Treating cancer with Chinese medicine and acupuncture

[Guest guest]

Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

 

Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a serious challenge

to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their gunsight and the laws in

many states clearly forbid us from treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice

also clearly exclude treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those

studies which show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of course we

have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather than treat cancer we treat

blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this yet another reason why we need our

own congress and our own regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine

will be considered as little more than folk medicine, we will continue to have

to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the immunity of Western

Oncologists and insurance companies will exclude reimbursing or continue to

under-reimburse for much of what we do.

 

Respectfully,

 

Yehuda

 

<zrosenbe wrote:

Hugo,

The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with such

things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent' tumors.

Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page news,

that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

and herbal medicine.

 

Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese medical

point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on strengthening

the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since acupuncture/moxa

is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi depression,

it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would spread

cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into acupuncture

tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

 

Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then, there

is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,

because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.

 

 

On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

 

> But it left me with enough doubt that I

> hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> reasonable.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi all,

 

Interesting topic.

 

Funny enough, i have two articles scheduled for the next issue of

Times, that both discuss cancer in Chinese medicine.

One gives information on how to 'treat' cancer whilst the other warns

practitioners not to claim they can treat cancer.

 

To sign up for your free issue, follow this link:

www.chinesemedicinetimes.com and enter your email address to

to the journal.

 

Attilio

 

Chinese Medicine , yehuda frischman

< wrote:

>

> Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

>

> Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a

serious challenge to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in

their gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid us from

treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude

treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies which

show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of

course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather than

treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this yet

another reason why we need our own congress and our own regulatory

agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be considered as

little more than folk medicine, we will continue to have to walk on

eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the immunity of Western

Oncologists and insurance companies will exclude reimbursing or

continue to under-reimburse for much of what we do.

>

> Respectfully,

>

> Yehuda

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

> Hugo,

> The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

> questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

> viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with

such

> things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent' tumors.

> Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page

news,

> that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

> connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

> women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

> concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

> and herbal medicine.

>

> Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

> and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese medical

> point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on

strengthening

> the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since acupuncture/moxa

> is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi depression,

> it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would

spread

> cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

> outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into acupuncture

> tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

> of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

>

> Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

> acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then,

there

> is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

> patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

> cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

> biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

> should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,

> because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.

>

>

> On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

>

> > But it left me with enough doubt that I

> > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> > the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> > reasonable.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yehuda,

The cancer business is largely that, a business. And it plays

along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients and their families,

fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so difficult to

offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer

business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that are

used.

 

Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese

disease categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.

 

There are people in our field, however, who do work in mainstream

cancer facilities, we have a mutual friend who works on salary in a

cancer hospital, there are folks 'in the system' such as Issac Cohen

in San Francisco who are working cooperatively with biomedical health

professionals.

 

 

On Dec 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:

 

> Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

>

> Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a serious

> challenge to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their

> gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid us from

> treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude

> treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies which

> show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

> Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of

> course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather than

> treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this

> yet another reason why we need our own congress and our own

> regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be

> considered as little more than folk medicine, we will continue to

> have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the

> immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will

> exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of what

> we do.

>

> Respectfully,

>

> Yehuda

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

> Hugo,

> The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

> questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

> viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with such

> things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent' tumors.

> Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page news,

> that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

> connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

> women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

> concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

> and herbal medicine.

>

> Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

> and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese medical

> point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on strengthening

> the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since acupuncture/moxa

> is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi depression,

> it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would spread

> cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

> outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into acupuncture

> tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

> of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

>

> Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

> acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then, there

> is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

> patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

> cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

> biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

> should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,

> because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.

>

>

> On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

>

> > But it left me with enough doubt that I

> > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> > the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> > reasonable.

>

>

[Guest guest]

The point is, that if you are an employee, as it were, of " Cancer, inc " , and

you are offering adjunct therapies along with what the

chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant big money, that

oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like our friend, and like the

integrative clinics in major hospitals and universities) then you are safe.

But if you are going to offer patients an alternative to what they are doing,

then you are a direct threat to them, and better not cross them without

realizing the risk you are taking of ruining your career. The machine is well

oiled to generate trillions, and they've got the FDA and the DEA firmly in their

pockets. The only way to circumvent the system is a) as if mentioned, don't

call it cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like Neal Miller and other

wonderful communicators among us have done: make friends with the oncologists,

tell them what they want to hear and speak fluently Western medical language.

