"I know you don't like anecdotal evidence, but I have witnessed with my own eyes this situation- A person was being needled for a certain condition. She had never had acupuncture before and knew nothing about it or it's basic theories. Yet she accurately described where she felt "something" moving up her arm and eventually into her head area. She described perfectly the path of her sensations which directly corresponded to the path of an acupuncture channel. This cannot be explained as nerve conduction, as there are no corresponding nerves which travel in that exact way. How is this explained?
"
Yes,I dislike anecdotal evidence.
It is true that there is no physiological or anatomical link between meridians and not even any real meridians.
I cannot really comment on such "rumors" but despite meridians etc. being hypotethical,there are certain points that can be traced to nerves (thus there could be a neurophysiological foundation) which of,Iīve seen nothing conclusive so far.
"And finally, one more point regarding animal studies. I have seen, after a distal point being stimulated, that other points along the channel "swell", allowing one to visually identify the channel pathway on horses. Again, this pathway has no corresponding anatomy to explain it, and there is no way placebo can explain it. Please don't insult my intelligence and say that I was "conned" or "tricked" by a quack, as I personally know the human patient anyway, and she could not have possibly known the pathway of the channel, yet she accurately described it to a "T". I am not some gullible dolt, I am trained in Western science (as much as human behavior can be considered a "science!"). The "qi", or "whatever" travels in pathways that are not yet know by Western science."
That contains possible arguments/fallacies to prejudicial language,pity and appeal to authority.
Youīre giving me hard time here.More anecdotal information that I have little to say on.If interested,Iīve posted some negative trials of veterinary acupuncture.
No,Iīm not trying to insult you in any way.
"Not known by Western science" is a fallacy.
The fact that these concepts are highly non-falsifiable demolishes it,it is not the same as "science cannot".
As fragbot has pointed out,how would we start studying this?
As you say yourself,anatomy&physiology knows as much about qi and meridians as it does know about soul (and the "burden of proof" may kick in)
In order for this to make some sense in terms of logic,it should start making some kind of predictions.Instead of that,one can evade them by saying that meridians are "invisible" and that "qi" is a life force that governs the universe.
After this,there have been some trials to track down such meridians just like trials which prove that needling the wrong points or perhaps not a point at all CAN bring similar results.
A complete collapse of logic is required to justify such a position imo.
When it comes to Western science as a method,there is another possible fallacy lying around here somewhere.
At least a few times during these debates Iīve had to remind of itīs non-existence.
Is feng shui science? Is tcm science? Is phrenology science? (not the medical application) Is personology a science?
By definition of it,these can be pseudoscience at best.
Yet half of these are Western,half Chinese.
If someone was to refer to "Western science" just a bit more in future,Iīd call it the "argument to location".
The sunsetīs setting down.Lay me on the forest floor.
______________________________
I do not necessarily stand behind all of the statements I have made in the past, in this forum. Some of the statements may have appeared to support a biased view of reality, and may have been offensive. If you are a moral person and were hurt by comments that I made, you can PM me about it and I will apologize if I find your cause reasonable.
-FC, summer of 2006-
Reply With Quote
