Healing crisis

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/18/04 4:30:15 AM,

Chinese Medicine writes:

 

<< Yeah, I have to say that I've never been one to buy into the idea of

 

a healing crisis in Chinese medicine. I usually think that it

 

indicates that something was missing in the treatment approach. >>

 

Lon: Two people come for treatment-the one who wants to " get better " and the

one who is already making him/her-self sick. Everyone wants to ''get better " ,

few want to change. There are two momentum's competing for the vessel the

upright, true, authentic influence that is rooted in the Jing, qi, and shen

(yang)

and the mundane yin influences of conditioning (xieqi, stagnations). The

closer a person gets to true healing, deep healing, healing that approaches the

restitution of the upright forces as the motivating influence inn a persons

life, the less likely they are to return for treatment.

Have you ever treated a patient and then, a day or two later, realized

the perfect treatment for him/her-only to have the patient cancel all standing

appointments? When the dysfunctional Qi that supports illness is about to

collapse all of the acquired negative momentum will rally to maintain possession

of

the vessel in, what I would term, a healing crisis that manifests

emotionally, physically, and ultimately spiritually as a crisis of faith.

When faced with its death, that part of ourselves which is not authentic

has only two ruses-it generates our greatest fear or desire. Another way of

saying this is that the zhenqi and zhengqi want to rectify the heart/kidney axis

and the xieqi, or that which possesses us is intent on never allowing us to

align with what is true and authentic. Thus fear and desire are generated to

keep separate the water and fire.

Not only is the healing crisis real (discussed at length in Ch 7 and 12

of Nourishing Destiny and Ch 4 of Clinical Practice) I'd go so far as to say

that there is no healing without one. And, this doesn't mean that physical

symptoms *have* to get worse-just that there is generally terror at some point

that

causes doubt before the restitution of authentic nature.

[Guest guest]

Lonny,

 

When I first read your post, I was inclined to agree, as I have seen numerous

varieties

of this dynamic occur in the clinic: healing progresses to a point where subtle

resistance intervenes, and the patient's attachment to his imbalance overcomes

his

will to improve.

 

Upon further reflection, however, I think you've oversimplified and overstated

the

case ('there is no healing without' a crisis, etc...). In all human experience,

there is a

continuum that spans the gamut from the coarsest physical aspect to the

subtlest,

innermost dimension. Along this continuum there are innumerable gradations,

though in general they could be grouped into such functional categories as

physical,

emotional, cognitive, spiritual, etc. Some of us tend to be most aware of the

physical

aspect; others are predominantly emotional; some are 'in their heads'. Some

function

in the realm of 'faith'; others are oblivious to, or in steadfast denial of,

this aspect of

their humanity. We all have moments of greater or lesser inner awareness; some

live

more stably in one dimension, and others are more volatile and apt to associate

their

somatic experience with emotions or psyche or spirit - or vice-versa.

 

As health care practitioners I think it behooves us to meet the patient where he

is,

and not overshoot (or undershoot) the mark. The patient who presents with a

physical complaint is usually inviting us in on that level, and may not be ready

to

transcend that level. To impose a more 'spiritual' treatment strategy upon one

who is

not amenable (consciously or unconsciously) may constitute an inappropriate

treatment - perhaps even an act of arrogance. And I think it is that sort of

misalignment with the patient's place along the continuum that tends to trigger

healing crises. The severity of the crisis will be commensurate with the extent

of the

misalignment.

 

It may of course be helpful to facilitate some release of deeply-constrained

emotion

or desire, provided that the release is welcomed, and manageble, by the patient.

We've all seen patients cry on the table, and we engage our communication skills

and

empathy to reassure the patient that this is a good thing. Part of our craft,

after all, is

to coax the patient up the spectrum toward greater awareness and personal

responsibility. But if something we've done triggers so much resistance that

the

patient doesn't come back, we've done them a disservice. It happens, and will

happen, to the best of us, but let's be honest with ourselves and refrain from

blaming

the patient, or even the patient's xie qi. Rather, let's learn from the

experience and

refine our approach.

 

Best regards,

Simcha Gottlieb

 

 

>

> Lon: The

> closer a person gets to true healing, deep healing, healing that approaches

the

> restitution of the upright forces as the motivating influence inn a persons

> life, the less likely they are to return for treatment.

> ...

