Severe shock and its effects help please

December 21, 2004

Do you mean tinctures or extracts, as Kan herbs uses? They are

prepared differently.

On Dec 21, 2004, at 1:00 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> one adapts the dosages of the ingredients

> >>>You cannot apply the qualities of an h2o extraction to a tincture

>

December 21, 2004

Alon,

Methods change much more than underlying theories do. There have

been many other preparation methods used throughout Chinese medical

history other than decoctions, and wines as a preparation method are

not dissimilar to 'tinctures'. Also, spray-dried powders often use

alcohol extraction methods, so we'd have to include these as well as

being 'non-traditional methods'. The Chinese have always had elaborate

preparation methods for medicinals, so I don't know how radical a

change liquid extracts are.

On Dec 21, 2004, at 12:13 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> Well since there is no information on the properties of chinese

> herbal tincture you can not speak of structure of prescriptions.

> Nothing to do with technology, it is about following traditional

> methods.

>

December 21, 2004

I find it amazing that you or anyone else would think that Chinese

medicine is 'narrow or frozen'.

>>>>>>>Zev read it again, i said the point of view of progress is narrow not CM.

December 21, 2004

You are talking about techonology, I am talking about actual theory,

structure of prescriptions, diagnosis, etc.

<<<<<<

Well since there is no information on the properties of chinese herbal tincture

you can not speak of structure of prescriptions. Nothing to do with technology,

it is about following traditional methods.

December 21, 2004

Zev i do not think understanding of CM principles via modern physiology is going

to make CM disappear. It will only lead to a more in-depth perspectives. While

for some the loss of the colorful lingo may seen harmful, or as a loss of

identity, to me the only important parameter is that the information and

correlation's are clear, verifiable clinically, and lead to a better outcome for

the patient. If for example the six stages of homotoxicology are a modern

interpretation of the 6 stages of SHL, and if the correlation's can be

demonstrated theoretically, applied successfully and verified in the clinic,

then the fact that one may not use the lingo of Heat, Cold, Yin or Yang but

describe the same syndromes (ie symptoms and signs) via modern language is not

relevant to me as long as one is still applying the principles of the SHL.

December 21, 2004

one adapts the dosages of the ingredients

>>>You cannot apply the qualities of an h2o extraction to a tincture

December 21, 2004

Zev, Any alcohol preparation

Alon

Chinese Medicine , " Z'ev

Rosenberg " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> Do you mean tinctures or extracts, as Kan herbs uses? They are

> prepared differently.

>

> On Dec 21, 2004, at 1:00 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> >

> > one adapts the dosages of the ingredients

> > >>>You cannot apply the qualities of an h2o extraction to a

tincture

> >

>

December 22, 2004

Interesting,

I was thinking of this example when we started this discussion. I

don't know how Miki Shima teaches this material, but I know Miki is not

going to lose his bearings because he is an expert in the Shang Han

Lun. However, if this same material was taught as homotoxicology

(which does have a six phase development of disease like the SHL)

without the 'colorful lingo', the source material from the Shang Han

Lun would disappear over time and transmission. Then, how would we be

keeping the SHL material alive? There has to be an accurate historical

transmission. We need to look ahead to the next few generations of

students, and, yes, 'lingo' is one of the main factors in keeping the

Chinese medical tradition alive.

Having said that, I have no problem with someone like Miki applying

the principles of the SHL to homotoxicology, or Reckeweg's teachings

themselves. I do have a problem with people indiscriminately mixing

paradigms without a comprehensive understanding of what they are doing.

On Dec 21, 2004, at 12:33 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> Zev i do not think understanding of CM principles via modern

> physiology is going to make CM disappear. It will only lead to a more

> in-depth perspectives. While for some the loss of the colorful lingo

> may seen harmful, or as a loss of identity, to me the only important

> parameter is that the information and correlation's are clear,

> verifiable clinically, and lead to a better outcome for the patient.

> If for example the six stages of homotoxicology are a modern

> interpretation of the 6 stages of SHL, and if the correlation's can be

> demonstrated theoretically, applied successfully and verified in the

> clinic, then the fact that one may not use the lingo of Heat, Cold,

> Yin or Yang but describe the same syndromes (ie symptoms and signs)

> via modern language is not relevant to me as long as one is still

> applying the principles of the SHL.

>

December 22, 2004

Okay then,

What could be useful is to distil the principles of each system, and teach

that.

My intuition, mixed with a tad of logic and dash of clinic is that the

principles should look similar, with jargon that equates from one set of

principles to another albeit with two difficulties.

The difficulty that I see is the same problem the physicist have when they

have had to apply Newtonian rules to certain problems and Quantum physics

rules to other problems. For physicists I understand they use Newtonian

rules when looking at big things and Quantum rules when looking at little

things. I think I heard that something like a black hole requires both set

of rules i.e. string theory or something.

So herbs and material substances ie say EA will operate on one set of

principles whilst subtle needling and homeopathic may operate on another set

of principles. There is probably a unifying theory to this some where.

Such a unifying theory might explain how to integrate say material nutrients

with homoeopathic nutrients. Perhaps one is the hardware and the other the

software?!?!

The second difficulty is that of objective. If you are a biochemical type

practitioner who wishes to prolong life as measured by chemicals/nutrients

etc and control pain and leave the spirit aspect to God concepts you may

have a different objective to that practitioner that seeks to serve

bodymindspirit which encapsulates much more into the healing equation than

the protection of physical life, there are now mind and spirit elements that

don't fit a measurement scale that also have to be factored in and they are

unique to each person/animal being treated.

Let me give an example. Lets say Px receives EA for carpal tunnel and the

pain and numbness are lessened as the nervous system is scrambled, so the

brain no longer registers the pain signals it was receiving.

Lets say same Px moves and gets subtle acupuncture (ie de qi but not the TCM

style, where the practitioner feels it yet the Px doesn't.) The Px also

achieves pain control.

Can the objective of these two approaches be compared? If both have

favourable outcomes do we call it the one and same thing? Are there other

parameters that should or can be measured? Is it simply Px satisfaction?

Perhaps greatest pain reduction for the smallest buck ($)? Is it the length

of time the Px is symptom free? Does any of this even matter?

Best wishes,

[zrosenbe]

Wednesday, 22 December 2004 10:25 AM

Chinese Medicine

Re: Severe shock and its effects help please