Lasers, Philosophy, Change and Growth

[Guest guest]

Z'ev,

 

Even though I agree with both you and that a Laser-Puncture discussion

" per se' is off purpose on a Chinese Herb Discussion list (and I don't

really want to needlessly prolong an off track discussion thread), but your

post did bring up some interesting philosophical, and practical questions for

me:

 

< " I am perplexed by these discussions of technologies that are peripheral

to traditional Chinese medicine " ----- " I am unaware that there is any

general acceptance by the Chinese medical community of the use of lasers,

and certainly, no classical basis for using them " . >

 

Your post here would seem to indicate that there is only one version of

, and as we all know this is not the case. Many different

family systems still exist beyond the officially Communist sanctioned version

of TCM.

 

Also, everywhere has traveled (Korea, Viet Nam, Taiwan,

France, etc, and now the US, and Canada) indigenous practioner's have always

adapted and evolved it to suit their new and unique circumstances,

technological, and scientific understanding's, as well as to suit the

pre-existing cultural preferences of their patients (for example, not many

American pts. will sit still for the strong type of heavy needle stimulation

commonly taught and used in modern day PRC).

 

I am in no way suggesting here that we should give up on the collective

wisdom of several thousand years worth of recorded cases studies, nor the

priceless medical classics written by the by the great archetypal physicians

of Chinese history such as Li Shi Shen, Sun Si Miao, Li Dong Yuen, or Zhong

Zhang Jing.

 

But one also has to remember that (for example) Zhong Zhang Jing's methods

were radical, new and different 1800 years ago, and not generally accepted by

his contemporaries, but through practice and experience they have become

integral to our modern TCM, and that many of the methods and formulae he

developed (by trial and error) are the " backbones " of many modern clinical

practices.

 

Further, due to modern pharmaceuticals, the evolution and changing nature of

pathogens and their evolving mechanisms of resistance, changing lifestyles,

levels of sanitation, politics, education, the type and quality of food

consumed (not to mention the incalculable effects of living in an " EMF Soup " ,

the effects of Chernobyl, pesticides, new synthetic chemicals released

constantly into our environment) all these have combined to change our

constitutions, requiring us to adapt and update constantly our methods and

understandings to suit our modern world (for that matter, we really do not

practice today the way Zhong Zhang Jing did back in his time, either).

 

The point is that all things need to change and evolve, even Oriental

Medicine.

At one time or another, all the techniques we now commonly use, and

incorporate in the modern practice of were new and generally

unaccepted until they became accepted through trial, error and experience.

 

has always been a growing, adaptive, and evolving

discipline, and has always incorporated new methods, ideas, and medicinals

into its armamentarium since it's inception.

 

For example, the Spice Trade along the Silk Road brought new herbs into China

from India and the Ayurvedic tradition, as well as the Arabic medical

tradition, and these were studied, experimented with, developed and

eventually incorporated into our constantly evolving Materia Medica.

 

One might even make the point that low energy Laser therapy could be viewed

as a modern form of high tech Moxa therapy (not to mention there is a large

body of research which has been done, and is still being done in the former

USSR, and former Eastern Block nations documenting and studying this type of

therapy).

 

 

< " Each xue/point has a location, DEPTH, STIMULUS, and protocol for

supplementation or drainage when using moxa or needles. How do you

determine depth, dosage and stimulus for laser, without any historical

protocol or classical source? " >

 

One has to remember that the Japanese practice very different needle

technique, and generally much different levels of insertion and stimulation

(and even point location) than do the Acupuncturists trained in the PRC. Much

of their practice is based on Nan Jing, and other, Japanese classics, yet

even here while they have preserved a calssical method, they have innovated

and created many new and effective modalities beyond what was listed in the

" Classics " .

 

< " While laser 'acupuncture' and color therapy may well be promising

treatments, by what criteria do we know if we are helping or doing damage

in the long term?

 

This is a good and valid point, but how does any medical practitioner,

whether TCM, or Western Medical know the long-term effect of their therapies?

 

Does anyone yet know the full long-term effect of all the antibiotics used in

the last 6 decades? How about LASIK procedures? Not to mention the modern

European reports about the unrecognized complications of herbal toxicity.

