PDA

View Full Version : Is TCM actually the placebo effect?



Fu-Pow
08-22-2001, 09:26 PM
I've been reading two books simultaneously, one is called simply "The Placebo Effect." The other is called "The Yellow Emperor's Classic on Internal Medicine." Both allude to the fact that TCM can only help prevent or relieve the some the symptoms of disease not cure it. Bringing into question its actual mechanism. Is it possible that it is simply the placebo effect at work?

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

illusionfist
08-23-2001, 02:46 AM
TCM is proactive and Western medicine for the most part is reactive.

Go get some acupuncture and see how it feels. Its something that can't be explained over these means.

Peace :D

Fish of Fury
08-23-2001, 02:54 AM
i find it odd that people always talk about SIMPLY or MERELY placebo effect.
placebo itself can be a powerful healing tool, and is underresearched and often ignored.
having said that, i'm personally pretty confident that there's more to TCM than placebo

__________________________________________________ _________________________ "I'm just trying to lull you into a genuine sense of security!"

dunbarj01
08-23-2001, 05:47 AM
Alot of research is being conducted in to TCM at the moment (as well as in the past few years) and due to the volume of TCM such a blanket question is not really worthwhile. As far as I know, some medical practices and medicines have been validated whereas research into other materials/ingredients has shed new light on applications unthought of. In the former group, I have seen that liqourice root has proven to have anti-inflammaotry actions and I believe this is a common ingredient in Dit Da Jow. I think one of the good things about the western scientific approach to validating TCM is that it may eventaully lead to a TCM codex/pharmacopea if one doesn't already exist.

joedoe
08-23-2001, 06:37 AM
I agree with Fish - there is a lot to be said about the Placebo Effect. I also agree that there is more to TCM than the Placebo Effect. I doubt that a system of medicine and treatment would have lasted so long on the Placebo Effect.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

dunbarj01
08-23-2001, 08:57 AM
That's a good point. If your placebos worked for a couple of thousand years, they'd have to be the full strength ones! :eek: :D :eek: :D

Okay, I'll just go over there... :rolleyes:

Nexus
08-23-2001, 06:30 PM
Umm that is a pretty funny question but you should look at the facts: TCM has been used in terms of acupuncture as an anesthetic. That means in laymens terms, if it were a placebo effect, it would have to be an amazingly powerful one considering thousands of people have undergone surgeries using only acupuncture as the primary source of pain numbing. It seems to have been kept around up until now.

- Nexus

<font size="1">"Time, space, the whole universe - just an illusion! Often said, philosophically verifiable, even scientifically explainable. It's the <font color="blue">'just'</font> which makes the honest mind go crazy and the <font color="blue">ego</font> go berserk." - Hans Taeger</font>

kull
08-23-2001, 07:10 PM
One interesting fact that is that placebo effects statistically has a success rate of ABOUT 30%. TCM has a higher success rate than that. On mitigating withdrawl sypmtoms from drug addiction it has about 70-80% success rate.

For physical rehabilitation one study (sorry, forgot the univ. that conducted the study) shows a higher success rate than that of physical therapy alone; more than 75%.

In an ancient medical text titled "Shang Hun Lun" Zhang Zhong Jin, successfully recorded and treated what many scholars believe, what would be called today "Typhoid Fever", this was about 2,500 yrs ago.

Also, and most IMPORTANT FACT in debunking the "placebo effect" champions, is the fact that acupuncture has been done on ANIMALS, with approximately the same success rate.

70%> is about, the standards for effective treatment for any new drug, therapy, procedure....etc. Coincidentally, it was also the standard in ancient Imperial China, in judging a successful physician from a useless one.
( Alternative Medicine for Dummies; by Dr.Dillard, MD,DC,CAc)

bearpaw
08-24-2001, 12:37 PM
To last 3000 years, TCM as a placebo would have to work very very well. better yet it works on scatipics too.

origenx
08-24-2001, 08:25 PM
Funny thing is - the "placebo effect" is basically a scientific admission of the validity of the mind-body link.

Nonetheless, I've had actual physical marks left on my body as a result of TCM treatments, so I doubt it's simply and solely a "placebo effect."

