Guest guest Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009  Hi Jason, I've never gotten around to investigating this properly, but I seem to recall that inflammation in western medicine began as a term that described redness/rubor, heat/calor, swelling/tumor, pain/dolor. This is the classical, and still taught, doctrine on inflammation. Some notes: (at Medterms.com:) History: Since antiquity (and to every medical student), the defining clinical features of inflammation have been known in Latin as rubor (redness), calor (warmth), tumor (swelling) and dolor (pain). These hallmarks of inflammation were first described by Celsus -- Aulus (Aurelius) Cornelius, a Roman physician and medical writer, who lived from about 30 B.C. to 45 A.D.  In fact, the roots of " inflammation " take us to " flam " which means " fire " + " in " which means " to create " . " Inflame " means literally " to create fire " , and " inflammation " is an ongoing process of creating fire. I think it is often forgotten that both Western and Chinese medicine are allopathic in nature.  We can go to dictionary.reference.com to find the root words: Origin: 1525–35; < L inflammÄtiÅn- (s. of inflammÄtiÅ), equiv. to inflammÄt(us) (ptp. of inflammÄre; see inflame, -ate1 ) + -iÅn- -ion  If we look at " flam " we find a lot of interesting type ideas: (at Wordinfo.info:) flam- + (Latin: fire, burn, blaze) inflame  To arouse or to excite feelings and passions.  To excite an intense emotion, especially anger or jealousy, in someone.  To make an emotion; such as, anger or jealousy to become more intense.  To become, or to make body tissue become, red and swollen, in response to an injury or an infection.  Lots of liver heat stuff.  But now the confusion starts, and I think this has a lot to do with a lack of fidelity to origins and foundations and roots, which western medicine is known for (the assumption that the newest is the best and that roots don't really have a function or reason for being);  As western diagnostic methods became more sensitive, evidence of inflammation was discovered in injuries and syndromes that did not exhibit the classic redness, heat etc. However, the level of inflammation was distinct. In Chinese Medicine we might call it yang within yin, or yin reverting to yang, as per our rule that any pathogen turns into heat.  Then the definition changed as we finally moved from clinical reality to cellular reality: (from biology-online.org:) Inflammation (Science: pathology) a localised protective response elicited by injury or destruction of tissues, which serves to destroy, dilute or wall off (sequester) both the injurious agent and the injured tissue. It is characterised in the acute form by the classical signs of pain (dolor), heat (calor), redness (rubor), swelling (tumour) and loss of function (functio laesa).  The first section of the definition is now viewed as primary, since cellular analysis (and interpretation) reveals most accurately what is going on, supposedly. Note how non-specific the terminology is now: " a localised, protective response " . Could be anything, in fact.  So, in this very inelegant post, the point I am making is that inflammation strictly means calor, rubor, tumor, dolor. As western medicine's lab analysis has become more detailed, WM has tried to come to grips with cellular evidence of " yin reverting to yang " or " yang within yin " , and has mistakenly assumed that " yin reverting to yang " or " yang within yin " is actually a type of " full yang " based on cellular examination, changed the definition accordingly, and treats accordingly.  Clinically I see this issue constantly; the GP assumes that there is inflammation in any injury, whether heat, cold, damp, excess or deficiency or whatever, prescribes anti-inflammatories, which preditably work poorly on anything that isn't excess heat.  Then the GPs ask me to step in because the " anti-inflammatories aren't working for some mysterious reason " and I retrain the patient to understand what inflammation is at its root, how any pathological factor can turn into a major or minor form of inflammation *secondarily* to the initial factor, and how we treat in an " anti-inflammatory " way only when there is actual, recognisable *inflammation* (*not* yin reverting to yang or yang within yin). Do I need to mention that they have great results with my methods?  Speaking spanish as my first language, I can also say that saying to someone, " si, pues, esta inflamado " sounds ridiculous if you even give yourself a bit of pause when looking at tissue that is cold to the touch, pale, better with warmth and barely swollen since INFLAMADO only means ONE thing: it is on FIRE and things that are ON FIRE SWELL UP, TURN RED AND ARE PAINFUL.   Sorry for the tone everyone, it just burns me up and I get all inflamed about western medical science's abysmal use of terminology. It's like having someone repeatedly try to convince you that blue is green, and that it has been finally proven in a laboratory. It wrecks our language. Think 1984, everyone. There many interesting conversations in sociology and anthropology about the power of naming. Yes, I'm a wood element.  