 

Many in the conventional medical field question the safety and effectiveness

of our therapeutics, and even though we as Chinese Herbalists see our pts

improving, can we point to any group of solid, long term, on going, peer

reviewed American or Western European scientific studies validating our

perceptions of safety and effectiveness?

 

Even multi million dollar, modern scientific and pharmacological studies

don't really know what happens in a pt. population until the studied

pharmaceutical is out on the market and has been ingested for years

(Thalidomide, DES, Rezulin, and Fen-Phen spring easily to mind).

 

The point here is that nearly every medical therapy is judged primarily on

clinical results, trial and error, and the (hopefully) long term surveillance

of pts, and after roughly 20 + years of low power laser tx, the only

complications which I have ever heard of relate to unintentional laser

irradiation of the eyes.

 

< " at this early stage of development of Chinese medicine in the

West, we risk loss of credibility of our profession.--- Without using

discrimination or judgment in our choice of treatment modality " >>>

 

Of course, using our best discrimination, and clinical judgment is what we

are all supposed to be doing all the time with our pts. anyway.

 

And I agree, that we are in an important phase in our professional

development, and due diligence is certainly required, however, if we as a

profession do not stretch and expand our boundaries, try new things, and

explore and test new ideas, new techniques and modalities we will stagnate,

and fail to live up to the examples of the authors of the great TCM classics

who went before us, who were, after all, innovators who when unsatisfied with

the state of the art they learned from their master's and teachers, took it

upon themselves to create new methods, new innovations and new approaches,

from which we have all benefited.

 

 

< " We should let our patients know that laser treatment is experimental

and get their consent, at the very least. " >

 

I am in complete agreement with you on this.

 

Hopefully, we as practitioners of (in general), and Chinese

Herbal Medicine (in specific), will not eschew modern refinements, tools, or

opportunities to expand and improve our practices, our medicinals, our

outcomes, and our pts health and well-being merely because the tools are new,

different, and not recorded in one of the Classic Text's of

(after all, we are having this discussion with modern, high tech, digital

computers communicating over the constantly evolving Internet).

 

In the final analysis, growth, development and improvement are impossible

without both trying and exploring new ideas, and new things, AND, keeping,

deepening and refining our understanding of our tremendous cultural and

classical legacies.

 

Just as it is with Yin & Yang, both the old, and the new, the classical, and

the technical, the intuitive, and scientific are necessary for the growth,

and health of our profession, and for the well-being of ourselves, and our

pts.

 

All the best to you, and our other listers.

 

Bruce Canning

 

***********[Original messages follow]****************

 

I almost hate to bring this up again. . . .but. . ..

 

I thought this was a Chinese herbal medicine site. . . ..I am perplexed by

these discussions of technologies that are peripheral to traditional

Chinese medicine, and seem to be accepted without question by

Practitioners. I am unaware that there is any general acceptance by the

Chinese medical community of the use of lasers, and certainly, no classical

basis for using them. What are the criteria?

 

1) Each Xue/point has a location, DEPTH, STIMULUS, and protocol for

supplementation or drainage when using moxa or needles. How do you

determine depth, dosage and stimulus for laser, without any historical

protocol or classical source?

2) While laser 'acupuncture' and color therapy may well be promising

treatments, by what criteria do we know if we are helping or doing damage

in the long term?

3) Without using discrimination or judgment in our choice of treatment

modality, at this early stage of development of Chinese medicine in the

West, we risk loss of credibility of our profession. We should let our

patients know that laser treatment is experimental and get their consent,

at the very least.

 

 

 

>Rob,

>thank you for the response. I am just getting into the use of laser for

>acupuncture, have seen color therapy and I am amazed at some of the results.

>My question to you is : How often do you use the laser therapy on your

>patients, duration and results. I plan to use in combination with standard

>TCM.

> Went to the web site and will probably purchase the LS01.

>

>Any other info or site with laser therapy please let me know.

>

>Thank you again,

>

>louis

>-

> " Vibeke en Rob " <JetteS

>

>Wednesday, April 26, 2000 5:44 AM

> lasers

>

>

>> Dear Louis,

>>

>> I have seven years experience with the Agnis LO1 laser

>> and am very happy with it. It is cheap strong and

>> reliable, it was produced as spin off from Russian

>> defence research. I was introduced to it when working

>> in Byelarus and immediately started working with it

>> and still do. They are infrared GaAs lasers.You can

>> find them at:

>>

>> http://www2.omnitel.net/agnis/

>>

>> OK good luck

>> Rob Jansen.

