Ling Zhi

[Guest guest]

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>>>>>>>>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, 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

[Guest guest]

,

> 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

[Guest guest]

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

[Guest guest]

,

> 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

[Guest guest]

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.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

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.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

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....

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I get the

same image in my mind with nutritive as construction.

>>>

Me too

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, " "

<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

[Guest guest]

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?

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, " "

<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

[Guest guest]

>

>

> 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?

> >

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

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

 

 

[Guest guest]

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

>

>