looking forward (response to infrared study)

[Guest guest]

Alon,

I remembered reading this study when it came out. It reminded me of a

question i had in my first semester to every acupuncture teacher which

was " how does blood travel through the channel if the channel can't be

seen? " I never, not once, received an adequate answer.

If one does a review of the major english authors, one finds that there

are many theories that the channels are not a pre-supposed material

object, but rather a reference (or some would say symbolic) to what has

been found to be a line of force acting in the body (eg. Kendell,

Maciocia). The Chinese culture has never concerned itself with origins

or hard lined rationale, it simply isn't a function of their culture. In

my experience in asking any Chinese teacher, the general response i

receive is that it just simply is. To which i find myself then asking

other questions which have found few answers such as " well then why

does

acupuncture work? "

Simply put most patients feel that a belief system is a prerequisite to

receiving acupuncture, which, of course is superstitious and just plain

wrong.

But we must ask ourselves, how is it explained when someone asks, " where

are the meridians? " And further how is it brought to the mainstream

culture? If we are simply content to say " it works because when you put

the needle in it works, " then we miss a large portion of the population

we could be helping who simply need to know the why of it.

Without explanation our medicine will stay in yesterday, i am one of

many who are looking to tomorrow, hopefully our profession will as well.

Tymothy

 

 

see this study on infrared and acup channels. It confirms what i have

seen using thermography

http://www.biomedical-engineering-online.com/content/4/1/38

 

 

 

 

" The greater danger for most of is not that our aim is too high and we miss it,

but that it is too low and we reach it. " Michelangelo

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service

[Guest guest]

Hi Tymothy.

 

The subject of " meridians " is one of my favorites. I had the same questions as

you when I

was in school, and had a hard time buying the invisible meridian theory. But

that's what I

was taught at my California school. After I graduated I moved to China (1998)

and studied

here for two years. My Chinese got pretty good and I've continued to study

Chinese and

Chinese medicine in Chinese ever since. Now I am living and studying in China

again, and

my Chinese is quite good. I can read, write and speak and am doing a PhD in CM

all in

Chinese. Here is my take on the " meridians " now that i can read Nei Jing in

Chinese.

 

The character that is often translated as " meridian " is ? " mai " 4 (I'm afraid

that the Chinese

characters will not come through on , but I'll try). This translation

originally

comes from Souille de Morant, who probably got the idea from the term jing1 mai4

??.

Jing1 can mean a lot of things, and when combined with other characters takes on

different meanings. ?? Jing1xian1 means meridian, as in an invisible line on a

map.

Mourant was probably unwilling to believe that the ancient Chinese could have

been

talking about real anatomy, so he translated ?? as meridian and qi as energy

flowing in

the invisible meridians.

 

In fact, ? mai4 really means " vessel " , as in blood vessel. ??xue4mai4 means

blood

vessel, ????? jing1mai4, dong4mai4 mean vein and artery respectively. Nei Jing

makes numerous mention of the fact that blood flows and resides in the

" vessels " . The

ancient Chinese were well aware of gross anatomy. They measured the size, shape

and

volume of the organs and even the length of the " vessels " . I have to wonder, why

would

these people who were so interested in accurate anatomical information, make up

a

system of invisible meridians and say that the blood flows inside of them, when

they must

have known of the existence of the blood vessels, and then go so far as to use

the actual

character for blood vessel to describe their invisible meridians? I don't think

they were

talking about invisible meridians at all, but were describing the blood vessels.

 

That said, the functions they attributed to the vessels do not correlate 100%

with our

modern understanding of the blood vessels. But the same goes for all the

anatomical

entities that the ancients described. The CM Liver is not 100% the anatomical

liver. CM

Spleen is not 100% the anatomical spleen. Etc. People are so obsessed with

discovering

what the " meridians " actually " are " , but why aren't they equally obsessed with

what the CM

Liver, Spleen, Kidneys, Lungs, Heart, etc., " are " ? I'm not saying I know what

the vessels

" actually " are, just like I don't know what the other organs " actually " are,

but I don't think

the ancient Chinese were talking about invisible meridians. They were describing

the blood

vessels, and then attributed a bunch of related, corresponding phenomenon to

them, just

the way they did with the other organs. That's my opinion.

 

Again, that is just my opinion, and I'm sure there are many who will disagree

with me, and

that is perfectly ok since I would never claim to *know* for a fact what the

ancients were

actually talking about. No one can say for sure what they were really talking

about, but this

explanation makes the most sense to me, at least at this point. I am completely

open to

the possibility that I am wrong, and am not even saying that I am right. I'm

just saying that

this is what I tend to believe.

 

Deke Kendall has a similar opinion, but in his book, " Dao of " ,

he is very

bold and unapologetic about his view and goes so far as to correlate specific

blood vessels

to the Chinese vessels. I, personally, am not comfortable being that bold, but I

appreciate

his work. He also presents a lengthy and excellent discussion of the mechanisms

of

acupuncture according to modern physiology, which I highly recommend.

