PDA

View Full Version : Skeptics on TCM



Former castleva
02-01-2003, 08:30 AM
I already created a similar thread at main forums thinking it would be a good place,I was wrong.
Ill try it out here.
I would like to spark some constructive discussion.

http://www.seanet.com/~vettf/Acuref2.htm

http://www.pulsemed.org/challengingbody.htm#2

http://www.pulsemed.org/challengingbody.htm

http://www.csicop.org/si/9609/china.html

BeiTangLang
02-17-2003, 02:14 PM
What are you after? This is about like religion or politics; either you believe it will help you or not. :D

I am guesing that for a good dicussion on this, you would have to get into a physicians forum......that is, for a true medical debate.
I doubt you will get one here.

Thanks for the thoughts though.
Best wishes,
~BTL

Former castleva
02-18-2003, 03:46 AM
I see where you are getting at.
Thanks for your long awaited reply though.

BeiTangLang
02-18-2003, 09:22 AM
You are very welcome. Sorry for the delay, but moding the NPM forum is my main gig here. I don't make it here much anymore.
Best Wishes,
~BTL

Former castleva
02-18-2003, 09:33 AM
I understand.
Best of wishes.

cha kuen
02-19-2003, 02:58 PM
Okay I'm gonna reply to this post. That first article is clearly written from a western medicine point of view.

I personally have had neck, shoulder and lower back problems. I'll tell you about my shoulder problem first. WHen doing a shaolin set, I messed up my left shoulder and it would slip in and out of the socket. It's not as bad as it seems because it didn't hurt or anything.

I go check out a chiropractor and he helps with it but my shoulder still slipped in and out. He gave me a few excercises to do. Fine.
I went to check out a western MD who works with the S.F. 49ers football tea. He xrays it and asks me if it hurts. I reply NO. He says, "Well in my practice, I've never seen anything like this. If it doesnt' hurt, then I wouldn't worry about it. If it hurts, then come back to me."

That was a waste of a few hundred dollars. I go check out this other chiropractor and he says that I have to do excercises or I will have to saw off my arm later on becaue it will go dead.

haha

So then I'm in hong kong and i run into a bonesetter. A bonesetter looks like he does chiropractic, but it's way different and uses herbs as well. He puts some hot, dark herb mixture on my shoulder and tapes it up for one day. I go home thinking, "What the hell is a patch of herbs gonna do to my shoulder ? How is that supposed to fix it?"

I went back a 2nd time to give him the benefit of the doubt. He took of the herbs and cleaned the area of my shoulder. He took his right hand and put it under my arm pit and did an adjustment or somesort. I didnt hurt and it looked like chirpractic to me. My shoulder stayed in the socket and it was amazing! He told me, "Don't move it around too much."

He then put more herb patches on it for a few days to make it heal faster.


Here's another story...lower back problems. The western concept of bringing relief to lower back is to strengthen the muscles around it by doing excericses and situps. I tried that and it didnt seem like i was getting anywhere. I go to a bonesetter, different one, and he puts the same herb patch on my back. This is after he massages a few pressure points and works on the soft tissue.

And whatevert is in that herb patch is amazing because it works instaly and makes the back straighter. i found great relief, about 80%.

ANywys, talking to my old kung fu teacher he said that chinese medicine is very good because it's been around for 3,000 years. Western medicine has been here for like 300. The human body has its own healing power and chinese medicine stimulates it so thta the body can heal it self. Stimulating with herbs, patches, needles, tunia, massage. He said that it's good to see a chinese doctor for sports injuires such as back, neck, stifness , fractures etc.

He also said that it's good to see a western doctor when you get run over by a car and your lung falls out and you need some transplant. Basically, go see an MD for serious operations.

But many of the times that MD's recommend surgery is when they cant' figure out what the hell is wrong, so they want to cut you open. And most of those surgeries for liek knee, neck, back, carpal tunnel don't even work.

In the end, I believe chinese medicine is awesome and can do very good things. Western medicine has its place but is a few thousand years behind.

cha kuen
02-19-2003, 03:00 PM
Also in western medicine, if you have a cough, cold, headache they will prescribe over the counter pills to you. This "symmetcial treatment" brings relief to the symptom, not the cause.

It will bring relief to your runny nose but not the cause, weak organs or whatever it is. After a few hours, guess what? Y our runny nose or cough comes back.

The chines way of healing it does not occur right away like western pills do. It will probably take a week or so but after that, it's totally out of your system while taking pills is only temporary.

cha kuen
02-19-2003, 03:04 PM
It is pointless to argue to MD's about chinese medicine because the approach is entirely different. MD's will have no clue if you talk about chi and meridians. They are never taught any of these concepts in school.

The only way to prove or argue with MD's is to prove it. Take a patient wtih a loewr back problem. Let the MD guy to his thing , xray and recommend situps and stretches.

After that, let the chinese doctor go at it for like 3 times and then y ou'll have your answer. Accunpunture is starting to be accepted on some insurance plans and since its arrival in the 70's , has done quite well.

Former castleva
02-19-2003, 05:17 PM
I agree that there is use for Chinese medicine.
I do not diss such methods and as supplementary therapies they do have their place.

"It is pointless to argue to MD's about chinese medicine because the approach is entirely different. MD's will have no clue if you talk about chi and meridians. They are never taught any of these concepts in school."

It is indeed pointless to argue.What your educated MD is interested in,like about anyone I would think,is interested in a proper,existent mechanism outside of ancient,cultural beliefs or anything like that.Laying it on the line.
There is nothing wrong with that,thus those who can may step up.
In very ancient of times,things were explained in a manner that the situation and resources allowed (Yeah,there was talk about spirits and all regardless of exact region) Knowledge about the complexity of physiology or even gross human anatomy was questionable.And there is still a lot to search for.

"After that, let the chinese doctor go at it for like 3 times and then y ou'll have your answer. Accunpunture is starting to be accepted on some insurance plans and since its arrival in the 70's , has done quite well."
Yeah.
It is also fortunate that even though China has been struggling with major problems with basic services like this,modern treatment is/has found its way and there are a lot of hospitals around these days (of course the treatment may not be very good everywhere) Modern treatment saved numerous lives in the past when it became somewhat available.

"Also in western medicine, if you have a cough, cold, headache they will prescribe over the counter pills to you. This "symmetcial treatment" brings relief to the symptom, not the cause."
This is more complex.
Things that practitioners of alternative medicine may want to tell you are about "natural" treatment etc. keywords that sound very soothing for ears.
The mechanism can be that of picking up anecdotal information from here and there to the direction of-"there was this guy X who suddenly lost his illness etc...".Such anecdotes whether true or not,sound good and may be real (it is all a different case whether they have much to do with some medicine,sometimes they may die away by themselves) Even complete placebo can work to a degree because of ones personal expectations and psychological build-up (I have seen discussion on this and even had some with a decent doc and it confirms the information that "natural" drugs or herbs can cause serious effects and even death,as in certain recorded cases.It could be considered unethical to give such out without knowing their chemical make-up.)
WM is rather interested in the cause,following the recipe of any respectable science.Researches and study are made constantly by people who care.
It is of little use to try to give orders from a position of weakness.Its first about backing up ones own behind and then telling those who work hard to keep up and seemingly rule what to do.
No wonder that they are in charge.


"It will bring relief to your runny nose but not the cause, weak organs or whatever it is. After a few hours, guess what? Y our runny nose or cough comes back."
No doctor can do the work for you.Doctors can cure your disease and tell you how to avoid regaining one.
Massive health promoting campaigns...etc.

Lower back issues can be of various causes (Therefore,it is not recommended to tell what conventional treatment would include without that long,hard training)
Seeing a specialist or otherwise,a reliable person will help with the shoulder.It may need careful treatment if in some cases,as if it becomes a chronic condition.
The MD you saw may not have been the best around,I wonder though that he had at least received timely training.

"But many of the times that MD's recommend surgery is when they cant' figure out what the hell is wrong, so they want to cut you open. And most of those surgeries for liek knee, neck, back, carpal tunnel don't even work."
Quite a brave statement.
I wonder what we would do without surgery.

"ANywys, talking to my old kung fu teacher he said that chinese medicine is very good because it's been around for 3,000 years. Western medicine has been here for like 300."
Longer than 300.
Western medicine also grows constantly,it is the dominant form of it for strong reasons and keeps growing to suit the growing needs.I do have a lot of respect for those involved.
Old does not translate into up-to-date.

"In the end, I believe chinese medicine is awesome and can do very good things. Western medicine has its place but is a few thousand years behind."

Not to be offensive or anything but that is simply sick.
Im serious.

sapphire tygre
02-19-2003, 05:30 PM
Critisizing herbal remedies and folk knowledge. It's ridiculous. Europe also understands the value of natural remedies. American doctors are not trained in such knowledge, and that ignorance leads to all kinds of problems. Dig deep into the herbal world. It's a goldmine.

Former castleva
02-19-2003, 05:40 PM
There are drugs in modern medicine that are of natural origin.
Synthetic can be tolerated,or not tolerated...
Same goes for natural.

This is not that much the case of a specific area.
Can they work? Possibly.But to reserve rights for bizarre claims that may mislead,I do not tolerate.

sapphire tygre
02-19-2003, 06:05 PM
Licensed doctors make outragious claims every day. There are quacks in all professions, the media just likes to focus on certain ones. Considering that in usa the established medical community is believed to the point of insanity, who's more dangerous?

Former castleva
02-20-2003, 05:55 AM
Yeah.Well I would have to agree with that in a way.
Its a boiling point of great succes and leading resources,then with the downsides displayed by certain professionals.

guohuen
02-20-2003, 10:18 AM
I have not consulted a western type doctor (AMA) in over 13 years. I consider it to be detrimental to my health, sanity and wealth.

cha kuen
02-20-2003, 11:13 AM
I didn't mean to say that surgery is useless. I'm just saying you only need surgery for the extreme measures such as putting in a kidney and things like that.

Many of the small surgeries they do for the neck, carpal tunnel, knee and things don't work.


"In the end, I believe chinese medicine is awesome and can do very good things. Western medicine has its place but is a few thousand years behind."

Not to be offensive or anything but that is simply sick.
Im serious.

What do you mean it's "sick?"

Former castleva
02-20-2003, 01:06 PM
At first,I hope I did not offend you since that was not the case.If I did,I apologize just in case.I wont be commenting on this issue that much anymore for reasons above but what I meant by that comment is that if I got that right,you are basically putting minority medicine over conventional treatment and saying it is " a few thousands years behind" which is some of the most horrid stuff Ive heard.
Without it,we would be blowing air into our wounds (Which is,besides those who choose to,the case in underdeveloped regions of earth)
Im open for decent alternative care but we have to be realistic with this.
On personal level,I might end up studying tcm someday but I know where Im going to go if Ill ever be to pursue a career in neurology and so on...

Thanks for replies btw.

