Guest guest Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Bill, I get what you are saying, Mercury is dangerous, I know that, it has never been in question. What *I* am saying is that dangerous medicinals DO have a place in our medicine when used safely, and even if they don't have a place in our medicine, they are OURS to do with as we see fit, not the FDA's or Health Canada's. I recommend that you either toe the line with the research, which supports my viewpoint as I have proved a couple of times over already, or point out the flaws in the research, or simply don't refer to it! Base your argument on reasoning rather than misrepresented data. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. The research has its conclusions written at the end - read those! Deposition of mercury in the brain in animals with long term overdosages is nothing to get alarmed about, it is known and to be expected. Extremely cold substances damage the jing, remember? Mercury is dangerous, but so are many other drugs and treatments which are used, successfully, to treat dangerous conditions. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, antibiotics, and we could go on. It'd be so nice if you stopped repeating your argument ad nauseum and dealt with these points. Chemotherapy is always dangerous, and yet it is used successfully (yes, it is also overused). Surgery always has some danger at least, as do anaesthetics, but they are routinely used, ostensibly with care and only when no other options are available. What is it that is so unclear about this argument? Maybe you don't practice , since CM theory clearly states that sometimes you must treat poison with poison, that there are times when harsh medicinals must be employed with great caution. Sometimes there is no time for an extended treatment to occur, as you should well know, despite trying to use that defense. Sometimes the treatment principle is to do some damage now so that there is a later. Those of you who think that Heart Fire is not that bad of a thing and does not justify use of the mercurial evil, you would only think that because you've never really encountered it. Heart Fire is a precursor for, as one example, stroke and the paralysis and brain damage (and death, by the way) that can occur from that (meanwhile you can spit at the affected patient, " well at least I didn't poison you! " (I merely withheld a treatment with a low and known risk and high potential benefit relative to your condition)). Heart Fire is also a precursor for insanity, which, when a patient finally slips over the edge, can cause them to be lost to you for a year, 5 years, or longer. Why would you not use a medicinal like Zhu Sha for a few days if it was indicated? Because it will cause (unproven) irreversible brain damage in three days? If we follow our scope and we are competent to perform our activities within that scope, there are many instances where we are justified in using dangerous medicinals for crisis intervention. Anyone familiar with the raw Fu Zi protocols? Don't do it, but know that it is possible and applied with acceptable risk by Lao Yi. The feeling and " reasoning " (not " first do no harm " , but, " never do any harm " ) in this discussion is reminiscent of a similar series of conversations that occurred between two camps of TCM people a few years ago here in Toronto regarding the horrifying research that demonstrated that cupping DAMAGED THE CAPILLARY BED!!! These practitioners actually suggested that cupping should not be performed anymore! What was interesting is that the " TCM " group that was for the elimination of cupping were first and foremost alt-med practitioners who were uncomfortable with Chinese Culture (didn't know how to use chopsticks, viewed CM science as " just one more " (very) theoretical tool in their toolbox, and used a medical language that was through and through new-age (they would identify with the term " light-workers " )). The ones for cupping were the one who knew that cupping was very safe and had no concern with acceptable levels of damage since the cost-benefit easily justified the treatment. I ran this Zhu Sha discussion by several Lao Yi that I know and they were all of the same opinion - you have to know how to use it, and it has its place, and health canada should stay (expletives) out of it. CM in Toronto apparently has a lot of big hot livers in it. How is that on your side, out of curiosity? Regulation meetings here, for example, are never calm affairs. I hope I have not yet been reduced to simple repetition. Thanks for the tolerance and interest of anyone who gets down here. I believe this is an important discussion to have. Hugo ________________________________ Hugo Ramiro http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com http://www.middlemedicine.org ________________________________ bill_schoenbart <plantmed2 Chinese Medicine Wed, 31 March, 2010 11:28:04 Re:Zhusha-Cinnabar Emmanuel, Your argument is emotional, not scientific. We don't eat Orlon sweaters or Superglue. And zhu sha doesn't have mercury in a few parts per billion. It has hundreds of millions of parts per billion. You asked for bioassays. That is why I posted the animal studies, such as this one: http://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/11370760 . Yes, the animals were given higher than normal doses of zhu sha, but the point is that it was absorbed through the GI tract and deposited in the brain. Even the article that purportedly claimed that zhu sha is safe mentioned poisonings in the past. Since NO amount of mercury is safe, this should raise a red flag. To argue passionately in support of using zhu sha places enormous faith in a human discovery from over 1000 years ago and ignores the discoveries in modern times. Yes, I am very familiar with people misusing science and making false claims about herb toxicity. That is not what is happening in the case of this mercury-based mineral. - Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Hugo, I made my point that zhu sha can cause mercury to be deposited in tissues. The studies show this. I don't see the point in endlessly arguing our sides to this issue. People can read all the posts and decide for themselves. - Bill Chinese Medicine , Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote: > > > Bill, I get what you are saying, Mercury is dangerous, I know that, it has never been in question. What *I* am saying is that dangerous medicinals DO have a place in our medicine when used safely, and even if they don't have a place in our medicine, they are OURS to do with as we see fit, not the FDA's or Health Canada's. > > I recommend that you either toe the line with the research, which supports my viewpoint as I have proved a couple of times over already, or point out the flaws in the research, or simply don't refer to it! Base your argument on reasoning rather than misrepresented data. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. The research has its conclusions written at the end - read those! Deposition of mercury in the brain in animals with long term overdosages is nothing to get alarmed about, it is known and to be expected. Extremely cold substances damage the jing, remember? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Hi Bill: -Bill-- I made my point that zhu sha can cause mercury to be deposited in tissues. The studies show this. --- Only for long-term overdosing. Hugo ________________________________ Hugo Ramiro http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com http://www.middlemedicine.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.