TCM challenge: parasites/shen bridge

[Guest guest]

The following is from my short essay on the 'Three Worms' found

at http://www.ancientway.com:

 

This leads us back to the

Three Worms. Parasites, which can include fungal, protozoan, and

bacterial infections, all have different ways of affecting their host

organisms. In some sense, the less powerful parasites are the most

insidious in their effects. Visible worms, which can lead to painful

cramping and passing of worms in the stools, are more easily

diagnosed and eliminated than a fungal invasion, such as Candida

albicans, a yeast who is currently a popular parasitic pet in the

west. Candida can lead to a variety of chronic symptoms, hard to pin

down and recalcitrant to treat. Depression, lethargy, digestive

discomfort, chronic fatigue, poor memory, and all sorts of gooey

discharges are all related to Candidiasis. And what does Candida feed

on? Mostly grains and sugars!

So the Daoists said there was a worm in each Dan Tien (Elixir

Field--the three main energy centers). The one in the lower abdomen

causes lust in addition to intestinal distress. The one in the heart

center causes anxiety as well as heart and lung diseases. The one in

the forehead (Third Eye) center caused psychic distress and

attachment to worldly things. They feed off of grains, and endeavor

to kill the body for their feast.

To have any hope of living a

long time, the Daoists counselled, one must abstain from grains while

killing the Three Worms with herbs, exercises, and a diet of

vegetables and mushrooms.

 

Parasites are one of the traditional 'causes of diseases' in

TCM, and while the door to them may have been opened by spleen/st.

deficiencies, they put down their own 'roots,' so to speak.

 

Kevin

[Guest guest]

Kevin

 

I think it is very instructive to look at formulae for the treatment

of

chronic gu syndrome. Flaws makes the case that these formulae are

based on Li dong yuan's spleen stomach theories, containing large

doses

of qi tonic plus heat clearers and qi regulators. Also, according to

Heiner Fruehauf, gu syndrome often does not involve active parasites,

but that the gu is a toxin, not the worm itself. In any event, this

gu

TOXIN is inherently an excess pathogenic factor. However the gu

SYNDROME is a mixed condition of excess and deficiency that conforms

somewhat to a yin fire pattern. The gu toxin must be addressed as

part

of gu syndrome treatment, but Heiner is clear that merely attacking

the

gu worms or toxins fails and only complex formula that address all

the

mutually engendering pathomechanisms are successful. So while I do

not

deny that parasites are a cause of acute illness, I do not perceive

gu

or worms (or candida) as a root cause of chronic illness. Damp is

also

a traditional " cause of disease " in TCM, but that does not mean it is

the root of a chronic disorder. I guess I do not see pathogens as

roots in this context. Other thoughts on this?

>

> Parasites are one of the traditional 'causes of diseases' in TCM,

and

> while the door to them may have been opened by spleen/st.

> deficiencies, they put down their own 'roots,' so to speak.

>

> Kevin

[Guest guest]

The first question should be: how would TCM differentiate gu as worms

as candida, as parasites, as fungus, as excessive natural metabolic

waste, etc?

 

The Li Dong yuan formulas are good choice because spleen function is

a necessary dimension of the immune system. In pulse diagnosis, we

look at spleen function (white blood cells, mucus production, etc.)

and lung function (wei qi) together to see how the immune system is

reponding. For example, many times you can recognize candida in the

gastrointestinal tract by looking at the qualities of the large

intestine pulse---often various degrees of soft and damp, holding a

degree of heat (depending how much inflammation). More often you can

read it in the yang aspect (what my version of the commentary from

the Nan Jing calls the " front " ) of the large intesting pulse, as

mucus is fed to it by the spleen.

 

Simply saying gu is too ambiguous. Reading 5 elements within 5

elements would give a much clearer picture.

 

Which brings me to my question: although TCM is supposed to be

eclectic about patterns, it seems to ignore 5 elements and 6 energies

(all but a few students I've talked to have ever used them in

clinic). How come? And, when you make herbal formulas, do you think

of the ways 5 elements works?

 

 

 

 

, herb-t@s... wrote:

> Kevin

>

> I think it is very instructive to look at formulae for the treatment

> of

> chronic gu syndrome. Flaws makes the case that these formulae are

> based on Li dong yuan's spleen stomach theories, containing large

> doses

> of qi tonic plus heat clearers and qi regulators. Also, according

to

> Heiner Fruehauf, gu syndrome often does not involve active

parasites,

> but that the gu is a toxin, not the worm itself. In any event, this

> gu

> TOXIN is inherently an excess pathogenic factor. However the gu

> SYNDROME is a mixed condition of excess and deficiency that

conforms

> somewhat to a yin fire pattern. The gu toxin must be addressed as

> part

> of gu syndrome treatment, but Heiner is clear that merely attacking

> the

> gu worms or toxins fails and only complex formula that address all

> the

> mutually engendering pathomechanisms are successful. So while I do

> not

> deny that parasites are a cause of acute illness, I do not perceive

> gu

> or worms (or candida) as a root cause of chronic illness. Damp is

> also

> a traditional " cause of disease " in TCM, but that does not mean it

is

> the root of a chronic disorder. I guess I do not see pathogens as

> roots in this context. Other thoughts on this?