That

being said, you are correct, and it is important for us to treat according to

our strength: using differentiated patterns with specificity.

 

Yehuda Frischman

 

<zrosenbe wrote:

Yehuda,

The cancer business is largely that, a business. And it plays

along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients and their families,

fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so difficult to

offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer

business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that are

used.

 

Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese

disease categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.

 

There are people in our field, however, who do work in mainstream

cancer facilities, we have a mutual friend who works on salary in a

cancer hospital, there are folks 'in the system' such as Issac Cohen

in San Francisco who are working cooperatively with biomedical health

professionals.

 

 

On Dec 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:

 

> Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

>

> Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a serious

> challenge to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their

> gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid us from

> treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude

> treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies which

> show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

> Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of

> course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather than

> treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this

> yet another reason why we need our own congress and our own

> regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be

> considered as little more than folk medicine, we will continue to

> have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the

> immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will

> exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of what

> we do.

>

> Respectfully,

>

> Yehuda

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

> Hugo,

> The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

> questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

> viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with such

> things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent' tumors.

> Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page news,

> that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

> connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

> women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

> concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

> and herbal medicine.

>

> Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

> and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese medical

> point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on strengthening

> the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since acupuncture/moxa

> is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi depression,

> it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would spread

> cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

> outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into acupuncture

> tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

> of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

>

> Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

> acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then, there

> is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

> patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

> cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

> biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

> should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,

> because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.

>

>

> On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

>

> > But it left me with enough doubt that I

> > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> > the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> > reasonable.

>

>

[Guest guest]

--If I may add a modest comment: Patients need what we can do.

Medicine, too, needs what we can do. When a cancer patient self-

refers to me and is covered by 3rd party payor for " nausea " I could

do PC6 (standard of care) and get on to the next patient. But a tumor

has form, and form is Earth, anything I add to PC6 to assist in the

transformation of the humidity associated with Earth is fair game in

my book. Right away I think of stimulating immunity--the Wei, that

has profound effect on transforming humidity due to it's Yang nature.

Patients do better, oncologists remark on the vitality of the patient

and are happy. Most of all I can sleep at night as I have applied my

art in a manner that is rigorous and ethical. Medicine should not get

in the way of healing, business should not prevent care, ego ought

not impede implementation of new treatment strategies. We have

problems of communication, not enemies; please. Thanks for this

forum.

 

Andy Lininger, L.Ac.

Clinical Faculty

nwhealth.edu

 

 

 

- In Chinese Medicine , yehuda frischman

< wrote:

>

> The point is, that if you are an employee, as it were,

of " Cancer, inc " , and you are offering adjunct therapies along with

what the chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant

big money, that oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like

our friend, and like the integrative clinics in major hospitals and

universities) then you are safe. But if you are going to offer

patients an alternative to what they are doing, then you are a direct

threat to them, and better not cross them without realizing the risk

you are taking of ruining your career. The machine is well oiled to

generate trillions, and they've got the FDA and the DEA firmly in

their pockets. The only way to circumvent the system is a) as if

mentioned, don't call it cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like

Neal Miller and other wonderful communicators among us have done:

make friends with the oncologists, tell them what they want to hear

and speak fluently Western medical language. That

> being said, you are correct, and it is important for us to treat

according to our strength: using differentiated patterns with

specificity.

>

> Yehuda Frischman

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

> Yehuda,

> The cancer business is largely that, a business. And it plays

> along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients and their families,

> fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so difficult to

> offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer

> business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that

are

> used.

>

> Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese

> disease categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.

>

> There are people in our field, however, who do work in mainstream

> cancer facilities, we have a mutual friend who works on salary in a

> cancer hospital, there are folks 'in the system' such as Issac

Cohen

> in San Francisco who are working cooperatively with biomedical

health

> professionals.

>

>

> On Dec 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:

>

> > Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

> >

> > Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a

serious

> > challenge to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their

> > gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid us from

> > treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude

> > treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies

which

> > show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

> > Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of

> > course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather

than

> > treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this

> > yet another reason why we need our own congress and our own

> > regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be

> > considered as little more than folk medicine, we will continue to

> > have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the

> > immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will

> > exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of

what

> > we do.

