Guest guest Posted September 17, 2004 Report Share Posted September 17, 2004 Most of the protocols for hep C involve minor bupleurum, because so many studies (190+) have shown it drastically reduces liver inflammation. As a practitioner, ask yourself what symptoms typically manifest for the progression of hep C, then ask yourself whether Minor B looks like a good formula. Chances are it will. Then, look at the real world evidence, as opposed to just your TCM theory, and ask yourself is it worth screwing around with ten other formulas just because you want to go strictly by the book, instead of using something which has shown clinical efficacy and covers most theoretical bases. Single herbs are added in as they are to any formula, to tailor it to the patient. Obviously, if a patient shows some major signs contraindicating Minor B, then try other things. Also, if your patient is taking Interferon, Minor B could kill them, as Japanese studies have shown (it potentiates the interferon, leading to pulmonary edema). In Japan, they use standardized herbal formulas (kampo), or combinations thereof, and have great clinical success. Sure it's different, but it has made their biomedical/herbal research that much easier by having a standard formula to refer to. The disadvantages are obvious, but it doesn't mean that such an approach is worthless simply because it is not 100% orthodox and traditional. In fact, it may be the key to treating the broadest spectrum of ill people, who can't afford to pay the office visit to have a formula custom-tailored week after week. Benjamin Hawes, MAOM, Lic. Ac., CORTEZ FAMILY ACUPUNCTURE 1430 E. Main Street, Suite #4 Cortez, CO 81321 (970) 565-0230 > ______________________ > > Message: 3 > Thu, 16 Sep 2004 16:50:51 -0000 > " briansbeard " <brian_s_beard > Herbs - symptom vs. root, was Hep C > > > I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts or concerns or experiences > regarding the use of herbs. In particular, what's the difference > between prescribing a formula based prescription rather than throwing > together a bunch of herbs that may have been individually been shown > to have some effect. > > The recent thread on Hep C had most suggestions being - everybody w/ > Hep C try this thing with no discussion about syndrome > differentiation. Does this concern anyone? > > And while a particular supplement may be shown to have results, if > done in an imbalanced fashion may create a further imbalance > elsewhere while not directing the root pattern to an overall state of > harmony. > > So while there seems to be value in taking a particular supplement, > would it not be better to also address the pattern differentiation. > Or is it? The bottom line is, does it work in the clinic. If anyone > has any experiences or thoughts on this I would be interested in > hearing them. > > --brian > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2004 Report Share Posted September 18, 2004 Well you certainly hit a key point here. And I'm not one to wear theory on my sleeve. But since I'm relatively new as a practitioner, I don't always know when to throw it out to try another appropach. And trying to get the patient to stick around while I struggle with that determination is another story... --brian > and ask yourself is it worth screwing > around with ten other formulas just because you want to go strictly by the > book, instead of using something which has shown clinical efficacy and > covers most theoretical bases. Single herbs are added in as they are to any > formula, to tailor it to the patient. 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.