Statistical Classification of Chinese Medicine Symptoms and Diseases

[Guest guest]

Judging by the quality of English in the introductory comments, this isn't going

to be such an exciting development. I am also concerned that this is another

attempt at the biomedicalization of Chinese medicine at a most serious level,

that of core terminology. There's much better stuff out there than this. . .

 

 

 

---- < wrote:

> Hi All who can read / use Chinese script,

>

> See " Statistical Classification of Symptoms and

> Diseases " at http://tinyurl.com/62p838

>

> There is a wealth of Chinese medical terminology here from China

> Medical College [Taiwan] by Jaung-Geng Lin

>

> ABSTRACT: This book is edited by the guideline of the book

> " International statistical classification of diseases, injuries and

> causes of death " (edited by national health administration), and is

> separated with the 17 chapters:

> 1. infections and parasitic diseases,

> 2. neoplasms,

> 3. endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases and immunity

> disorders,

> 4. diseases of blood and blood-forming organs,

> 5. mental disorders,

> 6. diseases of the nervous system and sense organs,

> 7. diseases of the circulatory system,

> 8. diseases of the respiratory system,

> 9. diseases of the digestive system,

> 10. diseases of the genitourinary system,

> 11. complications of pregnanacy , childbirth and the puerperium,

> 12. diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue,

> 13. diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue,

> 14. congenital anomalies,

> 15. certain conditions originating in the perinatal period,

> 16. symptoms, signs and ill-defined conditons,

> 17. injury and poisoning.

>

> Every Chinese medicine symptom and disease will be verified by the

> original Chinese medicine book, and with this powerful proof, we

> could make sure the exact meaning of every Chinese medicine symptom

> and disease.

>

> Cooperating with the western medicine meaning of the specific

> disease, we will group some Chinese medicine symptom or disease into

> some particular western medicine disease. With this principle,

> Chinese medicine symptoms and diseases will be classified in the

> scientific spirit, and be named with the scientific codes.

>

> With this book, the National insurance bureau will get a lot of help

> from here. And, meanwhile, the quality of clinical Chinese medicine

> will be improved, making the Chinese medicine more scientific and

> efficient.

>

> Keywords: Chinese medicine, symptom, sign

>

> Best regards,

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi All who can read / use Chinese script,

 

See " Statistical Classification of Symptoms and

Diseases " at http://tinyurl.com/62p838

 

There is a wealth of Chinese medical terminology here from China

Medical College [Taiwan] by Jaung-Geng Lin

 

ABSTRACT: This book is edited by the guideline of the book

" International statistical classification of diseases, injuries and

causes of death " (edited by national health administration), and is

separated with the 17 chapters:

1. infections and parasitic diseases,

2. neoplasms,

3. endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases and immunity

disorders,

4. diseases of blood and blood-forming organs,

5. mental disorders,

6. diseases of the nervous system and sense organs,

7. diseases of the circulatory system,

8. diseases of the respiratory system,

9. diseases of the digestive system,

10. diseases of the genitourinary system,

11. complications of pregnanacy , childbirth and the puerperium,

12. diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue,

13. diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue,

14. congenital anomalies,

15. certain conditions originating in the perinatal period,

16. symptoms, signs and ill-defined conditons,

17. injury and poisoning.

 

Every Chinese medicine symptom and disease will be verified by the

original Chinese medicine book, and with this powerful proof, we

could make sure the exact meaning of every Chinese medicine symptom

and disease.

 

Cooperating with the western medicine meaning of the specific

disease, we will group some Chinese medicine symptom or disease into

some particular western medicine disease. With this principle,

Chinese medicine symptoms and diseases will be classified in the

scientific spirit, and be named with the scientific codes.

 

With this book, the National insurance bureau will get a lot of help

from here. And, meanwhile, the quality of clinical Chinese medicine

will be improved, making the Chinese medicine more scientific and

efficient.

 

Keywords: Chinese medicine, symptom, sign

 

Best regards,

 

[Guest guest]

Maybe it's supposed to be an addendum to ICD, in a nationalistic sort

of way. There seem to be only a few things that resemble TCM.