> Not only is the healing crisis real (discussed at length in Ch 7 and 12

> of Nourishing Destiny and Ch 4 of Clinical Practice) I'd go so far as to say

> that there is no healing without one. And, this doesn't mean that physical

> symptoms *have* to get worse-just that there is generally terror at some point

that

> causes doubt before the restitution of authentic nature.

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

My experiences have led me to the perspective that healing follows

Herring's Law - " toxins " or more generally " obstructions " (physical,

emotional, mental, spiritual) are " released " form the inside to the

outside from the center to the extremities. This makes lots of sense

to me since that is how obstructions must travel in order to be

released from the body to the " outside " . As an aside I should relate

that my perspective is that illness is the result of obstructed qi

flow - as opposed to an " out of balance " condition.

 

In so far as " healing crisis " is concerned, I have found (an my

Chinese physician who has been practicing for 30 years concurs) that

the " rate of release " is highly unpredictable and nearly impossible to

control. A client or patient who decides to release will release

quickly - those who retain at one level or another will do so. This is

a very individualized phenomenon. On the otherhand, those

patients/clients who are properly educated about what to expect (the

nature and direction of the release per Herring Law) generally are

less concerned about the " healing crisis " (i.e., it no longer is

viewed as a crisis) vs. those who are not educated about what to expect.

 

I have talked to people who have related " cure " without healing

crisis, but upon further discussion, it becomes likely that the

" symptoms " have really shifted (to another place or deeper into the

body) rather than have been " cured " . This has been my experiences, but

still rather limited compared to the universe of experiences and I am

always looking for differing perspectives and ideas.

 

Regards,

Rich

[Guest guest]

hi all,

Jack worsley enthused about healing crises in the Laws of Cure

 

Symptoms move from above to below

Symptoms move from wthin to without

Symptoms reappear in the reverse order from which they originally

appeared

 

 

Also in naturopathy the healing crisis occurs.

 

In my experience I see a healing crisis mebbe 10% - 25% of the time

with acup and/or with herbs/naturopathy.

 

One is more likely to generate a healing crisis with

constitutional/wholistic/non-symptom-orientated type of treatments, I

think

 

regardez

 

stephen

>

 

 

--

Stephen MacAllan

Lic.Ac., B.Ac., M.Ac., M.H.,

Cert.B.E.R.M., M.H.

M.B.Ac.C.,M.A.M.H.

Acupuncturist, Herbalist,

Kosmed practitioner

Vega-tester

www.stephenmacallan.co.uk

www.stephenandphilipnaturally.co.uk

powered by amiga 060/mediator

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " stephen

macallan " <stephenmacallan@u...> wrote:

> hi all,

> Jack worsley enthused about healing crises in the Laws of

Cure

>

> Symptoms move from above to below

> Symptoms move from wthin to without

> Symptoms reappear in the reverse order from which they originally

> appeared

>

>

> Also in naturopathy the healing crisis occurs.

>

> In my experience I see a healing crisis mebbe 10% - 25% of the time

> with acup and/or with herbs/naturopathy.

>

I highly question this... To the best of my knowledge, Chinese

literature does not support this idea. So from a Chinese medical

perspective I would say that if you are getting that much of a

'healing crisis' I would say you are doing something wrong. Since we

all pretty much agree that Worsley is making things up anyway, I

wouldn't say that he validates the healing crisis. It is also well

known that Worsley was influenced by homeopathy which does have this

idea. This does not mean that it validates such reactions from a CM

perspective. I think it is just a cop-out for bad treatments.

 

 

> One is more likely to generate a healing crisis with

> constitutional/wholistic/non-symptom-orientated type of treatments,

I

> think

 

Why? I have not seen this...

 

-

[Guest guest]

Hi, you know, I really agree with this post. I've seen a lot of

evidence of this. I was the one that you quoted here saying that I

had not believed in a healing crisis---(but I think later in the post

I said that I have come to think it is valid)---and more and more I

think its real. In fact, I just got done treating someone who seems

to have a lingering pathogen. She has responded well to my

treatments, so the diagnosis seems to be right. As further evidence,

she told me today that whenever she gets a massage she gets sick---I

think this is because the pathogens are getting moved outward.