 

Deke's work may be reductionistic, but why does everything have to be so

complicated? Do

we have to go in the opposite direction and search endlessly for invisible

meridians? Some

of the science Deke presents in his " mechanisms " chapter is hard to refute.

Isn't it possible

that what he describes is what is going on? It may be that there are other

mechanisms at

work, but what he describes *is* going on, at least according to the science,

and certainly

accounts for at least some if not a lot of what is happening when a needle is

inserted into

an acupuncture point.

 

In any case, the actual mechanisms of acupuncture is another topic. The main

question

here, for me at least, is what were the ancient Chinese actually talking about?

If they were

not talking about invisible meridians, or even if there is any doubt about that,

is it fair to

go around saying that they were? And if they weren't talking about invisible

meridians, is it

logical to go looking for them?

 

Regarding this last rhetorical question, I am not suggesting people stop looking

for the

mechanisms of acupuncture. Quite the contrary, I think it's great that people

are doing

this. But I think we should keep an open mind to the results of such

investigations and not

be fixated on finding the invisible meridians, or anything else for that matter.

If they find

the " meridians " , that's great and I can accept that. And if they don't, it's

fine by me if

people keep on searching for them, because maybe they are really there. Who am I

to say.

But I tend to think they are not there and that, while at the moment most

explanations of

the mechanisms of acupuncture are going to be reductionistic, those explanations

are

better than the invisible meridian and energy explanation.

 

Just my 2 cents -- well, maybe more than 2 :-)

 

Best wishes,

 

Greg

 

 

Chinese Medicine , " Tymothy " <jellyphish@f...>

wrote:

>

> Alon,

> I remembered reading this study when it came out. It reminded me of a

> question i had in my first semester to every acupuncture teacher which

> was " how does blood travel through the channel if the channel can't be

> seen? " I never, not once, received an adequate answer.

> If one does a review of the major english authors, one finds that there

> are many theories that the channels are not a pre-supposed material

> object, but rather a reference (or some would say symbolic) to what has

> been found to be a line of force acting in the body (eg. Kendell,

> Maciocia). The Chinese culture has never concerned itself with origins

> or hard lined rationale, it simply isn't a function of their culture. In

> my experience in asking any Chinese teacher, the general response i

> receive is that it just simply is. To which i find myself then asking

> other questions which have found few answers such as " well then why

> does

> acupuncture work? "

> Simply put most patients feel that a belief system is a prerequisite to

> receiving acupuncture, which, of course is superstitious and just plain

> wrong.

> But we must ask ourselves, how is it explained when someone asks, " where

> are the meridians? " And further how is it brought to the mainstream

> culture? If we are simply content to say " it works because when you put

> the needle in it works, " then we miss a large portion of the population

> we could be helping who simply need to know the why of it.

> Without explanation our medicine will stay in yesterday, i am one of

> many who are looking to tomorrow, hopefully our profession will as well.

> Tymothy

>

>

> see this study on infrared and acup channels. It confirms what i have

> seen using thermography

> http://www.biomedical-engineering-online.com/content/4/1/38

>

>

[Guest guest]

----

 

Greg A. Livingston

01/29/06 06:38:24

Chinese Medicine

Re: looking forward (response to infrared study)

 

Hi Tymothy.

 

The subject of " meridians " is one of my favorites. I had the same questions

as you when I

was in school, and had a hard time buying the invisible meridian theory.

 

 

>>>Hi Greg.

 

A very well written message. Where are you doing your Ph D? Into what field?

Best of luck with it.

 

About the meridians: you make a good case for what you write. However, I

would like to disagree. I do not have any scientific data to back up my

thoughts and feelings, but here they are anyway.

 

I got into acupuncture when I was still studying physical therapy. In a

certain class, we were taught that there are points in the muscles that

would feel painful and sensitive when the muscle had been overloaded in some

way. These trigger points, remarkably would correlate with known acupuncture

points for 72% (if I remember well this is a statement by Melzach & Wall).

 

There you had it, I became very interested in what they called acupuncture.

I started reading books and started doing Qi Gong and Dao Yin exercises as

well as Daoist meditations. After graduating as a physical therapist, I

immediately enrolled into acupuncture school.

Because, by that time I had been able to verify the principles of Chinese

medicine.

 

Why do I say such a thing?

 

It was my very subjective experience that by doing the Qi Gong and tbe Dao

Yin exercises, I was able to feel the actual meridians and acupoints opening

up and streaming with Qi (when the meditation was going well). I was able to

know for sure that these meridians really existed. I could actually feel the

yin energy of the Earth being absorbed by Yongquan KI 1, and could feel the

yang energy of the skies and stars in Baihui GV 20.

This was the best proof I could get at the time. I was very convinced that

yin and yang qi really existed as I could subjectively feel them running in

meridians and collecting in acupoints. The meridian map that I could feel

was actually the meridian map that the Chinese had charted. They were not

the blood vessels, or an offshoot of them, like Greg argued for.