Repulsive Monkey
08-25-2001, 01:49 AM
If you thought that the Yellow Eporor's Classic made TCM out to be the Placebo effect, then unfortunately you may of misunderstood it. It is in fact quite the opposite. And yes, diseases CAN be cured. This in itself sounds like a generalisation, but it depends on situations and the probability of ones own health and the surrounding influencing factors also.

Fu-Pow
09-01-2001, 11:10 PM
Here's the direct quote from The Placebo Effect: and Interdisciplinary approach, edited by Anne Harrison.

"Acupuncture , the most extensively used treatment in China for 2500 years, is still in use, with incursions into Western countries. However, acupuncture has probably been more harmful than helpful, since is likely that unsterilized needles were responsible for ****logous serum jaundice, which was endemic in China for centuries. Although Veith (1972) concludes that "the maintenance of these cumbersome and probably painful methods of treatment must indicate that they possess healing power," the Yellow Emperor inadvertently proposed a better explanation. "The ancient sages did not treat those who were already ill," only "those who were not ill." His advice provides a primer for placebo effects: treat only patients who are not seriously ill, likely to improve spontaneously, and prone to benefit from nonspecific placebo or no treatment."

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

joedoe
09-03-2001, 10:17 AM
Western doctors don't treat those that are terminally ill either - they give them palliative care, but they do not treat the illness.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

Fu-Pow
09-04-2001, 11:12 PM
I don't see "terminally" ill in my quote anywhere.
The fact is that while acupuncture is helpful with relieving pain (a neurological phenomena) it has yet to show that it has any real physical effect. And we lack a scientific mechanism for explaining its effects other than that of the placebo effect. The placebo effect itself is a mysterious phenomena, but we do know that like acupuncture it is capable of relieving pain.

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

Fish of Fury
09-05-2001, 02:37 AM
the AMA seems convinced enough to accept acupuncture as a valid form of treatment.
regardless of the yellow emperor quote (which i suspect may be taken out of context, but i'm not sure) modern acupuncture has helped many people with a variety of illnesses...empirical evidence this may be, but it works.(not with 100% efficacy, but then again, nothing does)

science is great, but i think it's attained a cult like following ie. those who question "science" (or anybody in a white coat) are shouted down and their viewpoint not even considered.it reminds me of witches being burned at the stake.
why does a "scientific" theoretical speculation carry more weight than empirical evidence?

__________________________________________________ _________________________ "I'm just trying to lull you into a genuine sense of security!"

Fu-Pow
09-05-2001, 10:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> it reminds me of witches being burned at the stake.
[/quote]

Funny you should say that. Because it is because of science and our understanding of the world that people no longer believe in witches. But I didn't post this do argue about the effectiveness of science. Obviously the scientific method is very powerful.

And I'm not "shouting down" TCM. It has positive effects. But then again so does the placebo effect. The placebo effect is just as "mysterious" as TCM. No one really knows how the placebo works. We might as just well say it operates by some vague mchansism as "chi." So I'm not saying TCM isn't "real" I'm just curious if it operates under the same mechanism as the placebo effect, ie a psychosomatic mechanism.

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

dunbarj01
09-06-2001, 03:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The fact is that while acupuncture is helpful with relieving pain (a neurological phenomena) it has yet to show that it has any real physical effect. [/quote]

Fu Pow,

Your information seems somewhat dated. Accupuncture actually causes the release of endorphins. It has also been found that flicking the needles, twisting them or sending a current through them can alter the release of different opiod substances. Low frequency currents release enkephalins whereas high frequency releases dynorphin in the spinal cord. TCM has its sceptics and it is difficult applying the placebo effect as this is often used in western biomedical research because the western approach deals with singular chemical entities for the treatment of illness. TCM is a cocktail of chemicals and it is thus harder to fully understand the body's interaction with these chemcial cocktails.

Cheers

dunbarj01
09-06-2001, 04:02 AM
Hi Fish,

I think it is more complicated than that. There are many conflicting views in the scientific community. Many laymen have a view that science should be incorruptable but unfortunately some scientists are not that scientific, follow their own agendas, are confused with technologists or are part of the greater politics of science that is often hijacked by governments or big business. I think many scientists feel that they have trouble getting heard.