 

For example, po4shang1feng1 translates something like _ruinous injury

from wind_, but it's used to indicate lockjaw from tetanus.

 

BTW, I can't read ( ! ), but it's easy to search for the ususal

suspects, starting with characters for qi, blood, etc, and then run

those passages through MDBG's translator.

 

joe reid

www.jreidomd.blogspot.com

[Guest guest]

Phil,

You've raised some good questions.

 

My answer is that there are no good free resources for terminology

(glossaries/dictionaries) materia medicas or herbal formularies

available. And there shouldn't be. The amount of work to produce

decent to high quality work in these areas is vast, and authors or

compilers should be paid for this work. If practitioners want high-

quality data, they need to pay for it.

 

There are many good websites out there with free articles and research

reports, including herbal formulas, single herbs, and terminological

issues for free. I think even these should be paid for in principle.

 

I know some top-notch translators who make much too little for their

work. One just translated a Chinese medical classic, with thousands

of hours of work, and has perhaps made three hundred dollars in

royalties. Another great translator has told me he makes the

equivalent of fifty cents an hour for his work. These are people with

degrees in Mandarin Chinese and English language studies, professional

translators/authors.

 

I know of at least one website that is giving away authors' works

illegally as downloadable PDF's without the authors' consent.

 

If we don't support writers, compilers and translators, the quality of

the work will be low. We need high-quality dictionaries, glossaries

and texts, low quality work just adds to the confusion that is already

out there in the CM profession.

 

 

On Jun 17, 2008, at 8:34 PM, wrote:

 

> Hi Z'ev, & All,

>

> Z'ev wrote:

> > Judging by the quality of English in the introductory comments, this

> > isn't going to be such an exciting development. I am also concerned

> > that this is another attempt at the biomedicalization of Chinese

> > medicine at a most serious level, that of core terminology. There's

> > much better stuff out there than this. . .

>

> Z'ev, I would be very interested in YOUR best sources:

>

> (1) What are your TOP THREE resources to access TCM terminology free

> online in a form that can be copied and edited for future searches?

>

> (2) What are your TOP THREE resources to access data on Chinese

> SINGLE HERBS free online in a form that can be copied and edited for

> future use?

>

> (2) What are your TOP THREE resources to access data on Chinese

> HERBAL FORMULAS free online in a form that can be copied and edited

> for future use?

>

> Best regards,

>

>

>

>

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

 

I have to agree with Z'ev. & nbsp;

 

It seems as an industry, the Western world has a limited amount of information,

and I am not talking just about the Classics, but also in modern research as

well. & nbsp; We are limited because the majority of us do not speak or read

Chinese, which leaves us dependent on education from 2 sources.

 

We are dependent on dissemination of resources through oral tradition (by our

educators who are from China, or educators who speak/ read Chinese). & nbsp; Often

these people are very busy, both as practitioners and as faculty. & nbsp; So often

their teachings get disseminated through their students, which may or may not be

the best form of transmission (due to language barriers, comprehension of the

student, etc.)

 

The second way that we get our information is from the translators in our

field. & nbsp; The field of translation for is a field that I

believe will be growing exponentially over the next decade, because in some

sense we are so information starved (compare walking in to a library of Western

medicine with walking in to a Chinese medicine library anywhere in

America). & nbsp; Schools like SIOM and other schools that have taken it upon

themselves to make the learning of Chinese mandatory in their institution are

the schools with true vision.

 

So what happens if I go to every website on Chinese medicine and copy all of the

information on that website (data mining), what have I achieved? & nbsp; Well I

can fact check the information I already have ..., but in my opinion I have not

created anything that is additive to our field. & nbsp; In my opinion it is like

spreading around more of the same information (both true and false) & nbsp; (and I

am sure that the owners of those websites are not that appreciative of someone

going on to their website to just take all of the information, that they had to

collect, and do the data entry (hours to years of work), just so someone can

drag and click and copy it in a second. & nbsp; IMHO)

 

The only way we will get " more " information in our field is to rely more heavily

on the Oral tradition, or to begin to translate as much material that we can get

a hold of (classics & amp; modern research) into English (and German, Spanish,

French & amp; Italian, etc). & nbsp; The cost of translation from Chinese into

English is very high by some standards, but it is still lower then most of us

make dollar for dollar seeing patients. & nbsp;

 

What we have in is a supply and demand graph -- where there is a huge supply of

material (in Chinese), and there is a fair amount of demand for the material --

but we have a logistical problem, in that there are only a small number of

people within our profession that do this kind of work (translation). & nbsp; I

believe that we are far enough a long in our field in the West, that it is time

to begin to invest heavily in our translators, so that we can have more

information available to use from all the thousands of years that Chinese

medicine has been in existence.