 

Of course scientists will object to these subjective experiences and label

them as unscientific, but I feel that they are actually a deeper level of

science, where objective science can no longer exist (much like in quantum

physics). It could all be due to powerful suggestion, is another explanation

However, one should at least admit that it is extraordinary that 2000 years

ago ancient Chinese Dao Yin Yang Shen Gong practitioners were able to feel

the exact same thing as some westerner somewhere in Flanders in the nineties

 

 

I am sure that some day certain proof of meridians will appear, but for now

I am satisfied to rely on my own subjective experiences. Very unscientific,

but what is one to do when science has not caught up with Qi?

 

Regards,

 

Tom.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Tom,

 

Your point is well taken, but I think you didn't fully understand my point (I'm

not the best

writer so I take the blame for not being more clear) and I'm not sure that we

are in

disagreement, if that makes any sense. :-)

 

The vessels are not just the blood vessels. Just like the other organs in CM,

many

attributes and functions were ascribed to them that do not belong to the

anatomical entity

itself. The subjective findings that you describe yourself having experienced

are the kinds

of phenomenon that were ascribed to the vessels. Thus, what you say and what I

say are

not mutually exclusive. What the vessels are in actuality is a mystery, but I

still don't think

that the ancient Chinese were talking about invisible meridians, especially

since they said

that blood flows in them and use the character for blood vessel. They also said

the Liver

rises on the left side of the body, but they clearly knew the anatomical liver

was located on

the right. Why aren't we looking for an invisible Liver on the left side of the

body?

 

So, I am not arguing that the vessels are the anatomical blood vessels, just

like I would not

argue that the CM Liver is the anatomical liver. They are more than that. You

have

described feeling the pathways of the vessels and that they are not the blood

vessels. I

agree, and we all know that these pathways exist, whatever they are, and the

ancients

clearly new about them as well, but I still think the ancients were not

describing invisible

structures but attributing phenomenon to anatomical structures. ie blood

vessels. Just like

they said the Liver is related to the eyes and the tendons, etc. No one would

suggest that

the anatomical liver is connected to the eyes and the tendons, but it is most

definitely true

that eyes and tendons and CM Liver are all related to each other. I think it's

the same thing

in the case of the vessels.

 

What do you think?

 

You asked about my PhD studies- I'm studying acupuncture here in Hangzhou.

 

Warm regards,

 

Greg

 

 

Chinese Medicine , " Tom Verhaeghe "

<verhaeghe_tom@h...> wrote:

> >>>Hi Greg.

>

> A very well written message. Where are you doing your Ph D? Into what field?

> Best of luck with it.

>

> About the meridians: you make a good case for what you write. However, I

> would like to disagree. I do not have any scientific data to back up my

> thoughts and feelings, but here they are anyway.

>

> I got into acupuncture when I was still studying physical therapy. In a

> certain class, we were taught that there are points in the muscles that

> would feel painful and sensitive when the muscle had been overloaded in some

> way. These trigger points, remarkably would correlate with known acupuncture

> points for 72% (if I remember well this is a statement by Melzach & Wall).

>

> There you had it, I became very interested in what they called acupuncture.

> I started reading books and started doing Qi Gong and Dao Yin exercises as

> well as Daoist meditations. After graduating as a physical therapist, I

> immediately enrolled into acupuncture school.

> Because, by that time I had been able to verify the principles of Chinese

> medicine.

>

> Why do I say such a thing?

>

> It was my very subjective experience that by doing the Qi Gong and tbe Dao

> Yin exercises, I was able to feel the actual meridians and acupoints opening

> up and streaming with Qi (when the meditation was going well). I was able to

> know for sure that these meridians really existed. I could actually feel the

> yin energy of the Earth being absorbed by Yongquan KI 1, and could feel the

> yang energy of the skies and stars in Baihui GV 20.

> This was the best proof I could get at the time. I was very convinced that

> yin and yang qi really existed as I could subjectively feel them running in

> meridians and collecting in acupoints. The meridian map that I could feel

> was actually the meridian map that the Chinese had charted. They were not

> the blood vessels, or an offshoot of them, like Greg argued for.

>

> Of course scientists will object to these subjective experiences and label

> them as unscientific, but I feel that they are actually a deeper level of

> science, where objective science can no longer exist (much like in quantum

> physics). It could all be due to powerful suggestion, is another explanation

> However, one should at least admit that it is extraordinary that 2000 years

> ago ancient Chinese Dao Yin Yang Shen Gong practitioners were able to feel

> the exact same thing as some westerner somewhere in Flanders in the nineties

>

>

> I am sure that some day certain proof of meridians will appear, but for now

> I am satisfied to rely on my own subjective experiences. Very unscientific,

> but what is one to do when science has not caught up with Qi?