> >

> > Respectfully,

> >

> > Yehuda

> >

> > <zrosenbe wrote:

> > Hugo,

> > The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

> > questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

> > viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with

such

> > things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent'

tumors.

> > Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page

news,

> > that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

> > connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

> > women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

> > concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

> > and herbal medicine.

> >

> > Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

> > and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese

medical

> > point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on

strengthening

> > the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since

acupuncture/moxa

> > is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi

depression,

> > it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would

spread

> > cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

> > outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into

acupuncture

> > tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

> > of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

> >

> > Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

> > acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then,

there

> > is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

> > patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

> > cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

> > biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

> > should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play

golf,

> > because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to

me.

> >

> >

> > On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

> >

> > > But it left me with enough doubt that I

> > > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> > > the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> > > reasonable.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Hi, i would like to say that in cancer if we increse immunity of the patient

then it will be very good such as Du 14, Li11, Li4, ST36, SP6, PC6 & in addition

if we ask patient to do abdomianl breathing exercises then we can help the

patient in his current situation to better extent.

We have tried five element diagnosis & treated few tumours with bleeding

jingwell pts pertaining to that channel/.

The tumor can be due to excess energy in tht meridian so we can try to bleed

that meridian on which the tumor is lying.

 

Chintamani.

Acupuncturist

 

 

" C. A. Lininger " <calininger wrote:

--If I may add a modest comment: Patients need what we can do.

Medicine, too, needs what we can do. When a cancer patient self-

refers to me and is covered by 3rd party payor for " nausea " I could

do PC6 (standard of care) and get on to the next patient. But a tumor

has form, and form is Earth, anything I add to PC6 to assist in the

transformation of the humidity associated with Earth is fair game in

my book. Right away I think of stimulating immunity--the Wei, that

has profound effect on transforming humidity due to it's Yang nature.

Patients do better, oncologists remark on the vitality of the patient

and are happy. Most of all I can sleep at night as I have applied my

art in a manner that is rigorous and ethical. Medicine should not get

in the way of healing, business should not prevent care, ego ought

not impede implementation of new treatment strategies. We have

problems of communication, not enemies; please. Thanks for this

forum.

 

Andy Lininger, L.Ac.

Clinical Faculty

nwhealth.edu

 

- In Chinese Medicine , yehuda frischman

< wrote:

>

> The point is, that if you are an employee, as it were,

of " Cancer, inc " , and you are offering adjunct therapies along with

what the chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant

big money, that oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like

our friend, and like the integrative clinics in major hospitals and

universities) then you are safe. But if you are going to offer

patients an alternative to what they are doing, then you are a direct

threat to them, and better not cross them without realizing the risk

you are taking of ruining your career. The machine is well oiled to

generate trillions, and they've got the FDA and the DEA firmly in

their pockets. The only way to circumvent the system is a) as if

mentioned, don't call it cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like

Neal Miller and other wonderful communicators among us have done:

make friends with the oncologists, tell them what they want to hear

and speak fluently Western medical language. That

> being said, you are correct, and it is important for us to treat

according to our strength: using differentiated patterns with

specificity.

>

> Yehuda Frischman

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

> Yehuda,

> The cancer business is largely that, a business. And it plays

> along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients and their families,

> fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so difficult to

> offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer

> business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that

are

> used.

>

> Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese

> disease categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.

>

> There are people in our field, however, who do work in mainstream

> cancer facilities, we have a mutual friend who works on salary in a

> cancer hospital, there are folks 'in the system' such as Issac

Cohen

> in San Francisco who are working cooperatively with biomedical

health

> professionals.

>

>

> On Dec 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:

>

> > Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

> >

> > Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a

serious

> > challenge to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their

> > gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid us from

> > treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude

> > treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies

which

> > show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

> > Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of

> > course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather

than

> > treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this

> > yet another reason why we need our own congress and our own

> > regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be

> > considered as little more than folk medicine, we will continue to

> > have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the

> > immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will

> > exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of

what

> > we do.

> >

> > Respectfully,

> >

> > Yehuda

> >

> > <zrosenbe wrote:

> > Hugo,

> > The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

> > questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

> > viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with

such

> > things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent'

tumors.

> > Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page

news,

> > that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

> > connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

> > women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

> > concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

> > and herbal medicine.