Cheers

Fu-Pow
09-06-2001, 08:28 AM
Can you point me to any peer reviewed journal article which outlines the information you posted about acupuncture. BTW, I am very little impressed by big words or chemical names, I am a scientist after all.

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

Fu-Pow
09-06-2001, 08:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>TCM is a cocktail of chemicals and it is thus harder to fully understand the body's interaction with these chemcial cocktails.
[/quote]

I might also add that herbs and their extracts are not standardized for potency. Therefore, when using an herbal concoction you really have no idea what you are getting in terms of "active" ingredients, nor the amount. There are a few instances in the history of herbal remedies where they actually have a pharmacological effect (e.g. think of limes combating scurvy) ,but for the most part it has been hit or miss.

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

Fish of Fury
09-08-2001, 02:30 PM
many modern herbal medicines ARE standardised in fact (if the MAIN active ingredient is known) whilst still retaining the chemical complexity of the whole herb.
many doctors/scientists have the concern you have raised, re: standardisation, safety etc.

on the other hand, from a natural medicine perspective this is a good thing,chemical complexity can equal synergy of actives, reduced side effects etc.

i believe there's a case for both points of view.

there is a great deal of research supporting the validity of herbal medicine, but going beyond this...i personally feel there is more value in applying natural medicines from their traditional paradigm as opposed to relying solely on modern research.
hundreds of years of empirical knowledge is not as hit and miss as you might think

__________________________________________________ _________________________ "I'm just trying to lull you into a genuine sense of security!"

Repulsive Monkey
09-08-2001, 02:52 PM
Vlad I admire your bravvado in your generalisations in summing up TCM as the age old (and may I add refuted) idea as an Endorphin releasing methodology of practice. It is clear to anyone with impartial knowledge that this clearly is NOT the reason why Acupunture works. This idea which is quite old now and quite redundant is merely a Western Scientifically repressed and rarther much knee-jerk framework of trying to understand another framework of medecine ONLY through their own model of understanding. To label it it generically as being THE DEFINITIVE reason for why it works is just like saying that during the Salem witch trials "Oh she must be a witch because when we drowned her she didn't float back up to the surface". You cannot label something through your own terminology and nomenclature if you don't have the correct understanding to use the correct words and models. If you don't have the right understanding or the right terminology to translate one process from a different style of medicine to another then just don't do it. Beleieve the translation will create all manner of problems and inaccuracies just like the fallacies we have todat in modern science when they try to explain other models out understanding out side of their realms into their (mis)understandings. It's like someone who only reads English trying to decipher text written in German. The translation will usually turn out out to be quite appalling.

Braden
09-08-2001, 09:40 PM
Acupunture has been tested using a variety of animal models. It worked. That's a pretty good indication it's not a placebo effect.

There are a number of "modern western scientific" explanations for the mechanism of acupuncture. Personally, I do not think that any of them are particularly good scientific explanations yet; but the nature of science is progressive, so this is not a particularly ****ing attack. However, it is important here to consider the difference between "western scientific" and "western medical" concepts in terms of proofs and validity. Science is concerned with describing underlying mechanisms. Medicine is not - it is only concerned with describing valid use. Of course, science feeds medicine to an immense degree; but to consider the two as the same is incorrect and will result in flawed logic, particularly in discussions such as these. For example, the drug lithium has been, and still is, in mass use and critical acceptance among the medical community as a treatment for depression; yet no mechanism has been proposed.

In regards to science accepting "a link between mind and body," I'm not sure why this should surprise anyone. Descarte's dualism was a political scheme devised so that scientists would be allowed to study the brain without infringing upon the domain of the church. The primary feeling among the conservative scientific community now is one of materialism - the mind IS the brain. So clearly the two are connected. So a theory that involves mind-brain interaction isn't at odds with conservative scientific thought in the least.

