Manaka V. Physical substrate

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

> By lacking

> any physical substrate to satisfactorily correlate with the distribution

> of information, this information model is the definition of metaphysical

> (beyond physical

 

Manaka proposes that the body's electrically active fascia is the physical

substrate for bioelectrical activity, including the channels. His " rabbit ear "

experiments show that stimulation of a single acupoint can increase tissue

bed motility distal to the stimulation. His mini-experiments using magnets,

pressure, needle stimulus and body movement to predictably move the

location of reported pressure pain do not establish that it is the fascia that

transmits the signal but that there is in fact a signal. However, because the

signal strength used is lower than that which would activate the periferal

nerves, it strongly suggest a different bioelectrical vector. PET imaging of

brain activity in response to acupoint stimulation is also strongly indicative

of a fascia-electrical signal because there is no latency as there would be

with molecular messengers carried by blood or lymph.

 

Both logically and historically an either/or comparison to Kendall makes no

sense. While it is indeed true that dissection occurred, this does not negate

the larger historical record of naked sense observation -- acupoint

relationships, dermatological phenomena, etc. -- or the rooting of qi within

Han cosmology. The qi that effused from the cosmic egg permeated all and

interconnectivity and qualitative relationship were its primary

characteristics. The channels are " imaginary " only if qi is assumed to be a

discrete entity rather the universal substrate. The fact of relationship is qi

in Han thought.

 

Bob

 

Robert L. Felt bob

Paradigm Publications www.paradigm-pubs.com

202 Bendix Drive 505 758 7758

Taos, New Mexico 87571

[Guest guest]

, " Robert L. Felt " <bob@p...> wrote:

 

> > By lacking

> > any physical substrate to satisfactorily correlate with the distribution

> > of information, this information model is the definition of metaphysical

> > (beyond physical

>

 

 

I wrote that, not Alon.

 

 

His mini-experiments using magnets,

> pressure, needle stimulus and body movement to predictably move the

> location of reported pressure pain do not establish that it is the fascia that

> transmits the signal but that there is in fact a signal.

 

 

I find these experiments unsatisfying as they are based upon subjective report

of pressure pain from patients.

 

> PET imaging of

> brain activity in response to acupoint stimulation is also strongly indicative

> of a fascia-electrical signal because there is no latency as there would be

> with molecular messengers carried by blood or lymph.

 

I believe Deke argues that it is the neuro part of the neurovascular nodes that

sends a rapid signal to the brain, thus the slow movementof blood is not a

factor in this calculus. If the signal is solely fascial-electric versus

neural-

ionic, shouldn't one be able to induce the response even if the nerve that

supplied the area was severed. As long as the fascia was intact, the signal

should still induce physiological change. This would be a pretty convincing

experiment. Has it been done?

 

 

>

> Both logically and historically an either/or comparison to Kendall makes no

> sense. While it is indeed true that dissection occurred, this does not

negate

> the larger historical record of naked sense observation -- acupoint

> relationships, dermatological phenomena, etc. -- or the rooting of qi within

> Han cosmology.

 

 

it's hard to imagine the naked sense observation you describe could account

for all the twists and turns and internal branches of the jing luo. How could

the internal branches and luo been discovered other than through either

dissection or meditation. If the former is true, than they must refer to

anatomical structures. Since we have not identified any anatomical

structures to correlate with the jingluo other than blood vessels, it is

unlikely the chinese did, either. If the latter is true, then the basis of CM

is

metaphysical. It is one thing for Unschuld to say the idea of channels and

collaterial derives from metaphors from chinese culture. It is another thing

altogether to account for the detailed description of the pathways as being

metaphorical. Unschuld rejects the mystical explanation. But if it not

anatomical and the metaphors do not nearly accont for the entire complexity,

then the only other way these pathways were elaborated must have been

mystical.