> >

> > Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

> > and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese

medical

> > point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on

strengthening

> > the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since

acupuncture/moxa

> > is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi

depression,

> > it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would

spread

> > cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

> > outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into

acupuncture

> > tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

> > of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

> >

> > Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

> > acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then,

there

> > is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

> > patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

> > cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

> > biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

> > should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play

golf,

> > because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to

me.

> >

> >

> > On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

> >

> > > But it left me with enough doubt that I

> > > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> > > the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> > > reasonable.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Andy,

 

You are preaching to the choir! But some oncologists are completely

threatened by us, view us as the enemy and seek ,with a vengeance, to undermine

Chinese medicine and Acupuncture in treatments associated with cancer.

Fortunately they are becoming fewer in number.The point is that to engage in

dialogue requires two people.

 

Respectfully,

 

Yehuda

 

" C. A. Lininger " <calininger wrote:

--If I may add a modest comment: Patients need what we can do.

Medicine, too, needs what we can do. When a cancer patient self-

refers to me and is covered by 3rd party payor for " nausea " I could

do PC6 (standard of care) and get on to the next patient. But a tumor

has form, and form is Earth, anything I add to PC6 to assist in the

transformation of the humidity associated with Earth is fair game in

my book. Right away I think of stimulating immunity--the Wei, that

has profound effect on transforming humidity due to it's Yang nature.

Patients do better, oncologists remark on the vitality of the patient

and are happy. Most of all I can sleep at night as I have applied my

art in a manner that is rigorous and ethical. Medicine should not get

in the way of healing, business should not prevent care, ego ought

not impede implementation of new treatment strategies. We have

problems of communication, not enemies; please. Thanks for this

forum.

 

Andy Lininger, L.Ac.

Clinical Faculty

nwhealth.edu

 

- In Chinese Medicine , yehuda frischman

< wrote:

>

> The point is, that if you are an employee, as it were,

of " Cancer, inc " , and you are offering adjunct therapies along with

what the chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant

big money, that oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like

our friend, and like the integrative clinics in major hospitals and

universities) then you are safe. But if you are going to offer

patients an alternative to what they are doing, then you are a direct

threat to them, and better not cross them without realizing the risk

you are taking of ruining your career. The machine is well oiled to

generate trillions, and they've got the FDA and the DEA firmly in

their pockets. The only way to circumvent the system is a) as if

mentioned, don't call it cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like

Neal Miller and other wonderful communicators among us have done:

make friends with the oncologists, tell them what they want to hear

and speak fluently Western medical language. That

> being said, you are correct, and it is important for us to treat

according to our strength: using differentiated patterns with

specificity.

>

> Yehuda Frischman

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

> Yehuda,

> The cancer business is largely that, a business. And it plays

> along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients and their families,

> fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so difficult to

> offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer

> business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that

are

> used.

>

> Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese

> disease categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.

>

> There are people in our field, however, who do work in mainstream

> cancer facilities, we have a mutual friend who works on salary in a

> cancer hospital, there are folks 'in the system' such as Issac

Cohen

> in San Francisco who are working cooperatively with biomedical

health

> professionals.

>

>

> On Dec 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:

>

> > Dear Hugo and Z'ev,

> >

> > Don't forget the other issue as well: the law. We present a

serious

> > challenge to the cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their

> > gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid us from

> > treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude

> > treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies

which

> > show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that some

> > Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of

> > course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather

than

> > treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this

> > yet another reason why we need our own congress and our own

> > regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be

> > considered as little more than folk medicine, we will continue to

> > have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the

> > immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will

> > exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of

what

> > we do.

> >

> > Respectfully,

> >

> > Yehuda

> >

> > <zrosenbe wrote:

> > Hugo,

> > The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex

> > questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical

> > viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears connected with

such

> > things as 'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent'

tumors.

> > Just today, a huge study was published in the U.S., front page

news,

> > that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year after the

> > connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of

> > women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these

> > concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture

> > and herbal medicine.

> >

> > Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,

> > and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese

medical

> > point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on

strengthening

> > the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since

acupuncture/moxa

> > is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi

depression,

> > it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would

spread

> > cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical

> > outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into

acupuncture

> > tumors would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques

> > of applying moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.

> >

> > Studies should be done perhaps, to see the efficacy of

> > acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until then,

there

> > is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating cancer

> > patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be

> > cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and

> > biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we

> > should tell people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play

golf,

> > because of the pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to

me.