HuangKaiVun
03-20-2003, 12:53 PM
Sorry Former castleva, but the 21st century Western physician in America often does NOT share your view.

These professionals have a deep respect for what nonWestern medical practitioners can do. They ought to - it's in their Western medical school training.

Accupuncture DOES work. In China, they've refined it to the point where they can use accupuncture in place of chemically induced anesthesia. I know a few people who've undergone that treatment and done really well with it after - people who were skeptical at first but changed their tune after talking to their doctors DURING their surgery.

The doctors who work with my students are impressed at how much Eastern medicine can help them. For example, I've been prescribing the use of soybeans for a particular patient of mine. Lo and behold, he had just gone to a conference studying the effects of soybeans on certain disorders. He found out that which the Chinese knew for centuries: that soybeans have a calming effect on the human physiology.

Also, another student was taken completely off his hypertensive medication by his doctor after training with me. The weight loss he experienced by training kung fu helped reduce his weight such that his renal system could function properly. I managed to do in the span of a month what thousands of dollars of renal medications could not.

Like it or not, many (not all) of these seemingly "bizarre" treatments stand up in the most rigid scientific inquiry, even those of double blinding and clinical trials. No amount of skepticism about those methods can change the reality of their efficacy.

In many ways, modern medicine IS a few thousand years behind various forms of alternative therapy - and vice versa. The two methods complement each other.

cha kuen
03-20-2003, 05:38 PM
Hungviakuan,

Thanks for the post. I felt like I was the only one backing up TCM here. And on a site note TCM is not just accupunture, it's also bonesetting, tuina and chi kung.

Also I remember talking to an accunpunture lady and she said that the hardest thing in school is just throwing away anything that you knew previously about heailng and injuries so that you get how chinese medicine works.

Empty your cup. My point is that western medicine can look at and see the effects of chinese medicine all they want, but they will never get how it works becuase they have been through so much training in western medicine. Unless they are ready to throw away everything that they have learned and re-learn everything from the TCM approach, they will never get how TCM works.

fragbot
03-21-2003, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by cha kuen
It is pointless to argue to MD's about chinese medicine because the approach is entirely different. MD's will have no clue if you talk about chi and meridians. They are never taught any of these concepts in school.

The only way to prove or argue with MD's is to prove it. Take a patient wtih a loewr back problem. Let the MD guy to his thing , xray and recommend situps and stretches.

After that, let the chinese doctor go at it for like 3 times and then y ou'll have your answer. Accunpunture is starting to be accepted on some insurance plans and since its arrival in the 70's , has done quite well.

In my world, you'd simply take an adequately-sized set of patients with reasonably identical symptoms. You'd put them through their treatment without notifying them or the health care worker that they're being monitored and then compare the results.

Oh well, feel free to stone the heretic now.

fragbot
03-21-2003, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
Accupuncture DOES work. In China, they've refined it to the point where they can use accupuncture in place of chemically induced anesthesia.


Ok, I'll bite. Out of 100, say, appendectomies in China. How many are performed with acupuncture and how many with a general anesthetic (FWIW, they may even use spinal blocks for something as routine as an appendectomy).



Also, another student was taken completely off his hypertensive medication by his doctor after training with me. The weight loss he experienced by training kung fu helped reduce his weight such that his renal system could function properly. I managed to do in the span of a month what thousands of dollars of renal medications could not.


This is disingenuous since I'd bet there's not a single GP in the US who wouldn't push someone who's overweight and diagnosed with hypertension to exercise.

And in other news, my dentist says I should brush my teeth twice daily.



Like it or not, many (not all) of these seemingly "bizarre" treatments stand up in the most rigid scientific inquiry, even those of double blinding and clinical trials. No amount of skepticism about those methods can change the reality of their efficacy.


When you say many, I'd be curious what you mean by that. In absolute or percentage terms?

I've done literature searches on these topics before and things like, say, qigong don't have therapeutic value beyond that of regular exercise.

I'm one of those people who's a true believer wannabe. I'd like to see alternative medicine therapies be successful. However, an honest look at the research reveals a scantily-clad emperor.

Contrast this with a procedure I had done 9 months ago. Since it had been recently FDA-approved, I was able to read the *entire discussion* at the FDA about the treatment's efficacy. Likewise, I was able to read numerous papers written by physicians performing the procedure. These papers contained information on mortality, morbidity, and success rates. Furthermore, I was able to read studies comparing this treatment with the existing treatment--life-long anti-coagulation--to make an informed decision.

Now, the cynical will say, "but no pharmaceutical company will fund the study." And I'll call horses***. Since I take 325mg of aspirin daily, I know for a fact that there have been and continue to be numerous studies on the efficacy of the lowly aspirin. Aspirin is essentially a refined herb.

Overall, there are far too many mountebanks in alternative medicine. Whether they're chiroquacks or people selling you emu oil, they're too many that are fraudy, fraud, frauds.

Vapour
03-21-2003, 08:07 PM
In Japan, Chinese herbal medicine are clinically tested and approved by the government and adiministered in hospital and clinic nationwide. There are even used for treatment for AIDS patient if some of them develop sever reaction to conventional ****tail treatment.

As of acupuncture, there is a guy who patented a way to paralyse fish. As you know we consume great amount of fish so to transport fish alive while not taking up so much space was a great way to save the cost so he made lot of money. His company specialise in patenting acupuncture point for different fish.

As far as I know, in the West, one must identify exact chemcial compound which is admininstered to the patient. (correct me if I'm wrong on this.) Often TCM use combination of natural ingredients so it is not so easy to go through the process of clinical testing process. However, if you search research from Japan/Korea/China, clinical testing results for Chinese herbal medicine are published in medical journals. Obviously these journals do not endorse qi/ki theory.

cha kuen
03-22-2003, 06:11 PM
If you say there are many quacks in chinese medicine, there are just as many in western medicine and I'll even go as far to say that some of the non-quacks in MD are just as uneffective as the quacks.

Accpunture is accepted on some insurance programs and there are boards that provide a license to practice it. That alone should tell people that it's good stuff.

Looking at data and tests won't help you see what chinese medicine is or does. Again, that's your idea of healing which will set you back if you went to a TCM school to learn.

fragbot
03-24-2003, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by cha kuen
If you say there are many quacks in chinese medicine, there are just as many in western medicine and I'll even go as far to say that some of the non-quacks in MD are just as uneffective as the quacks.


I'll have to take your word for it. Or not.

Remember we're trying to reasonably adult here.



Accpunture is accepted on some insurance programs and there are boards that provide a license to practice it. That alone should tell people that it's good stuff.


In my experience, it's specifically been shown effective for treatment of chronic pain. Interesting in its own right, but hardly earth-shattering stuff.



Looking at data and tests won't help you see what chinese medicine is or does. Again, that's your idea of healing which will set you back if you went to a TCM school to learn.

In honor of your wisdom, I just created a signature featuring your quote. No worries mate, the quote'll be appropriately attributed.

Former castleva
03-26-2003, 04:43 AM
Thanks for posting,recently returned to the board.

HuangKaiVun
04-01-2003, 11:54 AM
Like it or not, fragbot, the anecdotes I've mentioned about hypertension and accupuncture are REAL.

Besides, not all Western medical science works for everything. They're learning all the time themselves.

I need not answer your appendectomy question because there's enough stuff going on both ways in China for that to be seen. Don't believe me? GO THERE. SEE the people who've done well after having accupuncture as their anesthesia.

There are a ton of people who've gotten better because of what Eastern medicine has done.

No amount of disbelief on your part will change that - and many a Western medical physician would agree.

fragbot
04-01-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
Like it or not, fragbot, the anecdotes I've mentioned about hypertension and accupuncture are REAL.[/B]


What is it about TCM discussions that engender postings wholly lacking in critical thought?

Anyhow, I had hoped I wouldn't need to be so explicit. I don't doubt your student was able to control his blood pressure since that's a well-documented side-effect of exercise.

It's not the healing effect of Chinese medicine. It's simply the healing effect of exercise. Or is walking to the grocery now TCM as well?

The classic example is the oft-referenced study about TJQ in the nursing home leading to a reduction in the number of falls. While this is nice in its own right, it says nothing about the health benefits of TJQ. Unless you'd posit that TJQ provides a greater benefit than *any type* of core training that trains the pro-prioceptive reflex.



Besides, not all Western medical science works for everything. They're learning all the time themselves.


Tomorrow morning the sun will rise.

What do my previous statement and yours have in common?



I need not answer your appendectomy question because there's enough stuff going on both ways in China for that to be seen. Don't believe me? GO THERE. SEE the people who've done well after having accupuncture as their anesthesia.


Last time I looked at this topic, accupuncture was *not* commonly used for routine surgery even in China. While this may be due somewhat to a bias towards modern medicine, it also has to do with the fact that accupuncture works inconsistently across a population.



There are a ton of people who've gotten better because of what Eastern medicine has done.


Tomorrow evening the sun will set.

Again, what do our statements have in common?



No amount of disbelief on your part will change that - and many a Western medical physician would agree. [/B]

Your use of the word belief is particularly appropriate in a discussion of TCM.

Overall, like most people with whom I've had this discussion, you respond with a flinging knee without understanding what I find lacking in alternative medicine.

It's not that I think it works or not. I have no idea if it does or not, but its efficacy is **** near impossible to determine.

Furthermore, on the topic of alternative medicine in general, I find the following things problematic about it:

1) well-done research on its efficacy and side effects ("but herbs are safe because they're natural" --> bulls***) is extremely difficult to find.
2) its practitioners often seem offended by the whole idea of proving the efficacy of their methods. This is particularly strange since if I were an alternative health practitioner I'd be very excited to have research done on my methods. Instead, they'll fall back on the "we've been doing this for years" argument. Well, with an attitude like that, it's no wonder they're still providing 18th century medical care.
3) discussing the topic with its adherents is like visiting a old time southern revival. "Praise Jesus Echinacea," "Hallelujah Qigong," and "Arnica Amen" are all here with us today.

Vapour
04-01-2003, 02:48 PM
Hmmm, didn't I comment somewhere in this thread that in the East especially in Japan and Korea and small extent China, the governments fund clinical testing of TCM especially its herbal medicine. And these results are published in proper medical journal. You can get prescrption of herbal medicine from your G.P.

Former castleva
04-01-2003, 03:25 PM
Thanks for posting.

"Hmmm, didn't I comment somewhere in this thread that in the East especially in Japan and Korea and small extent China, the governments fund clinical testing of TCM especially its herbal medicine. And these results are published in proper medical journal. You can get prescrption of herbal medicine from your G.P."
Yes.I have the idea that herbal drugs are often handed out pretty much over-the-counter too.

"Last time I looked at this topic, accupuncture was *not* commonly used for routine surgery even in China. While this may be due somewhat to a bias towards modern medicine, it also has to do with the fact that accupuncture works inconsistently across a population."
Yeah.
One shocking and maybe well-known example was showing how acupuncture works as anesthesia for neurosurgery.
However,this particular case proved to be faking and lets say the hands of anesthesiology were floating around.