>

 

>

 

> >

> > Parasites are one of the traditional 'causes of diseases' in TCM,

> and

> > while the door to them may have been opened by spleen/st.

> > deficiencies, they put down their own 'roots,' so to speak.

> >

> > Kevin

[Guest guest]

Jim,

Gu is a very specific term in Chinese medicine, hardly ambiguous.

Wiseman defines it as a 'toxin of poisonous chong/parasites damaging the

network vessels and manifesting in the form of drum distention''.

 

Could you explain more thoroughly for the group about 5 phases within 5

phases? And what you mean by '6 energies'?

 

Certainly, Li Dong-yuan used five phase theory very widely, both in his

herbal prescriptions and acupuncture approach. Check out his 'Treatise on

Spleen and Stomach'. . . .it goes into detail on 5 phase approaches to

disease.

 

 

 

 

 

>The first question should be: how would TCM differentiate gu as worms

>as candida, as parasites, as fungus, as excessive natural metabolic

>waste, etc?

>

>The Li Dong yuan formulas are good choice because spleen function is

>a necessary dimension of the immune system. In pulse diagnosis, we

>look at spleen function (white blood cells, mucus production, etc.)

>and lung function (wei qi) together to see how the immune system is

>reponding. For example, many times you can recognize candida in the

>gastrointestinal tract by looking at the qualities of the large

>intestine pulse---often various degrees of soft and damp, holding a

>degree of heat (depending how much inflammation). More often you can

>read it in the yang aspect (what my version of the commentary from

>the Nan Jing calls the " front " ) of the large intesting pulse, as

>mucus is fed to it by the spleen.

>

>Simply saying gu is too ambiguous. Reading 5 elements within 5

>elements would give a much clearer picture.

>

>Which brings me to my question: although TCM is supposed to be

>eclectic about patterns, it seems to ignore 5 elements and 6 energies

>(all but a few students I've talked to have ever used them in

>clinic). How come? And, when you make herbal formulas, do you think

>of the ways 5 elements works?

>

>

[Guest guest]

Zev:

 

Even accepting Wiseman's definitions without reservation (which is

difficult since he translates hu shan as " foxy mounting " instead of

hernia), the question that I was trying to raise to the group is 'how

do we distinguish, in the Chinese models, the differences between

types of gu' or should we use this as a very broad category. In the

Wiseman definition, the poison can come from either insects or

reptiles, and he also defines gu as " sexual taxation in males " and

the " poison derived from insects as mentioned in the Book of Rites. "

 

Common American use of the term seems to include a much broader

understanding, if I read these discussions correctly.

 

How robust can we make our Chinese models? Western medicine seems to

have lots of the details, but no sense of how they all fit together.

My feeling has been that Chinese medicine goes too far in the other

direction, trying to include everything in very broad descriptions,

almost to the point of ambiguity.

 

Using a deeper approach to 5 elements could expand upon those

details. For example, when I make up a herbal formula I consider the

way it will work 5 elementally, and how it will move in 6 energies.

Often following it's effect on the pulses.

 

Another example: the discussion of yin fire seems difficult in 8-

Principles, but deceptively simple in 5 elements seeing it as the

interaction of pancreas (Earth), adrenal (Water), and liver (Wood).

We can even create a reliable prognosis, using it.

 

As to 5 elements: It seems conspicuous due to its absence---not only

in this discussion group but in general.

 

We can superimpose Eastern and Western medical categories by looking

at various ways the 5 elements are interrelated; forming a nonlinear,

complex system. So, one reason Li dong yuan's formulas are important

from this aspect is that the spleen (earth element) participates in

defining all the general systems in the body. When looking at immune

system, we look at the interaction of the spleen and lung. When

looking at the digestive system, spleen and liver. When looking at

the endocrine system, spleen and kidney. And when looking at the

nervous system, spleen, triple warmer, and heart.

 

This is just one of the ways we can view things in pulse diagnosis.