> >

> >

> > On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:

> >

> > > But it left me with enough doubt that I

> > > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on

> > > the subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so

> > > reasonable.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Andy,

 

Interesting response. The issue of natural care vs big medical business

(pharma) is complex. We all want to help patients yet we ignore the reality of

practice as defined for us by our state statutes (treating a cancer patient is

still treating cancer in some aspect). Having a license for healthcare is not

always a good thing. We should remember that if we are part of a team that

includes the western medical system and acting with their blessing, then most

likely we will be OK. Lord help us if we seek to treat these patients w/o their

toxic drugs or surgery to improve a patient's health. We really have little

choice if we want to help and must precede with caution on treatment. I concur

with Yehuda in that we need to take off the rose-colored glasses and be very

aware of what they can do.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

:

calininger: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 15:41:07 +0000Re: TCM -

Treating cancer with Chinese medicine and acupuncture

 

 

 

 

--If I may add a modest comment: Patients need what we can do. Medicine, too,

needs what we can do. When a cancer patient self-refers to me and is covered by

3rd party payor for " nausea " I could do PC6 (standard of care) and get on to the

next patient. But a tumor has form, and form is Earth, anything I add to PC6 to

assist in the transformation of the humidity associated with Earth is fair game

in my book. Right away I think of stimulating immunity--the Wei, that has

profound effect on transforming humidity due to it's Yang nature. Patients do

better, oncologists remark on the vitality of the patient and are happy. Most of

all I can sleep at night as I have applied my art in a manner that is rigorous

and ethical. Medicine should not get in the way of healing, business should not

prevent care, ego ought not impede implementation of new treatment strategies.

We have problems of communication, not enemies; please. Thanks for this forum.

Andy Lininger, L.Ac. Clinical Facultynwhealth.edu- In

Chinese Medicine ,

wrote:>> The point is, that if you are an employee, as it were, of " Cancer,

inc " , and you are offering adjunct therapies along with what the

chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant big money, that

oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like our friend, and like the

integrative clinics in major hospitals and universities) then you are safe. But

if you are going to offer patients an alternative to what they are doing, then

you are a direct threat to them, and better not cross them without realizing the

risk you are taking of ruining your career. The machine is well oiled to

generate trillions, and they've got the FDA and the DEA firmly in their pockets.

The only way to circumvent the system is a) as if mentioned, don't call it

cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like Neal Miller and other wonderful

communicators among us have done: make friends with the oncologists, tell them

what they want to hear and speak fluently Western medical language. That> being

said, you are correct, and it is important for us to treat according to our

strength: using differentiated patterns with specificity. > > Yehuda Frischman >

> <zrosenbe wrote:> Yehuda,> The cancer business is largely

that, a business. And it plays > along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients

and their families, > fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so

difficult to > offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer >

business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that are > used.> >

Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese > disease

categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.> > There are people in

our field, however, who do work in mainstream > cancer facilities, we have a

mutual friend who works on salary in a > cancer hospital, there are folks 'in

the system' such as Issac Cohen > in San Francisco who are working cooperatively

with biomedical health > professionals.> > > On Dec 16, 2006, at

11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:> > > Dear Hugo and Z'ev,> >> > Don't forget

the other issue as well: the law. We present a serious > > challenge to the

cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their > > gunsight and the laws in many

states clearly forbid us from > > treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also

clearly exclude > > treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those

studies which > > show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that

some > > Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of > >

course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather than > > treat

cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this > > yet another

reason why we need our own congress and our own > > regulatory agencies. Until

we have them, our medicine will be > > considered as little more than folk

medicine, we will continue to > > have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will

not have the > > immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will >

> exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of what > > we

do.> >> > Respectfully,> >> > Yehuda> >> > <zrosenbe wrote:>

> Hugo,> > The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex> >

questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical> > viewpoints.

Many physicians are colored by fears connected with such> > things as

'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent' tumors.> > Just today, a huge

study was published in the U.S., front page news,> > that breast cancer rates

declined 15% in the year after the> > connection with HRT and breast cancer was

revealed, as millions of> > women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So

sometimes these> > concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as

acupuncture> > and herbal medicine.> >> > Chinese medicine works from a

different theoretical foundation,> > and therefore draws different conclusions.