 

But to respond to the main point of your post, I very much think that

the wounded sides of people often try to sabotage aligning with

healing and their true qi. You mentioned that just when you have

figured out the best way to treat someone they cancel---I too have

seen that a number of times. Very frustrating and said--if they only

knew. Even more telling, I have often had patients call a few days

after a treatment and leave me a message telling me how much better

they feel and how thankful they are. And then, after that successful

treatment, they stop coming. Bizarre. In most of these cases they

have come several times and gotten so-so results, and then when we

get to the heart of the matter and get really good results they quit

(and these are not cases where I think they were so much better that

they were ready to stop). As I reflect on this I am realizing that

in many cases these are people with addictions. I wonder how best to

approach this?

 

Laura

 

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine ,

Spiritpathpress@a... wrote:

>

> In a message dated 7/18/04 4:30:15 AM,

> Chinese Medicine writes:

>

> << Yeah, I have to say that I've never been one to buy into the

idea of

>

> a healing crisis in Chinese medicine. I usually think that it

>

> indicates that something was missing in the treatment approach. >>

>

> Lon: Two people come for treatment-the one who wants to " get

better " and the

> one who is already making him/her-self sick. Everyone wants

to ''get better " ,

> few want to change. There are two momentum's competing for the

vessel the

> upright, true, authentic influence that is rooted in the Jing, qi,

and shen (yang)

> and the mundane yin influences of conditioning (xieqi,

stagnations). The

> closer a person gets to true healing, deep healing, healing that

approaches the

> restitution of the upright forces as the motivating influence inn a

persons

> life, the less likely they are to return for treatment.

> Have you ever treated a patient and then, a day or two later,

realized

> the perfect treatment for him/her-only to have the patient cancel

all standing

> appointments? When the dysfunctional Qi that supports illness is

about to

> collapse all of the acquired negative momentum will rally to

maintain possession of

> the vessel in, what I would term, a healing crisis that manifests

> emotionally, physically, and ultimately spiritually as a crisis of

faith.

> When faced with its death, that part of ourselves which is not

authentic

> has only two ruses-it generates our greatest fear or desire.

Another way of

> saying this is that the zhenqi and zhengqi want to rectify the

heart/kidney axis

> and the xieqi, or that which possesses us is intent on never

allowing us to

> align with what is true and authentic. Thus fear and desire are

generated to

> keep separate the water and fire.

> Not only is the healing crisis real (discussed at length in Ch

7 and 12

> of Nourishing Destiny and Ch 4 of Clinical Practice) I'd go so far

as to say

> that there is no healing without one. And, this doesn't mean that

physical

> symptoms *have* to get worse-just that there is generally terror at

some point that

> causes doubt before the restitution of authentic nature.

[Guest guest]

Hi Laura

 

Yes, many times this seems to be the case in my experience as well.

I think that here is where we meet the boundaries of self and other;

patient and practitioner. Some patients are open to moderating their

lifestyles, some not. They know that whatever it is unhealthy that

they are doing is not contributing to a good outcome with respect to

their treatment. But they also feel overwhelmed and not ready to

completely cease these activities in the beginning. I always try to

gently nudge the patient by commenting that they need not give

everything up all at once; that maybe as they feel more well, they

will also not feel the need to self medicate as much with their

addictive substances and mental habits. I set them up to expect

this. I have seen patients lower their " dosages " and finally lose

interest in these addictions with this type of approach. They do not

want to hear that it is " all or nothing " with respect to joy of life

vs. health. They feel empowered by making their own decisions about

these things and are usually pleasantly surprised when they want

only a couple of beers after work rather than a 6-pack and a binge

on the weekend. What do you think?

 

Shanna

 

Chinese Medicine , " heylaurag "

<heylaurag@h...> wrote:

As I reflect on this I am realizing that

> in many cases these are people with addictions. I wonder how best

to

> approach this?

>

> Laura

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Laura!

 

Get people with addictions to pay for a series or a course of treatments,

if that is legal where you are (isn't where I am). The thought of losing

their money *might* bring them back. But usually addicts love their

addiction more than their health, family or even their God.

 

At 09:21 PM 7/19/2004, you wrote:<snip>

when we

>get to the heart of the matter and get really good results they quit

>(and these are not cases where I think they were so much better that

>they were ready to stop). As I reflect on this I am realizing that

>in many cases these are people with addictions. I wonder how best to

>approach this?

>

>Laura

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

Jason, who are the " we all " that agree Worley was making things up? When we

discussed this in the group, many people were far from agreeing with you on

this issue. Or are you using the " we " in the royal sense?

