Development of new software for TCM Dx and Tx, esp in CHM

[Guest guest]

I couldn't agree more. Designing a prescription for a complex case is

an algorithmic process that is much more suitable to be aided by

relational databases than simple textbooks without cross-referencing

capabilities.

 

 

On May 15, 2004, at 9:10 AM, wrote:

 

>

> For those who do not believe this is the way to go, I can see

> you in my rear view mirror. Its already happening. Its just one more

> thing we can either

> do right or see someone else do it and coopt the profession in its

> wake. I have made my

> case. for anyone who cannot see that searching a database is the

> EXACT same thing as

> plodding through books looking for entries that correlate to certain

> keywords, I guess you

> never will.

>

> When I open a book, I am looking for the diseases, patterns and

> symptoms that make up

> my working dx. Perhaps others don't do it that way and thus the

> database idea makes no

> sense. In a laborious process, I finally end up with a number of

> options. Granted, this has

> become much easier for those complaints I see regularly and for which

> no references are

> necessary. But it was my novice method and still applies in complex

> cases. It is also the

> method I teach my students at PCOM - a method that was decided in a

> joint process

> involving all the herb teachers at all 3 of our campuses over a 9

> month period involving

> about 150 emails.

>

> Once I have narrowed the field, I can then explore the 5-10 options

> more deeply,

> including pathomechanisms and obscure confirming sx. From this, I

> craft my formula. In

> the most extreme scenario, this could take up to 45 minutes or more

> for a student and

> require the use of a dozen books spread out all around you. Since the

> information was

> found using keywords like patterns and sx, what conceivable difference

> would it make if

> one accessed the same " possibilities " using a single keyword search

> and then displaying a

> summary of all the results on one screen. It would make one

> difference and one alone. It

> would cut that 45 minutes down to around 10. for me, it cuts a 10-15

> minute process to

> 5 minutes or less.

>

> While one can certainly use a computer as a cookbook, I believe this

> even more likely with

> printed texts due the search limitations in that media. time is of

> the essence for busy px

> and many students tell me that it is very much this factor that

> prevents them from doing

> tailored prescribing.

>

 

[Guest guest]

Such a project is already in early stages of development at Paradigm

publications.

 

 

On May 15, 2004, at 9:21 AM, Steven Slater wrote:

 

> It would also probably necessitate a huge inbuilt glossary and synonym

> directory to enable practitioners from varying educational backgrounds

> to use the database with their learnt terminologies. To my knowledge no

> complete listing of synonym's exists.

>

> Of course we will never get anywhere unless we start, but the more I

> think about the intricacies of such a project............the more

> intimidating such a undertaking begins to become in my mind.

[Guest guest]

Allowing that there are individual preferences in individual treatment

strategies, especially with acupuncture, expert systems could allow

access to classical texts, classical physicians such as Li Dongyuan,

and works of modern authors than one could access at the click of a

mouse. One of the points of a computer database is the ability to

access whatever source one wants for treatment. The closest thing we

have to that is the TCM CD-ROM of classical texts in Chinese, but the

search engine is very weak. Homeopaths have access to expert systems

of George Vithoulkas, or relational databases of Kent, Hahnemann,

Clarke, and modern repertories, materia medicas, Eizayaga's algorithms,

and can pick, choose and compare any data sets they want.

 

If we access the vast Chinese libraries, and I think we should

cooperate with the Chinese and Japanese libraries on such a project,

one could greatly expand one's source material to a heretofore untapped

treasure chest of information.

 

 

On May 15, 2004, at 11:22 AM, Al Stone wrote:

 

> Adding too many sources of information to a database will render it

> unusable when we take a problem such as Shao Yang headache and locate,

> according to ALL the books, about a million different points to treat

> this. Perhaps if the reason for the points usage were included, it

> could help to guide the practitioner, but more information is not

> necessarily more useful and often times actually less usable.

[Guest guest]

This one is easy and the one I often tell my students. Patients with textbook

signs and

symptoms often don't respond in the text book way to treatment. This is why I

agree

a data base must include lots of " Plan B' follow-up treatments that differ from

the

norm.

doug

 

 

, rw2@r... wrote:

 

> For those of you who have been practicing as an herbalist for many years, or

have

been teaching for many years: What are the most common reasons that you feel

your

clinical results (or those of your students) have fallen short of what you

believe

should be possible?

>

> The answers to that question will lead directly to how much of what type of

data is

needed.

>

> For example, the most revealing experiences are those in which an initial

oversight

or error was made, leading to either side effects or disappointing results. In

such

cases, what was done, either by you or another practitioner, that eventually

made the

difference, and what type of information or correction was involved in this

action?

Then, how could this type of information be integrated into a database?

[Guest guest]

On May 15, 2004, at 6:56 PM, rw2 wrote:

 

> I decided that students were wasting their time studying too many

> herbs and formulas.

> 90 or so herbs is quite enough for beginners. Even experts use these

> 90 herbs as 85-95% of all the ingredients in their formulas. Knowing

> 50 formulas inside-out is far better than a dilettantish knowledge of

> 300.

> Students were not spending nearly enough time **playing** with

> symptom-pattern analysis. Not just memorizing, but playing with them

> in their minds, doing what-if types of games. Instead of spending

> hours searching for just the right herbs, I recommended they spend

> hours analyzing the symptoms of a clinical case and their possible

> significance Combining these Chinese cases with my own observations in

> America reinforced my opinion that Americans do not suffer from a

> deficiency of 1000's of Chinese herbs, but instead suffer because

> their practitioners do not educate them in the toxicity of a typical

> American diet and what to do about it.

 

And I couldn't agree more with all of the above. In information

science, there is a law of diminishing returns. After a certain point,

huge inputs of data into a system result in only minute gains in

efficiency or even setbacks if the new information delays databases

searches and confuses results. So we all do have to ask ourselves how

much gain one gets from new data after a point. Roger is certainly

right that knowing more formulas or single herbs is not the answer.

