Post

[bodhitree]

Former
define woo-woo ism?

[chen zhen]

It does'nt work?
It's the work of the CIA & Mossad.

At least a conspiracy of some sort.

[Former castleva]

Woo-woo,similar to "voodoo" is sometimes used to refer to superstition,pseudoscience etc.

[bodhitree]

Oh, like western medicine, oh wait that works, give em drugs or cut it out, give em drugs or cut it out

[bodhitree]

hey guys I'm headed out for the weekend, peace and prosperity, keep posting here for me, even if your making fun of me(chen).

[Former castleva]

"Oh, like western medicine, oh wait that works, give em drugs or cut it out, give em drugs or cut it out"

An ugly strawman.

[jgradisher]

Former Castleva,
I agree with you about the straw man and woo-woo-ism. But I think at least a bit of modern Western allopathic medicine involves woo-woo-ism as well. I recently read an article by Howard Bloom about the desperate battles by allopathic organisations in the US in the 19th Century to suppress homeopathic medicine, for instance. Or the recent modern battles against chiropractic.

If an allopathic doctor hasn't seen something before and/or doesn't have a cure for it, then it must not exist (I'm not saying this is true of every allopathic doctor, but in my experience, I've run into this before.) Lower Back Pain is a good example of this sort of thing.

My wife also had an eye problem wherein she had to go to 4 different doctors with 4 different prescriptions. The first three either gave her medication for the symptom or told her that her eyes were just tired. The fourth one told her to take care of the cause (sugar in the diet), while giving her drops for the symptom. She eliminated sugar and her eyes have improved immensely. (Two of the first three were allopathic eye "specialists", the fourth was an allopath GP with some homeopathic training, I believe.)

I think that any practitioner of any style of medicine would probably be a bit of a charlatan by dismissing any other tradition of healing, including allopathic, out of hand. There are some diseases and symptoms that are recognized in some systems that aren't recognized in others. And yes, every system has a bit of woo-woo-ism in it, some more than others. Including modern Western medecine. If it didn't have a certain level of woo-woo-ism, we wouldn't be willing to pay so much for our treatments. Humans like being bamboozled and wowed.

Regards,
James

[chen zhen]

keep posting here for me, even if your making fun of me(chen).

It's not funny making fun of you while you're gone, booty..

[Former castleva]

jgradisher,
Thanks for your opinion.Even though I do not entirely agree about your idea of "woo-wooism".

"Western medecine. If it didn't have a certain level of woo-woo-ism, we wouldn't be willing to pay so much for our treatments. Humans like being bamboozled and wowed."

That´s a colorful expression.
I´m not sure what you mean.

"(Two of the first three were allopathic eye "specialists", the fourth was an allopath GP with some homeopathic training, I believe.)"

If I read you right,you mean the first three were ophtalmologists and the fourth one was...a doctor with homeopathic training? I see.Specialists SHOULD know these things and I´m not entirely sure what you meant by this either but the possible fact that the person had homeopathic training is hardly relevant.

The battles against homeopathy or chiropractices as you put it,I don´t know for how long this is the case but these "therapies" (especially homeopathy) have deserved their reputation.
As far as my minor debating with them has gone,I´ve not seen any well reasoned arguments in their favour.For what it can be worth,I think tcm is better if you really are into this type of stuff.

[jgradisher]

If I had a problem, my first trip would not be to the herbalist, that's for sure.

But not everything my M.D. says is necessarily gospel. That's why I can go get a second opinion, and sometimes that second opinion will be completely at odds with the first only because the second doctor read an article in the JAMA or the Lancet that the first one had not seen.

If I read you right,you mean the first three were ophtalmologists and the fourth one was...a doctor with homeopathic training? I see.Specialists SHOULD know these things and I´m not entirely sure what you meant by this either but the possible fact that the person had homeopathic training is hardly relevant.

Two of the first 3 were opthalmologists, one of the opthalmologists told her that she had tired eyes. The final doctor having some homeopathic was irrelevant to the case in point, but perhaps made her more open to things that the "specialists" would not see because it does not coincide with their limited view.

We all are sometimes limited by the filters we see the world through. I don't see why doctors and scientists can't be subject to the same filters. As well, with the whole publish or perish phenomenon, a lot of researchers can be hampered from interpreting data that may go counter to received wisdom; it certainly has a lower chance of being published.

Of course a similar analogy can be applied to those people who have a vested interest in "alternative" medicine. We get the Cherokee Hair Tampon Phenomenon (see the South Park episode of the same name) there: if it was manufactured or discovered by a non-modern non-Western person, it must be good.

I think a lot of traditional medicine is good at the preventive aspects, even if just for the placebo effect, but having a very limited exposure to traditional medicine, I couldn't pronounce boldly on the efficacy of treating actual disease. I would like to believe the hype, but having no personal experience, I can't say that I do yet.

Just my two cents worth, again...

By the way, I do enjoy reading your rationalist diatribes; I too tend to be skeptical of things I haven't yet experienced. I suppose the key is to temporarily suspend disbelief, without getting lost in it.

Regards,
James

[bodhitree]

Former
Cherokee hair tampon(CHT) Was great!!! There are a lot of frauds out there, but a lot of healing systems use common logic. TCM diet, preventative medicine: balance your intake of foods, mostly whole grains, fresh fruits and veggies, very little meat. This does not go against many western diets(exeption of Atkins). Many products long used as medicinal in Asiatic traditions are being recomended by modern science such as Green Tea and other types of teas for their antioxident qualities. Not everything that is traditional is woo woo ism. As for CHT, there are a lot of peaple and buisnesses trying to profit on peoples interest into various traditions. All these drinks, cosmetics, and everything else with herbal products are just marketing tools. For one thing most tradition medicines dont isolate active ingrediants and for another thing there are many things to concider before taking medicinal things, Old TCM masters didnt say 'go buy your snapple w/ ginseng in it' it just isn t that simple!

[Former castleva]

I agree about some of that,there really is a basis for certain teas and generally healthy diet (with no tao cycles or cultural restrictions,and without certain improvements)
I think one good thing they got right in TCM (by accident perhaps) was the influence of emotions,which reached the ears of conventional medicine a lot longer ago.

[bodhitree]

TCM is in agrees with modern medicine in the fact that emotions are physical things. TCM may say they come from energy and MM may say it comes from chemichals, Both the same.

[Former castleva]

I don´t think it´s just that simple but basically,yeah.

[bodhitree]

Former
I don´t think it´s just that simple but basically,yeah

TCM didnt have the tools researchers have today. Modern Doctors dont have the advantage of observing the whole person and their patterns to diagnose/treat illness. MM knows anatomy, geneology very well. TCM see's how interactions happen very well. All Good