Susie

PS Worsley will be remembered long after you and I are forgotten!

 

 

>Since we all pretty much agree that Worsley is making things up anyway, I

>wouldn't say that he validates the healing crisis.

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " susie "

<susie@p...> wrote:

> Jason, who are the " we all " that agree Worley was making things up?

When we

> discussed this in the group, many people were far from agreeing with

you on

> this issue. Or are you using the " we " in the royal sense?

> Susie

 

I didn't see anyone deny that he didn't take liberties in his

approach (meaning making things up) - which as 'we' said is fine as

long as you call it for what it is... I thought the facts were layed

out in various books and by students. Meaning he created a system, or

atleast partially, I can't imagine anyone denying this, or am I wrong...?

 

 

 

> PS Worsley will be remembered long after you and I are forgotten!

>

 

What does that have to do with anything? It sounds religious...

 

-

 

>

> >Since we all pretty much agree that Worsley is making things up

anyway, I

> >wouldn't say that he validates the healing crisis.

[Guest guest]

While Jason was making an 'off-the-cuff' comment, clearly much of the

Worsley material was not from classical Chinese sources, but from

homeopathy and personal observations of his own, for better or worse.

It doesn't matter if people agree or disagree, unless they could come

up with clear sources for their position. It doesn't matter what

people believe in issues such as these, but what factual sources exist

for their points of view.

 

 

On Jul 20, 2004, at 4:13 AM, susie wrote:

 

> Jason, who are the " we all " that agree Worley was making things up?

> When we

> discussed this in the group, many people were far from agreeing with

> you on

> this issue. Or are you using the " we " in the royal sense?

> Susie

> PS Worsley will be remembered long after you and I are forgotten!

[Guest guest]

Hi Jason,

>

> I didn't see anyone deny that he didn't take liberties in his

> approach (meaning making things up) - which as 'we' said is fine as

> long as you call it for what it is... I thought the facts were layed

> out in various books and by students. Meaning he created a system, or

> atleast partially, I can't imagine anyone denying this, or am I

wrong...?

 

I think each practitioner creates their own system based upon what

they believe works for him/her. I personally do not believe that there

are any " facts " in - or any medicine for that matter.

The books you read are just a very small percentage of all of the

material that is available - and all the books that have been written

are only a very small percentage of the total knowledge that has been

accumulateed.

 

Even the Neijing is only one book, representing one point of views.

Most ancient texts have been lost or burned and who knows how much

seemingly contradictory knowledge was contained in those books. I can

surely say that much of the oral knowledge that I have accumulated

either doesn't appear in any of the mainstream textbooks or is so

vaguely implied that it would be impossible to gleam the information

from the textbook itself without actual experience.

 

On top of all this, any translated text is highly dependent upon the

translator's own personal experiences. Even a book written in English

(e.g. Shakespeare) can be interpreted in an innumerable number of ways

by English speaking people.

 

For myself, I keep myself wide open to all ideas and points of view.

In fact, I am most interested in personal experiences and points of

view such as those of Worsely because I believe that these are most

illuminating since they come from experiences related by the person

who actually experienced them - albeit these too are subject to

interpretation. :-) I do not know how many times I have had to explain

and re-explain concepts when I teach Taiji and Qigong. My guess is

that the author of the Neijing had similar issues. :-)

 

Regards,

Rich

[Guest guest]

Why should one presume on is whole and integrated compared to the patient?

 

Who has not come across the healer who is a mess to begin with, with

unresolved

issues of anger, rage, bitterness, grief and phobia.

 

Better a healer who is damaged and know it, that one who is whole but does

not.

 

The TCM healer is in the making and will in the next decade or so come

complete.

 

Whether this will a profound example for all to follow, or a caricature of

what

caused the alternating health movement remains to be seen.

 

One thing is certain. The wakeful public never forgives.

 

Dr. Holmes Keikobad

MB BS DPH Ret. DIP AC NCCAOM LIC AC CO & AZ

www.acu-free.com - 15 CEUS by video.

NCCAOM reviewed. Approved in CA & most states.

[Guest guest]

What monumental pomposity to presume to lead patients to resolving

mixed up emotions when one's own are in disarray!

 

Walk the thin line open to healers, not to play God, or Guru, or Gospel,

or Go-Between.

 

If you must mess with emotions and behavioral patterns, do so by

setting example, and never saying a word.