>

> Regards,

>

> Tom.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Tom, Timothy, and other list members,

 

After reviewing my posts I feel I am not doing a very good job making my case.

For a really

good discussion of this subject, I HIGHLY recommed Donald Kendell's book, Dao of

. For those of you adverse to new-agey stuff, don't let the

title of the

book scare you off- this book is anything but new-age. I think Deke in many

ways, but

maybe not all, has hit the nail on the head with his interpretation of Nei Jing.

I can't make a

better or more clear argument than he has made in his book, and even if I could

I don't

have the time. :-)

 

Best regards, and oh yeah, Happy Chinese New Year to everybody! The smoke from

all the

fireworks here has reduced visibility to less than a couple hundred meters!!

You'd have to

see it to believe it!

 

Greg

[Guest guest]

Oh I see Greg, thank you for further explaining. English is not my native

tongue, I may have missed what you were trying to say.

 

Ok so now I believe I understand what you mean: just like there is a liver

and a Liver, there are blood vessels and vessels (the latter vessels being

the jing mai). Am I right to put it this way?

 

I was thinking about this this afternoon.There is a book by Matsumoto and

Birch ( I believe it is Reflections on the sea- but I could be wrong) in

which they discuss embryology. In that chapter, they describe how the Chong

Mai is the first extraordinary vessel to be formed: it is the central axis

that is formed in the new embryo. This also makes it the first vessel, as

the extraordinary vessels predate the other vessels. After that the Du, Ren

and Dai Mai are created. The Qiao Mai and Wei Mai follow. Only later will

the jing mai be created.

 

If the mai are somehow related to blood vessels, how does one explain that

the extraordinary vessels exist long before any blood vessels are created?

To me this means that the mai are not dependent on the blood vessels, and

they exist before the blood vessels are created. There may be

correspondences in the physical plane, because " Qi is the commander of the

Blood " , but Qi is different from Blood.

 

But I can see how you interpret the connection between Qi and Blood, ergo

vessels and blood vessels.

 

I would argue for the existence of an energetic body, which is closely

intertwined with the physical body but is different from it and also

predates it.

Note the existence (and creation) of several energetic bodies in Daoist

alchemy.

Even more, the existence of an energetic body seems be a cross-cultural (or

archetypical) phenomenon. Be it Shakyamuni Budha or Rudolf Steiner, they all

have mentioned the existence of energetic planes of existence.

 

But perhaps you also agree with this, right?

 

Our only difference may then be that you believe that the ancients described

the vessels after they saw the blood vessels, but that I believe that they

first knew about the vessels and only later about the blood vessels.

Vertical information as opposed to horizontal information- vertical as in

the jing-qi-shen axis and horizontal as in the material world.

 

Again, not very scientific but at the same time empirical. You asked me what

I thought : )

 

I really hope science will be able to explain these phenomena, the sooner

the better. But at this point in time, I feel we may have to trust our inner

senses on this one.

 

Good luck with your studies in Hangzhou! Send us a Xi Hu postcard : )

 

Tom.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Tom,

 

> Oh I see Greg, thank you for further explaining. English is not my native

> tongue, I may have missed what you were trying to say.

 

I think your English is quite excellent. This is a complicated subject and it's

hard for me to

fully explain here- I don't have the time, and it would be like writing a book.

Fortunately,

Kendell already wrote the book, so I refer you there. That said, I don't agree

100% with

Kendell's interpretation/translation of Nei Jing and everything he says in his

book, but I

agree with a lot of it.

 

>

> Ok so now I believe I understand what you mean: just like there is a liver

> and a Liver, there are blood vessels and vessels (the latter vessels being

> the jing mai). Am I right to put it this way?

 

Well, sort of. What I am trying to say is that the ancients attributed

physiological

phenomenon to the various anatomical entities of the body. Thus, they knew about

the

organs, just like they knew about the blood vessels (and even blood

circulation), but since

they were more geared toward looking at physiological functions and their

relationships,

they grouped related physiological functions/phenomenon together and then

attributed

these to the various anatomical entities. There is nothing wrong with this at

all (except

that it confuses people nowadays), and as we all know, the understanding of

physiology by

the ancient Chinese in some/many ways surpasses modern understanding because

modern medicine/science hasn't made these connections, hasn't developed the

holistic

physiological model.

 

So, the vessels are the blood vessels, but they are more than that. They are

not, in my

opinion, however, invisible meridians. They are a physiological phenomenon,

probably the

sum of functions of many different identifiable anatomical entities, such as the

blood

vessels, nerves, lymph, blood, immune system, mast cells, and on and on and on.

It may

be too complicated to figure out completely. But I just don't think there are

invisible

meridians, and I really don't think that's what the ancient Chinese meant.

