Guest guest Posted October 4, 2005 Report Share Posted October 4, 2005 Actually, porcini is a bolete, not a polypore. - Bill Schoenbart PO Box 8099 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 >>>>>> Ling zhi is distantly related to other polypores, such as zhu ling (polypores have pores instead of gills, such as the delicious wild mushroom porcini). Mistletoe is a parasitic plant that gleans nutrients off of living plant hosts. Eric>>>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 , Bill Schoenbart <plantmed2@g...> wrote: > Actually, porcini is a bolete, not a polypore. Sorry about the gross oversimplification. Originally, all polypores were grouped together in contrast to the gilled mushrooms. However, because such a broad distinction was not particularly accurate, the polypores got split into 100+ genera. Porcini, ling zhi, and zhu ling are not closely related, they all belong to different genera. I was just pointing out that they are in the same general vein, i.e., they are pored fungi, not cacti, not trees, not grasses, not shruby parasitic plants containing chlorophyll in their leaves. Anyway, such gross oversimplification is hardly necessary since we have Thomas to give us all a thorough grounding in the subject. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 , > wrote: > The Mistletoe's (Viscaceae) are a diverse group of angiosperms (plants with seeds protected by an overy), in 7 genera represented by ~~450 species. These are perennial parasitic shrubs growing on the aboveground portions of woody plants. Loranthaceae is a different genus and Viscaceae is sometime lumped in that genus and is parasitic on a more diverse group of plants. I am honestly not sure which of these two genera Taxillus (sang ji sheng) belongs to, do you know Eric? Thanks for the great in-depth info. The official species in the pharmacopeia is Taxillus chinensis (D.C.) Danser. The zhong yao da ci dian says Loranthaceae, and then goes on to distinguish by production areas as follows: Red-berried mistletoe (Viscum coloratum), China (mainly north, but also widely distributed over the south). Southern mistletoe and hairy mistletoe (Loranthus spp.), China (south of the Yangtze). It looks like they may be lumping the genera together, no? There is some controversy with drug sources vis-a-vis their official species for TCM. The PRC pharmacopeia book that has been everyone's standard may no longer continue to be the standard. I think that updating these names is part of the current tasks that the WHO commission is seeking to tackle. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 Thanks guys. Finally something about Chinese herbs. Bob , " Eric Brand " <smilinglotus> wrote: > , > > wrote: > > > The Mistletoe's (Viscaceae) are a diverse group of angiosperms > (plants with seeds protected by an overy), in 7 genera represented by > ~~450 species. These are perennial parasitic shrubs growing on the > aboveground portions of woody plants. Loranthaceae is a different > genus and Viscaceae is sometime lumped in that genus and is parasitic > on a more diverse group of plants. I am honestly not sure which of > these two genera Taxillus (sang ji sheng) belongs to, do you know Eric? > > Thanks for the great in-depth info. > > The official species in the pharmacopeia is Taxillus chinensis (D.C.) > Danser. The zhong yao da ci dian says Loranthaceae, and then goes on > to distinguish by production areas as follows: Red-berried mistletoe > (Viscum coloratum), China (mainly north, but also widely distributed > over the south). Southern mistletoe and hairy mistletoe (Loranthus > spp.), China (south of the Yangtze). It looks like they may be > lumping the genera together, no? > > There is some controversy with drug sources vis-a-vis their official > species for TCM. The PRC pharmacopeia book that has been everyone's > standard may no longer continue to be the standard. I think that > updating these names is part of the current tasks that the WHO > commission is seeking to tackle. > > Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 , > wrote: > Eric, > > It looks like there is at least three genera used, no? Yes, it would appear as if they are lumping them together, Viscum into the Loranthaceae. For many years now the botanist have tried to hold onto their jobs by lumping and splitting genera. (That's not entirely true as, of course, new information comes to light all the time, it just seems that way sometimes.) My personal opinion is that they should not lump these two genera together, but I'm no botanist and I'm sure that within the next decade or so they will have more definative work done on the two genera. The big question is whether or not the different species produce different clinical results. Are they simply divided based on subtle differences in morphology? Based on their host plants? If we were using chemotaxomony instead of morphology to divide the species, would they be divided differently? And if they are chemically very similar, do we assume that they have similar effects? How different will the effects be if the plant is grown in a different location? What if the pharmacologic effect is not coming from a plant constituent, but instead from an invisible fungus inhabiting the plants in a certain area, or some other chemical change that is in response to a localized environmental factor? This is the big problem with using Western specimens of Chinese herbs. Some plants are the exact same species yet have totally different chemical profiles depending on their location. We can only learn of their effects through use, but it takes a lot of use, a lot of human guinea pigs (paying clients?), and minimal variables. Minimizing variables to determine effects is virtually impossible if using compound formulas, but if we aren't using compound formulas, we aren't doing anything similar to TCM. Can of worms. > Also, I wanted to point out that Viscum is also used in Western herbology. In fact, I believe I saw Viscum album (the species used in the West) listed in at least one CM materia medica. I have used it like sang ji sheng and it seems to work very similarly. What is it used for in Western herbology? > Do you know which species we mostly see here in the