 

Dr. Holmes Keikobad

MB BS DPH Ret. DIP AC NCCAOM LIC AC CO & AZ

www.acu-free.com - 15 CEUS by video.

NCCAOM reviewed. Approved in CA & most states.

[Guest guest]

I am sorry, but this is clearly false. Chinese medicine is based on

statements of fact. If only a small percentage of information is in

books, where do you get your information from? Lineages? Who records

them? And how?

 

Chinese medicine is a literary, rational medicine with an unbroken

chain going back 2000 years. While there have been great innovations

in its history, and clinically Chinese medicine is very creative,

personal and individualized, there are principles, theories and

statements of fact that must be learned to practice it, like any other

field.

 

Also, this point of view (there are no facts in CM) can be used to

legislate misinformation. If someone with a voice in our profession

states, 'never treat phlegm diseases with moxa', this will lead to many

practitioners abandoning moxa treatment for phlegm diseases. I've seen

such falsehoods as 'never use more than three needles, or it will

damage the channels', or 'never needle cancer patients, as it will

spread the disease' influence practitioners to adapt these statements

as absolute dogmas, without any sources in the experience of the

Chinese or Japanese traditions. I am sorry, this is unacceptable.

 

 

On Jul 20, 2004, at 8:11 AM, Rich wrote:

 

>

> I think each practitioner creates their own system based upon what

> they believe works for him/her. I personally do not believe that there

> are any " facts " in - or any medicine for that matter.

> The books you read are just a very small percentage of all of the

> material that is available - and all the books that have been written

> are only a very small percentage of the total knowledge that has been

> accumulateed.

[Guest guest]

To be honest guys this is starting to sound like the chiropractic profession all

over again.

 

I am a licensed chiropractor and also a licensed acupuncturist.

 

The acupncture / TCM professional is doing what the chiros have done for years

which has never progressed the chiropractic profession where it could be, due to

all the inner fighting and conflicts among themselves.

 

Who's technique is best, who has the best philosophy, who has the better

schools, etc.

 

There are so many different ways of practicing either TCM, acupuncture,

chiropractic, etc.

 

The bottom line is that it all works to some degree. Some patients may respond

to one technique over a different technique.

 

I haver never hesitated to refer a patient to another practioner who may be

better versed in a different technique if I am don't see my patient improving.

 

Case in point:

 

I have seen 3 different patients in the school acupuncture clinic being treated

for several months for tinnitus and dizziness without real good results. I was

asked to examine the patients from a western perspective. Upon doing an ear exam

I noticed an abundant of ear wax in all 3 patients. After removing the wax on a

couple of occasions the problems were solved.

 

I also seen patients who had been treated with chiropractic, massage and

physical therapy who were unreponsive to treatment. After a course of

acupuncture treatment they were symptom free.

 

I also had patients who were being treated with TCM and acupuncture for headache

and neck pain who were also unresponsive but became symptom free after a few

spinal manipulations.

 

There is a place for all techniques and several different therapies, some work

for some people, some don't work for other people. This does not mean the

techniques or therapy is useless, it only means it wasn't helpful for that

patient

 

I would hate to see the same thing happen to TCM practioners that has happened

to the chiros because someone or some group has a different belief system.

 

Even with the several degrees I have obtained, I am always open to learning what

works for others that I can learn from clinically. I don't always need the proof

that it works. If its valid then it should work, maybe not for everybody but it

should work enough to see the positive effects on the majority of people.

 

Brian

 

 

 

Rich <rfinkelstein wrote:

Hi Jason,

>

> I didn't see anyone deny that he didn't take liberties in his

> approach (meaning making things up) - which as 'we' said is fine as

> long as you call it for what it is... I thought the facts were layed

> out in various books and by students. Meaning he created a system, or

> atleast partially, I can't imagine anyone denying this, or am I

wrong...?

 

I think each practitioner creates their own system based upon what

they believe works for him/her. I personally do not believe that there

are any " facts " in - or any medicine for that matter.

The books you read are just a very small percentage of all of the

material that is available - and all the books that have been written

are only a very small percentage of the total knowledge that has been

accumulateed.

 

Even the Neijing is only one book, representing one point of views.

Most ancient texts have been lost or burned and who knows how much

seemingly contradictory knowledge was contained in those books. I can

surely say that much of the oral knowledge that I have accumulated

either doesn't appear in any of the mainstream textbooks or is so

vaguely implied that it would be impossible to gleam the information

from the textbook itself without actual experience.