 

But who is going to pay for this creation of new material? & nbsp; Surely the NIH

isn't interested, neither is the NEH. & nbsp; Publishers really only can produce

as much material as people will buy, and how many of us buy a new book every

month? (supply and demand again) & nbsp; How about NCCAOM will & nbsp; they pay for

it? & nbsp; It seems that they have their own things to do. & nbsp; How about a

millionaire -- they could pay for it ... I have yet to meet one that is

interested What I am trying to say folks, is that if we want access to more

information it boils down to you and me to pay for this information. & nbsp; This

is the conclusion that I have come to. & nbsp; No one person, company, school,

millionaire, government entity is going to step in and magically pay for the

information that I want (or most likely that you want.)

 

Together, you and I can pay for this translation, and add volumes of data that

is accessible to our field. & nbsp; It won't take that many of us, it just takes

commitment on the part of us both, and some really skilled translators.

 

Sincerely,

 

L.Ac.

The Database

Chinese Medicine

www.cm-dbcart.com

 

 

--- On Tue, 6/17/08, & lt;zrosenbe & gt; wrote:

& lt;zrosenbe & gt;

Re: Re: Statistical Classification of Symptoms

and Diseases

Chinese Medicine

Cc:

Tuesday, June 17, 2008, 11:12 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phil,

 

You've raised some good questions.

 

 

 

My answer is that there are no good free resources for terminology

 

(glossaries/ dictionaries) materia medicas or herbal formularies

 

available. And there shouldn't be. The amount of work to produce

 

decent to high quality work in these areas is vast, and authors or

 

compilers should be paid for this work. If practitioners want high-

 

quality data, they need to pay for it.

 

 

 

There are many good websites out there with free articles and research

 

reports, including herbal formulas, single herbs, and terminological

 

issues for free. I think even these should be paid for in principle.

 

 

 

I know some top-notch translators who make much too little for their

 

work. One just translated a Chinese medical classic, with thousands

 

of hours of work, and has perhaps made three hundred dollars in

 

royalties. Another great translator has told me he makes the

 

equivalent of fifty cents an hour for his work. These are people with

 

degrees in Mandarin Chinese and English language studies, professional

 

translators/ authors.

 

 

 

I know of at least one website that is giving away authors' works

 

illegally as downloadable PDF's without the authors' consent.

 

 

 

If we don't support writers, compilers and translators, the quality of

 

the work will be low. We need high-quality dictionaries, glossaries

 

and texts, low quality work just adds to the confusion that is already

 

out there in the CM profession.

 

 

 

 

 

On Jun 17, 2008, at 8:34 PM, wrote:

 

 

 

& gt; Hi Z'ev, & amp; All,

 

& gt;

 

& gt; Z'ev wrote:

 

& gt; & gt; Judging by the quality of English in the introductory comments, this

 

& gt; & gt; isn't going to be such an exciting development. I am also concerned

 

& gt; & gt; that this is another attempt at the biomedicalization of Chinese

 

& gt; & gt; medicine at a most serious level, that of core terminology. There's

 

& gt; & gt; much better stuff out there than this. . .

 

& gt;

 

& gt; Z'ev, I would be very interested in YOUR best sources:

 

& gt;

 

& gt; (1) What are your TOP THREE resources to access TCM terminology free

 

& gt; online in a form that can be copied and edited for future searches?

 

& gt;

 

& gt; (2) What are your TOP THREE resources to access data on Chinese

 

& gt; SINGLE HERBS free online in a form that can be copied and edited for

 

& gt; future use?