Thanks,  Hugo ________________________________ Hugo Ramiro http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com http://www.chinesemedicaltherapies.org ________________________________ Chinese Medicine Monday, 29 June, 2009 12:40:30 RE: anti-inflammatory Y, This is not correct. Western medicine has much wider definition when talking about internal inflammation. Inflammation can be a cold pattern in CM. -Jason Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine [Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine ] On Behalf Of yehuda frischman Sunday, June 28, 2009 12:38 AM Western medical diagnosis defines inflammation as the presence of 4 criteria: pain, redness, swelling and heat. Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Wonderful post, Hugo. I really appreciate your thought process. In discussions such as these, I think that it is very important to think outside the box, to " think differently, " as the old Apple commercials used to say. As you, I and others have pointed out, though it is tempting to view and pigeonhole any kind of chronic pain as being inflammation, it is a serious mistake to do so. I think that Cornelius's observation was as accurate then as it is now: Inflammation is a process that begins with irritation, and manifests as the four elements we have spoken of: pain, heat, redness and  swelling. Let us consider for a moment these four, particularly from a Chinese medical perspective: I was always taught that pain by definition results from blockage and stagnation. Yet the Chinese were very astute in recognizing that there are many causes and manifestation of that blockage: it could be Qi stagnation, or it could be Blood stasis. If the blood is stagnant,  it could be from cold accumulation, it could be from trauma,  it could be from viscosity related to Blood Xu and so forth. But inflammation is a process in and of itself, and is different.  To my understanding it refers to a self-preserving mechanism in the body which promotes healing, by speeding up the metabolism (much as fever is a healing process).  Sometimes it works, but sometimes it doesn't and the body gets stuck and  starts to attack itself, producing chronic symptoms, or even deteriorating to the point of morbidity.  Part of this process is also the generation of scar tissue to protect the site of an injury or inflammation, but at the root are these four signs of localized pain, heat, redness and  swelling. (I think it is informative, also, that in the process of CranioSacral Therapy, when " energy cysts " are released, there is nearly always a significant degree of heat released,  and a reduction of swelling which both the patient and the therapist are aware of. For that matter, with acupuncture, often we see the same thing: a redness and heat on the skin often precede the reduction of symptoms of pain in the case of blood stasis).   The problem is always when the acute problem is not resolved, that other dysfunctional  mechanisms wreak havoc, and degenerate into chaotic disorder.  This can be manifested, as you point out, as " yin reverting to yang " or " yang within yin " .   So it is our job as detectives untangle the mess, to follow the pathogenesis of the dysfunction or dis-ease, and  to peel off each dysfunctional layer until we can arrive at the root cause.  It is here, I think, that the confusion originates. I think that it is a mistaken notion, an oxymoron,  to refer to " cold inflammation "   But that cold can accompany as a complication or sequella to the process of  inflammation I would absolutely validate.   Where does the cold come from? It could be a metabolic issue which we would identify as Yang Xu. It could even come from cold accumulation by misguided therapeutic application of cold creating blood stasis. Maybe from inappropriate dress or dietary decisions.  But the key is working backwards and reversing the process  from my experience. That is the reason why anti-inflammatories will not always work, because the understanding of the process is faulty and resultantly the therapy is incorrect and ineffective.  Respectfully,     --- On Mon, 6/29/09, Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote: Hugo Ramiro <subincor Re: anti-inflammatory - latin roots Chinese Medicine Monday, June 29, 2009, 12:07 PM  Hi Jason, I've never gotten around to investigating this properly, but I seem to recall that inflammation in western medicine began as a term that described redness/rubor, heat/calor, swelling/tumor, pain/dolor. This is the classical, and still taught, doctrine on inflammation. Some notes: (at Medterms.com: ) History: Since antiquity (and to every medical student), the defining clinical features of inflammation have been known in Latin as rubor (redness), calor (warmth), tumor (swelling) and dolor (pain). These hallmarks of inflammation were first described by Celsus -- Aulus (Aurelius) Cornelius, a Roman physician and medical writer, who lived from about 30 B.C. to 45 A.D.  