 

While one could correlate organs and symptoms with points on the surface of

the body, I just don't see how any of this naked sense data led to the very

detailed description of the vessels as they move internally. And yet if one

opened the body, one would indeed see a network of longitudinal vessels with

collateral branches and network vessels all making a continuous loop around

the body and that network is the blood vessels. Now perhaps the observation

of the vascular system led the ancient chinese medical theorists to propose

an invisible network of channels that carried the qi. But this still brings up

the question of why the nei jing repeatedly refers to the qi and blood flowing

together and does not mention qi flowing in channels of its own (according to

Deke - I plan to explore this more on my own). Perhaps we have to wait for

Unschuld's volume and commentary that covers this exact topic to learn more.

 

The qi that effused from the cosmic egg permeated all and

> interconnectivity and qualitative relationship were its primary

> characteristics. The channels are " imaginary " only if qi is assumed to be a

> discrete entity rather the universal substrate. The fact of relationship is

qi

> in Han thought.

 

This assumes the original physicians and anatomists who did the dissections

and studies presented in the nei jing were influenced by han culture and

philosophy at the time the nei jing was compiled. The nei jing is a politically

correct text that was saved when others were destroyed. The information in

it may predate the han era by many centuries. It may have been derived in part

from anatomical works from other cultures such as egyptian. the anatomical

information in the nei jing may have been the work of people who predated the

era of lao zi. They may have known nothing of qi as interconnectivity or

universal substrate, but perhaps merely as air or function, as Deke says. The

han sensibility may not have even existed in the consciousness of these men.

 

Perhaps the anatomy of the jing luo may have been based upon data obtained

from the human sacrifical rites practiced in the shang dynasty. It is very

possible that the mystical overtones in the neijing were overlaid on an earlier

body of more empirical knowledge. Unschuld is clear that the neijing was

written in a way that mirrored the social and economic structure of ancient

china. It survived due to it political correctness in its era. We have no idea

what came before the neijing; we only know a lot was lost. If it now turns

out much of the anatomical information in the neijing is actual vascular

anatomy, this creates another piece to the puzzle; a piece that may have been

lost for millennia.

 

[Guest guest]

Both logically and historically an either/or comparison to Kendall makes no

sense.

>>>I agree but these discussions are fun

Alon

 

 

[Guest guest]

PET imaging of

brain activity in response to acupoint stimulation is also strongly indicative

of a fascia-electrical signal because there is no latency as there would be

with molecular messengers carried by blood or lymph.

>>>>Bob, how is that? since PET imaging only shows metabolic activity how does

it inform us as to the activating source? We now know that nerve activity does

not only involve action potentials and that it is not " electricity in a wire "

and that some of the retrograde information that nerves communicate are

molecular in nature and do not follow the simple " sodium " gate action potential

mechanisms. Some seem to be instantaneous and graded, i.e. not all or nothing.

So I am not sure how PET imaging informs us of the source of activity from

acupoint stimulation.

Alon

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, " "

wrote:

 

> detailed description of the vessels as they move internally. And

yet if one

> opened the body, one would indeed see a network of longitudinal

vessels with

> collateral branches and network vessels all making a continuous loop

around

> the body and that network is the blood vessels. Now perhaps the

observation

> of the vascular system led the ancient chinese medical theorists to

propose

> an invisible network of channels that carried the qi. But this

still brings up

> the question of why the nei jing repeatedly refers to the qi and

blood flowing

> together and does not mention qi flowing in channels of its own

(according to

 

It has been taught by many teachers in many classes at PCOM that the

Chinese " xue " does not have a 1:1 relationship with the biomedical

" blood. " Though " blood " is " xue, " " xue " is more than just " blood. "

 

What is lymphatic fluid in Chinese medicine? That fluid flows

throughout the body and is about as pervasive as the blood vessels.

 

Brian C. Allen

[Guest guest]

As long as the fascia was intact, the signal

should still induce physiological change. This would be a pretty convincing

experiment. Has it been done?

>>>Except for one experiment all of the others i have seen were the nerve was

severed or anesthetized, the acup effects were negated

Alon