 

As for Jing Mai, these are the large, deep vessels. Luo mai are smaller vessels

that branch

off from the Jing Mai, and sun mai are tiny vessels that branch off from the luo

mai

(capillaries, essentially)

>

> I was thinking about this this afternoon.There is a book by Matsumoto and

> Birch ( I believe it is Reflections on the sea- but I could be wrong) in

> which they discuss embryology. In that chapter, they describe how the Chong

> Mai is the first extraordinary vessel to be formed: it is the central axis

> that is formed in the new embryo. This also makes it the first vessel, as

> the extraordinary vessels predate the other vessels. After that the Du, Ren

> and Dai Mai are created. The Qiao Mai and Wei Mai follow. Only later will

> the jing mai be created.

>

> If the mai are somehow related to blood vessels, how does one explain that

> the extraordinary vessels exist long before any blood vessels are created?

> To me this means that the mai are not dependent on the blood vessels, and

> they exist before the blood vessels are created. There may be

> correspondences in the physical plane, because " Qi is the commander of the

> Blood " , but Qi is different from Blood.

 

Because the " extraordinary " vessels (qi mai) are also vessels, as in blood

vessels. The same

character is used in Nei Jing. Again, Jing mai are just larger vessels, and they

do appear

later. Deke believes the Chong is, at least in part, the aorta. I am not an

expert in

embryology, so I don't know if the aorta is the first blood vessel to appear,

but it would

make sense since it is directly connected to the heart. Again, don't take it TOO

literally- in

other words, the Chinese may have called the aorta the chong, but the functions

attributed

to the chong are obviously not all related to that anatomical entity as we now

know it.

 

>

> But I can see how you interpret the connection between Qi and Blood, ergo

> vessels and blood vessels.

 

I don't think I said anything about this. What do you mean?

 

>

> I would argue for the existence of an energetic body, which is closely

> intertwined with the physical body but is different from it and also

> predates it.

> Note the existence (and creation) of several energetic bodies in Daoist

> alchemy.

> Even more, the existence of an energetic body seems be a cross-cultural (or

> archetypical) phenomenon. Be it Shakyamuni Budha or Rudolf Steiner, they all

> have mentioned the existence of energetic planes of existence.

>

> But perhaps you also agree with this, right?

 

Well, I can't disagree. I am not all-knowing, so I cannot say this is untrue.

But I also can't

say, honestly, that it IS true. It may be, true, it may not. I am open to the

possibility, but I

am not capable of figuring out the validity of this. Just not that smart and/or

sensitive!

 

>

> Our only difference may then be that you believe that the ancients described

> the vessels after they saw the blood vessels, but that I believe that they

> first knew about the vessels and only later about the blood vessels.

> Vertical information as opposed to horizontal information- vertical as in

> the jing-qi-shen axis and horizontal as in the material world.

 

Actually, we don't even differ here. I think they knew about the vessel pathways

(ie

propagated sensation pathways, as you yourself have experienced) long before

they knew

about the blood vessels. It was only later, through dissection, that they

discovered the

blood vessels and then attributed the functions of the jingluo system to these

anatomical

entities

 

>

> Again, not very scientific but at the same time empirical. You asked me what

> I thought : )

 

Well, science can't explain everything, right? I appreciate your empiricism- I

think it's

valuable and should not be discarded for be " unscientific " . Thanks for your

thoughts!

 

>

> I really hope science will be able to explain these phenomena, the sooner

> the better. But at this point in time, I feel we may have to trust our inner

> senses on this one.

 

I hope so, too. Trusting our inner senses is good, but the Chinese wrote stuff

down pretty

clearly, so it's there if we want to explore it. Obviously what they wrote is

open to

interpretation. But I think the ancient Chinese were far too intelligent to be

dismissed as

being unable to understand real anatomy and physiology. Therefore, I don't think

they

were making up a system of invisible pathways that distributed blood throughout

the body

when, given their descriptions of anatomy, they must have known about the blood

vessels.

..

>

> Good luck with your studies in Hangzhou! Send us a Xi Hu postcard : )

 

Thanks, Tom! It's possible to upload pictures to this group, correct? Would it

be proper

etiquette to upload scenic pictures, or only pictures related to CM?

 

Best wishes,

 

Greg

[Guest guest]

After almost 30 years of martial arts, I also fall into this

category. Feeling is believing.

 

 

Kelvin

 

 

Chinese Medicine , " Tom Verhaeghe "

<verhaeghe_tom@h...> wrote:

>

>

>

>

> ----

>

> Greg A. Livingston

> 01/29/06 06:38:24

> Chinese Medicine

> Re: looking forward (response to infrared study)

>

> Hi Tymothy.

>

> The subject of " meridians " is one of my favorites. I had the same

questions

> as you when I

> was in school, and had a hard time buying the invisible meridian

theory.

>

>

> >>>Hi Greg.

>

> A very well written message. Where are you doing your Ph D? Into

what field?

> Best of luck with it.

>

> About the meridians: you make a good case for what you write.

However, I

> would like to disagree. I do not have any scientific data to back

up my

> thoughts and feelings, but here they are anyway.