West? Not entirely sure. I spent three years working in a pharmacy in California and have seen many batches of the stuff, but I don't know how to discern the species from a dried sample, if that is even possible. The boss at the shop wouldn't have much to offer because he is an old generation-doctor from Vietnam who has never read a word of Latin in his life, and I am not trained in botany. Andy Ellis would be a good person to ask. Also, Bensky's new book should have very accurate information on this matter. Erich Stoger is apparently an expert in such issues, so Bensky's new book is probably the closest thing to an authority that we have on the subject in English right now. > Anyway, another example of this is sheng ma, which many of us have known as Cimicifuga, has been changed to Actea. This is actually its original genus. I find this interesting because I have been using an actea species similarly to the Cimicifuga species for quite a few years. I always knew they were closely related, now it seems closer than many had previously thought. You mean that the plant and product are the same, but the species name changed? When did this name change occur? > As to the WHO project. At what stage is this project? Is there any preliminary data available. They haven't dealt with the issue of medicinals yet, but it will probably be clear by late October. Same with formulas. It looks like a few names will change, such as xiao qing long tang (Minor Bluegreen Dragon Decoction). The qing in that phrase generally means blue-green, which is a rather dark color roughly equivalent to the color of the visible veins on one's inner forearm. However, qing can be used to mean black as well. In Chinese mythology, there are white tigers and black dragons in opposition (the bai hus and the qing longs). This will probably be used as the interpretation for the formula names, causing the qing long formulas to be called black dragon formulas instead. Another likely change will be ying, as in construction/nutritive. I'm not sure who coined construction, I know that Nigel has never been satisfied with it as a word choice. A case could be made for nutritive in the sense of the four aspects wei-qi-ying-xue, because in later use the word was used in compounds like nutrition; however, nutritive isn't that great of a general translation because we talk about ying-wei as well- in this context, it means camp, the opposite of the troops protecting the perimeter. It looks like this ying will be changed to camp, which is a very accurate translation. However, it sounds horrible in English to native speakers. Every time I think of the phrase " camp qi " I just start imagining YMCA's in the gay New York scene of the 1920's.... Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 Thanks for putting this questions I've hinted at in the past into bold detail. One of the solutions is to start attracting botanists, ethnobotanists and plant chemists who have an interest in working with Chinese medicinals. This again will take more resources and money than our profession presently has. Perhaps some of these resources are available in China, but language barriers still remain. There are a handful of people who are able to help, such as Erich Stoger and Simon Mills, but we need more. In education, we need to begin to address these issues. Presently, Western CM education is all about putting all resources into graduating practitioners, and none to researchers, translators, growers, CM pharmacists or any other necessary sub-professions of Chinese medicine. It doesn't bear out well for the future of our field unless we start developing these resources. On Oct 6, 2005, at 1:47 AM, Eric Brand wrote: > The big question is whether or not the different species produce > different clinical results. Are they simply divided based on subtle > differences in morphology? Based on their host plants? If we were > using chemotaxomony instead of morphology to divide the species, would > they be divided differently? And if they are chemically very similar, > do we assume that they have similar effects? > > How different will the effects be if the plant is grown in a different > location? What if the pharmacologic effect is not coming from a plant > constituent, but instead from an invisible fungus inhabiting the > plants in a certain area, or some other chemical change that is in > response to a localized environmental factor? > > This is the big problem with using Western specimens of Chinese herbs. > Some plants are the exact same species yet have totally different > chemical profiles depending on their location. We can only learn of > their effects through use, but it takes a lot of use, a lot of human > guinea pigs (paying clients?), and minimal variables. Minimizing > variables to determine effects is virtually impossible if using > compound formulas, but if we aren't using compound formulas, we aren't > doing anything similar to TCM. Can of worms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 In New Mexico, we found a commonly used substitute for cimicifuga known as baneberry (actaea arguta), it is listed in several herbal texts from the southwest US. It is common in the Sangre de Cristo mountains. On Oct 6, 2005, at 1:47 AM, Eric Brand wrote: >> Anyway, another example of this is sheng ma, which many of us have >> > known as Cimicifuga, has been changed to Actea. This is actually its > original genus. I find this interesting because I have been using an > actea species similarly to the Cimicifuga species for quite a few > years. I always knew they were closely related, now it seems closer > than many had previously thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 Eric, Paul Unschuld already has used camp qi all along, it is in his new translations text, " Chinese Life Sciences " as well. However, I wonder if it suits a historical context more than a clinical one. I visualize different things with camp and construction. I get the same image in my mind with nutritive as construction. On Oct 6, 2005, at 1:47 AM, Eric Brand wrote: > Another likely change will be ying, as in construction/nutritive. I'm > not sure who coined construction, I know that Nigel has never been > satisfied with it as a word choice. A case could be made for > nutritive in the sense of the four aspects wei-qi-ying-xue, because in > later use the word was used in compounds like nutrition; however, > nutritive isn't that great of a general translation because we talk > about ying-wei as well- in this context, it means camp, the opposite > of the troops protecting the perimeter. It looks like this ying will > be changed to camp, which is a very accurate translation. However, it > sounds horrible in English to native speakers. Every time I think of > the phrase " camp qi " I just start imagining YMCA's in the gay New York > scene of the 1920's.