All the veterans on this list know that the most highly regarded

practitioners are often known for their ability to recombine basic

formulas and materia medica for the treatment of almost all conditions.

Examples include both zhang zhong jing and zhu dan xi. This style of

practice has also been espoused in modern times by those ranging from

Bob Flaws to Ma shou chun (at SIOM). And that students benefit

infinitely more from case analysis than rote memorization is a proven

fact of modern learning theory that I have found to be as true in OM as

anywhere else.

 

This law of diminishing returns raise some questions. If more basic

data will not lead to better results, why? Sometimes we hear things

like Bensky doesn't cover all the herbs functions as listed in the

zhong yao da ci dian, so we are missing so much. But the ZYDCD is

exhaustive. Bensky culled his work by consulting numerous sources and

extrapolating a consensus. Properties of herbs and formulas that

appear in most or every text are far more relevant than data that is

idiosyncratic. I cannot trust idiosyncratic information and would

offer that much of what is missing in english in terms of herb and

formula data is either idiosyncratic or extraneous. I have long argued

that we should practice based upon consensus that has been achieved

over centuries, not by seeking the most unusual or marginal as our

guides. So for herbs and formulas, I believe we have the data we need

(hang on, something is missing, though). I believe the same is true of

patterns (Flaws compendium and wiseman PD) and even pathomechanisms

(sionneau TD series and wiseman PD describe the PMs of most sx one will

ever see). I am not saying the current literature is exhaustive, but

just that being more exhaustive would probably not yield much more

clinical efficacy. I agree with Roger that it is diet and lifestyle

that actually achieve significant additional efficacy.

 

Roger and I are both proponents of studying chinese medical terminology

in chinese, but I believe neither of us think that burrowing forever in

the chinese literature will reveal much more new " data " that will

affect outcomes in any major way. As I think Z'ev and Bobs Flaws and

Damone and other chinese readers have also commented for years, it is

the lack of case studies that inhibits us most. So there is something

missing if one cannot read Chinese, but it is not the data that is

contained in thousands of essentially redundant or obscure texts on

herbs and rx. It is the records of treatment and essays on theory and

pathomechanisms. Blue Poppy has been reporting clinical audits and

case histories in its online journal for several years. I still have

not yet read all the back articles, but have created a personal

searchable file on my hard drive for future reference. With all that

is available in English already and law of diminishing returns, I would

wager there are really a few hundred important books left to translate,

rather than many thousand. Getting such books (and journals) available

in unicode and using a wenlin tool to work through them would fill the

main gap we have. This should be a major focus of future translation

efforts, narrowly tailored to meet our actual needs and not just either

repackaging existing data or adding obscure tidbits for their almost

prurient value. That is why I require a database that searches many,

many sources to have a ranking feature for scoring data. That is why

google works and older engines did not.

 

As an aside related to databases playing a major role in information

storage and access for our field, I know there are some who bemoan the

supposed weakness in such an approach as opposed to old fashioned hard

core memorization. But several questions are begged here. What % of

the ancient chinese population was capable of this type of eidetic

memory. A minute portion, most of whom were probably raised with a

rigor unusual in any era or culture. Today, a child needs to process

infinitely more information than a farmer's child in ancient china.

There is a real questions as to whether the average person can actually

achieve the memorization skills of some in ancient times due to this.

The need to memorize huge amounts of data may have actually been one of

the great limitations of the ancient world. Synaptic capacity may have

ultimately been tied up piling data in, rather than focusing on

process. Perhaps this just one thing we need to let go of. Perhaps

this and only this can really elevate TCM. As long as we burden our

students without outrageous amounts of unnecessary memorization, the

more we will produce practitioners who cannot think and do not remember

the data anyway. This will ultimately destroy the profession as it

becomes dominated by those who have no choice but to resort to cookbook

medicine. It is ironic because one of the main battles we have here at

POCM centers around the insistence of most of the Chinese profs that

only more memorization will solve the problem. We may have reached the

point in america where we can only go forward by distancing ourselves

from trends like these from the PRC.

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX:

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Todd:

 

Do you have a list of the herbs and formulas that you recommend as a student to

study such as the 50 formulas and the 90 herbs that you mentioned.

 

Brian

 

< wrote:

 

On May 15, 2004, at 6:56 PM, rw2 wrote:

 

> I decided that students were wasting their time studying too many

> herbs and formulas.

> 90 or so herbs is quite enough for beginners. Even experts use these

> 90 herbs as 85-95% of all the ingredients in their formulas. Knowing

> 50 formulas inside-out is far better than a dilettantish knowledge of

> 300.

> Students were not spending nearly enough time **playing** with

> symptom-pattern analysis. Not just memorizing, but playing with them

> in their minds, doing what-if types of games. Instead of spending

> hours searching for just the right herbs, I recommended they spend

> hours analyzing the symptoms of a clinical case and their possible

> significance Combining these Chinese cases with my own observations in

> America reinforced my opinion that Americans do not suffer from a

> deficiency of 1000's of Chinese herbs, but instead suffer because

> their practitioners do not educate them in the toxicity of a typical

> American diet and what to do about it.

 

And I couldn't agree more with all of the above. In information

science, there is a law of diminishing returns. After a certain point,

huge inputs of data into a system result in only minute gains in

efficiency or even setbacks if the new information delays databases

searches and confuses results. So we all do have to ask ourselves how

much gain one gets from new data after a point. Roger is certainly

right that knowing more formulas or single herbs is not the answer.

All the veterans on this list know that the most highly regarded

practitioners are often known for their ability to recombine basic

formulas and materia medica for the treatment of almost all conditions.

Examples include both zhang zhong jing and zhu dan xi. This style of

practice has also been espoused in modern times by those ranging from

Bob Flaws to Ma shou chun (at SIOM). And that students benefit

infinitely more from case analysis than rote memorization is a proven

fact of modern learning theory that I have found to be as true in OM as

anywhere else.