>

> I got into acupuncture when I was still studying physical therapy.

In a

> certain class, we were taught that there are points in the muscles

that

> would feel painful and sensitive when the muscle had been

overloaded in some

> way. These trigger points, remarkably would correlate with known

acupuncture

> points for 72% (if I remember well this is a statement by Melzach

& Wall).

>

> There you had it, I became very interested in what they called

acupuncture.

> I started reading books and started doing Qi Gong and Dao Yin

exercises as

> well as Daoist meditations. After graduating as a physical

therapist, I

> immediately enrolled into acupuncture school.

> Because, by that time I had been able to verify the principles of

Chinese

> medicine.

>

> Why do I say such a thing?

>

> It was my very subjective experience that by doing the Qi Gong and

tbe Dao

> Yin exercises, I was able to feel the actual meridians and

acupoints opening

> up and streaming with Qi (when the meditation was going well). I

was able to

> know for sure that these meridians really existed. I could

actually feel the

> yin energy of the Earth being absorbed by Yongquan KI 1, and could

feel the

> yang energy of the skies and stars in Baihui GV 20.

> This was the best proof I could get at the time. I was very

convinced that

> yin and yang qi really existed as I could subjectively feel them

running in

> meridians and collecting in acupoints. The meridian map that I

could feel

> was actually the meridian map that the Chinese had charted. They

were not

> the blood vessels, or an offshoot of them, like Greg argued for.

>

> Of course scientists will object to these subjective experiences

and label

> them as unscientific, but I feel that they are actually a deeper

level of

> science, where objective science can no longer exist (much like in

quantum

> physics). It could all be due to powerful suggestion, is another

explanation

> However, one should at least admit that it is extraordinary that

2000 years

> ago ancient Chinese Dao Yin Yang Shen Gong practitioners were able

to feel

> the exact same thing as some westerner somewhere in Flanders in

the nineties

>

>

> I am sure that some day certain proof of meridians will appear,

but for now

> I am satisfied to rely on my own subjective experiences. Very

unscientific,

> but what is one to do when science has not caught up with Qi?

>

> Regards,

>

> Tom.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Greg:

 

Is this a book that patients can understand? I am always in search of a

simple book on CM that patients can grasp and undertand. I don't think

everyone needs to know but some really would like to read something.

 

Anne

 

Greg A. Livingston wrote:

 

> Hi Tom, Timothy, and other list members,

>

> After reviewing my posts I feel I am not doing a very good job making

> my case. For a really

> good discussion of this subject, I HIGHLY recommed Donald Kendell's

> book, Dao of

> .

>

>

>

>

>

>

=

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

----

 

ra6151

01/30/06 16:16:23

Chinese Medicine

Re: Re: looking forward (response to infrared study)

 

 

 

One of my teachers used to say, " The nervous system is the last to know. "

What she meant was that primary, first-level sensory information is gathered

on

a cellular level. Only when that information moves from cells to nerves

and

then to higher brain centers such as the thalamus and cortex do we then have

 

" consciousness " of the sensory event in a " thinking " sense. But it is also

possible to have a cellular-level consciousness of what goes on around us,

but

it is a different kind of consciousness; the information comes to us in a

more

fleeting form, perhaps like what we call insight or intuition.

 

(Tom) Roseanne, do you have a reference for this? One of my own teachers

talks about the connection between cell membranes and Jing Essence. You

mention a Shen aspect to cells. Can you explain a bit more?

 

My teacher Bruno Braekman links EFA's with Kidney Jing. He will use oil

supplements even for chronic low back pain, based upon the assumption that EFA's

will nourish Kidney Jing. Some of the conditions that improve with EFA

supplementation, like dyslexia, ADHD and depression can be due to insufficient

Kidney Jing. Since cell membranes are made of EFA's and cellular health is

important for overall health, Bruno linked Kidney Jing to EFA's.

 

 

[Guest guest]

>Since they are not to be found upon dissection, they must be " invisible " ,

>no?

 

Maybe they are visible, please check out this link for some recent

anatomical research that could help to explain what we call jing luo mai.

 

 

http://www.tcmstudent.com/bonghan05.pdf

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

[Guest guest]

Hi Anne,

 

There are parts that a layperson can understand, but the bulk of the book is

written for

professionals. It's not the cheapest book, either, so patients might not want to

buy it just

to read a few chapters. If you got a copy that you were willing to loan

patients, that might

work.

 

Regards,

 

Greg

 

 

Chinese Medicine , Anne Crowley

<blazing.valley@v...> wrote:

>

> Greg:

>

> Is this a book that patients can understand? I am always in search of a

> simple book on CM that patients can grasp and undertand. I don't think

> everyone needs to know but some really would like to read something.

>

> Anne

>

> Greg A. Livingston wrote:

>

> > Hi Tom, Timothy, and other list members,

> >

> > After reviewing my posts I feel I am not doing a very good job making

> > my case. For a really

> > good discussion of this subject, I HIGHLY recommed Donald Kendell's

> > book, Dao of

> > .