HuangKaiVun
04-08-2003, 11:12 AM
fragbot and former castleva, you uneducated laymen should go to Western medical school and see how much Eastern therapies are accepted.

You guys would be LAUGHED OUT of Western medical schools.

This discussion is nothing but a flame war against Chinese medicine.

Former castleva
04-08-2003, 12:34 PM
"This discussion is nothing but a flame war against Chinese medicine."
:confused:

"You guys would be LAUGHED OUT of Western medical schools."

:rolleyes:


Just take it easy,calm down.

cha kuen
04-13-2003, 09:26 AM
Former,

If you visited a TCM doctor and tried this experiment:

You stand across the room and hold out your hand. The TCM doctor points his finger at your hand. (You are 20 feet away from him) When he shoots energy into your hand, you will feel a heat, tingly sensation in your hand that is noticable and not psychological.

If that happened, what would you think about TCM and all that talk about Chi energy?

**NOTE** I'm being serious here guys. Not some wack post about chi this and chi that. I have met 2 people that can do what I just mentioned above.

Former castleva
04-13-2003, 10:20 AM
"Former,

If you visited a TCM doctor and tried this experiment:

You stand across the room and hold out your hand. The TCM doctor points his finger at your hand. (You are 20 feet away from him) When he shoots energy into your hand, you will feel a heat, tingly sensation in your hand that is noticable and not psychological.

If that happened, what would you think about TCM and all that talk about Chi energy?

**NOTE** I'm being serious here guys. Not some wack post about chi this and chi that. I have met 2 people that can do what I just mentioned above."

Im a skeptic so I prefer to analyze carefully,but to answer your question.-
One thing to take into account (since you mentioned psychology) is that of expectation,if my hand would start to burn (so to speak) without me not expecting it,then one could say it has some merit.
But if Im aware of what is supposed to happen,my very own psyche may assist me very well.
Of course now,this would require me to actually have me to feel it.
As when it comes to chi energy,it would still remain questionable whether we actually need chi to explain this,people have the tendency to explain things by paranormal forces in such cases when it is indeed hard to explain in common sense.
Id like to see a test being done in controlled enviroment though.

fragbot
04-13-2003, 07:41 PM
Im a skeptic so I prefer to analyze carefully,but to answer your question.-
One thing to take into account (since you mentioned psychology) is that of expectation,if my hand would start to burn (so to speak) without me not expecting it,then one could say it has some merit.
But if Im aware of what is supposed to happen,my very own psyche may assist me very well.
Of course now,this would require me to actually have me to feel it.
As when it comes to chi energy,it would still remain questionable whether we actually need chi to explain this,people have the tendency to explain things by paranormal forces in such cases when it is indeed hard to explain in common sense.
Id like to see a test being done in controlled enviroment though.

A test in a controlled environment? *chuckle* It'd be like testing the existence of God.

I'm reminded of an old CMA story. Some guy was saying he could paralyze* someone without touching them and, sure enough, he could do it to his students. Unfortunately, he was nonplussed by the request that he "do it to that dog over there."

It's no different from the faith healer on TV. "Praise the lord, I can walk."

*paralyze or heal with chi. Two sides of the same coin.

cha kuen
04-13-2003, 09:24 PM
Hey Fragbot,

Can you take that stuff off of your signature? Or do you want me to explain what I meant with those words?

"Looking at data and clinical tests won't help you understand TCM"

Becuase Former castle wants to see this proof and that proof , but the only finding that that will lead to is that "TCM is effective" which still won't give him any knowledge about TCM.

His understanding of healing, via western medicine, won't help him in TCM either because everything that he knows right now, he will have to let go of (emtpy the cup) if he watned to learn TCM./.

Former castleva
04-14-2003, 03:43 AM
OK.

"A test in a controlled environment? *chuckle* It'd be like testing the existence of God."
Non-falsifiable.
:cool:

cha kuen
04-14-2003, 02:04 PM
Former,

SInce you are so closed minded about TCM, I suggest that you not "meditate" about tcm anymore becuase you'll get absolutely no where with it. You gave up before you tried. You're like a guy going into a race who keeps thinking " dman, am i going to win?"

Like Huangvaikuan, I'm out.

BTW- what type of stuff are you reading anyways? magazine for skeptics? That's like reading "The negative thinker's outlook on life"

Former castleva
04-14-2003, 02:16 PM
"SInce you are so closed minded about TCM, I suggest that you not "meditate" about tcm anymore becuase you'll get absolutely no where with it. You gave up before you tried. You're like a guy going into a race who keeps thinking " dman, am i going to win?" "
OK.

"Like Huangvaikuan, I'm out. "
Too bad.Because I started to like you.

"BTW- what type of stuff are you reading anyways? magazine for skeptics? That's like reading "The negative thinker's outlook on life""
I read that kind of stuff too.
No,it is not negative thinking.

cha kuen
04-27-2003, 03:19 PM
Castle,

You were starting to like me? So if you like me then what do I get?? Some organic food?

Former castleva
04-27-2003, 04:22 PM
"Castle,

You were starting to like me? So if you like me then what do I get?? Some organic food?"

Im afraid I do not quite understand your expression (funny it is though)
While I may not be able to offer organic food,we might still be able to participate in productive discussions in future.

Kevin Wallbridge
05-03-2003, 12:00 AM
I don't visit these boards much anymore but I have managed to wade through tis thread and I may have something to add.

First off, I'm a medical anthropologist with a specialization in communication between Chinese medical practitioners and Bio-medical practitioners. I teach at a school of Chinese medicine (med. history, ethics, Qigong). I'm a bit miffed by the attitude of superiority being expressed by Bio-medical partisans here.

The idea that Bio-medicine is older than 300 years is a bit of a stretch. William Harvey in the 1600's? It took 200 years for his work on the heart to have a wide enough effect to stop the practice of bloodletting as it was done in Humoral medicine. Pharmacy? Chemistry didn't even have a nomenclature until 1769 (Lavoisier) let alone a medical focus. Jenner in the 1780's was beginning to work on something that a modern physician would find familiar. Basically the Bio-medicine that we recognize today didn't begin until after the changes in aesepsis (hygiene) and anaesthesia after the Crimean war in 1850's. So saying its older than 150 years what I call extreme arrogance and revisionist power mongering.

Another basic aspect of arguments against Chinese medicine is the religious adherance to experimental verification. The idea that all aspects of knowledge can be revealed by isolation is not a fact, its a belief. Do we really know enough to isolate for blind studies involving humans? Does measuring parts-per-million tell us what a healing experience is? There are a lot of presumptions that go along with the philosophy of logical positivism, superior to simple superstition to be sure, but is that all there is to TCM?

Lets keep in mind that there are medical dossiers in China stretching back to Chunyu yi (215-167 BCE). TCM is based on observation not isolation. If it were a mere 150 years old then this would make it very suspect. However, it is 2500 years of recorded observation, and that gives it some weight.

One thing that I love about these arguments is the dismissal of the effect of the mind. The first problem with this is the religion that supposes the mind and the body are seperate things. This is total FAITH and has no basis in anything other than convenience. Keep in mind that when de Cartes proposed "cogito ergo sum" he was saying "I can doubt all but that I doubt." The same solopsistic box that thousands of first year philosophy students crawl into. He used God to get out ("God is not an evil genius trying to deceive me.") do I have to believe in God to believe in Bio-medicine? To dismiss psychosomatic effects of treatments is to miss how virtually all of the healing in the world occurs. While there are truly biological effects from the interaction of chemical substances, why is there so much variation, and what about the statistical left-overs for whom there was no effect?

Yet there is more to this. While acupuncture anaesthesia is used in China, this use is minor. One of the main reasons is that it is a new idea, it doesn't have many years behind it. However, there are some compelling questions that come out of it. If it is purely psychosomatic that why does acuanaesthesia work on animals? I'm confident that it doesn't have to do with the belief system of the horse having a tooth extracted.

I love when Bio-medical partisans hint at quackery when talking of TCM yet ignore the massive amount of iatrogenic illness and death caused by modern treatment methods. Imagine a world dominated by TCM where Bio-medicine stepped forward to be judged for viability.

T "How deep?"
B "500 years..., well, 300..., well 150 years."
T "Hmmm, alright then, is it safe?"
B "Very safe, the safest, only tens of thousands are killed by it each year."
T "Hmmm, How about etiology (disease causes), what is this 40% idiopathic?"
B "It means no known cause can be determined."
T "You don't know?"
B "No bloody idea really, we treat them anyway though."
T "We'll be in touch."

Now don't get me wrong, I get as ****ed off with apologists who trash the value of Bio-medicine and try to make TCM into some magical healing method of the ancients. Bio-medicine is fabulous for traumatic injury and surgery, and its role in the control of infectious disease is not at all appreciated today. Yet it sort of sucks at issues of aging and chronic disease. "Walk more, and don't smoke" is a feeble excuse for preventative medicine. Its a product of its culture. Bio-medicine is an industry and suffers from its association to corporate bottom lines, and has done so since the after effects of the Flexnor Report of 1908. I have no doubt that TCM will suffer similarly in years to come.

The idea that one is better than the other begs the question of "for what?" In Canada TCM is not considered "alternative medicine" it is "complementary medicine." This is an attempt to recognize that it is a valuable and time tested method of healing that offers support for that 150 year old system that gets called "traditional medicine" by those that do not know the past.

The simplistic scientifically styled arguments against TCM that have been presented here are like religious fundamentalism that says you are a believer or a heretic. As an historian I teach that science is from Christianity and carries forward many of its assumptions. Sadly, many of the metaphysical assumptions of tight back-sided puritans are weilded against TCM when these discussions start. Then the defenders reply with anecdotal stories and emotion. When will modern people stop behaving like crusaders and infidels and realize that these medical systems don't need to satisfy each others criterion. Both are good in their respective spheres.

cha kuen
05-03-2003, 12:40 AM
Good post!

I agree that both are good at certain things. TCM is good for sports injuries and everything but extreme cases like heart transplants or putting in a new eyeball. I'll let the MDs take care of that.

Former castleva
05-03-2003, 06:11 AM
"First off, I'm a medical anthropologist with a specialization in communication between Chinese medical practitioners and Bio-medical practitioners. I teach at a school of Chinese medicine (med. history, ethics, Qigong). I'm a bit miffed by the attitude of superiority being expressed by Bio-medical partisans here."
Im happy with paleo/biological anthropology but fine for you.

"The idea that Bio-medicine is older than 300 years is a bit of a stretch. William Harvey in the 1600's? It took 200 years for his work on the heart to have a wide enough effect to stop the practice of bloodletting as it was done in Humoral medicine. Pharmacy? Chemistry didn't even have a nomenclature until 1769 (Lavoisier) let alone a medical focus. Jenner in the 1780's was beginning to work on something that a modern physician would find familiar. Basically the Bio-medicine that we recognize today didn't begin until after the changes in aesepsis (hygiene) and anaesthesia after the Crimean war in 1850's. So saying its older than 150 years what I call extreme arrogance and revisionist power mongering."
You seem to be presenting biomedical history to your own favour,it depends on how you define that.