>>

>> =====

>> http://www.vitaminlab.com/cj.cfm?pid=380300

>>

>>

>>

>> Send online invitations with Invites.

>> http://invites.

>>

>> ------

>> Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers.

>> http://click./1/3019/6/_/542111/_/956742275/

>> ------

>>

>> Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

>>

>

>

>------

>Avoid the lines and visit avis.com for quick and easy online

>reservations. Enjoy a compact car nationwide for only $29 a day!

>Click here for more details.

>http://click./1/3011/6/_/542111/_/956761237/

>------

>

>Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

 

 

 

 

------

Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.

http://click./1/3020/6/_/542111/_/956892965/

------

 

Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

 

 

 

----------------------- Headers --------------------------------

Return-Path: <sentto-201013-812-GRCanning=aol.com (AT) returns (DOT) >

Received: from rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (rly-zc03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.3]) by

air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v70.20) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Apr 2000 23:38:10 -0400

Received: from mq. (mq. [208.50.144.79]) by

rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (v71.10) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Apr 2000 23:37:36 -0400

X-eGroups-Return: sentto-201013-812-GRCanning=aol.com (AT) returns (DOT)

Received: from [10.1.10.38] by mq. with NNFMP; 28 Apr 2000

03:36:28 -0000

Received: (qmail 12830 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2000 03:36:04 -0000

Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 28 Apr 2000

03:36:04 -0000

Received: from unknown (HELO qg.) (10.1.2.27) by mta1 with SMTP;

28 Apr 2000 03:36:04 -0000

Received: (qmail 27557 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2000 03:36:04 -0000

Received: from volt.electriciti.com (216.240.160.252) by qg. with

SMTP; 28 Apr 2000 03:36:04 -0000

Received: from [216.240.161.117] (elec-240-161-117.ixpres.com

[216.240.161.117]) by volt.electriciti.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id

UAA09509 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2000 20:33:27

-0700 (PDT)

Message-Id: <v03007801b52eb6c35413@[216.240.161.117]>

In-<000501bfaf91$678ee540$02000003@GTEweioflif>

References: <20000426094433.16076.qmail

X-eGroups- " " <zrosenberg

" " <zrosenberg

MIME-Version: 1.0

Mailing-List: list ; contact

-owner

Delivered-mailing list

Precedence: bulk

List-Un: <->

Thu, 27 Apr 2000 20:38:00 -0700

Re: lasers

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

>>

[Guest guest]

>

> < " I am perplexed by these discussions of technologies that are peripheral

>to traditional Chinese medicine " ----- " I am unaware that there is any

>general acceptance by the Chinese medical community of the use of lasers,

>and certainly, no classical basis for using them " . >

>

>Your post here would seem to indicate that there is only one version of

>, and as we all know this is not the case. Many different

>family systems still exist beyond the officially Communist sanctioned version

>of TCM.

 

There is no doubt about that. . . .I am not personally sanctioning a

'Communist' version of TCM.

>

 

 

>Also, everywhere has traveled (Korea, Viet Nam, Taiwan,

>France, etc, and now the US, and Canada) indigenous practioner's have always

>adapted and evolved it to suit their new and unique circumstances,

>technological, and scientific understanding's, as well as to suit the

>pre-existing cultural preferences of their patients (for example, not many

>American pts. will sit still for the strong type of heavy needle stimulation

>commonly taught and used in modern day PRC).

 

I agree. I don't use the strong needle stimulation used in the PRC.

However, these developments evolved over time, and all of the places you

mentioned ( with the possible exception of France) had access to the

original texts of Chinese medicine in their original language, and

developed the medicine over many centuries. Also, they were all based on

classical theory of yin yang, five phase, six channel, etc. The

modalities, acumoxatherapy and herbal medicine, were the same. Here we are

talking about new technologies, which, as far as I know, are not being used

according to Chinese medical theory.

>

>I am in no way suggesting here that we should give up on the collective

>wisdom of several thousand years worth of recorded cases studies, nor the

>priceless medical classics written by the by the great archetypal physicians

>of Chinese history such as Li Shi Shen, Sun Si Miao, Li Dong Yuen, or Zhong

>Zhang Jing.