From the Chinese medical> > point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based

on strengthening> > the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since

acupuncture/moxa> > is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi

depression,> > it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would

spread> > cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical> >

outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into acupuncture> > tumors

would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques> > of applying

moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.> >> > Studies should be done

perhaps, to see the efficacy of> > acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer

patients. Until then, there> > is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not

treating cancer> > patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better

to be> > cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and> >

biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we> > should tell

people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,> > because of the

pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.> >> > > > On

Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:> >> > > But it left me with enough

doubt that I> > > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on> > > the

subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so> > > reasonable.> >> > [Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]> >> > Yehuda L. Frischman, L.Ac,

CST, SER> > http://traditionaljewishmedicine.com/> >> >

> > > > Tired of

spam? Mail has the best spam protection around> > >

>> >

[Guest guest]

Sounds like politics and economics to me. It is hard to break down some

barriers.Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

: :

Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:43:41 -0800Re: Treating cancer with Chinese

medicine and acupuncture

 

 

 

 

Andy,You are preaching to the choir! But some oncologists are completely

threatened by us, view us as the enemy and seek ,with a vengeance, to undermine

Chinese medicine and Acupuncture in treatments associated with cancer.

Fortunately they are becoming fewer in number.The point is that to engage in

dialogue requires two people.Respectfully,Yehuda " C. A. Lininger "

<calininger wrote:--If I may add a modest comment: Patients need

what we can do. Medicine, too, needs what we can do. When a cancer patient

self-refers to me and is covered by 3rd party payor for " nausea " I could do PC6

(standard of care) and get on to the next patient. But a tumor has form, and

form is Earth, anything I add to PC6 to assist in the transformation of the

humidity associated with Earth is fair game in my book. Right away I think of

stimulating immunity--the Wei, that has profound effect on transforming humidity

due to it's Yang nature. Patients do better, oncologists remark on the vitality

of the patient and are happy. Most of all I can sleep at night as I have applied

my art in a manner that is rigorous and ethical. Medicine should not get in the

way of healing, business should not prevent care, ego ought not impede

implementation of new treatment strategies. We have problems of communication,

not enemies; please. Thanks for this forum. Andy Lininger, L.Ac. Clinical

Facultynwhealth.edu- In Chinese Medicine , yehuda

frischman < wrote:>> The point is, that if you are an employee, as

it were, of " Cancer, inc " , and you are offering adjunct therapies along with

what the chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant big money,

that oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like our friend, and like

the integrative clinics in major hospitals and universities) then you are safe.

But if you are going to offer patients an alternative to what they are doing,

then you are a direct threat to them, and better not cross them without

realizing the risk you are taking of ruining your career. The machine is well

oiled to generate trillions, and they've got the FDA and the DEA firmly in their

pockets. The only way to circumvent the system is a) as if mentioned, don't call

it cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like Neal Miller and other wonderful

communicators among us have done: make friends with the oncologists, tell them

what they want to hear and speak fluently Western medical language. That> being

said, you are correct, and it is important for us to treat according to our

strength: using differentiated patterns with specificity. > > Yehuda Frischman >

> <zrosenbe wrote:> Yehuda,> The cancer business is largely

that, a business. And it plays > along with the deep-felt sentiments of patients

and their families, > fighting for their lives. This is what makes it so

difficult to > offer alternative treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer >

business controls research, funding, and the very modalities that are > used.> >

Having said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese > disease

categories as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.> > There are people in

our field, however, who do work in mainstream > cancer facilities, we have a

mutual friend who works on salary in a > cancer hospital, there are folks 'in

the system' such as Issac Cohen > in San Francisco who are working cooperatively

with biomedical health > professionals.> > > On Dec 16, 2006, at

11:19 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:> > > Dear Hugo and Z'ev,> >> > Don't forget

the other issue as well: the law. We present a serious > > challenge to the

cancer establishment. The AMA has us in their > > gunsight and the laws in many

states clearly forbid us from > > treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also

clearly exclude > > treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those

studies which > > show that acupuncture spreads or accelerates cancer and that

some > > Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been shown to be Estrogenic. Of > >

course we have learned to call a skunk a pole cat, and rather than > > treat

cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but isn't this > > yet another

reason why we need our own congress and our own > > regulatory agencies. Until

we have them, our medicine will be > > considered as little more than folk

medicine, we will continue to > > have to walk on eggshell, even our DAOM's will

not have the > > immunity of Western Oncologists and insurance companies will >

> exclude reimbursing or continue to under-reimburse for much of what > > we

do.> >> > Respectfully,> >> > Yehuda> >> > <zrosenbe wrote:>

> Hugo,> > The issue of treating cancer patients raises many complex> >

questions from all sides, from the biomedical and Chinese medical> > viewpoints.