"Another basic aspect of arguments against Chinese medicine is the religious adherance to experimental verification. The idea that all aspects of knowledge can be revealed by isolation is not a fact, its a belief. Do we really know enough to isolate for blind studies involving humans? Does measuring parts-per-million tell us what a healing experience is? There are a lot of presumptions that go along with the philosophy of logical positivism, superior to simple superstition to be sure, but is that all there is to TCM?"
Religious adherance?
Is not real,documented value or lack of it the least thing one can ask for? Especially in this kind of a case.
That verification is for your own good,to not do so is to be "unethical".

"Lets keep in mind that there are medical dossiers in China stretching back to Chunyu yi (215-167 BCE). TCM is based on observation not isolation. If it were a mere 150 years old then this would make it very suspect. However, it is 2500 years of recorded observation, and that gives it some weight."
2500,4000,150...Its not necessarily the time something gets lugged around but if it carries the capacity to evolve.Old does not equal good in my terms.
I bet there were "doctors" of various kinds long B.C around the world,nothing new there.

"One thing that I love about these arguments is the dismissal of the effect of the mind. The first problem with this is the religion that supposes the mind and the body are seperate things. This is total FAITH and has no basis in anything other than convenience. Keep in mind that when de Cartes proposed "cogito ergo sum" he was saying "I can doubt all but that I doubt." The same solopsistic box that thousands of first year philosophy students crawl into. He used God to get out ("God is not an evil genius trying to deceive me.") do I have to believe in God to believe in Bio-medicine? To dismiss psychosomatic effects of treatments is to miss how virtually all of the healing in the world occurs. While there are truly biological effects from the interaction of chemical substances, why is there so much variation, and what about the statistical left-overs for whom there was no effect?"
Coming back to religion again.Are you referring to a certain religion? Religion refers to a belief in supernatural (not an argument I would use as a defense,considering) Im well aware of this holistic trend that you are referring to and well aware of opposite end of dualism-body/mind.For me,it is body=mind.Actually maybe no mind at all,but the "mind" is rather produced by your body (cns) and yes,they are pretty hard to separate (nothing to separate it seems)
Descartes seems to have been after the right idea to a degree,commenting that mind may actually be in the cranium (while being obsessed with pineal gland though.Hippocrates pointing to the right direction without details)
For sure there are psychosomatic factors to be associated with healing,but you cannot count on placebo to make hokey treatment appear effective (which can happen)
charismatic figures,expectation and irritation and so on,may influence the outcome but to trust on that is hardly productive in long run,thats why there needs to be a solid structure.
Conventional medicine recognizes these things and how they affect the patient.
However,to talk about psychosomatic factors in this context is an argument self-contradictory enough to bury what it tries to defend.

"Yet there is more to this. While acupuncture anaesthesia is used in China, this use is minor. One of the main reasons is that it is a new idea, it doesn't have many years behind it. However, there are some compelling questions that come out of it. If it is purely psychosomatic that why does acuanaesthesia work on animals? I'm confident that it doesn't have to do with the belief system of the horse having a tooth extracted."
Lets hope they do not have to count on that anymore.
Since Im obviously "religously" biased towards my beliefs,could you point some studies or related documents of this efficiency to me? Of course I cannot answer,among the anecdotes we are.
Virtually all vets I have seen or heard of do not take changes though.

"I love when Bio-medical partisans hint at quackery when talking of TCM yet ignore the massive amount of iatrogenic illness and death caused by modern treatment methods. Imagine a world dominated by TCM where Bio-medicine stepped forward to be judged for viability."
"Imagine all the people..."...Reality does not agree with this idea.
Wonder how many more deaths there would be.
What is China doing with SARS by the way?

"T "How deep?"
B "500 years..., well, 300..., well 150 years."
T "Hmmm, alright then, is it safe?"
B "Very safe, the safest, only tens of thousands are killed by it each year."
T "Hmmm, How about etiology (disease causes), what is this 40% idiopathic?"
B "It means no known cause can be determined."
T "You don't know?"
B "No bloody idea really, we treat them anyway though."
T "We'll be in touch." "

Many do die indeed,however,to die despite proper treatment is not necessarily to die due to treatment (of course mistakes are another issue) You have to count your priorities.
If anecdotes and great healers were for real,we could invite them to our hospitals to faith heal,needle treat or herb feed terminally ill people that even conventional treatment may not be able to.

"The idea that one is better than the other begs the question of "for what?" In Canada TCM is not considered "alternative medicine" it is "complementary medicine." This is an attempt to recognize that it is a valuable and time tested method of healing that offers support for that 150 year old system that gets called "traditional medicine" by those that do not know the past."
So it seems to be for a few countries.
Im aware of this,I wonder what kind of requirements it had to pass.

"The simplistic scientifically styled arguments against TCM that have been presented here are like religious fundamentalism that says you are a believer or a heretic. As an historian I teach that science is from Christianity and carries forward many of its assumptions. Sadly, many of the metaphysical assumptions of tight back-sided puritans are weilded against TCM when these discussions start. Then the defenders reply with anecdotal stories and emotion. When will modern people stop behaving like crusaders and infidels and realize that these medical systems don't need to satisfy each others criterion. Both are good in their respective spheres."
I fail to see how science derives from christianity and carries forward many of its assumptions (while the disciple of medicine you are defending stems heavily from a Chinese religion/philosophy)
When there will be more than anecdotes and emotion,one must be on his/her way there.Conventional medicine simply refers to a form of scientifically legitimate,proven medicine (may it be east or west)
This same requirement for proven and falsifiable does not only go for tcm but urine therapy,ear candling,homeopathy,naturopathic...Scientific method is not all that hard and does not take favourites.
I think the question is not if they can be united (which requires certain things to be done) but rather if we do need to (if shown to be effective and without mysticism,then Im sure Ill be one of those to talk FOR)

Im not trying to be "difficult" around here,thanks for posting.

fragbot
05-03-2003, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Kevin Wallbridge
First off, I'm a medical anthropologist with a specialization in communication between Chinese medical practitioners and Bio-medical practitioners. I teach at a school of Chinese medicine (med. history, ethics, Qigong). I'm a bit miffed by the attitude of superiority being expressed by Bio-medical partisans here.


Yeah, you're miffed at us, but the others supporting TCM are ever so reasonable.

I do appreciate how honestly you state your financial and emotional bias.



So saying its older than 150 years what I call extreme arrogance and revisionist power mongering.


Oh horse****. Even if this was brought up (I don't remember if it was), it's peripheral to the discussion as a whole.

Power mongering? Hyperbole much?



Another basic aspect of arguments against Chinese medicine is the religious adherance to experimental verification. The idea that all aspects of knowledge can be revealed by isolation is not a fact, its a belief. Do we really know enough to isolate for blind studies involving humans? Does measuring parts-per-million tell us what a healing experience is? There are a lot of presumptions that go along with the philosophy of logical positivism, superior to simple superstition to be sure, but is that all there is to TCM?


If you think it's unreasonable to apply double blind studies to TCM, please explain why. If it effective, shouldn't it be able to show itself as such?

Yeah, it's a belief. So what? If it's not the best tool available, explain why.



Lets keep in mind that there are medical dossiers in China stretching back to Chunyu yi (215-167 BCE). TCM is based on observation not isolation. If it were a mere 150 years old then this would make it very suspect. However, it is 2500 years of recorded observation, and that gives it some weight.


If you look at the discussion (at least from my point of view), I've never said whether it works or doesn't because I don't know. There's so little information available in a form acceptable to people who can read.

Some parts of it probably do. That being said, you'll still need to explain why applying the same standards of efficacy to it is a bad idea.



One thing that I love about these arguments is the dismissal of the effect of the mind. The first problem with this is the religion that supposes the mind and the body are seperate things. This is total FAITH and has no basis in anything other than convenience. Keep in mind that when de Cartes proposed "cogito ergo sum" he was saying "I can doubt all but that I doubt." The same solopsistic box that thousands of first year philosophy students crawl into. He used God to get out ("God is not an evil genius trying to deceive me.") do I have to believe in God to believe in Bio-medicine? To dismiss psychosomatic effects of treatments is to miss how virtually all of the healing in the world occurs. While there are truly biological effects from the interaction of chemical substances, why is there so much variation, and what about the statistical left-overs for whom there was no effect?


If I understand you correctly, you just described the placebo effect as well as the healing effect of faith. In my experience, having had similar discussions before, proponents of TCM consistently ignore the placebo effect when relating their anecdotal experiences.

And, yes, I don't doubt some faith healers can convince people to heal themselves. Are you defining that as medicine (if you're going to throw strawmen around left and right, I'm allowed one)?



I love when Bio-medical partisans hint at quackery when talking of TCM yet ignore the massive amount of iatrogenic illness and death caused by modern treatment methods. Imagine a world dominated by TCM where Bio-medicine stepped forward to be judged for viability.


Could you possibly create even more strawman arguments?

I had a surgical procedure done about a year ago. Before consenting to the procedure, I read approximately 500 pages of research on that particular procedure. It was abundantly clear what morbidity was likely as well as what the probability of each complication was. Furthermore, I was able to compare its efficacy and side-effects with the available medical treatments--long-term anti-coagulation.

In the past, I've tried finding out the same amount of information about various folk remedies (qigong included). This sort of information doesn't exist in any sort of meaningful manner.

Of course, the standard response "no one will fund it because there's no money to be made" rings hollow since I also take aspirin daily. As you undoubtedly know, aspirin's use is under current research for heart disease, prevention of Alzheimer's, prevention of deep-vein thrombosis and who knows what else.



Now don't get me wrong, I get as ****ed off with apologists who trash the value of Bio-medicine and try to make TCM into some magical healing method of the ancients. Bio-medicine is fabulous for traumatic injury and surgery, and its role in the control of infectious disease is not at all appreciated today. Yet it sort of sucks at issues of aging and chronic disease. "Walk more, and don't smoke" is a feeble excuse for preventative medicine.


Yeah, but is, say, practice of TJQ or qigong any better? In other words, is someone practicing qigong going to (on average) live a longer, better life than someone practicing judo or tennis?

Beyond age-related diseases (AKA Alzheimer's or macular degeneration), what treatment does someone need for aging?



The simplistic scientifically styled arguments against TCM that have been presented here are like religious fundamentalism that says you are a believer or a heretic.


Ummm, you have had discussions with supporters of TCM before haven't you? It's merely a response in kind.

I've yet had one provide a coherent answer to the following question: what's unreasonable with applying double-blind methodologies to traditional methods?

In my experience, questions like the above are treated as heretical?



Then the defenders reply with anecdotal stories and emotion.


Indeed. To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.