>

>But one also has to remember that (for example) Zhong Zhang Jing's methods

>were radical, new and different 1800 years ago, and not generally accepted by

>his contemporaries, but through practice and experience they have become

>integral to our modern TCM, and that many of the methods and formulae he

>developed (by trial and error) are the " backbones " of many modern clinical

>practices.

 

And over how long a period did Zhong Ji's teachings become adapted? It

wasn't overnight! My main objection is that we are too quick to adapt new

technologies without any critical discernment, before we fully understand

them or integrate them into the practice of medicine (eastern or western).

We are too impressed by shiny new toys, without a complete understanding of

their possible dangers. Another use of lasers is in eye surgery. . . .the

eye is directly connected to the brain. . . .have we really thought about

the effects of altering eye tissue on the brain? Yet the surgery is touted

as 'safe'. This is a problem of our society, not just our profession.

>

>Further, due to modern pharmaceuticals, the evolution and changing nature of

>pathogens and their evolving mechanisms of resistance, changing lifestyles,

>levels of sanitation, politics, education, the type and quality of food

>consumed (not to mention the incalculable effects of living in an " EMF Soup " ,

>the effects of Chernobyl, pesticides, new synthetic chemicals released

>constantly into our environment) all these have combined to change our

>constitutions, requiring us to adapt and update constantly our methods and

>understandings to suit our modern world (for that matter, we really do not

>practice today the way Zhong Zhang Jing did back in his time, either).

 

One of my arguments when I lecture is that no matter how much the ephemeral

world changes and mutates, the PRINCIPLES of Chinese medicine are based on

universal laws of creation, much like physics, or the core of spiritual

teachings that underly religion. The effort must be mad to understand the

modern world, not by extrapolating from the phenomena, but by application

of natural law to our situation. Remember, we are practicing a medicine

with a continuity factor of 2000+ years, and we owe it to ourselves to

fully understand it in depth before mucking around with it.

>

>The point is that all things need to change and evolve, even Oriental

>Medicine.

>At one time or another, all the techniques we now commonly use, and

>incorporate in the modern practice of were new and generally

>unaccepted until they became accepted through trial, error and experience.

 

Fine. . . . .but should we experiement on our patients before we know what

we are doing? Or are we so deluded by technology that we feel we can use

anything we want, or so deluded that we think we understand Chinese

medicine well enough to include any technique in it?

>

> has always been a growing, adaptive, and evolving

>discipline, and has always incorporated new methods, ideas, and medicinals

>into its armamentarium since it's inception.

>

>For example, the Spice Trade along the Silk Road brought new herbs into China

>from India and the Ayurvedic tradition, as well as the Arabic medical

>tradition, and these were studied, experimented with, developed and

>eventually incorporated into our constantly evolving Materia Medica.

 

These new medicinals and ideas, as you say, were studied and experiemented

with over time, and adapted, from a society with previous experience with

the ideas and medicines. This is not true of lasers.

>

>One might even make the point that low energy Laser therapy could be viewed

>as a modern form of high tech Moxa therapy (not to mention there is a large

>body of research which has been done, and is still being done in the former

>USSR, and former Eastern Block nations documenting and studying this type of

>therapy).

 

This is a possible beginning for understanding.

>

>

> < " Each xue/point has a location, DEPTH, STIMULUS, and protocol for

> supplementation or drainage when using moxa or needles. How do you

> determine depth, dosage and stimulus for laser, without any historical

> protocol or classical source? " >

>

>One has to remember that the Japanese practice very different needle

>technique, and generally much different levels of insertion and stimulation

>(and even point location) than do the Acupuncturists trained in the PRC. Much

>of their practice is based on Nan Jing, and other, Japanese classics, yet

>even here while they have preserved a calssical method, they have innovated

>and created many new and effective modalities beyond what was listed in the

> " Classics " .

 

Still, the Japanese acupuncture is fully based on the classical literature,

and the new modalities are really icing on the cake (magnetic polarity

machines, magnets on points, etc.) They are still based squarely on

classical theory. This is my point!

>

> < " While laser 'acupuncture' and color therapy may well be promising

> treatments, by what criteria do we know if we are helping or doing damage

> in the long term?

>

>This is a good and valid point, but how does any medical practitioner,

>whether TCM, or Western Medical know the long-term effect of their therapies?