Which leads to another problem in this thread. What do you mean by psychosomatic response? The implied definition is one of the mind influencing the body. But as the two are currently seen as one entity, this seems entirely meaningless. Do you mean any mechanism whereby the CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM influences the REST OF THE BODY? I'm sure that, spelled out in such a manner, it is clear how fruitless THAT definition would be. If you mean something else, then much care must be taken in spelling out exactly what you mean. Good luck; I don't think it can be done. The point is, be carefull tossing around terms like "psychosomatic;" upon analysis they're far more useless than they seem.

dunbarj01
09-09-2001, 05:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> BTW, I am very little impressed by big words or chemical names, I am a scientist after all.[/quote]

Good for you, son.

Describing a biological mechanism or pathway will be difficult without using chemical terms or the like. For references you can search the British Medical Journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, The American Journal of Chinese Medicine, Focus on Alternative & Complementary Therapies, Anethesia, Journal of Obesity & Related Disorders, Acupuncture in Medicine, Journal of Internal Medicine, Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine. They should outline what acupunture can and can't do.

Fish of Fury
09-09-2001, 08:08 AM
Oh, and i just wanted to say...
..epigallocatechingallate!

aw, c'mon FuPow, aren't you even a LITTLE bit impressed? :)

__________________________________________________ _________________________ "I'm just trying to lull you into a genuine sense of security!"

Fu-Pow
09-09-2001, 09:07 PM
Thanks for the list. But I was wondering specifically where you got the information you posted in regards to these chemical signals.

BTW, don't call me son....very disrespectful...it'd be like me calling you my *****. Lets not go there.

Fu-Pow

http://www.fongs-kungfu.de/assets/images/lionhead.gif

"Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu does not encourage its students to abuse or harm others with no reason. Nevertheless, in times when Kung Fu must be performed, Choy Lay Fut requires the student to change from a gentleman into a fierce and cold fighter."

-Lee Koon Hung,
CLF:The Dynamic Art of Fighting

joedoe
09-10-2001, 04:42 AM
I once had a similar discussion with one Goktimus Prime. Just because TCM cannot easily be explained using scientific terminology does not mean that it does not work. To me, we are talking about 2 different thought paradigms so it would be difficult at best to explain one system in terms of another system.

Just because it cannot be easily measured or quantified does not mean that the theory (or practice) is unsound.

Needless to say, I disagree with you - I do not believe TCM is the placebo effect. How about we just agree to disagree? :)

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

Crimson Phoenix
09-17-2001, 04:13 PM
Fish,nah, not impressed, it's just some antioxidant found in green tea which is pretty much hyped as anti cancerous these days...hahahahhahahah :-)
Are there some other fellow biologists here???

kull
09-17-2001, 11:48 PM
There has been an emerging field within the scienctific community that is looking beyond the the "Newtonian Mechanics" of biology. Quantum theory has been a revolution in physics( the basis of all scientific discipline) for quite some time. Yet, these theories has yet to filter down to our understanding of biology.

There are still many processes in our bodies that we have yet to understand. One very unwidely publicized problem exists in field of muscle energetics; hydrolysis of ATP and CP are inadequate to account for the total energy production(incl.thermodynamics)for muscle contraction. 2 reviews of this subject concur that some "extra" energy is produced, and by muscles from a variety of animals also. (Holmscher,E. and C.J. Keen,1978. Skeletal muscle energetics and metabolism. Ann.Rev.Physiol.40:93-131; Curtin, NA and RC Woledge,1978. Energy changes in muscular contraction. Physiol. Rev.58:690-761). There are also many more "unexplained phenomena" that shows that current knowledge of physiology cannot explain; ie emanation of magnetic fields from qigong practioners, yoga, theraputic touch nurses...that can have "non-artifact" effects.

Read "Body Electric" Dr. Robert o. Becker MD. His research has very far reaching implications, far too complex to explain on a bulletin board. Also, papers by James Oschman PhD, Beverly Rubik PhD.

As for peer review study on effect of acupuncture, research journals are full of them. All you have to do is look. I will give you one, Charles Shang, MD. Mechanism of Acupuncture- Beyond neurohumoral theory( Emory Univ. School of Med.) "pt PC6 accelerates bradycardia and decelerates tachycardia. ST36 surpresses hyperfunction(diarrhea) and stimulates hypofunction(constipation) of gut motility."