When will modern people stop behaving like crusaders and infidels and realize that these medical systems don't need to satisfy each others criterion. Both are good in their respective spheres.

Physician heal thyself.

It's fascinating that you accuse my side of polarizing the debate. As I've stated previously, I've spent a good amount of time interested in TCM. However, unlike many with the same interests, I've done it with a skeptical eye.

Pilgrim
05-04-2003, 01:02 PM
Hi All
Just to jump into the palaver regarding TCM and it's validity, of course the medicine is valid. Acupuncture is a very common form of medicine, in China, Europe, Mexico, acupucnture and chinese medicine is found everywhere? Does it work? Of course it does. Remember there still is cancer, common cold, hepatitis, and every other form of disease in the US, Canada, Europe and in China, Africa, Paraguay. Does this mean does western medicine or Chinese medicine (a la traditional or ethnic medicine) works or doesn't work?
Part of validity comes from successful results and understanding how thinks work. Evidence based medicine/scientific reasoning has had some real clunkers. it wasn't too far in the past when people took a trip to mercury when they had VD. That's cause western/evidence medicine once felt mercury based ointments could heal chancres. Presciptions From The Golden Chamber has instructions on how to revive a person who has been hanged- tramping on shoulders while holding the head taunt. As far as I know these techniques are not used anymore. Chinese medicine uses what works and keeps it in it's theories. That's why 5 element theory, zang fu diagnosis, jing luo concepts, 8 priciples on and on and on continue to evolve.
Finding a scientific basis for Chi- it will never happen. That's using western concepts/paradigms for non-western concepts. Feeling chi from 10 feet across the room is BS, it's not health care. It's tricks. However if you feel chi, you'll know it's something, it exists. The problem is what to do with the feeling.
Try reading Encounters With Chi/Qi from some medical docter named David Eisenberg from Harvard Med school. Read Medicine in China, A History of Ideas by Paul Unschuld.One's a scientific sceptic, the other's a historian.
The best way to determine validity is to get sick ,break a leg, catch pneumonia, or just feel bummed out and then get treatment from a practitioner of Chinese medicine. The positive results of better health will be valid.

Pilgrim
05-04-2003, 01:28 PM
Hey
As you know in double blind studies the technician/worker doesn't know if he has the placebo or the real "medicine" and the 2 groups of clients don't know if they are getting the real "medicine" or the placebos. The idea is to control the placebo effect and to see if what is real really works.
With acupuncture no has come up with a way to make a placbo acupuncture needle. One that feels like it's going in the skin but really isn't, one that has a sensation of chi but not really be chi. Most people when they see a needle coming at them think there's a needle coming at me therefore it's hard if not impossible to have a control. ( Search the web, in Germany as i recall, they have attempted to make a palcebo acupuncture needle)
A practioner of acupuncture will place great importance on the exact location of the acupucnture point in order for acu to work, with the idea if throwing in a needle anywhere in the body-not in a location that has results- the idea of palcebo negates the reason why acu works. Points are exact and must me located exactly hence no results. With a placebo- an untrainned person placing needles in incorrect locations- acu won't work to begin with. Research this concept by looking in Journal of Substance Abuse-lots odf debate on point location, placebo effect,stimulation of vagus nerve fiddle-faddle.
With herbs, double blind is hard if not impossible due to the nature of herbs. Where are you going to come up with a material that looks like ginseng tastes like ginseng but isn't ginseng. That would be the control/placebo. Then giving ginseng to evryone in the two groups of subjects, some would definately get sick cause not everyone needs ginseng. Cause they got sick, there'd be docter induced harmful consequnce, researchers would feel herbs are unsafe, and more misconceptions would occur. Plus most Chinese RXs have a number of herbs in them, and creating a placebo that has the taste of all tose herbs would be difficult. Plus the synergistic/antagonistic aspects of formulas, preperation, decocting or tincturing, well good luck double-blinding that.

fragbot
05-04-2003, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by Pilgrim
With acupuncture no has come up with a way to make a placbo acupuncture needle. One that feels like it's going in the skin but really isn't, one that has a sensation of chi but not really be chi. Most people when they see a needle coming at them think there's a needle coming at me therefore it's hard if not impossible to have a control. ( Search the web, in Germany as i recall, they have attempted to make a palcebo acupuncture needle).


It's interesting they're trying to create an accupuncture placebo. It's an important step in the right direction.



A practioner of acupuncture will place great importance on the exact location of the acupucnture point in order for acu to work, with the idea if throwing in a needle anywhere in the body-not in a location that has results- the idea of palcebo negates the reason why acu works. Points are exact and must me located exactly hence no results. With a placebo- an untrainned person placing needles in incorrect locations- acu won't work to begin with. Research this concept by looking in Journal of Substance Abuse-lots odf debate on point location, placebo effect,stimulation of vagus nerve fiddle-faddle.


Thanks for the reference. I am confused about something you said--with a placebo, the accupuncture shouldn't work. Isn't this the idea of a placebo?



With herbs, double blind is hard if not impossible due to the nature of herbs. Where are you going to come up with a material that looks like ginseng tastes like ginseng but isn't ginseng.


For some things (eg dit da jow*), it might be rather difficult. However, for herbs taken as a tea or tincture, there's absolutely no reason the flavor/odor couldn't be masked of, if encapsulated in gelatin, made a non-issue altogether.

*FWIW, I'd like to see any studies of any type on dit da jow. I've seem many anecdotes about how it's the miracle cure for bruising or soft-tissue injuries. However, I've also heard the same for arnica (useless crap from what I can tell), bromelain (extract from pineapple; appears to work but increases your clotting time), and papain (extract from papaya; same drawback as bromelain).



Then giving ginseng to evryone in the two groups of subjects, some would definately get sick cause not everyone needs ginseng.


Presumably, you'd only treat people who had a condition alleviated by ginseng.



Cause they got sick, there'd be docter induced harmful consequnce, researchers would feel herbs are unsafe, and more misconceptions would occur.


Umm, isn't this pretty much the idea?

When they figured out the weight-loss drug (name escapes me right now) caused people's heart valves to stop working, this was a good things.



Plus most Chinese RXs have a number of herbs in them, and creating a placebo that has the taste of all tose herbs would be difficult. Plus the synergistic/antagonistic aspects of formulas, preperation, decocting or tincturing, well good luck double-blinding that.

I've spent 5 minutes on this email and I've come up with potential strategies to attack this problem. They may not be worth a ****, but if they occur to me I have to question why others can't be similarly creative.

As an aside, I appreciate your response. Unlike most I've received when I've had this discussion in the past, it showed a willingness and ability to have a discussion.

While it's the ideal, I don't expect researchers to create a "perfect" study. There's a middle-ground that beneficial for everyone.

Former castleva
05-05-2003, 06:31 AM
"Just to jump into the palaver regarding TCM and it's validity, of course the medicine is valid. Acupuncture is a very common form of medicine, in China, Europe, Mexico, acupucnture and chinese medicine is found everywhere? Does it work? Of course it does"

Hi to you too!
Do not expect one to take your word for its validity,it may spread very well and as far as I know,millions of people still use homeopathy despite its extremely questionable value.

"Finding a scientific basis for Chi- it will never happen. That's using western concepts/paradigms for non-western concepts."
One last time,scientific method does not look for selected locations.



"The best way to determine validity is to get sick ,break a leg, catch pneumonia, or just feel bummed out and then get treatment from a practitioner of Chinese medicine. The positive results of better health will be valid."
Those are serious conditions,I do not think I would be taking changes (of course practitioners around are a few too)

From The National Council Against Health Fraud:
"Research during the past 20 years has not demonstrated that acupuncture is effective against any disease."
"Consumers who wish to try acupuncture should discuss their situation with a knowledgeable physician who has no commercial interest"
"Perceived effects of acupuncture are probably due to a combination of expectation, suggestion, counter-irritation, conditioning, and other psychologic mechanisms."
"Its theory and practice are based on primitive and fanciful concepts of health and disease that bear no relationship to present scientific knowledge"

Thats mostly on acupuncture,but it probably gives a decent picture considering that it is what laymen know this practice from.

"With acupuncture no has come up with a way to make a placbo acupuncture needle."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&dopt=r&uid=9717924

"Introducing a placebo needle into acupuncture research.

Streitberger K, Kleinhenz J.

Clinic of Anesthesiology, University of Heidelberg, Germany.

BACKGROUND: A problem acupuncture research has to face is the concept of a control group. If, in control groups, non-acupoint needling is done, physiological acupuncture effects are implied. Therefore the effects shown in this group are often close to those shown in the acupuncture group. In other trials, control groups have received obviously different treatments, such as transcutaneous electrical nervous stimulation or TENS-laser treatment; it is not clear if the effects of acupuncture are due only to the psychological effects of the treatment. METHODS: We developed a placebo acupuncture needle, with which it should be possible to simulate an acupuncture procedure without penetrating the skin. In a cross-over experiment with 60 volunteers we tested whether needling with the placebo needle feels any different from real acupuncture. FINDINGS: Of 60 volunteers, 54 felt a penetration with acupuncture (mean visual analogue scale [VAS] 13.4; SD 10.58) and 47 felt it with placebo (VAS 8.86; SD 10.55), 34 felt a dull pain sensation (DEQI) with acupuncture and 13 with placebo. None of the volunteers suspected that the needle may not have penetrated the skin. INTERPRETATION: The placebo needle is sufficiently credible to be used in investigations of the effects of acupuncture."

Another similar study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11799305&dopt=Abstract

"Credibility of a newly designed placebo needle for clinical trials in acupuncture research.

Fink M, Gutenbrunner C, Rollnik J, Karst M.

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hannover Medical School. m.g.fink@gmx.de

OBJECTIVE: To test the credibility of a newly designed placebo needle for acupuncture research. DESIGN: Analysis of data on credibility of true and placebo interventions of a randomised, placebo-controlled, patient- and evaluator-blind clinical trial. PATIENTS AND SETTING: The study was carried out at a university department for physical medicine and rehabilitation. 68 patients (age 48.1 +/- 14.1 years, mean +/- SD) fulfilling the criteria of the International Headache Society for tension-type headache were enrolled into the study. INTERVENTIONS: Group 1 (treatment) was assigned to traditional needle placement and manipulation, whereas in group 2 (control) a new placebo device was used. OUTCOME PARAMETERS: After the first treatment with real or placebo acupuncture, patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire on credibility. In addition, after 3 or 4 treatments, patients were asked for the feeling of needle insertion and deqi. RESULTS: No difference between real and placebo acupuncture was detected with respect to the credibility of the treatment (p > 0.05). Needle insertion was recognised in all patients in the real acupuncture group and in all but 4 patients of the placebo group (p < 0.05). deqi was reported by 84% of patients in the real acupuncture group and by 34% of patients in the placebo group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Acupuncture with the placebo needle device described here is of high credibility, and does not differ from that of real acupuncture treatment. However, to achieve comparable ***** sensations in both treatment conditions, careful training with the placebo needle is needed. Furthermore, from these results arise new questions with respect to the placebo response of placebo needles. Further investigations are warranted to test if placebo needles are active controls. Copyright 2001 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg"


"A practioner of acupuncture will place great importance on the exact location of the acupucnture point in order for acu to work, with the idea if throwing in a needle anywhere in the body-not in a location that has results- the idea of palcebo negates the reason why acu works. Points are exact and must me located exactly hence no results."
I do realize that the exact point is considered important but I do remember this study which was published in a science mag. (unfortunately I cant offer you a reference)
The study concerned psychiatric patients with depression,there were a few groups which received additional acupuncture treatment for it (using supposedly appropriate techniques)
One group was needled "right",another was treated with "wrong" points.
Conclusions:Both groups showed some minor differences in condition but the results were just as good or bad on both sides.It was suggested that additional attention that patients got (again coming back to rather differing reasons for explaining) was probably why they showed minor improvements.