 

This law of diminishing returns raise some questions. If more basic

data will not lead to better results, why? Sometimes we hear things

like Bensky doesn't cover all the herbs functions as listed in the

zhong yao da ci dian, so we are missing so much. But the ZYDCD is

exhaustive. Bensky culled his work by consulting numerous sources and

extrapolating a consensus. Properties of herbs and formulas that

appear in most or every text are far more relevant than data that is

idiosyncratic. I cannot trust idiosyncratic information and would

offer that much of what is missing in english in terms of herb and

formula data is either idiosyncratic or extraneous. I have long argued

that we should practice based upon consensus that has been achieved

over centuries, not by seeking the most unusual or marginal as our

guides. So for herbs and formulas, I believe we have the data we need

(hang on, something is missing, though). I believe the same is true of

patterns (Flaws compendium and wiseman PD) and even pathomechanisms

(sionneau TD series and wiseman PD describe the PMs of most sx one will

ever see). I am not saying the current literature is exhaustive, but

just that being more exhaustive would probably not yield much more

clinical efficacy. I agree with Roger that it is diet and lifestyle

that actually achieve significant additional efficacy.

 

Roger and I are both proponents of studying chinese medical terminology

in chinese, but I believe neither of us think that burrowing forever in

the chinese literature will reveal much more new " data " that will

affect outcomes in any major way. As I think Z'ev and Bobs Flaws and

Damone and other chinese readers have also commented for years, it is

the lack of case studies that inhibits us most. So there is something

missing if one cannot read Chinese, but it is not the data that is

contained in thousands of essentially redundant or obscure texts on

herbs and rx. It is the records of treatment and essays on theory and

pathomechanisms. Blue Poppy has been reporting clinical audits and

case histories in its online journal for several years. I still have

not yet read all the back articles, but have created a personal

searchable file on my hard drive for future reference. With all that

is available in English already and law of diminishing returns, I would

wager there are really a few hundred important books left to translate,

rather than many thousand. Getting such books (and journals) available

in unicode and using a wenlin tool to work through them would fill the

main gap we have. This should be a major focus of future translation

efforts, narrowly tailored to meet our actual needs and not just either

repackaging existing data or adding obscure tidbits for their almost

prurient value. That is why I require a database that searches many,

many sources to have a ranking feature for scoring data. That is why

google works and older engines did not.

 

As an aside related to databases playing a major role in information

storage and access for our field, I know there are some who bemoan the

supposed weakness in such an approach as opposed to old fashioned hard

core memorization. But several questions are begged here. What % of

the ancient chinese population was capable of this type of eidetic

memory. A minute portion, most of whom were probably raised with a

rigor unusual in any era or culture. Today, a child needs to process

infinitely more information than a farmer's child in ancient china.

There is a real questions as to whether the average person can actually

achieve the memorization skills of some in ancient times due to this.

The need to memorize huge amounts of data may have actually been one of

the great limitations of the ancient world. Synaptic capacity may have

ultimately been tied up piling data in, rather than focusing on

process. Perhaps this just one thing we need to let go of. Perhaps

this and only this can really elevate TCM. As long as we burden our

students without outrageous amounts of unnecessary memorization, the

more we will produce practitioners who cannot think and do not remember

the data anyway. This will ultimately destroy the profession as it

becomes dominated by those who have no choice but to resort to cookbook

medicine. It is ironic because one of the main battles we have here at

POCM centers around the insistence of most of the Chinese profs that

only more memorization will solve the problem. We may have reached the

point in america where we can only go forward by distancing ourselves

from trends like these from the PRC.

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX:

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I have felt for years that the present system of learning several

hundred Chinese medicinals does little for the student, because they

need to be presented in relationship to prescriptions and cases to be

understood. I still think the Liu Yiren text " The Heart Transmission

of Medicine " (soon to be deleted I hear?) provides a great template

for teaching families of prescriptions. I think it is much more

important to know a few families of prescriptions well than several

hundred memorized without any deep knowledge of what they do in

context.

 

 

On May 16, 2004, at 10:02 AM, wrote:

 

> And I couldn't agree more with all of the above. In information

> science, there is a law of diminishing returns. After a certain point,

> huge inputs of data into a system result in only minute gains in

> efficiency or even setbacks if the new information delays databases

> searches and confuses results. So we all do have to ask ourselves how

> much gain one gets from new data after a point. Roger is certainly

> right that knowing more formulas or single herbs is not the answer.

> All the veterans on this list know that the most highly regarded

> practitioners are often known for their ability to recombine basic

> formulas and materia medica for the treatment of almost all conditions.

> Examples include both zhang zhong jing and zhu dan xi. This style of

> practice has also been espoused in modern times by those ranging from

> Bob Flaws to Ma shou chun (at SIOM). And that students benefit

> infinitely more from case analysis than rote memorization is a proven

> fact of modern learning theory that I have found to be as true in OM as

> anywhere else.

[Guest guest]

The advantage of having access to the ZYDCD is that one can see the

process by which that consensus was reached over the historical period

of development of CM. Rather than having to accept a one-dimensional

arbitrary description of a medicinal, one can see the depth and breadth

of understanding about it, and choose accordingly. Sometimes it is the

'off label' uses of a medicinal that are important, such as using gui

zhi/cinnamon twig for chuan/panting. Again, if this was made available

in a database format, anyone could dive in and use whatever information

was relevant to their needs.

 

As far as diet and lifestyle goes, I agree with you and Roger, these

issues are very important. I have always seen the ideal of our

profession as Asian medicine naturopaths, not just technicians of

acupuncture or herbal prescriptions. As I've said over and over again,

it saddens me to see the effects of modern diet not only on the patient

population, but on students in such places as PCOM. Very few see the

importance of health cultivation for someone who wants to take care of

others' health. Diet coke and fast food just don't jive with gui zhi

tang and xiao yao wan.