 

& gt;

 

& gt; (2) What are your TOP THREE resources to access data on Chinese

 

& gt; HERBAL FORMULAS free online in a form that can be copied and edited

 

& gt; for future use?

 

& gt;

 

& gt; Best regards,

 

& gt;

 

& gt;

 

& gt;

 

& gt;

 

 

 

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

 

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

 

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Z'ev, & All,

 

Z'ev wrote:

> Judging by the quality of English in the introductory comments, this

> isn't going to be such an exciting development. I am also concerned

> that this is another attempt at the biomedicalization of Chinese

> medicine at a most serious level, that of core terminology. There's

> much better stuff out there than this. . .

 

Z'ev, I would be very interested in YOUR best sources:

 

(1) What are your TOP THREE resources to access TCM terminology free

online in a form that can be copied and edited for future searches?

 

(2) What are your TOP THREE resources to access data on Chinese

SINGLE HERBS free online in a form that can be copied and edited for

future use?

 

(2) What are your TOP THREE resources to access data on Chinese

HERBAL FORMULAS free online in a form that can be copied and edited

for future use?

 

Best regards,

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Jonathan,

 

 

You mention that 'we don't speak or read Chinese, which leaves us

dependent on education from 2 sources. Translations and Oral tradition.'

 

Wouldn't a third source be direct transmission from the heart of the

medicine itself? I'm not talking about beginning students. As

presented, and correct me if I'm taking your post out of context,

you've presented a scenario where we in the West are dependent on the

Chinese for development of the medicine.

 

Is it not true that their culture is so different from ours

(totalitarianism, state enforced atheism, etc.) that we may actually

be significantly advancing the medicine in our own cultural context

beyond what the Chinese are even capable of in their cultural context?

 

Is it not reasonable that the relative freedoms we take for granted in

much of the West might provide a cultural context in which we would

have a whole different realm of very important insights that the

Chinese wouldn't even have access to?

 

Isn't it reasonable that practitioners who've practiced here 20-30

years would be so in touch with the heart of the medicine that their

understanding of it, in the most significant ways, would in no way be

limited by lack of access to Chinese literature or teachers?

 

Seems to me it stopped being " Chinese medicine " in the 1970's. That

doesn't mean we don't all have a lot to learn from each other. But are

we really inherently " limited " by lack of translations? Is China, at

this point in history the true source of the medicine? Or has

something changed?

 

Regards, Lonny Jarrett

[Guest guest]

Very astute observation. I think we are advancing this medicine. Although I

think we are in the minority, I believe we are bettering this beautiful gift

from China.

 

Sincerely,

 

Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac.

 

 

:

Revolution: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:58:50 +0000Re:

Statistical Classification of Symptoms and Diseases

 

 

 

 

Hello Jonathan,You mention that 'we don't speak or read Chinese, which leaves

usdependent on education from 2 sources. Translations and Oral

tradition.'Wouldn't a third source be direct transmission from the heart of

themedicine itself? I'm not talking about beginning students. Aspresented, and

correct me if I'm taking your post out of context,you've presented a scenario

where we in the West are dependent on theChinese for development of the

medicine. Is it not true that their culture is so different from

ours(totalitarianism, state enforced atheism, etc.) that we may actuallybe

significantly advancing the medicine in our own cultural contextbeyond what the

Chinese are even capable of in their cultural context?Is it not reasonable that

the relative freedoms we take for granted inmuch of the West might provide a

cultural context in which we wouldhave a whole different realm of very important

insights that theChinese wouldn't even have access to? Isn't it reasonable that

practitioners who've practiced here 20-30years would be so in touch with the

heart of the medicine that theirunderstanding of it, in the most significant

ways, would in no way belimited by lack of access to Chinese literature or

teachers?Seems to me it stopped being " Chinese medicine " in the 1970's.

Thatdoesn't mean we don't all have a lot to learn from each other. But arewe

really inherently " limited " by lack of translations? Is China, atthis point in

history the true source of the medicine? Or hassomething changed? Regards, Lonny

Jarrett

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Lonny,

 

I will do my best to keep my answer short, but I may fail as there is so many

ways I could answer this.