 

On top of all this, any translated text is highly dependent upon the

translator's own personal experiences. Even a book written in English

(e.g. Shakespeare) can be interpreted in an innumerable number of ways

by English speaking people.

 

For myself, I keep myself wide open to all ideas and points of view.

In fact, I am most interested in personal experiences and points of

view such as those of Worsely because I believe that these are most

illuminating since they come from experiences related by the person

who actually experienced them - albeit these too are subject to

interpretation. :-) I do not know how many times I have had to explain

and re-explain concepts when I teach Taiji and Qigong. My guess is

that the author of the Neijing had similar issues. :-)

 

Regards,

Rich

[Guest guest]

>> > hi all,

wrote

 

 

 

 

> > Jack worsley enthused about healing crises in the Laws of

> Cure

> >

> > Symptoms move from above to below

> > Symptoms move from wthin to without

> > Symptoms reappear in the reverse order from which they originally

> > appeared

> >

> >

> > Also in naturopathy the healing crisis occurs.

> >

> > In my experience I see a healing crisis mebbe 10% - 25% of the time

> > with acup and/or with herbs/naturopathy.

> >

> I highly question this..

 

 

Do you indeed? Does that mean it didn't happen? Does that mean the

thirty years I have spent in alt. medicine have not enabled me to

learn from my own observations. I gather you rate yourself somewhat of

a scholar but I don't believe any scholar can deny an other's

experience.

 

 

 

.. To the best of my knowledge, Chinese

> literature does not support this idea.

 

Perhaps chinese literature does or does not support this idea, but

until you've read it all, I mean ALL, maybe you should be a tad less

categorical

 

 

So from a Chinese medical

> perspective I would say that if you are getting that much of a

> 'healing crisis' I would say you are doing something wrong.

 

Would you indeed? But I forgot, you have read all there is to read, and know all

there is to know.

 

Since we

> all pretty much agree that Worsley is making things up anyway,

 

No, we don't!!

 

I

> wouldn't say that he validates the healing crisis.

 

Once upon a time everyone believed that the world was flat, someone

came along and said it was round, no doubt some ignorant people

accused that someone of making it all up, but guess what?

 

 

 

 

It is also well

> known that Worsley was influenced by homeopathy which does have this

> idea. This does not mean that it validates such reactions from a CM

> perspective. I think it is just a cop-out for bad treatments.

 

Gosh, so now I do bad treatments! Not only have you not attended a

college that teaches 5 element style practice and not only have you

never met me nor do you know anything about me but you presume to

judge me and my treatments! I joined this group to learn and share

ideas and experiences not to be dumped on in the way that orthodox

medicine dumps on alt. medicine

 

>

>

> > One is more likely to generate a healing crisis with

> > constitutional/wholistic/non-symptom-orientated type of

treatments,

> I

> > think

>

> Why? I have not seen this...

>

Perhaps you've never treated wholistically. Perhaps you have, I don't

know......... without knowing you personally or perhaps being your

patient (as if) I don't have enough information to make a judgement.

 

 

stephen

 

--

Stephen MacAllan

Lic.Ac., B.Ac., M.Ac., M.H.,

Cert.B.E.R.M., M.H.

M.B.Ac.C.,M.A.M.H.

Acupuncturist, Herbalist,

Kosmed practitioner

Vega-tester

www.stephenmacallan.co.uk

www.stephenandphilipnaturally.co.uk

powered by amiga 060/mediator

[Guest guest]

Hi Shanna and all, I think you are right. I've made the mistake of

sounding too enthusiatic about someone quiting a substance (even

something like coffee) and losing them completely. In fact,

sometimes it seems that the paradoxical approach works---its tricky

to find just the right wording, but when you get it right THEY wind

up being the ones trying to tell you just how bad it is for them.

 

I also think that in most cases of addiction people really are just

self-medicating, so I can respect that they feel like they are making

the only choice that they have. If all you see before you are bad

choices, well then you have to choose one of the bad choices.

Hopefully in time they can see that what we have to offer can be a

replacement, and a healthy one at that.

 

Laura

 

 

Chinese Medicine , " shannahickle "

<shannahickle> wrote:

> Hi Laura

>

> Yes, many times this seems to be the case in my experience as well.