But do not take my word for it,necessarily.

Documented study:
"Acupuncture and bronchial asthma: a long-term randomized study of the effects of real versus sham acupuncture compared to controls in patients with bronchial asthma.

Medici TC, Grebski E, Wu J, Hinz G, Wuthrich B.

Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. media@bluewin.ch

BACKGROUND: Acupuncture has traditionally been used in China in the treatment of bronchial asthma and is being increasingly applied in Western countries. Although there are many published studies on acupuncture and asthma, few meet the scientific criteria necessary to prove the effectiveness of acupuncture. OBJECTIVE: To examine the short- and long-term effects of real versus sham or no acupuncture in patients with bronchial asthma. DESIGN: Randomized partially blinded study with three parallel groups. SUBJECTS: Sixty-six (66) patients of both genders (mean age, 39 years) with mild-to-moderate persistent bronchial asthma. INTERVENTIONS: After 2 weeks of run-in, the patients with asthma were randomized to receive either real (23 patients) or sham acupuncture (23 patients) or no acupuncture (20 patients). Two acupuncture periods (each 4 weeks) within the first 4 months were followed by a 6-month observation. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was the change of peak expiratory flow (PEF) variability at the end of the two treatment periods. Secondary outcomes were changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), airway responsiveness, symptoms of asthma, the use of asthma drugs, and patients' well-being. Moreover, the effect of the intervention on eosinophils and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) in blood and sputum was assessed. RESULTS: PEF variability decreased in all groups. In a subgroup of patients whose asthma medication remained fairly unchanged, PEF variability decreased significantly after needling of real as well as sham points at month 4 and 5 compared to controls (p < or = 0.005). However, there was no difference in the decrease of PEF variability between patients who had the blinded treatment with real or sham acupuncture. Most of the other functional and clinical variables did not differ from those obtained in controls. Eosinophils and ECP in blood and sputum decreased in all groups, but the only significant differences were found in blood eosinophil count at 4 months between sham acupuncture and the control group (p < 0.05) and at 10 months between real and sham acupuncture (p < 0.05) suggesting a possible effect on eosinophilic inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: In view of the fact that the effects after real and sham acupuncture compared to controls who had no needling at all were small, in all likelihood clinically irrelevant, our data do not seem to support the use of acupuncture in the management of pharmacologically well-treated patients with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma."
Source being:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12614526&dopt=Abstract

"With a placebo- an untrainned person placing needles in incorrect locations- acu won't work to begin with."
More study,controversial?

Former castleva
05-05-2003, 06:34 AM
"However if you feel chi, you'll know it's something, it exists."
If you assume it is chi,then good for you but this is not an argument.

"The significance of needle placement site in acupuncture.

Vincent CA, Richardson PH, Black JJ, Pither CE.

Department of Psychology, University College, London, U.K.

Traditional acupuncturists claim that correct needling of classical acupuncture loci is associated with a characteristic set of sensations usually referred to as 'Teh Chi'. The studies reported here examine this claim. In the first a multiple adjective sensation rating scale was developed and administered to 125 patients receiving acupuncture treatment. The results were subjected to principal components analysis and the first factor to emerge provided some support for the constellation of sensations corresponding to Teh Chi. In the second study the scale was used in a randomised controlled mixed single/double blind experiment in which 65 volunteers were stimulated at three classical and three non-classical (sham) needling sites by either a trained acupuncturist (single blind) or an anaesthetist (double blind). The results of the second study did not support the contention that the sensations of Teh Chi occur more frequently at classical acupuncture needling sites. The implications of the results for the practice of acupuncture are discussed.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial"


"With herbs, double blind is hard if not impossible due to the nature of herbs."
If it is so impossible to test them,is not it questionable to hand them out or assume they work?
Of course to not test them would only allow this kind of practice to sink deeper down into mysticism and it would sure still be considered questionable at least.


"...researchers would feel herbs are unsafe, and more misconceptions would occur"
And herbs can be unsafe,there is a documented case or two of a person dying of related herbs (related persons medical condition might have conflicted with)
I once mentioned this to a doctor of mine and he was quick to remind that he has witnessed a case where a natural herb launched a life threatening allergic reaction.

"The herbal and dietary methods of Chinese medicine are alien to pharmacology and nutrition science. At least 7,000 plant species are used as medicines in China. Of the 150 most commonly used species, ten are poisonous at "doses" recommended by herbalists. Unquestionably, many of these thousands of plant species have at least marginal therapeutic utility, but the prescientific system that guides their use is unreliable."
Source being:http://www.hcrc.org/contrib/raso/frmacu.html

"Plus the synergistic/antagonistic aspects of formulas, preperation, decocting or tincturing, well good luck double-blinding that."
If credibility is what they are after,rest is history.

"Remember there still is cancer, common cold, hepatitis, and every other form of disease in the US, Canada, Europe and in China, Africa, Paraguay. Does this mean does western medicine or Chinese medicine (a la traditional or ethnic medicine) works or doesn't work?"
Hardly does,agreed.
Do I think this relates to this context or does a thing for central arguments? Hardly.

Thank you for posting.

Former castleva
05-05-2003, 01:33 PM
"Cardiovascular effects of acupuncture stimulation at point Governing Vessel 26 in halothane-anesthetized ponies.

Dill SG, Gleed R, Matthews NS, Erb HN, Miller TK.

Department of Clinical Sciences, New York State College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca 14853.

The acupuncture point Governing Vessel (GV-26) is used commonly in the Orient to treat shock in human beings and other species. The cardiovascular effects of stimulation of GV-26 were studied in healthy ponies during 2 episodes of halothane anesthesia. During one anesthetic episode, electrical stimulation (electrostimulation) of GV-26 was performed, and during the other anesthetic episode, heat stimulation (moxibustion) of GV-26 was performed. The order of the stimulations was random. A nonacupuncture point was selected for comparable control stimulation during each experiment. Control and acupuncture stimulations were of equal intensity. There were no significant changes in cardiac output, systemic arterial pressure, or heart rate associated with either electrical or heat acupuncture stimulation."

"Electroacupuncture in the treatment of chronic lameness in horses and ponies: a controlled clinical trial.

Steiss JE, White NA, Bowen JM.

Department of Physiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens 30602.

Electroacupuncture was used to treat lameness in horses and ponies with chronic laminitis (n = 10) or navicular disease (n = 10). A clinical trial was conducted with random allocation of equal numbers of animals to control and treatment groups. Acupuncture was performed three times per week for four consecutive weeks. The degree of lameness was assessed by 1) a grading scheme, 2) measurement of stride lengths and 3) analysis of weight distribution using a force plate. Although seven out of ten animals with chronic laminitis improved clinically during the trial, there were no statistically significant differences between treatment and control groups. Six out of ten horses with navicular disease improved, but there were no significant differences between treatment and control groups."

Double-blind evaluation of implants of gold wire at acupuncture points in the dog as a treatment for osteoarthritis induced by hip dysplasia.

"Hielm-Bjorkman A, Raekallio M, Kuusela E, Saarto E, Markkola A, Tulamo RM.

Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland.

Thirty-eight dogs with hip dysplasia were studied to evaluate the use of gold wire implants at acupuncture points around the hip joints. They were assigned at random into two groups of 19. In the treated group, gold wire was inserted through hypodermic needles at electrically found acupuncture points around both hips. In the control group, the areas were prepared in the same way but had only the skin pierced at sites which were not acupuncture points, with a needle of the same size as that used in the treated group. Over a period of six months the dogs were studied repeatedly by two veterinarians and by the dogs' owners who were unaware of the treatments the dogs had received; they assessed the dogs' locomotion, hip function and signs of pain. Radiographs were taken at the beginning and end of the study. Although the data collected from both groups by the veterinarians and the owners showed a significant improvement of locomotion and reduction in signs of pain (P=0.036 for the veterinary evaluation and locomotion and P=0.0001 and P=0.0034 for the owners' evaluation of locomotion and pain, respectively), there were no statistically significant differences between the treated and control groups (P=0.19 and P=0.41, P=0.24, respectively)."

Pilgrim
05-05-2003, 10:25 PM
Whoooaaaa
This is a very intellectual topic and i guess that's what scientific research is all about. Unfortunately.
A lot of the way i view research and stats ( you know lies, big lies and statistics) comes from where i come from. I've had a license to pratice acupuncture/herbs and all the other stuff within the scope of my practice for the last 11 years. So I've got a conception of what I do.
Those resources from medical schools come from a certain place. Not saying I'm biased or that they are biased. If you have access to all the many journals of acupuncture you'll find studies that clearly say that acupucnture works, herbs are good and that chi exists-actually I haven't seen one of those, not that such studies don't exist but I've read none. Chi's existence is based on assumption I guess. And chi is not electricity or energy it goes beyond that, there's a cultural concept idea identity of something that we in the west have lost. However such concepts of chi exist in native american healing but that is definately not written down. So how can it be studied. Energy work exists in muslim culture, india, malaysia but most of the people who know teach those concepts do so on a personal level. ( Well aruyvedic medicne is becoming more present inn the west.)
If you've ever seen a person or an animal die, you know something leaves them at the moment of death. Chi. If you've ever felt love that did something to you, well those changes and feeling s have a lot to do with chi. And if you've ever wondered why so and so who seemed so healthy and had a physical that found no problems with their healtth, yet they suddenly died, became totally depressed or suddenly had a migriane, well that's chi.
Look in some of the web sites from the acupuncture schools, they often have plenty of research going on. There's a man named Richard Hemmerschlag who runs , along with some other medical people, a web site on acupuncture research.( probably spelled his name wrong but it's basically correct) itmonline.com has stuff that would be of interest(insitute of traditional medicine in oregon)
Perhaps one needs to consider what is healing. Taking paxil for the rest of your life or taking herbs for the rest of your life. Both can help control depression but no one says either cures the depression. Taking herbs or acupuncture to decrease the frequncy/severity of colds definately happens, but that person may still get a cold. The reality is the person who gets their yearly flu shot is also likely to get a cold. Does that mean the medicine is not working?
The idea about herbs not being safe, that is true. Also remember that iatrogenic death is the leading cause of death in any hospital. The number of people killed by aspirine, wrong medications, incorrect dosages, incorrect medical procedures is far larger then the deaths due to let's say, mahuang . And the kava kava thing that's because the insurance industry has threatened to end coverage for practitioners who use kava kava, it's not based on much research. Of course the backlash of a MD accidentally killing a person is not as intense as an acupucnturist killing a person, which as far as I know has not occured in the US, Canada, England , Germany, Australia.I could go on.
The thing is herbs are safer then medications. I'd like to see the dosages of the toxic herbs from that guys web site.
Anyway, medicine is experiential. One of you guys live in Finland and i don't know if there are any acupuncturists there. I do know there's a really good guy who lives in Lapland who practices serak. But the things is , try the medicine. See what it does for your health. It will improve your condition on a physical, emotional, and spiritual level. I mean you had the balls to do kung fu, we're not talking ballet, find out more about the culture and try some of the medicine.