>

>Does anyone yet know the full long-term effect of all the antibiotics used in

>the last 6 decades? How about LASIK procedures? Not to mention the modern

>European reports about the unrecognized complications of herbal toxicity.

 

I would point out here that the herbal toxicity reported is the result of

non-traditional use of Chinese medicinals in a symptomatic matter for

weight loss.

>

>Many in the conventional medical field question the safety and effectiveness

>of our therapeutics, and even though we as Chinese Herbalists see our pts

>improving, can we point to any group of solid, long term, on going, peer

>reviewed American or Western European scientific studies validating our

>perceptions of safety and effectiveness?

 

There are journals filled with outcome-based studies in Chinese, forty

journals publishing every month. There are bookshelves full of case

histories from Jin-yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties, still untranslated. This

is an effort that, to me, is much more valuable than jumping into new,

unproven technology.

>

>Even multi million dollar, modern scientific and pharmacological studies

>don't really know what happens in a pt. population until the studied

>pharmaceutical is out on the market and has been ingested for years

>(Thalidomide, DES, Rezulin, and Fen-Phen spring easily to mind).

 

Good point. Does that make it right? It sounds more to me like mass

poisoning of the public. That is one of the reasons that other forms of

medicine are appealing to our patients.

>

>The point here is that nearly every medical therapy is judged primarily on

>clinical results, trial and error, and the (hopefully) long term surveillance

>of pts, and after roughly 20 + years of low power laser tx, the only

>complications which I have ever heard of relate to unintentional laser

>irradiation of the eyes.

 

We have no idea, until we determine dosage, depth and time issues in

treatment how using lasers effects the points and channels, how it effects

the pulses. Perhaps you should set up study and research on this topic.

At least biomedicine does clinical trials and studies before adapting new

technologies or drugs!

>

> < " at this early stage of development of Chinese medicine in the

> West, we risk loss of credibility of our profession.--- Without using

> discrimination or judgment in our choice of treatment modality " >>>

>

>Of course, using our best discrimination, and clinical judgment is what we

>are all supposed to be doing all the time with our pts. anyway.

>

>And I agree, that we are in an important phase in our professional

>development, and due diligence is certainly required, however, if we as a

>profession do not stretch and expand our boundaries, try new things, and

>explore and test new ideas, new techniques and modalities we will stagnate,

>and fail to live up to the examples of the authors of the great TCM classics

>who went before us, who were, after all, innovators who when unsatisfied with

>the state of the art they learned from their master's and teachers, took it

>upon themselves to create new methods, new innovations and new approaches,

>from which we have all benefited.

 

I am glad you agree. However, no one has set up any criteria, judgement or

way of putting this into practice. Innovators always had to deal with

proving their theories or treatments, building schools, and allowing their

innovations to be tested by other practitioners. I see very little of this

going on. I see little creative debate, and worst of all, little attempt

to connect such things as laser and NAET with the body of Chinese medical

theory.

>

>

> < " We should let our patients know that laser treatment is experimental

>and get their consent, at the very least. " >

>

>I am in complete agreement with you on this.

>

>Hopefully, we as practitioners of (in general), and Chinese

>Herbal Medicine (in specific), will not eschew modern refinements, tools, or

>opportunities to expand and improve our practices, our medicinals, our

>outcomes, and our pts health and well-being merely because the tools are new,

>different, and not recorded in one of the Classic Text's of

>(after all, we are having this discussion with modern, high tech, digital

>computers communicating over the constantly evolving Internet).

 

Computers are communication tools, like telephones, letter-writing and air

mail. I don't stick computers into my patients. Of course, there are

those who would like to replace pulse diagnosis with computer measurement

of channels!

>

>In the final analysis, growth, development and improvement are impossible

>without both trying and exploring new ideas, and new things, AND, keeping,

>deepening and refining our understanding of our tremendous cultural and

>classical legacies.

 

Nice idea. . . .but the present reality is wanting. Few of us are

well-versed enough in classical theory or have access to the literature to

make this happen.

>

>Just as it is with Yin & Yang, both the old, and the new, the classical, and

>the technical, the intuitive, and scientific are necessary for the growth,

>and health of our profession, and for the well-being of ourselves, and our

>pts.

>

>All the best to you, and our other listers.

>

> Bruce Canning

 

 

Bruce, I enjoyed this discussion. Thank you very much.

 

 

>