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> =

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Tom,

 

> Thank you for your reply, Greg.

 

Likewise. I enjoy the conversation.

 

> This is Kendall's book you are talking about, isn't it? http://tinyurl

> com/c8oc3

 

Can't open that webpage- gotta love that P.R. China firewall! Can't open a lot

of pages

from here. Kendell's book is called, " Dao of , Understanding an

Ancient

Healing Art " , Oxford University Press.

 

> I am still having troubles understanding exactly how you view the vessels.

> If Qi Gong practitioners can feel the meridians, they must exist, right?

> Since they are not to be found upon dissection, they must be " invisible " ,

> no?

 

The propagated sensation pathways definitely exist. I think everyone on this

list will agree

on that. So, what we are really discussing here is what they are. I do not mean

to reduce

these pathways to blood vessels. What they are, I am not sure, but I, like you,

think this

may be discovered eventually. I *tend* to think that they are are a

conglomeration of

known anatomical entities who's combined physiological functions make up this

phenomenon. Since I am not all-knowing I cannot say for sure, but I really don't

believe

that they are metaphysical or supernatural structures, or invisible meridians

with energy

flowing through them.

 

Finally, how are they linked to the blood vessels in my mind? I think this is

your main

question for me, no? The ancients ascribed related groups of physiological

functions/

phenomenon to the various organs that do not entirely belong to these anatomical

entities

as modern medicine/science now knows them. I think everyone on the list will

agree with

that. I am saying they did the same thing with the blood vessels.

 

I am not suggesting I know exactly what the ancients were thinking. Did they

really think

propagated sensation was actually coming from the blood vessels? I don't know.

Did they

really think the anatomical liver was related to the eyes, anger, tears,

sighing, etc? I don't

know. What I am quite sure of, is that these " organs " exist on a physiological

level.

Stedman's medical dictionary defines organ as, " Any part of the body exercising

a specific

function " . The CM " organs " don't exactly fit this desciption because they are

conglomerations of functions/phonomenon derived from many *different* parts of

the

body. But on the other hand, they do fit this description from a wholistic point

of view that

is capable of looking beyond the micorscopic, trying to understand the body

vis-a-vis

related function/phenomenon, as an organic whole. Jeez, did that make any sense?

 

In some ways it doesn't really matter, since whatever they were thinking they

got it right.

The model of physiology that they developed is entirely accurate as far as I can

tell, so it's

not the most important issue, really. If you prefer to think there are meridians

or not, in

the end it doesn't make a whole lot of difference in the clinic.

 

That said, I think it *is* important to search for the truth, and to represent

CM as correctly

as possible- otherwise it's not *really* CM. Let me quote a passage from page11

of

Kendell's book:

 

" Why does anyone care whether Chinese anatomy and physiology are explained as

energy

flowing through meridians, or by the circulation of blood, nutrients, other

vital substances,

and vital air (qi) through the vascular system? The answer to that lies in the

moral

obligation of every practitioner to provide each patient with the latest medical

understanding available. The need to continually search for the truth is the

most

fundamental principle of science and medicine. If the functioning of the human

body

cannot be understood under normal physiological conditions, then there is little

hope of

knowing how to treat it when disease conditions exist. Research so far shows

that the true

concepts of Chinese medicine operate under known physiological principles,

involving the

complex organization of the neural, vascular, endocrine, visceral, and somatic

systems,

sustained by the circulation of nutrients, vital substances, and oxygen from

vital air. "

 

Please don't infer from this that I support 100% all the notions in Kendell's

book, but he

makes a lot of good points. It's well worth reading.

 

> I do not really think think that vessels are truly invisible. With the right

> state of mind they can be felt, and there are people who (think they) can

> see them.

 

Here is a quote from Neijing, Lingshu, Jingmai, " all floating/superficial

vessels that can be

commonly seen, these are luomai. " If this is not a referrence to blood vessels,

then what is

it? Obviously the authors of Neijing could also see them! :-)

 

> Finally, whilst indeed there is much information to be found in books, I

> would stress the need for experiencing deep meditations, in which vessels

> and energetic planes may reveal themselves. The other week I saw that Heiner

> Freuhauf organizes trips to China http://tinyurl.com/8pzkk. People study

> classical Chinese medicine during that trip, but they also practice Qi Gong

> and other techniques.

 

I undrestand what you mean. I am not trying to negate peoples' experiences of

their

bodies. This is entirely valid and important and is probably how a lot of the

ideas in the

wholistic system of CM came about. Without reflection on the phenomenon of the

body,

we are left with what western medicine has developed- a highly sophisticated

body of

knowledge that is divorced from the organic nature of the body and it's

existence in and

interaction with nature and the universe.

 

> To really understand and grasp Chinese medicine, I also believe we should

> study Chinese culture, including the Daoiost roots of Chinese medicine at

> least to some extent. There is no way we can know exactly what the ancients

> were feeling, seeing and talking about, but we can try to experience it for

> ourselves. Besides reading their books.