> I think that here is where we meet the boundaries of self and

other;

> patient and practitioner. Some patients are open to moderating

their

> lifestyles, some not. They know that whatever it is unhealthy that

> they are doing is not contributing to a good outcome with respect

to

> their treatment. But they also feel overwhelmed and not ready to

> completely cease these activities in the beginning. I always try to

> gently nudge the patient by commenting that they need not give

> everything up all at once; that maybe as they feel more well, they

> will also not feel the need to self medicate as much with their

> addictive substances and mental habits. I set them up to expect

> this. I have seen patients lower their " dosages " and finally lose

> interest in these addictions with this type of approach. They do

not

> want to hear that it is " all or nothing " with respect to joy of

life

> vs. health. They feel empowered by making their own decisions about

> these things and are usually pleasantly surprised when they want

> only a couple of beers after work rather than a 6-pack and a binge

> on the weekend. What do you think?

>

> Shanna

>

> Chinese Medicine , " heylaurag "

> <heylaurag@h...> wrote:

> As I reflect on this I am realizing that

> > in many cases these are people with addictions. I wonder how

best

> to

> > approach this?

> >

> > Laura

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I think Jason's points are as follows:

 

1) mainstream Chinese medicine does not say that a healing crisis is a

necessary part of the healing process in the treatment of disease.

This does not mean that in certain circumstances, such as in

chong/parasitic diseases, it doesn't happen. It is a specialized

situation, not a given.

 

2) sometimes what we perceive as a 'healing crisis' may mean wrong

treatment, i.e. too much needle stimulus in acupuncture, toxicity from

herbs or supplements.

 

 

On Jul 20, 2004, at 4:46 PM, stephen macallan wrote:

 

> Do you indeed? Does that mean it didn't happen? Does that mean the

> thirty years I have spent in alt. medicine have not enabled me to

> learn from my own observations. I gather you rate yourself somewhat of

> a scholar but I don't believe any scholar can deny an other's

> experience.

[Guest guest]

I think what Jason is saying here is that sometimes we use metaphors to

explain reactions to treatment that may not do justice for what we see.

Bad reactions to treatment don't necessarily mean 'healing crises'. I

know from my own practice that some patients simply cannot tolerate

certain dosages of herbs or strong needle treatments, that they are

counterproductive. I don't think that is a personal judgment on

Jason's part.

 

 

On Jul 20, 2004, at 4:46 PM, stephen macallan wrote:

 

> It is also well

>> known that Worsley was influenced by homeopathy which does have this

>> idea. This does not mean that it validates such reactions from a CM

>> perspective. I think it is just a cop-out for bad treatments.

>

> Gosh, so now I do bad treatments! Not only have you not attended a

> college that teaches 5 element style practice and not only have you

> never met me nor do you know anything about me but you presume to

> judge me and my treatments! I joined this group to learn and share

> ideas and experiences not to be dumped on in the way that orthodox

> medicine dumps on alt. medicine

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " stephen

macallan " <stephenmacallan@u...> wrote:

> >> > hi all,

> wrote

>

>

>

>

> > > Jack worsley enthused about healing crises in the Laws of

> > Cure

> > >

> > > Symptoms move from above to below

> > > Symptoms move from wthin to without

> > > Symptoms reappear in the reverse order from which they originally

> > > appeared

> > >

> > >

> > > Also in naturopathy the healing crisis occurs.

> > >

> > > In my experience I see a healing crisis mebbe 10% - 25% of the time

> > > with acup and/or with herbs/naturopathy.

> > >

> > I highly question this..

>

>

> Do you indeed? Does that mean it didn't happen? Does that mean the

> thirty years I have spent in alt. medicine have not enabled me to

> learn from my own observations. I gather you rate yourself somewhat of

> a scholar but I don't believe any scholar can deny an other's

> experience.

 

No, I do not question your experience, just the idea that these are

healing crisis. This is the point where we can explore… The question

is how we differentiate a healing crisis from a bad treatment, from a

CM medical perspective (since this is TCM group). Here is the real

question. One way is to scan the literature, I have not at read

everything, nor ever will come close, that is the advantage of a

group. If someone has read something then they can clearly post it!