 

 

On May 16, 2004, at 10:02 AM, wrote:

 

> This law of diminishing returns raise some questions. If more basic

> data will not lead to better results, why? Sometimes we hear things

> like Bensky doesn't cover all the herbs functions as listed in the

> zhong yao da ci dian, so we are missing so much. But the ZYDCD is

> exhaustive. Bensky culled his work by consulting numerous sources and

> extrapolating a consensus. Properties of herbs and formulas that

> appear in most or every text are far more relevant than data that is

> idiosyncratic. I cannot trust idiosyncratic information and would

> offer that much of what is missing in english in terms of herb and

> formula data is either idiosyncratic or extraneous. I have long argued

> that we should practice based upon consensus that has been achieved

> over centuries, not by seeking the most unusual or marginal as our

> guides. So for herbs and formulas, I believe we have the data we need

> (hang on, something is missing, though). I believe the same is true of

> patterns (Flaws compendium and wiseman PD) and even pathomechanisms

> (sionneau TD series and wiseman PD describe the PMs of most sx one will

> ever see). I am not saying the current literature is exhaustive, but

> just that being more exhaustive would probably not yield much more

> clinical efficacy. I agree with Roger that it is diet and lifestyle

> that actually achieve significant additional efficacy.

[Guest guest]

I think that didactic methods such as reciting texts aloud helped the

memorization process traditionally. Not only was this done in China,

where many teaching texts where written as long poems, but Tibet and

India as well. In yeshivot, this method is used to learn Talmud.

Another factor of this method that goes beyond rote memorization is the

fact that students would debate the information and theory, and stretch

their understanding and knowledge, using the teacher to guide them in

resolving disputes. So, on one hand, you had the oral recitation to

aid memorization, and on the other, debating issues, cases and data to

stretch the mind's thinking abilities.

 

I don't see these methods being adapted in our modern institutions of

TCM So without a monastic environment with a narrow focus, new

methods of education must be developed. I think computer-based data

retrieval is the wave of the future. I agree that more memorization

will not solve any problems. Rather it will create practitioners who

cannot think for themselves, but can only extract data from textbooks.

 

 

On May 16, 2004, at 10:02 AM, wrote:

 

> The need to memorize huge amounts of data may have actually been one of

> the great limitations of the ancient world. Synaptic capacity may have

> ultimately been tied up piling data in, rather than focusing on

> process. Perhaps this just one thing we need to let go of. Perhaps

> this and only this can really elevate TCM. As long as we burden our

> students without outrageous amounts of unnecessary memorization, the

> more we will produce practitioners who cannot think and do not remember

> the data anyway. This will ultimately destroy the profession as it

> becomes dominated by those who have no choice but to resort to cookbook

> medicine. It is ironic because one of the main battles we have here at

> POCM centers around the insistence of most of the Chinese profs that

> only more memorization will solve the problem. We may have reached the

> point in america where we can only go forward by distancing ourselves

> from trends like these from the PRC.

[Guest guest]

Al:

 

Thank you for the book information. Do you have any idea who the publisher is. I

have done a search on the internet for the books and don not find much. Most of

the sites tell my its out of stock.

Thanks

Brian

 

Al Stone <alstone wrote:

Clinical Handbook of Internal Medicine - The Treatment of Disease with

Traditional

 

Volume 1 is the Lung, Kidney, Liver and Heart. ISBN: 1-875760-93-8

 

Volume 2 is the Spleen and Stomach. ISBN: 0-9579720-0-8

 

There is a Volume 3 in the works, but I have no idea when to expect it

in print.

 

 

-al.

 

On May 14, 2004, at 12:19 PM, Brian Hardy wrote:

 

> Do you have the title, etc. for the Maclean book.

> Thanks

> Brian

 

 

--

 

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

-Adlai Stevenson

 

 

 

Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including board

approved continuing education classes, an annual conference and a free

discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, Brian Hardy <mischievous00>

wrote:

:

>

> Do you have a list of the herbs and formulas that you recommend as a student

to study

such as the 50 formulas and the 90 herbs that you mentioned.

 

It was Roger who mentioned that. My agreement was a guesstimate. Perhaps he

can help.

But flaws seventy essentials and the shang han lun are places to start.

 

[Guest guest]

These books are published in Australia and are always available through

these too suppliers:-

 

www.acuneeds.com

 

and

 

chinabooks.com.au

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

 

On 17 May 2004, at 6:33 AM, Brian Hardy wrote:

 

> Al:

>

> Thank you for the book information. Do you have any idea who the

> publisher is. I have done a search on the internet for the books and

> don not find much. Most of the sites tell my its out of stock.

> Thanks

> Brian

>

> Al Stone <alstone wrote:

> Clinical Handbook of Internal Medicine - The Treatment of Disease with

> Traditional

>

> Volume 1 is the Lung, Kidney, Liver and Heart. ISBN: 1-875760-93-8

>

> Volume 2 is the Spleen and Stomach. ISBN: 0-9579720-0-8

>

> There is a Volume 3 in the works, but I have no idea when to expect it

> in print.

>

>

> -al.

>

> On May 14, 2004, at 12:19 PM, Brian Hardy wrote:

>

>> Do you have the title, etc. for the Maclean book.

>> Thanks

>> Brian

>

>

> --

>

> Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

> -Adlai Stevenson

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Bensky culled his work by consulting numerous sources and

> extrapolating a consensus.

 

Actually, based on my own reading in the Chinese medical literature, I

would say that most of Bensky & Gamble's and Bensky & Barolet's

materials come from single, well known contemporary Chinese sources

for each book. The bibliographies are, in my opinion, " smoke and

mirrors. "

 

Sorry if this is off the subject.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

 

 

Thanks for mentioning my book. These 70 or so formulas are the ones

that were taught at the Shanghai University of to

undergraduates when I was a student there in 1985 or '86. However, in

looking back at that book, I would also say that a number of formulas

in that book are not clinically useful in our setting. One has to

learn them in order to be " educated, " but one may then never have

occasion to use them.