 

I agree 100%. That is why I have made all this effort to learn Chinese and why I

have spent

so much time in China. Don't forget that CM has more than just Daoist roots.

 

 

> If it's OK with the moderators, I'd like to see your pictures, Greg!

 

If I get the OK from the moderators I'd be happy to post some.

 

Warm regards,

 

Greg

[Guest guest]

Very interesting stuff, Mike. Thanks for the link (this one the Chinese firewall

let me

access!).

 

Again just let me clarify, I am not saying the the blood vessels themselves

account for the

entirety of the phenomenon known as the mai4. What is to account for this

phenomenon, I

don't know. Maybe what Mike has posted here can account for some of it. All I am

saying

is that the Chinese assigned this phenomenon to the blood vessels. Whether they

actually

thought the phenomenon was 100% related to the blood vessels or not, no on can

say, just

like we can't say if they really thought all the phenomenon associated with any

of the CM

organs was 100% related to the anatomical organs themselves.

 

Thanks Mike!

 

Greg

 

 

Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser "

<naturaldoc1@h...> wrote:

>

> >Since they are not to be found upon dissection, they must be " invisible " ,

> >no?

>

> Maybe they are visible, please check out this link for some recent

> anatomical research that could help to explain what we call jing luo mai.

>

>

> http://www.tcmstudent.com/bonghan05.pdf

>

>

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

[Guest guest]

Greg,

 

Are you talking TCM professionals or Western medical professionals? I

have a fairly good science background and don't have any trouble reading

Western medical journals, but I'm a newbie at TCM. Would this book work

for me? I've been looking for something that made a correlation between

the Western understanding of anatomy and physiology and TCM principles.

 

Nancy S+13

 

 

Greg A. Livingston wrote:

 

> Hi Anne,

>

> There are parts that a layperson can understand, but the bulk of the

> book is written for

> professionals. It's not the cheapest book, either, so patients might

> not want to buy it just

> to read a few chapters. If you got a copy that you were willing to

> loan patients, that might

> work.

>

> Regards,

>

> Greg

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Nancy,

 

The book is geared towards CM professionals.

 

Let me add, that while I appreciate most and agree with some of the material in

Kendell's

book, I do not support his views 100%. He is, in my opinion, overly bold in some

of his

assertions, and this I find somewhat intollerable. That said, the book should be

of interest

to anyone who reads it.

 

Greg

 

 

Chinese Medicine , Nancy S+13 <nancy@s...>

wrote:

>

> Greg,

>

> Are you talking TCM professionals or Western medical professionals? I

> have a fairly good science background and don't have any trouble reading

> Western medical journals, but I'm a newbie at TCM. Would this book work

> for me? I've been looking for something that made a correlation between

> the Western understanding of anatomy and physiology and TCM principles.

>

> Nancy S+13

>

>

> Greg A. Livingston wrote:

>

> > Hi Anne,

> >

> > There are parts that a layperson can understand, but the bulk of the

> > book is written for

> > professionals. It's not the cheapest book, either, so patients might

> > not want to buy it just

> > to read a few chapters. If you got a copy that you were willing to

> > loan patients, that might

> > work.

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > Greg

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Greg,

 

You are welcome. I, too, have an interest in understanding this within a

biophysical context. I happen to think that this work is very applicable

and valid. Blood vessels and nerves just do not answer many questions nor

explain much regarding our CM theory. They are important but clearly not

the emphasis the ancients had. Ever wonder why the discussions of jing luo

mai connected to water? I have and this biological concept really answers a

lot of these questions. Later.

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

 

 

> " Greg A. Livingston " <drlivingston

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: looking forward (response to infrared study)

>Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:48:56 -0000

>

>Very interesting stuff, Mike. Thanks for the link (this one the Chinese

>firewall let me

>access!).

>

>Again just let me clarify, I am not saying the the blood vessels themselves

>account for the

>entirety of the phenomenon known as the mai4. What is to account for this

>phenomenon, I

>don't know. Maybe what Mike has posted here can account for some of it. All

>I am saying

>is that the Chinese assigned this phenomenon to the blood vessels. Whether

>they actually

>thought the phenomenon was 100% related to the blood vessels or not, no on

>can say, just

>like we can't say if they really thought all the phenomenon associated with

>any of the CM

>organs was 100% related to the anatomical organs themselves.

>

>Thanks Mike!

>

>Greg

>

>

>Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser "

><naturaldoc1@h...> wrote:

> >

> > >Since they are not to be found upon dissection, they must be "

>invisible " ,

> > >no?

> >

> > Maybe they are visible, please check out this link for some recent

> > anatomical research that could help to explain what we call jing luo

>mai.

> >

> >

> > http://www.tcmstudent.com/bonghan05.pdf

> >

> >

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

>

>

>

>