Supplementing vs. Draining Acupuncture Technique and Needle Retention

[Guest guest]

Is anyone aware of any primary sources that say that needle retention

time affects whether acupuncture treatment is supplementing or

draining? It is a commonly held belief in the West that prolonged

needle retention (generally past 20 minutes or so) causes an

acupuncture treatment to be draining in nature- many teachers warn

students not to leave needles in for too long in patients with vacuity

cases, lest their supplementing needle treatments reverse and have a

draining effect on the patient's channels.

 

However, despite this widespread belief, I have been unable to find

any Chinese sources that support this notion, and I am beginning to

suspect that it may be an urban myth amongst Western practitioners. I

have asked the dept head at the acupuncture dept in the hospital where

I study, I have asked other senior acupuncture doctors in the dept,

and I have asked the younger resident doctors who have recently

finished a cutting-edge modern TCM education. All of them are totally

perplexed by my question and all state that whether acupuncture is

supplementing or draining is completely dependent on needle technique,

not needle retention. They've never even heard of the notion that

prolonged retention would affect supplementing vs. draining.

(Incidentally, they consider good supplementing technique much more

difficult to master than good draining technique.)

 

I have also investigated mainland Chinese and Taiwanese standard

textbooks on acupuncture, and have been completely at a loss to find

anything remotely reinforcing this idea.

 

I would love to hear from anyone with a primary source that supports

the idea that needle retention can change acupuncture from

supplementing (bu3) to draining (xie4). In the absence of primary

sources, I would be interested to know what secondary sources promote

this idea so that they may be investigated more extensively.

 

I suspect that this notion comes from the frequent mistranslation of

xie4, draining, with the word " sedating. " Chinese doctors will

sometimes laugh upon hearing that Westerners refer to " sedating " an

acupuncture point. In Chinese, sedating/sedation is a totally

separate concept from draining. Draining is a method of needle

manipulation, an action that can be done to an acupuncture channel, as

well as a method of treatment in internal medicine (da huang, for

example, is a draining medicinal). To the Chinese, sedation is

something that is achieved by drugs such as diazepam, and they would

never use the term to express what we achieve through xie4 fa3 needle

technique.

 

It seems that many people have the tendency to equate the

pharmacologic notions of stimulating and sedating with the CM notions

of supplementing and draining. Indeed, short needle retention is more

stimulating and prolonged needle retention is more sedating. But

whether the effects on the channel qi are supplementing or draining is

independent of this. The effect on channel qi is determined by needle

technique; we supplement vacuity and drain repletion. We should not

superimpose our Western notions onto CM concepts without a clear

understanding of what the CM concept is.

 

We have seen as-yet-unsubstantiated claims that ginseng should not be

used with stimulants, presumably based on the equation of the CM

notion of supplementing qi with the Western notion of stimulants. We

are also apparently seeing widespread belief that the sedation

achieved by acupuncture in general (known to be largely mediated

through endorphin release according to WM) is equitable with the CM

notion of draining.

 

The belief that 30 minute needle retention is contraindicated for

vacuity patients is extremely widespread in the West. We should

examine the veracity of this belief before assuming that it is true.

Therefore, I would ask the group to please come forward with our

sources for this information. I am completely open to updating my

hypothesis at the first sign of evidence to the contrary. But does

the evidence exist in the primary literature?

 

Eric Brand

[Guest guest]

Great topic - I wish I had some answers but in fact was just wondering

about the same thing yesterday (though would not have elaborated the

issues so eloquently).

 

Nora

 

 

Eric Brand wrote:

 

> Is anyone aware of any primary sources that say that needle retention

> time affects whether acupuncture treatment is supplementing or

> draining?

>

>

>

>

>

>

> http://babel.altavista.com/

>

>

> and

> adjust accordingly.

>

> Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside the

> group requires prior permission from the author.

>

> If you are a TCM academic and wish to discuss TCM with other

> academics,

>

>

>

> ------

>

[Guest guest]

> How many of us do free hand

> needling with thicker needles? (we had this discussion before).

>

>

> Marnae,

> I had to smile remembering my teacher Dr So. He had us wrap foam rubber with

> rubber bands and then cover that with leather and then practice needling

> through the leather.

> the most developed ( and bulging) muscle on my body is between my thumb and

> forefinger on the right. From needling day after day. Year after year.

>

> best,

> Cara

>> >

>> >