 

Given that I specialize in gynecology here in the U.S. and Europe, I

reckon that I treat 85% of all patients I see with modifications of

5-7 formulas. To further clarify, that means 85% of the patients I see

are females, aged 35-55 years old, suffering from chronic as opposed

to acute gynecological conditions as well as autoimmune diseases to

which females are especially prone.

 

Since I'm pretty sure someone is going to ask what those 5-7 formulas are:

 

Xiao Chai Hu Tang (and all its modifications)

Xiao Yao San (and all its modifications)

Bu Zhong Yi Qi Tang (and all its modifications, meaning all of Li

Dong-yuan's specifically yin fire Rxs)

Ban Xia Xie Xin Tang (and all its modifications, meaning all Xie Xin Rxs)

Wen Dan Tang (and all its modifications, both pluses and minuses,

which then includes Er Chen Tang)

Er Xian Tang (and all its modifications)

Liu Wei Di Huang Wan (and all its modifications)

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001>

wrote:

 

> Actually, based on my own reading in the Chinese medical literature, I

> would say that most of Bensky & Gamble's and Bensky & Barolet's

> materials come from single, well known contemporary Chinese sources

> for each book.

 

but weren't those single modern sources developed from consensus amongst

herbalists?

And does the more idiosyncratic information NOT included in Bensky make any

clinical

difference in general practice? Unless one has repeatedly failed in practice

when using

Benksy, the answer would have to be no. I don't doubt that if one looks widely

through

the medical literature that one will find many approaches to things and many

nuances and

" missing data " . I just doubt that much of this data alters efficacy. Essays on

pathomechanisms are enlightening, as are cases, but I think your own use of only

a few

formulas is telling. You don't need more herbs or more rx to ply your trade.

So unless

someone can give me an example of vital information that is missing from materia

medicas and formularies, these are two genres that are adequately represented in

english

already. Despite having access to the entire corpus of TCM, my chinese

colleagues use

basically the same 90 herbs I do, with a few regional favorites thrown in. We

have the

herb data we need. Additional details may just lead to diminishing returns. I

think we

need to recognize that the average person needs to function in clinic and has no

interest

in scholarship ( and I would wager that this has been true forever - we know the

docs who

wrote - most just practiced). We can bemoan that or we can try and achieve the

best

outcome by different means. I think software is this means.

 

[Guest guest]

The books are published by the Unit of the Faculty of

Health, University of Western Sydney Macarthur.

Distributed by Impulse Books (www.impulsebooks.com)

 

On May 16, 2004, at 1:33 PM, Brian Hardy wrote:

 

> Al:

>

> Thank you for the book information. Do you have any idea who the

> publisher is. I have done a search on the internet for the books and

> don not find much. Most of the sites tell my its out of stock.

> Thanks

> Brian

>

> Al Stone <alstone wrote:

> Clinical Handbook of Internal Medicine - The Treatment of Disease with

> Traditional

>

> Volume 1 is the Lung, Kidney, Liver and Heart. ISBN: 1-875760-93-8

>

> Volume 2 is the Spleen and Stomach. ISBN: 0-9579720-0-8

>

> There is a Volume 3 in the works, but I have no idea when to expect it

> in print.

>

>

> -al.

>

> On May 14, 2004, at 12:19 PM, Brian Hardy wrote:

>

>> Do you have the title, etc. for the Maclean book.

>> Thanks

>> Brian

>

>

> --

>

> Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

> -Adlai Stevenson

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

For my own list of most important 90 herbs and 50 formulas (in response to:) see

below.

 

Most of the herb choices are based on the frequency with which they appear in

classical formulas.

 

In the RMHI " Herbal Tutor " software games, we prioritize the presentation of

these herbs first, so that students learn these well before they ever move on to

learn additional herbs.

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

-----------------------

" " <

Re: Development of new software for TCM Dx and Tx, esp in CHM

 

, Brian Hardy <mischievous00>

wrote:

:

>

> Do you have a list of the herbs and formulas that you recommend as a student

to study

such as the 50 formulas and the 90 herbs that you mentioned.

 

It was Roger who mentioned that. My agreement was a guesstimate. Perhaps he

can help.

But flaws seventy essentials and the shang han lun are places to start.

------------

 

 

======================================

90 HERBS:

 

Relieve Wind Chill

Angelicae, Rx [bai/ zhi~]

Asari, Hb cum Radice [xi\ xin-]

Cinnamomi, Rml [gui\ zhi-]

Ephedrae, Hb [ma/ huang/]

Ledebouriellae, Rx (= Sileris, Rx) [fang/ feng-]

Notopterygii, Rz et Rx [qiang- huo/]

Schizonepetae, Hb seu Fl [jing- jie\]

Zingiberis Recens, Rz [sheng- jiang-]

 

Relieve Wind Heat

Bupleuri, Rx [chai/ hu/]

Cimicifugae, Rz [sheng- ma/]

Menthae, Hb [bo\ he/]

Puerariae, Rx [ge/ gen-]

Sojae Praeparatum, S [dan\ dou\ chi~]

 

Purge Fire

Anemarrhenae, Rx [zhi- mu~]

Gypsum [shi/ gao-]

Gardeniae, Fr [zhi- zi~]

Lophatheri, Hb [dan\ zhu/ ye\]

 

Cool Blood

Moutan Radicis, Cx [mu~ dan- pi/]

Rehmanniae Glutinosae (dried), Rx [sheng- di\ huang/]

Bubali, Cornu [shui~ niu/ jiao~] (substitute for Cornu Rhinoceri)

Scrophulariae, Rx [xuan/ shen-]

 

Clear Damp Heat

Coptidis, Rz [huang/ lian/]

Phellodendri, Cx [huang/ bai~]

Scutellariae, Rx [huang/ qin/]

 

Clear Heat Toxins

Forsythiae, Fr [lian/ qiao/]

Lonicerae Japonicae, Fl [jin- yin- hua-]

 

Purge-Attack

Rhei, Rz [da\ huang/]

