Guest guest Posted March 9, 2004 Report Share Posted March 9, 2004 Alon, When is your book coming out and what is the title? > >Message: 5 > Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:52:35 -0800 > " alon marcus " <alonmarcus >Re: Digest Number 1912 > >Greg i think you will like my new upcoming book hearing what you like >about Deke's work >Alon Lake Street Greg A. Livingston, L.Ac. Wang Huiyu, BTCM 121-1/2 11th Avenue San Francisco CA 94118 (415)752-3557 shanren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2004 Report Share Posted March 9, 2004 , Greg Livingston <shanren@c...> wrote: > Brian, > > You really need to look at the book as it's far too complicated to try to > explain here, if I could even do it. > Thanks, Greg and others from bring this topic to light for me. I will be adding the book to my list of books I still need to get. Brian C. Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2004 Report Share Posted March 9, 2004 When is your book coming out and what is the title? >>>Hopefully later this year. The title would probably be Foundations for Integrated Musculoskeletal Medicine alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 - > > I am open to the possibility that there is more to it than one can > currently explain with modern physiology. I am not interested in > reductionism, but I do like to have at least some idea of what's going on > physiologically, This is also where I am... But a few things: 1) I am disputing nor care if ancient china considered the channels blood vessels... I am also not saying there is not a true physiological response somewhere in the body. The question is when and where it occurs. 2) My stance or interest in the medicine is nothing spiritual or woo-woo, although since I believe that 'modern science' cannot account for all phenomenon then it may be metaphysical (beyond our physical understanding). But NOT metaphysical is some spiritual way. I just have an current interest in the SUBTLE. I just remind readers that our universe is supposedly made up of (some say) only about 10% of what we call `matter' or physical matter the way we perceive things. Everything else is still a mystery and labeled dark matter. 3) This subtle, based on qi or what Manaka names the x-signal, is what I am interested in. It is clear there is a very physiological response with deeper needling. The more puzzling piece is this more subtle side. 4) Gross changes in the body can be mapped with needling, but these changes do not account for minute differences in function between points (Lung 8 vs. 9) nor minute differences in location. My question was how does modern science explain this. It is very clear to me that 4 participants all feeling pulses (etc) can all feel millimeter differences in point location; Minute differences in technique (instantly). I have no answers, the stating my observations. 5) Most peculiar is this: Classically it is stated that the practitioner feels the qi (not the patient) and I have realized that one can feel this `qi' without inserting the needle and manipulate it. That is using a needle; I do not label this as qi-gong. This is what is beyond just physical. One can sense (and be verified) when one had obtained qi (without insertion) and create a physical change in the patient. This is subtle and very much part of at least Japanese acupuncture. If china (classically) had any concept of this is hard to say. But the fact remains, it is going on now and it must be reconciled with. Manaka is trying to make some sense, and that can only help our profession (as well as Kendall), I just think there is some `energetic' field that science has yet uncovered? Why is that so hard to believe, especially looking back at science in the last 100 years. Look at all the fields and information that was unknowable then? There are many experiments that help put a finger on this type of thinking. I.e. the cut leaf study, where the thermograph(or whatever it is) shows a complete whole leaf, but the leaf is actually cut in half – there is supposedly an energetic field still intact (it's energetic substrate matrix) – Hasn't Rupert Sheldrake done much work on verifying the interconnectedness of things, beyond the basic knowable physical realm. Or is he dismissed just because he explores the non-physical. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 , " " < @h...> wrote: I just think there is > some `energetic' field that science has yet uncovered? Why is that so > hard to believe, especially looking back at science in the last 100 > years. Look at all the fields and information that was unknowable > then? we'll see, but I don't think the examples you cite tell anything about the = mechanism of acupuncture of subtle effects, just that organisms generate a = field. but this field may solely be for orientation of top and bottom, lef= t and right. there is no evidence that it has any other effects. There are many experiments that help put a finger on this type > of thinking. I.e. the cut leaf study, where the thermograph(or > whatever it is) shows a complete whole leaf, but the leaf is actually > cut in half – there is supposedly an energetic field still intact > (it's energetic substrate matrix) – sheldrake is dismissed because his workis pure speculation and he provides = no experimental evidence to verify his claims. check out Deke's citations on = the other hand. while we may not have to reconcile contradictory classical ide= as, we do have to reconcile why cutting a nerve eliminates the effects of acupuncture if the nerve is not essential to the process. If there is trul= y a more subtle force or one that travels through pathways other than neurovascular, why are these effects still dependent on nerves. Hasn't Rupert Sheldrake done much > work on verifying the interconnectedness of things, beyond the basic > knowable physical realm. Or is he dismissed just because he explores > the non-physical. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 , " " wrote: > , " " < > @h...> wrote: > > I just think there is > > some `energetic' field that science has yet uncovered? Why is that so > > hard to believe, especially looking back at science in the last 100 > > years. Look at all the fields and information that was unknowable > > then? > > we'll see, but I don't think the examples you cite tell anything about the = > > mechanism of acupuncture of subtle effects, just that organisms generate a = > > field. but this field may solely be for orientation of top and bottom, lef= > t and > right. there is no evidence that it has any other effects. > > There are many experiments that help put a finger on this type > > of thinking. I.e. the cut leaf study, where the thermograph(or > > whatever it is) shows a complete whole leaf, but the leaf is actually > > cut in half – there is supposedly an energetic field still intact > > (it's energetic substrate matrix) – > > sheldrake is dismissed because his workis pure speculation and he provides = > no > experimental evidence to verify his claims. What about his recent book, " Seven experiments to change the world. " I don't think his ideas would have made into the prestigous " Nature " journal if all his ideas were simply dismissed. Sheldrake is definitely on too something and it may have definite relevance to our discussion. In fact, his conception of morpho-genetic fields is much less controversial then say x-fields and meridian theory in acupuncture. matt check out Deke's citations on = > the > other hand. while we may not have to reconcile contradictory classical ide= > as, > we do have to reconcile why cutting a nerve eliminates the effects of > acupuncture if the nerve is not essential to the process. If there is trul= > y a > more subtle force or one that travels through pathways other than > neurovascular, why are these effects still dependent on nerves. > > Hasn't Rupert Sheldrake done much > > work on verifying the interconnectedness of things, beyond the basic > > knowable physical realm. Or is he dismissed just because he explores > > the non-physical. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 I just think there is some `energetic' field that science has yet uncovered? >>>I am sure that is correct. The question always comes back what can we do clinically and how predictable is it Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 , " alon marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote: > I just think there is > some `energetic' field that science has yet uncovered? > >>>I am sure that is correct. The question always comes back what can we do clinically and how predictable is it > Alon > Exactly… Call it whatever you want, but what works clinically IM trumps all, and that must be explained – If modern science cannot put there finger on it, people call it metaphysical – which is a loaded word – But this is reality. I would like people to read about the kazato method of study/ verification and am interested what people think. (Sorry I do not have a link or anything, maybe someone can supply this) – Basically it is a system of study that can produce reproducible and verifiable positive changes. Since this x-signal or morphic resonace can't at the moment be tested completely, they use the old stand-by – human consensus. One can choose to dismiss this straight from the hip because it does not (and connot) conform to a strict scientific method (or experiment) unaltered by human contact. That is fine, your choice, and IMO, limitation. But otherwise I think human consensus is how we got here, through experimentation. Kazato groups are set up to test new theories (acu techniques, point locations, diagnostic criteria etc). and I feel it is actually the BEST way as of date. Comments… - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 Kazato groups >>>Jason can you elaborate alon 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.