As a scientist you know that "evolution is a conservative process", bacteria have non-molecular communication system. The ability to respond to environment develop long before there were nerves, hormones, and circulatory sys. Hence, complex organism will still retain some of these processes.

Fu-Pow
09-18-2001, 07:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> There has been an emerging field within the scienctific community that is looking beyond the the "Newtonian Mechanics" of biology. [/quote]

In order to reach a Quantum theory of biology it would require that the molecules that make up the human body, somehow "step out" of there role as molecules in the human body. Granted, molecules in the human body have a differently coordinated activity in the human body, than in say a rock. However, at the quantum level the molecules still follow certain laws. And those laws are the basis for the next level of organization, ie the molecule. One level of organization supports the other. So while I think you can have a more integrated idea of biology you cannot say that it is really "Quantum."

Thanks for the references I will check them out.

Fu-Pow
http://www.makskungfu.com/images/Graphics/Choy%20Lay%20Fut%20red.gif

Fish of Fury
09-19-2001, 03:57 AM
interesting Fu Pow

in basic chemistry we can see that relative to the size of subatomic particles (even simply the nucleus and electrons) an atom is largely just space.as we move up to larger molecules we've got even more space.
so in a way the apparent solidity of matter could be seen as a reflection of the strength of the bonds (ionic and covalent).these bonds can be seen as energy, so it's energy not "solid stuff" that makes matter seem solid.
the duality of matter (viewing light as either a wave or a photon particle interchangeably) sets a precedent to view "real" particles as energy as well.

now, i totally agree that this could be seen as theoretical and impractical.at the orginisational level of the human body (atoms-molecules-tissues-organs-systems) how relevant is this?
i don't know, but i believe personally that the question should not be shrugged off too lightly.

how sure are we that atoms/energy can't
""step out" of there role as molecules in the human body"

i know from personal experience that things like acupuncture, energy healing etc. DO get results.
not 100%, and not for everyone(no system of medicine does)...but they do something.

so, is it just placebo? (i don't think so).but if so, isn't that really just another word for the same thing, a scientifically unexplained healing phenomena.
ie. if it's "all in the mind" doesn't that warrant some respect and/or research?

many things are written off as placebo or spontaneous remission...but these aren't really explanations, they're just terms.
we don't even know how anaesthetic works.don't you think that until we can fully scientifically explain placebo and spontaneous remission that we should keep at least an open mind that there may be forces at work in nature/the human body beyond our current scientific model?

as a previous poster mentioned, i'd also question the validity of trying to force traditional paradigms into the current scientific understanding.
systems like TCM may be complete and accurate in their own right.
just as we have many different languages that can all express the same concepts, is it not possible to have different methods of understanding the same things (in this case medicine/health/the body) without having to squeeze them into "science" or the modern allopathic model of medicine?

__________________________________________________ _________________________ "I'm just trying to lull you into a genuine sense of security!"

bodhitree
07-24-2003, 05:45 AM
If TCM is placibo, why is it effective in Vetranary medicine.

fragbot
07-24-2003, 08:34 AM
Originally posted by bodhitree
If TCM is placibo, why is it effective in Vetranary medicine.

My dog periodically starts to bloat. When I see the preliminary symptom--crazed licking of everything in sight--I begin to pet her and speak to her in calming tones.

About 1/2 the time, this is enough to make her symptoms and, presumably, her discomfort disappear.

How does this fit with your question?

bung bo
08-09-2003, 06:22 PM
i've had acupuncture treatments that totally knocked out some friggin serious joint problems before. i think it is more that a placebo.

although, when i have that done, or any herbal or natural healing performed, i feel really good knowing i'm using natural stuff to heal myself and i'm certain it will work. and when i take some synthetic drug for a mygraine or something, i just grumble about how it will make me drowsy and sluggish and all the other crappy side effects that come with synthetic drugs. so i see how some people can think TCM is a placebo. those people should try some TCM.