Mirabilitum (= Magnesia Sulfaricum; Natrum Sulfaricum) [mang/ xiao-]

 

Drain Dampness

Alismatis, Rz [ze/ xie\]

Coicis, S [yi\ yi~ ren/]

Mutong, Caulis [mu\ tong-]

Plantaginis, S [che- qian/ zi~]

Poriae Cocos Paradicis, Sclerotium [fu/ shen-]

Poria, Sclerotium [fu/ ling/]

 

Expel Wind Dampness

Duhuo, Rx [du/ huo/]

 

Transform Hot Phlegm

Fritillariae Cirrhosae, Bulbus [chuan- bei\ mu~]

Fritillariae Thunbergii, Bulbus [zhe\ bei\ mu~]

Trichosanthis, Rx [tian- hua- fen~]

 

Transform Cold Phlegm

Pinelliae, Rz [ban\ xia\]

Platycodi, Rx [jie/ geng~]

 

Relieve cough

Mori Albae Radicis, Cx [sang- bai/ pi/]

Pruni Armeniacae, S (= Armeniacae Amarae, S) [xing\ ren/]

 

Aromatic- transform Dampness

Amomi, Fr seu S [sha- ren/]

Atractylodis, Rz [cang- zhu/]

Magnoliae Officinalis, Cx [hou\ po\]

 

Relieve Food Stagnation

Fermentata, Massa [shen/ qu-]

 

Regulate Qi

Aquilariae, Lignum [chen/ xiang-]

Citri Reticulatae, Pc [chen/ pi/]

Citri seu Ponciri, Fr (= Aurantii, Fr) [zhi~ qiao\]

Citri seu Ponciri Immaturus, Fr (= Aurantii Immaturus, Fr) [zhi~ shi/]

Cyperi, Rz [xiang- fu\]

Linderae, Rx [wu- yao\]

Meliae Toosendan, Fr [chuan- lian\ zi~]

Saussureae seu Vladimirae, Rx (= Aucklandiae, Rx) [mu\ xiang-]

 

Hemostatic

Pseudoginseng, Rx [san- qi/]

 

Invigorate Blood

Achyranthis Bidentatae, Rx [niu/ xi-; huai/ niu/ xi-]

Curcumae, Tuber [yu\ jin-]

Ligustici Wallichi, Rx [chuan- xiong-]

Myrrha [mo\ yao\]

Olibanum, Gummi [ru~ xiang-]

Paeoniae Rubra, Rx [chi\ shao/]

Persicae, S [tao/ ren/]

Salviae Miltiorrhizae, Rx [dan- shen-]

 

Warm Interior

Foeniculi, Fr [xiao~ hui/ xiang-]

Piperis Nigri, Fr [hu/ jiao-]

Zingiberis, Rz [gan- jiang-]

 

Tonify Qi

Astragali, Rx [huang/ qi/]

Atractylodis Macrocephalae, Rz [bai/ zhu/]

Codonopsis, Rx [dang~ shen-]

Dioscoreae Oppositae, Rx [shan- yao\]

Ginseng, Rx [ren/ shen-]

Glycyrrhizae, Rx [gan- cao~]

 

Tonify Blood

Angelicae Sinensis, Rx [dang- gui-]

Asini, Gelatinum [e- jiao-]

Lycii, Fr [gou~ qi~ zi~]

Paeoniae Lactiflorae, Rx [bai/ shao/]

Rehmanniae Glutinosae Conquitae, Rx [shu/ di\ huang/]

 

Tonify Yang

Cuscutae, S [tu~ si- zi~]

Eucommiae, Cx [du\ zhong\]

 

Tonify Yin

Amydae, Carapax [bie- jia~]

Ophiopogonis, Tuber [mai\ men/ dong-]

Testudinis, Plastrum [gui- ban~]

 

Astringe

Corni, Fr [shan- zhu- yu/]

Pruni Mume, Fr [wu- mei/]

Schizandrae, Fr [wu~ wei\ zi~]

 

Calm Spirit

Draconis, Os [long/ gu~]

 

Nourish Heart and calm Spirit

Polygalae, Rx [yuan~ zhi\]

 

Open Orifices

Acori Graminei, Rz [chang- pu/]

 

Extinguish Internal Wind

Bombyx Batryticatus [jiang- can/]

Gastrodiae, Rz [tian- ma/]

 

Expel Parasites:

Arecae, S [bin- lang/]

 

 

 

======================================

50 FORMULAS:

 

Ephedra Decoction [Ma/ Huang/ Tang-]

Cinnamon Twig [Gui\ Zhi- Tang-]

Minor Bluegreen Dragon [Xiao~ Qing- Long/ Tang-]

Honeysuckle and Forsythia Powder [Yin/ Qiao/ San~]

Minor Bupleurum Decoction [Xiao~ Chai/ Hu/ Tang-]

Major Bupleurum Decoction [Da\ Chai/ Hu/ Tang-]

White Tiger Decoction [bai/ Hu~ Tang-]

Clear the Nutritive Level Decoction [Qing- Ying/ Tang-]

Rhinoceros Horn and Rehmanniae Decoction [Xi- Jiao~ Di\ Huang/ Tang-]

Coptis Decoction to Relieve Toxicity [Huang/ Lian/ Jie~ Du/ Tang-]

Drain the Epigastrium Decoction [Xie\ Xin- Tang-]

Clear the Stomach Powder [Qing- Wei\ San~]

Gentiana Longdancao Decoction to Drain the Liver [Long/ Dan~ Xie\ Gan- Tang-]

Artemisia Annua and Soft-shelled Turtle Shell Decoction [Qing- Hao\ Bie- Jia~

Tang-]

Major Order the Qi Decoction [Da\ Cheng/ Qi\ Tang-]

Rhubarb and Prepared Aconite Decoction [Da\ Huang/ Fu\ Zi~ Tang-]

Minor Bupleurum Decoction [Xiao~ Chai/ Hu/ Tang-]