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 I get the same image in my mind with nutritive as construction. >>> Me too Oakland, CA 94609 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > > Eric, > Paul Unschuld already has used camp qi all along, it is in his new > translations text, " Chinese Life Sciences " as well. Yes, Unschuld has long rallied for " camp, " and Nigel agrees with him completely. Construction was in use prior to Nigel's work; despite the fact that camp is thought to be a better translation of ying, it is an awkward word because of its slang use. >However, I > wonder if it suits a historical context more than a clinical one. Do you think that camp is removed in meaning from the clinical reality? Isn't the military metaphor of camp and defense still basically what we are using as our rationale in the clinic? I > visualize different things with camp and construction. I get the > same image in my mind with nutritive as construction. So do I. As always, thanks for your comments. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 If we are thinking in terms of evil qi attacking the body, the relationship of defense/soldiers and camp qi makes sense. However, when thinking of bodily substances, especially ying qi's relationship with the blood, construction or nutritive works better in my opinion. On Oct 6, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Eric Brand wrote: > Do you think that camp is removed in meaning from the clinical > reality? Isn't the military metaphor of camp and defense still > basically what we are using as our rationale in the clinic? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > > If we are thinking in terms of evil qi attacking the body, the > relationship of defense/soldiers and camp qi makes sense. However, > when thinking of bodily substances, especially ying qi's relationship > with the blood, construction or nutritive works better in my opinion. I agree with you on this point. Perhaps it should be translated differently in the different contexts. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 > > > On Behalf Of > Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:25 PM > > Re: Re: Ling Zhi > > If we are thinking in terms of evil qi attacking the body, the > relationship of defense/soldiers and camp qi makes sense. However, > when thinking of bodily substances, especially ying qi's relationship > with the blood, construction or nutritive works better in my opinion. I agree and was just about to post this exact msg. and yours came in - > > > On Oct 6, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Eric Brand wrote: > > > Do you think that camp is removed in meaning from the clinical > > reality? Isn't the military metaphor of camp and defense still > > basically what we are using as our rationale in the clinic? > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 John Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience with Ling Zhi. Were you slicing a fresh mushroom or a dried one that you had soaked? Can you reccomend a source of good quality? Turiya Hill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Turiya, The mushroom tops that I use come from Mayway, as well as the double ginseng cooker. red ling zhi (more bitter = more alkaloids, medicinal use, more for the heart/ LV/ blood- " hong " black ling zhi (little sweeter, culinary uses, more for the SP/KD - black/ " hei " ) and ling zhi spores (the jing/ essence of the mushroom?) I've used the red whole tops and the spores. The mushroom tops come in 500 gm ( 1.1 lbs) and are 3-4 inches in diameter. I thought about soaking them, but then you may lose some of the constituents, especially the spores on top of the mushroom, which brush off like red dust. So, I use a serrated knife and saw through them, cutting them into small pieces, using about half a mushroom top for a medium size (4 cups) double ginseng cooker, adding about 3 cups of water (3/4) to the brim with the mushroom pieces inside and placing the double ginseng cooker into another stainless steel pot with water covering at least half of the outside of the double ginseng cooker. Simmer on medium-low heat for 3 hours>. It is not necessary to cover the stainless steel pot. Steam should rise gently without boiling. The water solution inside of the double ginseng cooker will steep, allowing for the ling zhi and volatile oils to be retained. Then, after three hours or so, just filter the solution inside of the double ginseng cooker into small sake cups and enjoy. I like tasting the mushroom without anything else. But, if it is too bitter, then a little peach fruit (symbol of longevity) can be added. Usually ling zhi and peaches are illustrated together in old sketchings. Also, I've mixed in strawberry lemonade, which gives it a tasty tanginess. In Terry Willard's excellent book about Reishi, he states that there was study done where ascorbic acid was found to potentate the effects of the mushroom, by assisting in the breakdown of the polysaccharides, thereby allowing for further absorption of the chemical constituents inside the intestines. Interestingly, I noticed that adding a source of natural vitamin C and sugars? would facilitate the speed of action (probably waking up the digestive system to receive the herb). Hope this helps. On 1/31/07, Turiya Hill <turiya wrote: > > John > > Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience with Ling Zhi. > Were you slicing a fresh mushroom or a dried one that you had soaked? > Can you reccomend a source of good quality? > Turiya Hill > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.