Many physicians are colored by fears connected with such> > things as

'estrogen-dependent' and 'testosterone-dependent' tumors.> > Just today, a huge

study was published in the U.S., front page news,> > that breast cancer rates

declined 15% in the year after the> > connection with HRT and breast cancer was

revealed, as millions of> > women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So

sometimes these> > concerns are superimposed on other modalities, such as

acupuncture> > and herbal medicine.> >> > Chinese medicine works from a

different theoretical foundation,> > and therefore draws different conclusions.

From the Chinese medical> > point of view, treatment of cancer is largely based

on strengthening> > the correct qi in order to overcome evil qi. Since

acupuncture/moxa> > is designed to strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi

depression,> > it seems unlikely within our world view that acupuncture would

spread> > cancer. I've never heard of anyone experiencing such a clinical> >

outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling directly into acupuncture> > tumors

would have negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques> > of applying

moxabustion directly over cancerous areas as well.> >> > Studies should be done

perhaps, to see the efficacy of> > acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer

patients. Until then, there> > is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not

treating cancer> > patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better

to be> > cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and> >

biomedical treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we> > should tell

people not to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,> > because of the

pesticide residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.> >> > > > On

Dec 15, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:> >> > > But it left me with enough

doubt that I> > > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on> > > the

subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so> > > reasonable.> >> > [Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]> >> > Yehuda L. Frischman, L.Ac,

CST, SER> > http://traditionaljewishmedicine.com/> >> >

> > > > Tired of

spam? Mail has the best spam protection around> > >

>> >

[Guest guest]

You betcha, but remember that we also challenge alot of the assumptions and

sacred cows they were taught in Med school. Have you read any of the books by

Bob Mendelsohn, MD, OBM: the three that come to mind are, " Confessions of a

Medical Heretic " " MALe Practice " , and " How to Raise a Healthy Child, in Spite of

your Doctor " . Another great book by an enlightened MD is " Stop the Medicine " by

Cynthia Foster, MD.

 

Yehuda

 

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

Sounds like politics and economics to me. It is hard to break down

some barriers.Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

: :

Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:43:41 -0800Re: Treating cancer with Chinese

medicine and acupuncture

 

Andy,You are preaching to the choir! But some oncologists are completely

threatened by us, view us as the enemy and seek ,with a vengeance, to undermine

Chinese medicine and Acupuncture in treatments associated with cancer.

Fortunately they are becoming fewer in number.The point is that to engage in

dialogue requires two people.Respectfully,Yehuda " C. A. Lininger "

<calininger wrote:--If I may add a modest comment: Patients need

what we can do. Medicine, too, needs what we can do. When a cancer patient

self-refers to me and is covered by 3rd party payor for " nausea " I could do PC6

(standard of care) and get on to the next patient. But a tumor has form, and

form is Earth, anything I add to PC6 to assist in the transformation of the

humidity associated with Earth is fair game in my book. Right away I think of

stimulating immunity--the Wei, that has profound effect on transforming humidity

due to it's Yang nature. Patients do better, oncologists remark on the

vitality of the patient and are happy. Most of all I can sleep at night as I

have applied my art in a manner that is rigorous and ethical. Medicine should

not get in the way of healing, business should not prevent care, ego ought not

impede implementation of new treatment strategies. We have problems of

communication, not enemies; please. Thanks for this forum. Andy Lininger, L.Ac.