In fact, the roots of " inflammation " take us to " flam " which means " fire " + " in " which means " to create " . " Inflame " means literally " to create fire " , and " inflammation " is an ongoing process of creating fire. I think it is often forgotten that both Western and Chinese medicine are allopathic in nature.  We can go to dictionary.referenc e.com to find the root words: Origin: 1525–35; < L inflammÄtiÅn- (s. of inflammÄtiÅ), equiv. to inflammÄt(us) (ptp. of inflammÄre; see inflame, -ate1 ) + -iÅn- -ion  If we look at " flam " we find a lot of interesting type ideas: (at Wordinfo.info: ) flam- + (Latin: fire, burn, blaze) inflame  To arouse or to excite feelings and passions.  To excite an intense emotion, especially anger or jealousy, in someone.  To make an emotion; such as, anger or jealousy to become more intense.  To become, or to make body tissue become, red and swollen, in response to an injury or an infection.  Lots of liver heat stuff.  But now the confusion starts, and I think this has a lot to do with a lack of fidelity to origins and foundations and roots, which western medicine is known for (the assumption that the newest is the best and that roots don't really have a function or reason for being);  As western diagnostic methods became more sensitive, evidence of inflammation was discovered in injuries and syndromes that did not exhibit the classic redness, heat etc. However, the level of inflammation was distinct. In Chinese Medicine we might call it yang within yin, or yin reverting to yang, as per our rule that any pathogen turns into heat.  Then the definition changed as we finally moved from clinical reality to cellular reality: (from biology-online. org:) Inflammation (Science: pathology) a localised protective response elicited by injury or destruction of tissues, which serves to destroy, dilute or wall off (sequester) both the injurious agent and the injured tissue. It is characterised in the acute form by the classical signs of pain (dolor), heat (calor), redness (rubor), swelling (tumour) and loss of function (functio laesa).  The first section of the definition is now viewed as primary, since cellular analysis (and interpretation) reveals most accurately what is going on, supposedly. Note how non-specific the terminology is now: " a localised, protective response " . Could be anything, in fact.  So, in this very inelegant post, the point I am making is that inflammation strictly means calor, rubor, tumor, dolor. As western medicine's lab analysis has become more detailed, WM has tried to come to grips with cellular evidence of " yin reverting to yang " or " yang within yin " , and has mistakenly assumed that " yin reverting to yang " or " yang within yin " is actually a type of " full yang " based on cellular examination, changed the definition accordingly, and treats accordingly.  Clinically I see this issue constantly; the GP assumes that there is inflammation in any injury, whether heat, cold, damp, excess or deficiency or whatever, prescribes anti-inflammatories , which preditably work poorly on anything that isn't excess heat.  Then the GPs ask me to step in because the " anti-inflammatorie s aren't working for some mysterious reason " and I retrain the patient to understand what inflammation is at its root, how any pathological factor can turn into a major or minor form of inflammation *secondarily* to the initial factor, and how we treat in an " anti-inflammatory " way only when there is actual, recognisable *inflammation* (*not* yin reverting to yang or yang within yin). Do I need to mention that they have great results with my methods?  Speaking spanish as my first language, I can also say that saying to someone, " si, pues, esta inflamado " sounds ridiculous if you even give yourself a bit of pause when looking at tissue that is cold to the touch, pale, better with warmth and barely swollen since INFLAMADO only means ONE thing: it is on FIRE and things that are ON FIRE SWELL UP, TURN RED AND ARE PAINFUL.   Sorry for the tone everyone, it just burns me up and I get all inflamed about western medical science's abysmal use of terminology. It's like having someone repeatedly try to convince you that blue is green, and that it has been finally proven in a laboratory. It wrecks our language. Think 1984, everyone. There many interesting conversations in sociology and anthropology about the power of naming. Yes, I'm a wood element.  Thanks,  Hugo ____________ _________ _________ __ Hugo Ramiro http://middlemedici ne.wordpress. com http://www.chinesem edicaltherapies. org ____________ _________ _________ __ <@chinesemed icinedoc. com> Monday, 29 June, 2009 12:40:30 RE: anti-inflammatory Y, This is not correct. Western medicine has much wider definition when talking about internal inflammation. Inflammation can be a cold pattern in CM. -Jason Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine [Traditional _ Chinese_Medicine ] On Behalf Of yehuda frischman Sunday, June 28, 2009 12:38 AM Western medical diagnosis defines inflammation as the presence of 4 criteria: pain, redness, swelling and heat. Period. 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.