 

So let me start with direct transmission… I could take this several different

ways.  Because I am an acupuncturist, will I simply know how to treat my

patients? Will the medicine (somehow) transmit their treatment to me?  How does

the medicine do this?  Does it communicate through spirit, or books or a teacher

showing up on spontaneously on my doorstep?

 

When I think of direct transmission, I think of a master or an avatar laying

their hands on someone’s head, and “seeding” them (implanting them) with the

source of the tradition.  I have never had a professor do this for me, but in

some circles it might happen.  Certainly, the medicine can not do this for me,

as it is inanimate.  

 

But, if what you are talking about is the idea, of developing a methodology

through the course of having a practice, then we are in line.  I think that one

can learn a lot from one’s patients, and the astute observer can even track the

changes and see the bigger pattern of pathology amongst one’s patients.  But

then this is no different then what has happened in all medical practices for

1000’s of years.

 

The next question I would have is, if you have received direct transmission (and

hence, there is an internal sense of knowing) – how do you transmit it on to the

rest of us?  And how many practitioners go to the grave with their unique

information?  Who would know about Lonny Jarrett without Nourishing Destiny and

The Clinical Practice of ?  How many practitioners in America

are there, and how many of them have written down their transmission?

 

I have to say that I don’t buy the argument that China is a different culture

then ours, so the “medicine” that we practice, is now “American medicine.”  That

would seem to me that you are saying that people are fundamentally different.

 Now, I can buy that from a climate perspective, but not from a socio/ political

perspective.   has long said that treatment of people that live

in the North of China, is going to be different then for people that live in the

South of China.  I have noticed that the predominate pathology is different

everywhere you live in the United States, and I would say the same about the

world – but let us be clear that this is because of where someone lives, and not

how fast they live.

 

We may be “advancing” the system of Chinese medicine because of the freedom we

have in the West, but how do you know if what is “your transmission” or “my

transmission” is really an advancement?  Unless you read Chinese (I don’t know

if you do or not), what would you compare your “transmission” to?  For the West

it might be an advancement, but perhaps only because we know no better.  

 

The state of public Chinese medicine is perhaps radically different now in China

then in the past.  But I seem to remember other cultures in the history of

mankind, who have adopted the dominant paradigm on the surface, so that their

hereditary paradigm could survive (I am thinking of many of the Mayan and Indian

cultures in North & South America).  Under the public face of Chinese medicine

there are still practitioners of Chinese medicine who base their practice off of

studies of the Classics.

 

I have met some people who have been in practice like you have said for 20 or 30

years, they supposedly have been in touch with the Heart of their medicine, and

yet when asked, they could not locate Governing Vessel 20.  These same

practitioners would say that their knowledge of Herbs was limited, and when they

taught their formulas class, they read to the class out of Bensky’s formulas

book.  This is more then likely the exception, and not the rule.  So just being

in practice for 20 to 30 years does not imply knowledge by itself.

 

 

The amount of information available now, versus what was available 20 to 30

years ago is huge.  I have talked to people who graduated from South West

acupuncture college in the 1970’s who said that they learned from Bensky’s ACT

book (and that was their only book, along with class notes from their

professors).  I am not saying in any way shape or form that Bensky’s ACT book is

bad, I am just comparing it to the resources a student has now – I have over 150

books on in my library, and I don’t even have a fraction of

them.  The Redwing catalog has over 2000 books, audio, videos, and CD Rom’s

available to our profession, and this is just one supplier.  But still, compare

this amount of material to the material that is in China in Chinese, or the

material in a Western medicine library, and we are still in our infancy as a

profession.

 

Lastly, several points – How does your 30 years worth of practice compare to

2500 years worth of case records and medical essays.   I like your books Lonny,

and I have learned from some of your understandings of the medicine, but you

don’t replace the Classics in my mind.  The sheer depth of the material that is

available in Chinese is more then we can recreate in several lifetimes, and that

was if we all wrote books.  The Bei Ji Qian Jin Yao Fang for example is 2000

pages in Chinese – that is equivalent to 6000 pages in English (of raw

translation with no annotations, footnotes, index, etc).  This text is mostly a

formulary (with some acupuncture & moxabustion).  

