posted May 17, 2004 Hi Mike, To answer your questions, Dr. Ping Qi Kang is at 2408 Clement St., San Francisco near 25th Avenue in the outer Richmond District. Regarding valuable lessons from Dr. Kang, they are too numerous too mention. A few highlights would be the efficacy of tui na in the hands of a master. Another would be that successful treatments of hepatitis C, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and other internal medicine conditions are normal procedure with the use of appropriate herbal formulas. I brought my acute care broken back to Dr. Kang in the 1980s, and have been happily running half marathons and marathons ever since. My profile shows me running a 1:39 US Half Marathon in San Francisco. Not too shabby for a 50-something guy with a broken back. Obviously I'm prejudiced by the successful personal treatment, but I've also learned some valuable lessons. Back in the 1980s I was directing the California Community Clinic at the America College of TCM in San Francisco. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Emmanuel, Thanks for echoing with more examples! Those are very good examples. Where does Dr. Ping Qi Kang hold his office/clinic or teach? What's the most valuable things you learned from him? Mike L. Emmanuel Segmen <susegmen wrote: Hi Mike, Yes, I can certainly confirm that from the point of view of Western science, that the " microscopic level " of knowledge has had applications to human physiology for a very short period of time. Your " less than 1% " of the truth level of information from the microscopic or molecular view is in my estimation accurate. A good test is to see if surgical intervention (the macroscopic view) has been greatly changed or guided by the molecular view. The epidemiological truth is that surgical intervention has been little changed or, if anything, actually misguided. Back in 1985 and again in 1998 major epidemiological studies showed that radical mastectomy was an unnecessary action as compared to lumpectomy and radiation with regard to breast cancer. The current standard of treatment at major medical centers is now radical mastectomy, vascular surgery, and major reconstructive surgery, utilizing at least two surgical teams (can you hear the cash register in the background?). If you add the prophylactic surgeries going on for both breast cancer as well as prostate cancer, you begin to see in small measure how healthcare costs have tripled over the last few years. Prescription drugs, of course, is an even bigger part of that. From the research point of view where I stand as a Western scientist, we are at the equivalent time in WM as the Yellow Emperor was at his time with CM. We're just beginning. I personally would not bet my life on 20, 30 or even 50 years worth of Western culture. CM is my primary care healthcare. Attilio, there are indeed masters of CM that you can train with. I associate with Dr. Ping Qi Kang here in San Francisco. His insight is enormous. He refers to masters back in Shanghai that he studied with and keeps threatening to bring several of them to the U.S. Apparently they are forced to retire at age 55 just when they are hitting their prime (as you've just alluded to the time it takes to attain mastery.) Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Chris, Perhaps I should've been more explicit. I am against being integrated into the WM framework! We should all learn/work hard to continue bringing out the good result of TCM treatments. The way I see it is, WM views, or tries to view, subjects at microscopic level with the assumption that when all parts are " visible " with microscopic view everything is known, therefore, problems treatable. Some of the fundamental problems with this approach are: 1) What's known at miroscopic level may not tell the causal-effect. Don't we see tons of medical research paper worked on the " association " possible reasons with a problem, but not the actual cause. 2) The microscopic level knowledge accumulated so far is probably way less than 1% of all truth!! TCM views the the whole subject as a system, with inter-related subsystems. TCM understands the subject with macroscopic level models (5 phase, meridians, etc.) and by using different metrics (tongue, pulse reading, palpation, etc) to assess the behavior under these models. When multiple models are applied and multiple metrics are measured the practitioner has a better opportunity to identify the causal-effect, thereby bringing about a better treatment result. Modeling and simulation is a way to understand the unknowns better. Having microscopic level knowledge is great, but before sufficient amount of microscopic level knowledge is accumulated, it can be very dangerous to apply them as if the knowledge is sufficient; such has been the problem with WM so far. (Well, it's got only 100+ years of evolution.) As with any modeling and simulation, such as designing a large scale circuit, having a time-tested model is the key to success. TCM has multiple time-tested models, which is why it can do wonder healings. So, until WM evolves to know just about everything at microscopic level and figure out the relationships of how they work together (macroscopic level) TCM can register these knowledge as a reference (but don't count on its correctness by itself). We don't have to disgard them, as they will continue to correct themselves by proving wrong year after year, generation after generation; the stories similar to the HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) will continue to show up. TCM will continue to survive as one treasurous discipline to serve mankind, as long as we do a good job of keeping it up! Mike L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.