If, for example, no one can produce any literature that discusses it,

because I can't, then we have a problem. Because CM, as far as I

know, says that these reactions that you get, purported by many (not

you), are bad treatments. So we have to look at the next level,

personal experience. We say how do you differentiate side-effects

between healing crisis, and what is the source for that. Someone

could practice for 50 years living in a bubble and think they are

doing everything right – this means only a little, without a good

`map'. Maybe they have created a system that is better than CM

knowledge. This is were I am skeptical. Chinese medicine is highly

evolved and they have dealt with many strange issues (lurking

pathogens etc). Wouldn't you find it peculiar if they considered

side-effects to be bad treatments and not healing crisis's. DO you

think they just never thought of the idea of healing crisis. I

understand there is obviously mixed views on healing crisis's. IMO,

most people that talk about them rarely talk about mistreatments, and

most of them are on the less educated (THIS IS NO reference to

Stephen), just my observation.

 

>

>

>

> . To the best of my knowledge, Chinese

> > literature does not support this idea.

>

> Perhaps chinese literature does or does not support this idea, but

> until you've read it all, I mean ALL, maybe you should be a tad less

> categorical

>

I agree, but this type of statement can't be used to disprove

anything. You cannot use information that is not found in the

literature to prove something… Only what is found (to date) is valid..

IS this wrong?

 

I go on what I know (at the moment) and stay open to other ideas that

have some root.

 

>

> So from a Chinese medical

> > perspective I would say that if you are getting that much of a

> > 'healing crisis' I would say you are doing something wrong.

>

> Would you indeed? But I forgot, you have read all there is to read,

and know all there is to know.

 

No, not at all, but can you find me a Chinese source that supports

that 10-25% of side-effects are healing crisis. A personal attack

will not divert the issue. Let's stick to the facts.

 

>

> Since we

> > all pretty much agree that Worsley is making things up anyway,

>

> No, we don't!!

 

So are you saying that Worley did not create many ideas in his system.

Or was it all handed down on tablets on top of the mountain, and he

followed it word for word. I think as Z'ev and so many others have

pointed out over the last month, you can deny that Worsley made stuff

up, but historical record says otherwise…

 

>

> Gosh, so now I do bad treatments! Not only have you not attended a

> college that teaches 5 element style practice and not only have you

> never met me nor do you know anything about me but you presume to

> judge me and my treatments!

 

I have studied 5 element with Neil G. from L.A. (briefly) and have had

moderate exposure to 5 E practitioners… and I do not know you… But

that is moot…

I am judging your perceived evaluation of results from a CM

perspective, is there something wrong with that? Why are you so

defensive, do you feel you actually could be viewing your healing

crisis's wrongly? But before you feel wronged, you practice 5 element

(a non-CM system which mixes ideas of homeopathy) – In this system

there is clearly the idea of healing crisis. You are in that world. I

am just evaluating it from CM (mainstream) perspective – I find

nothing wrong with this, and actually find it quite healthy. It is

just like evaluating CM with Western Medicine. There are obvious

issues with the evaluation process but we learn a lot from systems we

take them out of the box. Look how much we have learned about CM with

the advent of introducing WM, incredible! This is just like religion

or any other belief system / philosophy. It is very telling to look

at 20 cultures and find the commonalities…

 

SO are you open to the fact that the healing crisis is unneeded and

actually a bad treatment.? One can live in the box or be open to the

other side. I for one would like to hear more about why the healing

crisis is superior, and what system is there to offer guidelines for

this idea (this is the other side to me).

 

>

> >

> >

> > > One is more likely to generate a healing crisis with

> > > constitutional/wholistic/non-symptom-orientated type of

> treatments,

> > I

> > > think

> >

> > Why? I have not seen this...

> >

> Perhaps you've never treated wholistically. Perhaps you have, I don't

> know......... without knowing you personally or perhaps being your

> patient (as if) I don't have enough information to make a judgement.

 

IS CM wholistic…? I am unsure, just curious with what you think in

relation to 5E (worsley)?

 

So do you blame me for not buying into the idea that so many reactions

are healing crisis when this idea is not in my world? I of course

have to question it, and maybe through enough information I will adopt

it, or maybe not. But I think one aversion that I have is that so

many alterative health practitioners that practice medicine w/o a real

education overuse this idea, and have no framework. They have long

lists of things that could go wrong and say these are all healing

crisis's. Do you not think this is bizarre? Especially if there was

another system 2000+ years old that doesn't? This is why I view most

bad reactions as mistakes and most of my treatments should have zero

side-effects. I personally like that idea…Comments?

 

-