 

These common Chinese medicine texts of this day and age, are the equivalent of

6000 pages of material, and these page numbers represent the book with their

notes, annotations & index.

 

The Clinical Practice of 829 pages

Bensky’s Formulas & Strategies (1990) 562 pages

Bensky’s ACT (1981) 741 pages

Bensky’s Materia Medica (1993) 556 pages

Yeung’s Handbook of Chinese Herbal Formulas (1998) 431 pages

Yeung’s Handbook of Chinese Herbs (1996) 673 pages

Maciocia’s Practice of (2000) 924 pages

Maciocia’s Obstetrics & Gynecology in (1999) 959 pages

Deadman’s Manual of Acupuncture (1998) 671 pages

 

There are others, but these are the some of the big books for our medicine – I

count 6,346 pages compare this to the Bei Ji Qian Jin Yao Fang – and which is

just one book of  the 1000 Classical texts (that just I have been able to find)

out there.  

 

Why would our profession choose to throw out the baby with the bathwater?  Why

should we all just rely on our own limited experience, when someone else has had

the experience before us?  But sure, let’s just say that the Classics are

obsolete.  Then, in order for us to have a body of knowledge that spans the

breadth and depth of Chinese medicine, that has similar knowledge that is in the

Classics (but for our “modern model”), and allows us to compete with Western

medicine for “our place” in the global health care structure, then I suggest

that we all begin to write, and write copiously, about our own heart

transmission.

 

I for one would prefer to read what the Classics have to say, seeing as how the

vehicle that I am driving is the vehicle that they (the people who wrote the

Classics) invented.  The human body – same car – just different drivers.

 

Sincerely,

 

L.Ac.

The Database

Chinese Medicine

www.cm-dbcart.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

John: But, if what you are talking about is the idea, of developing a

methodology

through the course of having a practice, then we are in line.

 

 

Lonny: What I meant was the practitioner actually awakening to the

universal source of the medicine itself.

 

Jon: But

then this is no different then what has happened in all medical

practices for

1000's of years.

 

 

 

Lonny: Precisely. I'm suggesting that our connection to the medicine

has the potential to be just as deep as anyone's in the history of the

medicine. All this is in the context of taking issue with your

statement that we are " limited " to two sources " Chinese Teachers and

their students " or Translations. I'm merely pointing out that the

single most significant source of the medicine is available to us all

and that's the capacity to look deeply into the significance of our

own life experience.

 

Jon: Who would know about Lonny Jarrett without Nourishing Destiny and

The Clinical Practice of ? How many practitioners in

America

are there, and how many of them have written down their transmission?

 

Lonny: Nothing wrong with books. All I'm saying is that it's my

experience that we know enough for any practitioner who is interested

in depth to really connect with the true source of the medicine which

transcends any ethnic or nationalistic identity.

 

 

 

 

 

Jon: I have to say that I don't buy the argument that China is a

different culture

then ours, so the " medicine " that we practice, is now " American

medicine. " That

would seem to me that you are saying that people are fundamentally

different.

 

 

Lonny: In my clinical practice book I analyzed the different stages of

cultural development in CM over the last 4000 years. Let me know if

you'ld like to see it.

 

 

 

I'm saying the Chinese culture as a whole is reaching about 1860 now

very quickly. When that form of consciousness showed up in Tian Men

square they road over it with a tank. We've had two hundred years of

democracy and a large middle to upper class with expendable income and

free time. Time enough for people to have evolved into a stage of

narcissism that the Chinese culture simply could not, and does not

have. China simply does not have a huge class of idol rich whose main

problem is being victimized by being so fortunate. Few people in China

are suffering under the weight of having too man options. The average

Chinese person is superstitious in a way that I can't relate to at all

in my own experience.

 

I've also not seen (which certainly doesn't mean it doesn't exist)

kidney yang excess or Liver yangxu in any Chinese text book-though I

treat these things routinely.

 

 

If you are interested please google the following terms.

 

The Chinese culture at large is deeply rooted in the purple meme. It's

density is at the blue meme, and its barely made it to orange. its

NOWHERE near the 1960's (green meme). At our leading edge in Northern

Europe and North America we are in second tier and stepping into 3rd

tier (google please).