Former castleva
05-06-2003, 04:49 PM
Whoooaaaa
"This is a very intellectual topic and i guess that's what scientific research is all about. Unfortunately." How come it is unfortunate?
"A lot of the way i view research and stats ( you know lies, big lies and statistics) comes from where i come from. I've had a license to pratice acupuncture/herbs and all the other stuff within the scope of my practice for the last 11 years. So I've got a conception of what I do." I see.
"Those resources from medical schools come from a certain place. Not saying I'm biased or that they are biased." I tried not to pick my references from directly skeptic sources. "If you have access to all the many journals of acupuncture you'll find studies that clearly say that acupucnture works, herbs are good and that chi exists-actually I haven't seen one of those, not that such studies don't exist but I've read none." OK.OK,youre saying you have not seen them? I see. "Chi's existence is based on assumption I guess." Myth that is. "And chi is not electricity or energy it goes beyond that, there's a cultural concept idea identity of something that we in the west have lost." Uh huh,can you clarify? What have we "lost"? "However such concepts of chi exist in native american healing but that is definately not written down." Documented information would probably be hard to find.Always to keep in mind that such methods tend to be very old and possibly religiously related. "So how can it be studied.Energy work exists in muslim culture, india, malaysia but most of the people who know teach those concepts do so on a personal level." I see. "( Well aruyvedic medicne is becoming more present inn the west.)" Might be sad.

"If you've ever seen a person or an animal die, you know something leaves them at the moment of death. Chi. "
Irrelevant.Unrelated.
This is equal to a religious belief,something I prefer not to mess with in this context.
What is this supposed to mean?

"If you've ever felt love that did something to you, well those changes and feeling s have a lot to do with chi."
Irrelevant.Unrelated.Wrong.

"And if you've ever wondered why so and so who seemed so healthy and had a physical that found no problems with their healtth, yet they suddenly died, became totally depressed or suddenly had a migriane, well that's chi."
With as much respect as possible,thats utter woo woo.
Extremely simple way to express things though.
Thank lord we know that,earth would still be flat if we did not.

Anyhow,here is a discussion that you might find interested (to a degree at least)
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17634

"Look in some of the web sites from the acupuncture schools, they often have plenty of research going on. There's a man named Richard Hemmerschlag who runs , along with some other medical people, a web site on acupuncture research.( probably spelled his name wrong but it's basically correct) itmonline.com has stuff that would be of interest(insitute of traditional medicine in oregon) "
I may check that out.Thank you.

"Perhaps one needs to consider what is healing. Taking paxil for the rest of your life or taking herbs for the rest of your life. Both can help control depression but no one says either cures the depression."
Never have I heard how herbs have helped depression (possible anecdotes/promotion aside)
Neither have I heard why herbs would help depression.
Drugs may not always help depression but they can,and there is a basis for that.

"Taking herbs or acupuncture to decrease the frequncy/severity of colds definately happens, but that person may still get a cold. The reality is the person who gets their yearly flu shot is also likely to get a cold. Does that mean the medicine is not working?"
Which one do you think would come out on top?
How about cutting down vaccines for those? (Not gonna happen)
Im confident that there still are a lot of people out there "dying" to be injected.
You may run into quackerists against vaccines for reasons badly established,take those with a grain of salt (just a sidenote)

"Anyway, medicine is experiential. One of you guys live in Finland and i don't know if there are any acupuncturists there."
There must be some,but being a relatively developed country...

". I do know there's a really good guy who lives in Lapland who practices serak"
Thanks for telling.Im not familiar with serak though.

" It will improve your condition on a physical, emotional, and spiritual level. I mean you had the balls to do kung fu, we're not talking ballet, find out more about the culture and try some of the medicine."
Related culture used to be a remarkable interest for me so in that sense Im not operating on plain thin air,I hope.

"The idea about herbs not being safe, that is true. Also remember that iatrogenic death is the leading cause of death in any hospital. The number of people killed by aspirine, wrong medications, incorrect dosages, incorrect medical procedures is far larger then the deaths due to let's say, mahuang ."
Probably (mahuang is unproven as far as I know)
Fortunately were talking about incorrect application (or simply failure) to use correct medicine.
Aspirine is a natural drug btw,it can be dangerous but it can also help in threatening situations.

"The thing is herbs are safer then medications."
Counting the priorities...
probable Zero win/lose VS possible side-effects+considerable help.

Additionally:
Herbs you do not want to mess with-

Chinese Herbs;
Syo-saiko-to
Kombucha (herbal, mushroom or Jin-Bu-Huan
Kvass tea, kwapsan, tind kangasok)
Shon-wu-ian
Chuifong toukuwan
(Number of herbs have been found to cause serious or even fatal consequences to the direction of liver hepatitis)

Containing nephrotoxins:
Guan Mu Tong
Ma Dou Ling
Ba Zheng San
Xin Yi San
etc.

"Ginseng
The active ingredients in this herb are called ginsenosides and these are reported to enhance the body's immune system. If a person is healthy, then the immune system will be healthy. Any benefit above your natural immunity is pure speculation. Further, when analyzed, many of these "ginseng" products contain none or little of these active ingredients. And it may increase the blood pressure."

Of course certain remedies are very hard on extinct species too...

Other dangerous herbs:
Belladonna
Blue Gohash
Borage
Broom
Chaparrel
Coltsfoot
Comfrey
Ephedra
Germanium (Germander)
Lobelia
Poke Root
Sassafras
Skull Cap
Stephania
Tryptophan
Wormwood
Yohimbe

More Chinese;
"People with diabetes: Beware Chinese herbs (source: http://your-doctor.com/patient_info/alternative_remedies/various_therapy/fraud_topics/chineseherb_fraud.html )

People who have diabetes should avoid five brands of Chinese herbal products because they illegally contain drugs that can cause dangerous drops in blood sugar, according to the FDA.

California investigators discovered the herbs contain the prescription diabetes drugs glyburide and phenformin. People who use any of these herbs regularly and take diabetes medication are particularly at risk.

Diabetes Hypoglucose Capsules (sold by Chinese Angel Health Care Products of Santa Monica, Calif.)

Pearl Hypoglycemic Capsules (imported by Sino American Health Products Inc., of Torrance, Calif.)

Tongyitang Diabetes Angel Pearl Hypoglycemic Capsules and Tongyitang Diabetes Angel Hypoglycemic Capsules (sold by Sino American)

Zhen Qi Capsules (sold by Sino American)"

"People with skin conditions: Beware of Chinese remedies

Persons using "Chinese" skin preparations should think twice. Many of these unregulated products have been found to contain high potency corticosteroids at concentrations much higher than many prescription preparations.

Corticosteroids are useful in certain skin conditions but can cause many problems when used improperly including permanent skin damage and interference with the body's immune system. Furthermore, use of such products can mask potentially serious problems, such as skin cancer or autoimmune diseases, that have skin manifestations."

And so on.

Thanks for posting.

Pilgrim
05-06-2003, 08:40 PM
Hey
I've given you resources to find more scientific resources for Chinese medicine, Encounters With Chi, Medicine Of China, A history of Ideas. Read the intro to Chinese Medicine by George Soulie De Morant,the man some feel is extremely important for bring acupuncture to the west; a man who demanded Western knowledge expand to cover all the observations of Chinese acupuncture. Joseph Needham has a series of like 10 to 20 books covering Chinese science. Contact the Chinese med school or schools in Sweden, they have lots of info for you. You can get really intellectual on some of the pro Chinese medicine/complementary medicne web sites, there's people there who will have the info you seek.
A heart of stone, that's so sad. A person who truely lacks preconceived ideas in every aspect of their life, especially when looking at new ideas, that is rare. That's a person with no fear. Like I said try the medicine.
Those who say don't know, those who know don't say. This is way more time then I usually spend on the internet; time to do stances, practice, pratice, practice the things I love to do.

fragbot
05-06-2003, 09:56 PM
Castleva: if you wish to respond to individual paragraphs, it'd be much easier to read if you quoted them individually while separating your responses out.

Pilgrim: at this point, it's obvious you didn't pay attention during debate class in high school. Assuming it's reasonable to view TCM as the science of Chinese medicine, y'all are getting your clock cleaned. If you believe TCM is better viewed through the prism of the folklorist or, perhaps, the theologian, you'll need to frame your argument in this manner.

Former castleva
05-07-2003, 04:46 AM
"Castleva: if you wish to respond to individual paragraphs, it'd be much easier to read if you quoted them individually while separating your responses out."
I agree my responses may get a bit messy at times.

Thanks both.

fragbot
05-07-2003, 08:40 AM
http://www.medicalacupuncture.org/aama_marf/journal/vol12_1/evidence.html

Most telling are the hierarchies of clinical evidence.

looking_up
05-07-2003, 09:39 AM
I don't have time to read this whole discussion, but I wanted to say (if it hasn't been stated yet) that health shouldn't be a complicated matter that requires millions of dollars of scientific testing of chemicals and new therpies. Yes, there is a place for these things, and obviously people benefit from this sort of effort, but one need not make medicine/health care into something that only research scientists can understand. This is just common sense, which should be enough for anyone to keep themselves relatively healthy. In certain cases, help is needed, but the natural state of the body is health, not sickness. The TCM doctor is merely encouraging the return to balance/equilibrium. The human body is very complex, but at the same time it is not.

Thanks.