Clinical Facultynwhealth.edu- In Chinese Medicine ,

wrote:>> The point is, that if you are an

employee, as it were, of " Cancer, inc " , and you are offering adjunct therapies

along with what the chemo/radiation/surgery/analgesia business and resultant big

money, that oncologists are generating, in their setting, (like our friend, and

like the integrative clinics in major hospitals and universities) then you are

safe. But if you are going to offer patients an alternative to what they are

doing, then you are a direct threat to them, and

better not cross them without realizing the risk you are taking of ruining your

career. The machine is well oiled to generate trillions, and they've got the FDA

and the DEA firmly in their pockets. The only way to circumvent the system is a)

as if mentioned, don't call it cancer that you are treating, or b)Do like Neal

Miller and other wonderful communicators among us have done: make friends with

the oncologists, tell them what they want to hear and speak fluently Western

medical language. That> being said, you are correct, and it is important for us

to treat according to our strength: using differentiated patterns with

specificity. > > Yehuda Frischman > > <zrosenbe wrote:>

Yehuda,> The cancer business is largely that, a business. And it plays > along

with the deep-felt sentiments of patients and their families, > fighting for

their lives. This is what makes it so difficult to > offer alternative

treatments. The multi-trillion dollar cancer > business

controls research, funding, and the very modalities that are > used.> > Having

said that, we do treat differentiated patterns and Chinese > disease categories

as our stock in trade, not Western diseases.> > There are people in our field,

however, who do work in mainstream > cancer facilities, we have a mutual friend

who works on salary in a > cancer hospital, there are folks 'in the system' such

as Issac Cohen > in San Francisco who are working cooperatively with biomedical

health > professionals.> > > On Dec 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, yehuda

frischman wrote:> > > Dear Hugo and Z'ev,> >> > Don't forget the other issue as

well: the law. We present a serious > > challenge to the cancer establishment.

The AMA has us in their > > gunsight and the laws in many states clearly forbid

us from > > treating " Cancer " . Insurance malpractice also clearly exclude > >

treating cancer. Of course, they bring as proof those studies which > > show

that acupuncture spreads or

accelerates cancer and that some > > Chinese herbs (eg. Dong Gui) have been

shown to be Estrogenic. Of > > course we have learned to call a skunk a pole

cat, and rather than > > treat cancer we treat blood stasis or yin vacuity, but

isn't this > > yet another reason why we need our own congress and our own > >

regulatory agencies. Until we have them, our medicine will be > > considered as

little more than folk medicine, we will continue to > > have to walk on

eggshell, even our DAOM's will not have the > > immunity of Western Oncologists

and insurance companies will > > exclude reimbursing or continue to

under-reimburse for much of what > > we do.> >> > Respectfully,> >> > Yehuda> >>

> <zrosenbe wrote:> > Hugo,> > The issue of treating cancer

patients raises many complex> > questions from all sides, from the biomedical

and Chinese medical> > viewpoints. Many physicians are colored by fears

connected with such> > things as 'estrogen-dependent' and

'testosterone-dependent' tumors.> > Just today, a huge study was published in

the U.S., front page news,> > that breast cancer rates declined 15% in the year

after the> > connection with HRT and breast cancer was revealed, as millions of>

> women abandoned hormone replacement therapy. So sometimes these> > concerns

are superimposed on other modalities, such as acupuncture> > and herbal

medicine.> >> > Chinese medicine works from a different theoretical foundation,>

> and therefore draws different conclusions. From the Chinese medical> > point

of view, treatment of cancer is largely based on strengthening> > the correct qi

in order to overcome evil qi. Since acupuncture/moxa> > is designed to

strengthen the correct qi and relieve qi depression,> > it seems unlikely within

our world view that acupuncture would spread> > cancer. I've never heard of

anyone experiencing such a clinical> > outcome in our field. . .perhaps needling

directly into acupuncture> > tumors would have

negative results!! There are Tibetan techniques> > of applying moxabustion

directly over cancerous areas as well.> >> > Studies should be done perhaps, to

see the efficacy of> > acupuncture/moxabustion in aiding cancer patients. Until

then, there> > is not enough detrimental evidence to suggest not treating

cancer> > patients. If it were said that, " well, we don't know, better to be> >

cautious " , there are a whole slew of foods, activities, and> > biomedical

treatments that should be avoided as well. Perhaps we> > should tell people not

to eat grapefruit, get x-rays, or play golf,> > because of the pesticide

residues at golf courses. Same thing to me.> >> > > > On Dec 15,

2006, at 12:12 PM, Hugo Ramiro wrote:> >> > > But it left me with enough doubt

that I> > > hesitate to answer authoritatively when questioned on> > > the

subject. Because, you know, it all sounds so> > > reasonable.> >> > [Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]> >> > Yehuda L.

Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER> > http://traditionaljewishmedicine.com/> >> >

> > > > Tired of

spam? Mail has the best spam protection around> > >

>> >