 

Suffice it to say I've met one or two World-centric Chinese in my life

raised in the mainland. Almost all the country would still be at a

nationalistic level of development whereas in the US we have about

15-20% at a world-centric level.

 

================

 

Jon: We may be " advancing " the system of Chinese medicine because of

the freedom we

have in the West, but how do you know if what is " your transmission "

or " my

transmission " is really an advancement? Unless you read Chinese (I

don't know

if you do or not), what would you compare your " transmission " to?

 

 

Lonny: I can tell you with certainty that there isn't a single concept

in the history of the medicine that takes the discovery of evolution

into account in any meaningful way (please see my post last week on

this). The furthest the Chinese have gotten with evolution is

dialectical materialism (not very far). Claims that Buddhism and

Daoism were all about evolution are based on a very superficial

understanding of the term. Evolution (the deep time developmental

nature of the cosmos) is possibly the most significant discovery in

history and its implications are missing in the medicine from

beginning to now.

 

 

 

 

 

Jon: Under the public face of Chinese medicine

there are still practitioners of Chinese medicine who base their

practice off of

studies of the Classics.

 

 

Lonny: Sure. All written based on a circular model of time. Frankly

the shear level of myth and superstition in even the medical texts is

impossible for me to relate to. Li Zhi Shen and Sun Si Miao were all

about ghosts, fox spirits, women giving birth to animals, animals

giving birth to children. I always smile when I read in the intro to

certain CM books the translators assurance that " we added no

information not present in the source text " . Of course they aren't

pointing out they had to remove 75% of it because they were either to

embarrassed or not deep enough to translate it. Much of the

information in the historic texts was generated by humans and for

humans who dont really exist in the West anymore (Maybe if you went to

the mountains in Haiti).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jon: I have met some people who have been in practice like you have

said for 20 or 30

years, they supposedly have been in touch with the Heart of their

medicine, and

yet when asked, they could not locate Governing Vessel 20.

 

Lonny: I know. I suspect the entire literature of the medicine past,

present and future on a DVD wouldn't help in this case. Right?

 

 

 

Jon: This is more then likely the exception, and not the rule. So

just being

in practice for 20 to 30 years does not imply knowledge by itself.

 

 

Lon: Sure. And I've heard plenty of scholars in the medicine who've

written many books evidence absolutely no depth of perspective. Any

idiot can know stuff. Again, all things considered I think it would be

great if every text ever written on CM was available and cross

referenced on a DVD! I'm just saying that in ALL the most important

ways we aren't limited by their absence. People tend to look to

tradition as a way of avoiding personal responsibility for creating

the future.

 

 

 

 

 

Jon: The amount of information available now, versus what was

available 20 to 30

years ago is huge.

 

Lonny: I just had dinner with the head of a Chinese Medical school and

a gentleman who just published a medical text on the classics that

sold a million copies in China. I described the pulse system I use to

him (Hammer/Shen) and his comment was he doesn't know anyone in China

who has that kind of depth and that it's pretty much a dead art. When

I started taking CM seriously ,1980, there was nothing. I agree there

are alot of great books now. It's fantastic really.

 

 

 

 

Jon: Lastly, several points – How does your 30 years worth of practice

compare to

2500 years worth of case records and medical essays.

 

 

Lonny: In many ways its more significant. I'm sure I'll take hell for

that but I'm not answering from a personal perspective. Let me give a

little context. I consider consciousness to be the only real medicine.

I to the hierarchy first elaborated in the Shen nong ben cao

that the highest type of medicine treats the fulfillment of destiny,

the middle type constitutional issues, and the lowest type the

syndrome patterns and external influences. I consider " medicine " to be

in no way separate from the enlightenment teachings at the level of

physiology. Medicine at this level in ancient China was only for the

royal court and the richest of the rich. Very few people. A minority

tradition to say the least. And it is today, even in the West. But

today, in the developed countries, the average person lives better

than the aristocracy of ancient China.