Major Bupleurum Decoction [Da\ Chai/ Hu/ Tang-]

Frigid Extremities Powder [si\ Ni\ San~]

Rambling Powder [Xiao- Yao/ San~]

Increase the Fluids Decoction [Zeng- Ye\ Tang-]

Five-Ingredient Powder with Poria [Wu~ Ling/ San~]

Calm the Stomach Powder [Ping/ Wei\ San~]

Coptis and Magnolia Bark Decoction [Lian/ Po\ Yin~]

Two-Marvel Powder [Er\ Miao\ San~]

True Warrior Decoction [Zhen- Wu~ Tang-]

Regulate the Middle Pill [Li~ Zhong- Wan/]

Frigid Extremities Decoction [si\ Ni\ Tang-]

Four-Gentleman Decoction [si\ Jun- Zi~ Tang-]

Ginseng, Poria, and Atractylodes Macrocephalae Powder [shen- Ling/ Bai/ Zhu/

San~]

Tonify the Middle and Augment the Qi Decoction [bu~ Zhong- Yi\ Qi\ Tang-]

Generate the Pulse Powder [sheng- Mai\ San~]

Four-Substance Decoction [si\ Wu\ Tang-]

Tangkeui and Peony Powder [Dang- Gui- Shao/ Yao\ San~]

Peony and Licorice Decoction [shao/ Yao\ Gan- Cao~ Tang-]

Tangkeui Decoction to Tonify the Blood [Dang- Gui- Bu~ Xue\ Tang-]

Restore Spleen Decoction [Gui- Pi/ Tang-]

Six-Ingredient Pill with Rehmanniae [Liu\ Wei\ Di\ Huang/ Wan/]

Restore the Left Decoction [Zuo~ Gui- Yin~]

Great Tonify the Yin Pill [Da\ Bu~ Yin- Wan/]

Linking Decoction [Yi- Guan\ Jian-]

Restore the Right Pill [You\ Gui- Wan/]

Pinellia and Magnolia Bark Decoction [ban\ Xia\ Hou\ Po\ Tang-]

Peach Pit Decoction to Order the Qi [Tao/ He/ Cheng/ Qi\ Tang-]

Drive Out Stasis in the Mansion of the Blood Decoction [Xue\ Fu~ Zhu/ Yu- Tang-]

Cinnamon Twig and Poria Pill [Gui\ Zhi- Fu/ Ling/ Wan/]

Jade Windscreen Powder [Yu\ Ping/ Feng- San~]

Coptis and Ass-Hide Gelatin Decoction [Huang/ Lian/ E- Jiao- Tang-]

Two-Cured Decoction [Er\ Chen/ Tang-]

Warm the Gallbladder Decoction [Wen- Dan~ Tang-]

 

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

Thanks again for the help...

 

Al Stone <alstone wrote:The books are published by the

Unit of the Faculty of

Health, University of Western Sydney Macarthur.

Distributed by Impulse Books (www.impulsebooks.com)

 

On May 16, 2004, at 1:33 PM, Brian Hardy wrote:

 

> Al:

>

> Thank you for the book information. Do you have any idea who the

> publisher is. I have done a search on the internet for the books and

> don not find much. Most of the sites tell my its out of stock.

> Thanks

> Brian

>

> Al Stone <alstone wrote:

> Clinical Handbook of Internal Medicine - The Treatment of Disease with

> Traditional

>

> Volume 1 is the Lung, Kidney, Liver and Heart. ISBN: 1-875760-93-8

>

> Volume 2 is the Spleen and Stomach. ISBN: 0-9579720-0-8

>

> There is a Volume 3 in the works, but I have no idea when to expect it

> in print.

>

>

> -al.

>

> On May 14, 2004, at 12:19 PM, Brian Hardy wrote:

>

>> Do you have the title, etc. for the Maclean book.

>> Thanks

>> Brian

>

>

> --

>

> Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

> -Adlai Stevenson

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

, " "

wrote:

> , " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001>

> wrote:

>

> > Actually, based on my own reading in the Chinese medical literature, I

> > would say that most of Bensky & Gamble's and Bensky & Barolet's

> > materials come from single, well known contemporary Chinese sources

> > for each book.

>

> but weren't those single modern sources developed from consensus

amongst herbalists?

 

Sure. Absolutely.

 

> And does the more idiosyncratic information NOT included in Bensky

make any clinical

> difference in general practice?

 

Maybe. Especially when a med is used by both Western & Asian

herbalists and the standard Chinese rap does not explain the Western

uses which may be a valid extension of scope and may be clinically

relevant in certain patients/situations.

 

Unless one has repeatedly failed in practice when using

> Benksy, the answer would have to be no. I don't doubt that if one

looks widely through

> the medical literature that one will find many approaches to things

and many nuances and

> " missing data " . I just doubt that much of this data alters

efficacy. Essays on

> pathomechanisms are enlightening, as are cases, but I think your own

use of only a few

> formulas is telling. You don't need more herbs or more rx to ply

your trade.

 

Agreed.

 

So unless

> someone can give me an example of vital information that is missing

from materia

> medicas and formularies, these are two genres that are adequately

represented in english

> already. Despite having access to the entire corpus of TCM, my

chinese colleagues use

> basically the same 90 herbs I do, with a few regional favorites

thrown in. We have the

> herb data we need. Additional details may just lead to diminishing

returns. I think we

> need to recognize that the average person needs to function in

clinic and has no interest

> in scholarship ( and I would wager that this has been true forever -

we know the docs who

> wrote - most just practiced). We can bemoan that or we can try and

achieve the best

> outcome by different means. I think software is this means.

 

 

So far, TCM software has not be very successful commercially. In

addition, there's been a certain amount of pirating on the part of

students especially.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " "

wrote:

> , " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001>

> wrote:

>

> > Actually, based on my own reading in the Chinese medical literature, I

> > would say that most of Bensky & Gamble's and Bensky & Barolet's

> > materials come from single, well known contemporary Chinese sources

> > for each book.