Pilgrim
05-09-2003, 08:38 PM
Jello
As many folks know Chinese medicine really works. Personallly I've healed a tibial plateau fracture, torn acl, and torn medial maniscus with acupuncture, herbs, and chi gung. Had no insurance, didn't have 5 grand for surgury, and worked really hard and did the medicine for .........oh I still use Chinese medicine. It's part of a life style.Course the injury was 11 years ago. Broken fingers, cracked radius, a couple bouts with the flu. All cured.
A woman's bartholinitis was so severe she was about to have surgury ( talk about ouch and emotions) but acupuncture and lonicera, dandelion, smilax, moutan , red peony , corydalis and buplerum cured the problem. Someone's Bell's Palsy went from can't move the muscles on the right side of my face to gosh it's almost gone- after three acupucnture treatments. After 4 treatments and ongoing herbs, it is gone. The MD's were encouraging the person to take antibiotics and prednizone for several months in order to resolve the palsy. So the drugs and the herbs and the acupucnture was taken, what was the cure?
A person who wondered "can a mouse live inside my head " was told "no it can't" and has been out of the hostital for the longest period of their life; they feel because of acupuncture and compliance with medications. Guess it's palcebo, doesn't work, it's a crazy person saying acupuncture works. Reality is hospitalization has stopped, partly due to acupucnture needles that cost $4 a box of 100.
When interferon first came out to treat Hep C, like in 1990-1992, the sustained viral response was 10%. Side effects also included flu symptoms, nausea, depression, loss of appetite ( sounds like what happens with untreated Hep C ) but also included bone marrow suppression, anemia, depression, and thyroiditis. Now of course things have changed with pegylated interferon. The point is that western medicine is given a different standard then alternative/complementary/ Chinese medicine when it comes to acceptable side effects.
Yeah that Chinese medicne doesn't work
Why is practically every major teaching hospital in the US (Finland is not at this modern point yet, or is it?) giving medical docters the opportunity to learn about herbs and acupucnture so those modalities can be added to their medical skills? So MDs can make more money? Shame on you for thinking that. ( Maybe that is true. Maybe MD's want to take over the show)The reason is because those modalities are successful in clinical settings.
UCLA's medical docter course of 200-300 hours is all a MD needs to do acupucnture. Most non- MD schools are 2500 - 3000 hours but of course they are not doctors.
Could go on but 15 minutes is enough of hunting and pecking on the type writer ooooops keyboard.
I truely believe Chinese medicne and all alternative/complementary forms of medicine work, are socially responsible from the grass roots up, give people a choice in how they want to be treated ,and just like all health care attempt to do no harm. The more people work together for a common cause, the more likely the cause will occur.

cha kuen
05-10-2003, 01:16 AM
MD's only have to take 200-300 hours of schooling to do acupunture? That is insulting.

But then again, they won't make good acupunturist so they won't be a threat to us. But then again, it's a bad name for acupunture.

PLCrane
05-16-2003, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by Former castleva
"Cardiovascular effects of acupuncture stimulation at point Governing Vessel 26 in halothane-anesthetized ponies.

Dill SG, Gleed R, Matthews NS, Erb HN, Miller TK.

During one anesthetic episode, electrical stimulation (electrostimulation) of GV-26 was performed, and during the other anesthetic episode, heat stimulation (moxibustion) of GV-26 was performed. The order of the stimulations was random. A nonacupuncture point was selected for comparable control stimulation during each experiment. Control and acupuncture stimulations were of equal intensity. There were no significant changes in cardiac output, systemic arterial pressure, or heart rate associated with either electrical or heat acupuncture stimulation."

I see a problem with this design. If the effects of acupuncture depend on central processing of sensory information, the anesthesia may prevent this from happening. Maybe I'm wrong - has it been previously shown that acupuncture is effective on anesthetized subjects?

I see a problem with the sham needles, too. Same problem. If the effects depend on sensory information, then any stimulation of the point may have an effect. Thus, something like heating a point or massaging a point might work. Clinical experience suggests that these other methods of point stimulation are effective.

Here's a link to the NIH Consensus Statement on Acupuncture
http://odp.od.nih.gov/consensus/cons/107/107_intro.htm

And here's some text from the into page -
Acupuncture as a therapeutic intervention is widely practiced in the United States. While there have been many studies of its potential usefulness, many of these studies provide equivocal results because of design, sample size, and other factors. The issue is further complicated by inherent difficulties in the use of appropriate controls, such as placebos and sham acupuncture groups. However, promising results have emerged, for example, showing efficacy of acupuncture in adult post-operative and chemotherapy nausea and vomiting and in post-operative dental pain. There are other situations such as addiction, stroke rehabilitation, headache, menstrual cramps, tennis elbow, fibromyalgia, myofacial pain, osteoarthritis, low back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and asthma where acupuncture may be useful as an adjunct treatment or an acceptable alternative or be included in a comprehensive management program. Further research is likely to uncover additional areas where acupuncture interventions will be useful.

Former castleva
05-17-2003, 01:51 AM
"I see a problem with the sham needles, too. Same problem. If the effects depend on sensory information, then any stimulation of the point may have an effect. Thus, something like heating a point or massaging a point might work. Clinical experience suggests that these other methods of point stimulation are effective."
It has been shown various times,that whether you activate the certain point or not (a completely wrong point as an example) the results may not vary at all.
Another thing to take into account is that "real" needles are,as far as I know,designed for that very purpose.While using fake needles,the impact on the skin may be significantly lower than what it tends to be while using general acuneedles.

"I see a problem with this design. If the effects of acupuncture depend on central processing of sensory information, the anesthesia may prevent this from happening. Maybe I'm wrong - has it been previously shown that acupuncture is effective on anesthetized subjects?"
Besides a few rather proud hoaxes,Im yet to see anything very convincing.

PLCrane
05-17-2003, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by Former castleva

It has been shown various times,that whether you activate the certain point or not (a completely wrong point as an example) the results may not vary at all.


Do you know what they were using for outcome measurement? The opposite has been shown, too - that stimulation of acu-points results in changes seen on brain scan that don't occur with stimulation of non-points.

I'm not really familiar enough with all the research to carry on much of a conversation about it, but I see enough evidence not to discount the whole thing at this point. Um, I guess I also have some bias in that I already believe that acupunture works, based on personal experience. (note: believing that acupuncture works doesn't necessarily equate to believing that every concept in TCM is true or accurate.)

Here's a link to an abstract of Cho's study on stimulating vision related points in the leg and its effects on the visual cortex compared to shining a light in the eye. There's a link to the full text article, and if you click on Related Articles, you'll see abstracts from other studies, too.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9482945&dopt=Abstract


PLC

Former castleva
05-17-2003, 07:42 AM
"Do you know what they were using for outcome measurement? The opposite has been shown, too - that stimulation of acu-points results in changes seen on brain scan that don't occur with stimulation of non-points. "
Im unaware of the details.I mean that you can easily get the same chemicals/reaction going whether you "puncture" or stimulate in unrelated fashion (certain article(s) previously posted relate to this)
Ive read about these changes,yet this is on shaky ground.
I think that is a better way to go,in order to sweep meridians right under the rug and look for something else.

"I'm not really familiar enough with all the research to carry on much of a conversation about it, but I see enough evidence not to discount the whole thing at this point. Um, I guess I also have some bias in that I already believe that acupunture works, based on personal experience. (note: believing that acupuncture works doesn't necessarily equate to believing that every concept in TCM is true or accurate.)"
Nature of the subject remains controversial.

"Here's a link to an abstract of Cho's study on stimulating vision related points in the leg and its effects on the visual cortex compared to shining a light in the eye. There's a link to the full text article, and if you click on Related Articles, you'll see abstracts from other studies, too."
It is possible that ancients might have literally "hit a nerve" (nothing really special)
Too bad they are not representing any relationship/connection within occipital lobes and this point.
You could pick virtually any point and state that it influences the brain,you could say it effects the thalamus (which would happen regardless) as an example.
Interesting regardless.

PLCrane
05-17-2003, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by Former castleva

I think that is a better way to go,in order to sweep meridians right under the rug and look for something else.

Take a look at a book by Mark Seem, called Acupuncture Osteopathy: A New American Acupuncture. He looks at the relationship between acupuncture meridians and zones of the body (ventral, lateral and dorsal) and trigger point placement. He argues that acupuncture points and trigger points are really the same thing.

Japaneses acupuncturists work more along these lines than do Chinese acupuncturists, by using the classical point location as a general guideline and palpating to find the exact location and direction of push that elicits maximum tenderness in the area. This sometimes puts the point an inch or two away from the textbook location.


Too bad they are not representing any relationship/connection within occipital lobes and this point.

It sounds like you're expecting an anatomically based relationship. The ancient Chinese weren't big into anatomy, but they did pay attention to function. I would argue that they are seeing the relationship between the point on the leg and the function performed by the occipital lobes, even if they don't know where that function is being performed.

You could pick virtually any point and state that it influences the brain,you could say it effects the thalamus (which would happen regardless) as an example.
Interesting regardless.

They did more than that. They showed that stimulating point on the leg that's supposed to affect vision activated the same areas of the brain as shining a light in the eye.

If you want to look at what happens in the thalamus, then you should pick a point that's specific for some remote part of the body, and see if stimulating that point activates the same area of the thalamus as would stimulation of the body part itself.

Using Cho's methods, it might be worthwhile to map the brain activity associated with stimulation of each and every point, and maybe the effects of combined points, too. This could take awhile, but it might provide enough data to begin to sort out what's really happening.

Former castleva
05-17-2003, 08:08 PM
"They did more than that. They showed that stimulating point on the leg that's supposed to affect vision activated the same areas of the brain as shining a light in the eye."

I know of a point or two which supposedly effect the eyes (very close to eyes they are) which seem to draw some blood into the area,I can easily understand this.

"If you want to look at what happens in the thalamus, then you should pick a point that's specific for some remote part of the body, and see if stimulating that point activates the same area of the thalamus as would stimulation of the body part itself.

Using Cho's methods, it might be worthwhile to map the brain activity associated with stimulation of each and every point, and maybe the effects of combined points, too. This could take awhile, but it might provide enough data to begin to sort out what's really happening."
I have seen data on a couple of points that seem to hold some water in light of science,not much else but its a worthy idea.

"It sounds like you're expecting an anatomically based relationship. The ancient Chinese weren't big into anatomy, but they did pay attention to function. I would argue that they are seeing the relationship between the point on the leg and the function performed by the occipital lobes, even if they don't know where that function is being performed."
Yes,I am.
If it is supposed to be a scientific method,I expect one to build a basis for such conclusion in such a manner.
Understanding of anatomy/physiology of ancient Chinese which does not seem to have evolved to this day is literally brainless in many respects.
Anyone with minimal understanding of those would be concerned (They cannot draw dramatic "qi"-science links if you know what I mean,when it comes to development :) )

"Take a look at a book by Mark Seem, called Acupuncture Osteopathy: A New American Acupuncture. He looks at the relationship between acupuncture meridians and zones of the body (ventral, lateral and dorsal) and trigger point placement. He argues that acupuncture points and trigger points are really the same thing. "
Im afraid I wont see the book anytime soon but acupoints/"meridians" have taken plenty of space from various therapies (including certain "western" ones)
I would not be extremely surprised on some of this but I cant say much more for now.

cha kuen
05-17-2003, 09:16 PM
Former,

Talking to you about this stuff is pointless because we go in circles. Anywys, looking at TCM with a western view is pointless and will have no outcomes.