 

Simply put, I (many of us) have more experience treating people at the

level of consciousness and evolution, free from myth and superstition,

than probably anyone in Chinese history. We are treating a human being

who has never existed before. And, what's more thrilling, is we have

the potential to elevate what a human is, enmasse, in a way that no

other human beings have ever had before in history. I Know the world

is round, that the sun is the center of the solar system, that the

universe has been constantly developing for 15 billion years, and I

have nearly the sum total of the worlds knowledge accessible from my

laptop. In short, we have a perspective that is far greater than any

practitioner in the history of the medicine. We in the West are, for

the most part far ahead of animistic, mythic, ethnocentric, and

nationalistic forms of consciousness that every author in the history

of the medicine were in.

 

 

Jon: I like your books Lonny,

and I have learned from some of your understandings of the medicine,

but you

don't replace the Classics in my mind.

 

 

lonny: Well nothing could. I love Jimi Hendrix and he doesn't replace

hearing a tribe bang on hollow logs. But they sure don't have his

perspective either. And his perspective come from the time he lived

creating music for humans who had the ears too hear it. I'm far more

interested in the writings of Sri Aurobindu, Ken Wilber, Stev

Macintosh, Andrew Cohen, Tielhard De CHardin than I am in the bible,

the Vedas, and even the Dao De Jing. All great texts, and it's

importance to have an understanding of their world view, but written

in the infancy of the race. Sure any of them are deep enough to

dedicate a lifetime to......and one could spend a lifetime beating on

a log too. Technically, I'm sure there is a lot there. But frankly,

I'd rather spend an evening having a serious discussion with Zev,

Heiner, Ted K, or you or anyone of depth looking deeply into our

experience in real time and carrying the medicine forward. That's just

my preference.

 

 

 

 

Jon: The sheer depth of the material that is

available in Chinese is more then we can recreate in several

lifetimes, and that

was if we all wrote books. The Bei Ji Qian Jin Yao Fang for example

is 2000

pages in Chinese – that is equivalent to 6000 pages in English (of raw

translation with no annotations, footnotes, index, etc). This text is

mostly a

formulary (with some acupuncture & moxabustion).

 

 

Lonny: I'm sure it's fantastic and it should be translated! I'm just

saying that we are treating from a perspective far advanced in

relationship to the people who wrote it. We'll be able to use that

information in ways they never dreamed of.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are others, but these are the some of the big books for our

medicine – I

count 6,346 pages compare this to the Bei Ji Qian Jin Yao Fang – and

which is

just one book of the 1000 Classical texts (that just I have been able

to find)

out there.

 

Jon: Why would our profession choose to throw out the baby with the

bathwater?

 

 

Lonny: We shouldn't but lets at least throw out the bath water!

 

Jon: Why

should we all just rely on our own limited experience, when someone

else has had

the experience before us?

 

 

Lon: No one in Ancient China was World-centric, Had seen pictures from

the hubble telescope, had transcended mythic consciousness, had heard

Jimi play. I really think your failing to grab a very essential point.

I've read Lao zi in the Chinese and taking it apart character by

character, stroke by stroke. I get it intellectually and in the heart.

But we have a lot of perspective they didn't.

 

Please google the phrase " pre/trans fallacy "

 

 

 

 

Jon: But sure, let's just say that the Classics are

obsolete.

 

Lonny: Id never say this....Just that they are inherently limited!

 

)

 

 

 

Jon: then I suggest

that we all begin to write, and write copiously, about our own heart

transmission.

 

 

Lonny: I've certainly done my part.

 

 

Jon: I for one would prefer to read what the Classics have to say,

seeing as how the

vehicle that I am driving is the vehicle that they (the people who

wrote the

Classics) invented. The human body – same car – just different drivers.

 

Lonny: And you would be SO right if Consciousness wasn't the primary

issue in the practice of medicine-which it has been in the developed

world since 1860.

 

I love books. But I'll take someone with a true transmission in their

heart from the true source of the medicine who has average technical

knowledge any day over someone with infinite technical and historical

knowledge intellectually with little heart transmission. Technical

information is easy to get....the heart transmission....even in

China......was rare......

 

You response was great....I suspect we'd have a great time discussing

literature and/or direct experience.

 

 

Thanks, Lon