>

> but weren't those single modern sources developed from consensus

amongst herbalists?

> And does the more idiosyncratic information NOT included in Bensky

make any clinical

> difference in general practice? Unless one has repeatedly failed in

practice when using

> Benksy, the answer would have to be no. I don't doubt that if one

looks widely through

> the medical literature that one will find many approaches to things

and many nuances and

> " missing data " . I just doubt that much of this data alters

efficacy. Essays on

> pathomechanisms are enlightening, as are cases, but I think your own

use of only a few

> formulas is telling. You don't need more herbs or more rx to ply

your trade. So unless

> someone can give me an example of vital information that is missing

from materia

> medicas and formularies, these are two genres that are adequately

represented in english

> already.

 

 

 

Well, this is sure interesting, but I think there is still much more

information that is not covered in those initial books. I think that

Bensky's new book will demonstrate that adequately. I do not think

this is an issue of scholarship, but practical clinical usage. I just

disagree that all the important information is already in English.

But we have been though this before.

 

-

[Guest guest]

All this talk of designing a database using the current english

literature has got me to wondering about intellectual property rights

for such a project.

 

If we use Sionneau material, Maclean material, Wiseman, Flaws etc. is

it ok to use this data for such a database without permission?

 

If the majority of this material is taken from chinese texts anyway or

basically a reproduction of accepted knowledge.........are there any

intellectual property rights attached to such materials?

 

What I am getting at I suppose is...........where is the line between

someone's intellectual property and the shared common knowledge of our

profession drawn?

 

 

Best Wishes,

Dr. Steven J Slater

Practitioner and Acupuncturist

Mobile: 0418 343 545

chinese_medicine

[Guest guest]

Having worked on a pharmacological database of Chinese herb molecular

structures, it is clear that material used in databases is licensed for

use. One has to have permission to develop such products. Of course,

publishers can develop their own databases from published or translated

material if they have the rights.

 

 

On May 18, 2004, at 12:57 AM, Steven Slater wrote:

 

> All this talk of designing a database using the current english

> literature has got me to wondering about intellectual property rights

> for such a project.

>

> If we use Sionneau material, Maclean material, Wiseman, Flaws etc. is

> it ok to use this data for such a database without permission?

[Guest guest]

Thanks Z'ev,

 

However, I don't think recent discoveries like molecular structures are

the same thing as TCM patterns and their usual signs and symptoms,

treatment principles and formula etc.

 

Of course publishers can make databases of their own published

material....but where did they get this information from that they

published anyway?

 

WHat is TCM general knowledge and what is owned by a publisher?

 

Best Wishes,

 

 

On 19 May 2004, at 12:52 AM, wrote:

 

> Having worked on a pharmacological database of Chinese herb molecular

> structures, it is clear that material used in databases is licensed for

> use. One has to have permission to develop such products. Of course,

> publishers can develop their own databases from published or translated

> material if they have the rights.

>

>

> On May 18, 2004, at 12:57 AM, Steven Slater wrote:

>

>> All this talk of designing a database using the current english

>> literature has got me to wondering about intellectual property rights

>> for such a project.

>>

>> If we use Sionneau material, Maclean material, Wiseman, Flaws etc. is

>> it ok to use this data for such a database without permission?

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

, Steven Slater <dragonslive@i...>

wrote:

 

> If the majority of this material is taken from chinese texts anyway or

> basically a reproduction of accepted knowledge.........are there any

> intellectual property rights attached to such materials?

 

the chinese have copyright laws. but I am pretty sure if information is

included in 3 or

more independent sources, it is not plagiarized when adapted to a 4th. One can

summarize the information in their own words such as " ST 36 supplements qi " or

" huang

qin clears heat " without asking permission or paying any royalties to anyone.

this is public

domain data that canbe found in hundredss of texts worldwide. when you lift

exact

quotations or verbatim symptom lists, that is still plagiarism, though. but

this is easy

enough to avoid.

 

[Guest guest]

, " "

wrote:

> , Steven Slater

<dragonslive@i...> wrote:

>

> > If the majority of this material is taken from chinese texts

anyway or

> > basically a reproduction of accepted knowledge.........are there

any

> > intellectual property rights attached to such materials?

>

> the chinese have copyright laws. but I am pretty sure if

information is included in 3 or

> more independent sources, it is not plagiarized when adapted to a

4th. One can

> summarize the information in their own words such as " ST 36

supplements qi " or " huang

> qin clears heat " without asking permission or paying any royalties

to anyone. this is public

> domain data that canbe found in hundredss of texts worldwide.

when you lift exact

> quotations or verbatim symptom lists, that is still plagiarism,

though. but this is easy

> enough to avoid.

>

 

 

There is a great deal of information that is copied from one text to

another by the Chinese themselves. The lack of all the filler

language used in English prose makes Chinese texts appear even more

similar. Chinese has fewer overall words and many TCM words have a

concise meaning and thus cannot be substituted to vary the style.

Compound these issues with the fact that in the early days of the

PRC personal property was minimized; some texts did not even have

the names of the authors and the information was considered to

be " the people's information. "

 

Now China has protection of intellectual property, so people have to

avoid verbatim copying. Some material appears in an identical form

across several different texts; this makes it hard to say who is

copying whom, which is easier to deal with as a translator. I

believe that the basic rules Todd mentioned above are correct.

 

For sure, the English literature is the property of the authors and

publishers. It only makes sense that permission is needed for

things which are more specific to a certain author. Saying that

spleen vacuity is treated with si jun zi tang is obviously in the

public domain, but the specific literature takes a lot of work for

the translators to produce. Some people may encourage the

widespread copying of certain types of information just to

disseminate the material and raise the standards in the field. The

same people may protect other aspects of their material, and other

authors may want nothing copied from their work at all. It only

stands to reason that any specific information used requires consent

of the author/publisher prior to inclusion.

 

Eric Brand