Repulsive Monkey
08-10-2003, 04:39 AM
TCM is as much a placebo as Western medicine.
I would of thought that was obvious!!!
However TCM is not used in that way, it's used as pertinent treatment for specific conditions, but hey so Western medicine!! Why do people want to make divisions between the two when in fact there ar far more similarities than one wants to dmit?

blooming lotus
08-13-2003, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by
If you thought that the Yellow Eporor's Classic made TCM out to be the Placebo effect, then unfortunately you may of misunderstood it. It is in fact quite the opposite. And yes, diseases CAN be cured. This in itself sounds like a generalisation, but it depends on situations and the probability of ones own health and the surrounding influencing factors also.

repulsive monkey

If you were a practioner of tcm and which qi gong is surely a part of or even just aware of that both preventitively and curatively then to not practice or work to cultivate and consistently flow within that qi wouldn't that make you an attention seeking hypocondrac and other forms of tcm an absolute placebo?

And being that qi is the force which sustains life at full health or any health or life then wouldn't it have to be a conscious decision to let go of that and maybe i should meditate on it deeper but what would justify that - specifically?

Repulsive Monkey
08-14-2003, 02:41 AM
Your remark doesn't make too much sense on a few levels, namely I'm not sure what you're questioning due to its unclear direction, plus why do take someone elses quote and then comment to me (unless it was an old quote by me!).

By the way I am a practitioner of both TCM and Qi-gong.

There seems to be some confusion here???

blooming lotus
08-14-2003, 05:51 AM
Originally posted by
If you thought that the Yellow Eporor's Classic made TCM out to be the Placebo effect, then unfortunately you may of misunderstood it. It is in fact quite the opposite. And yes, diseases CAN be cured. This in itself sounds like a generalisation, but it depends on situations and the probability of ones own health and the surrounding influencing factors also.

This is one of your quotes and I as I said, not to take anything away from non qi gong forms of "tcm", but by practing qi gong you could be assumed to have maximum qi right - which we all know we both absorb and omit, so if a patient was to see us we would be consiously or no contolledly or no, omitting that qi which they - consciously or no are absorbing therefore giving them the benifits we receive from having qi flow at that level making anything else a placebo and ... do you see where I'm comming from with this or are we just on different planets with this?

Repulsive Monkey
08-18-2003, 08:58 AM
I think I see where you're coming from but I don't entirley agree with it however I will not enriely diss it either.

looking_up
08-18-2003, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by fragbot


My dog periodically starts to bloat. When I see the preliminary symptom--crazed licking of everything in sight--I begin to pet her and speak to her in calming tones.

About 1/2 the time, this is enough to make her symptoms and, presumably, her discomfort disappear.

How does this fit with your question?


Maybe your dog bloats because you don't pet her enough and speak to her in calming tones.

cha kuen
08-21-2003, 03:46 AM
There are plenty of studies that have x-rays of peopel who have lower back problems, that show xray improvements after external herbal treatment and stuff. (bonesetting)

Myself included. I'd have to dig up my old x-rays, and take some new ones, but i'm confident they show a big change, since my pain is a lot less now.



placebo macebo. Internal organ disorders are cured by herbs... diabeties, etc..........

The Willow Sword
08-24-2003, 06:54 AM
that the mind has the ability to faciliate a healing process within the body. Now i dont believe that TCM is Placebo. But i would imagine that combined with the minds ability to heal the body(as we have seen in the placebo effect) TCM which is essentially herbal food for the body can be and IS a better means to Prevent certain ailments of the body, and improve overall health and well being.
Although there are certain aspects of TCM which i find questionable. mainly with the use of certain ingrediants in formulas like sea horse and bear gall bladder and other stuff like deer and ox tendon.( i fail to see what ,if any, healing properites these ingrediants have on the body)

TWS

Former castleva
08-27-2003, 07:18 PM
"Umm that is a pretty funny question but you should look at the facts: TCM has been used in terms of acupuncture as an anesthetic. That means in laymens terms, if it were a placebo effect, it would have to be an amazingly powerful one considering thousands of people have undergone surgeries using only acupuncture as the primary source of pain numbing. It seems to have been kept around up until now."

Care/Can you provide evidence of this?

All relating;
http://www.vet-task-force.com/Acuref1.htm
http://www.canoe.ca/HealthAlternativeColumns/020509.html
http://www.ncahf.org/pp/acu.html