Tonics vs. Supplementing herbs

[Guest guest]

Z'ev, Bob, et al.,

 

With all due respect, Z'ev and Western herbalist's notion of tonic is not

the same as the Chinese idea of supplement. A tonic, as seen by Western

herbalists is a medicinal that when prescribed appropriately assists the body in

regaining right function. (This is not the same as an adaptogen, which is a very

specific term with a very specific definition [we'll save that for another

time].) Tone or firmness of tissue is often sited as the primary action of

tonics. Furthermore, it must be considered that Westerners tend to be a culture

of repletion, whereas Easterners tend to be a culture of vacuity. (This is a

grand generalization and I'd love to hear those who know more than I toss the

idea around a little.) However, with this generalizaion in mind and a careful

study of Western herbal medicine we see that there is little said about

supplementation as we understand it in Chinese herbology and the focus is fairly

obviously on clearing, draining, etc and regulating. With these

thearopies Western herbalist did and do quite well. They have, for the most

part, added a number of supplementing herbs to their tool chest such as Siberian

Ginseng, Chinese Ginseng, Astragalus, and most recently Macca. This is no

different than what Chinese medicine has done for as long as there has been

trade outside of China; American Ginseng, Corn Silk, and Myrrh are prime

examples.

 

Tonics, according to Western herbalism do not, necessarily, add anything

material or otherwise to the body. A supplementing medicinal is something that

adds to, supplies, and increases one of four things, qi, blood, yin, and yang.

To the best of my knowledge they can not do anything else, of course some

supplements also have other functions but from a purely theoretical standpoint

supplement do just that, supplement.

 

Thanks for playing,

Thomas

P.S. Nothing like just shootin' the breeze especially when it is something fun

and interesting. Perhaps there should be more of it and a little less cock

fighting, whata-ya-say.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Thomas,

This definition of tonic sounds a little like the astringents in that

compression might be related. When I think of digestive function, I think

of various glands compressing to release a fluid. Not the best comparison

but it made me think. Qi regulators also come to mind. Interesting topic.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

>

>

>

> Tonics vs. Supplementing herbs

>Sat, 4 Jun 2005 00:37:48 -0700 (PDT)

>

>Z'ev, Bob, et al.,

>

>With all due respect, Z'ev and Western herbalist's notion of tonic is

>not the same as the Chinese idea of supplement. A tonic, as seen by Western

>herbalists is a medicinal that when prescribed appropriately assists the

>body in regaining right function. (This is not the same as an adaptogen,

>which is a very specific term with a very specific definition [we'll save

>that for another time].) Tone or firmness of tissue is often sited as the

>primary action of tonics. Furthermore, it must be considered that

>Westerners tend to be a culture of repletion, whereas Easterners tend to be

>a culture of vacuity. (This is a grand generalization and I'd love to hear

>those who know more than I toss the idea around a little.) However, with

>this generalizaion in mind and a careful study of Western herbal medicine

>we see that there is little said about supplementation as we understand it

>in Chinese herbology and the focus is fairly obviously on clearing,

>draining, etc and regulating. With these

> thearopies Western herbalist did and do quite well. They have, for the

>most part, added a number of supplementing herbs to their tool chest such

>as Siberian Ginseng, Chinese Ginseng, Astragalus, and most recently Macca.

>This is no different than what Chinese medicine has done for as long as

>there has been trade outside of China; American Ginseng, Corn Silk, and

>Myrrh are prime examples.

>

>Tonics, according to Western herbalism do not, necessarily, add anything

>material or otherwise to the body. A supplementing medicinal is something

>that adds to, supplies, and increases one of four things, qi, blood, yin,

>and yang. To the best of my knowledge they can not do anything else, of

>course some supplements also have other functions but from a purely

>theoretical standpoint supplement do just that, supplement.

>

>Thanks for playing,

>Thomas

>P.S. Nothing like just shootin' the breeze especially when it is something

>fun and interesting. Perhaps there should be more of it and a little less

>cock fighting, whata-ya-say.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Thomas,

It is good to hear from you again. If you read my post again,

you will see that this is the point that I was trying to make in the

first place. Perhaps I didn't do such a good job at it?

 

 

On Jun 4, 2005, at 12:37 AM, wrote:

 

> With all due respect, Z'ev and Western herbalist's notion of

> tonic is not the same as the Chinese idea of supplement. A tonic,

> as seen by Western herbalists is a medicinal that when prescribed

> appropriately assists the body in regaining right function.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

,

>

wrote:

> Z'ev, Bob, et al.,

>

> With all due respect, Z'ev and Western herbalist's notion of tonic is

not the same as

the Chinese idea of supplement.

 

I never said that and never thought that? How did I get lumped in here? I

haven't even

posted in this thread except to comment on whether one should use pharmacology

to help

sort out TCM properties of western herbs.