We can also look at each organ (zang or fu) and divide the pulse into

first half and second half (what a Nan Jing commentary calls " front "

and " back " ). In this yang and yin aspect, we can read the functional

or yang part of the organ and compare it to its own yin or

structural, storage, or physical aspect. So, when looking at, let's

say, the pancreas, we can distinguish---from the pulse alone---

whether the person is hypoglycemic or diabetic, because we're looking

at 5 elements within the pancreas itself, 5 elements within the earth

element. And, as you mentioned earlier, we can discriminate if a

tumor is benign or cancerous. Plus many other things.

 

We also read 5 elements of emotion (qi level) interacting with 5

elements of homeostasis (blood level) interacting with the 5 elements

of the organ or constitutional level. So we can follow connection of

the branch to the root.

 

The foundation of how we do this is by combining the Nan Jing methods

of pulse diagnosis with Li Shi zhen's pulse qualities to construct a

much larger, classical system of pulse diagnosis that will be much

more detailed and more specific than TCM (8-Principle) patterns. This

info is from the class I'm teaching this semester. Later, if enough

people are interested and want to continue, I'll do the second level

of advanced classical pulse diagnosis.

 

How this makes me clearer. At 2 a.m. it seems to make sense.

 

Jim

[Guest guest]

>Zev:

>

>Even accepting Wiseman's definitions without reservation (which is

>difficult since he translates hu shan as " foxy mounting " instead of

>hernia), the question that I was trying to raise to the group is 'how

>do we distinguish, in the Chinese models, the differences between

>types of gu' or should we use this as a very broad category. In the

>Wiseman definition, the poison can come from either insects or

>reptiles, and he also defines gu as " sexual taxation in males " and

>the " poison derived from insects as mentioned in the Book of Rites. "

 

Jim,

You should read Bob Felt's reply to Peter Deadman on his objections to the

translation 'foxy mounting' .. . ..if you look at the Chinese characters,

you see that this translation makes much more sense than 'hernia', which is

in this situation a generalization which deprives the practitioner of the

tools to provide effective treatment. Each type of shan or mounting

disorder has a pattern, diagnosis and specific treatment, information that

is lost when one translates shan as 'hernial disorder'.

>

>Common American use of the term seems to include a much broader

>understanding, if I read these discussions correctly.

>

>How robust can we make our Chinese models? Western medicine seems to

>have lots of the details, but no sense of how they all fit together.

>My feeling has been that Chinese medicine goes too far in the other

>direction, trying to include everything in very broad descriptions,

>almost to the point of ambiguity.

 

I don't think it is the fault of Chinese medicine. . . .on one hand, you

want to use a generality like 'hernia' for shan, which obscures the

technical meaning, on the other hand, you say that Chinese medical language

is ambiguous.

>

>Using a deeper approach to 5 elements could expand upon those

>details. For example, when I make up a herbal formula I consider the

>way it will work 5 elementally, and how it will move in 6 energies.

>Often following it's effect on the pulses.

 

Again, what is 'six energies'? What is the pinyin? Is this six channel

theory? I certainly agree with you on the five phase model. Perhaps you

can submit your excellant article on cancer pulse diagnosis to this site,

so people can share in your important insights? I love the holographic 5

phase model you present in this article.

>

>Another example: the discussion of yin fire seems difficult in 8-

>Principles, but deceptively simple in 5 elements seeing it as the

>interaction of pancreas (Earth), adrenal (Water), and liver (Wood).

>We can even create a reliable prognosis, using it.

 

Jim, the yin fire model IS a five phase model. Li Dong-yuan's explanation

is purely five phase. I assume you've read the text, so what is the

problem here? It is clearly stated in the text (for example, pg. 105:

" spleen vacuity is the result of hyperactive heart fire which overwhelms

earth " ).

 

>

>The foundation of how we do this is by combining the Nan Jing methods

>of pulse diagnosis with Li Shi zhen's pulse qualities to construct a

>much larger, classical system of pulse diagnosis that will be much

>more detailed and more specific than TCM (8-Principle) patterns. This

>info is from the class I'm teaching this semester. Later, if enough

>people are interested and want to continue, I'll do the second level

>of advanced classical pulse diagnosis.

 

Sounds great. Go for it.

 

 

>

[Guest guest]

--- <zrosenberg

wrote:

 

>

> Again, what is 'six energies'? What is the pinyin?

 

I suspect this is " Wu Yun Liu Qi " . If so, LDY

includes it in Pi Wei Lun.

 

rh

 

 

 

Send instant messages & get email alerts with Messenger.

http://im./

[Guest guest]

Can you send me a copy of Felt's rebutal to Deadman, or an address to

find it? Being an English major, I take Deadman's remarks to heart.

In fact, my favorite book about translation from the Chinese is

Nineteen Ways of Looking At Wang Wei by Eliot Weinberger and Octavio

Paz (Moyer Bell, 1987).

 

If anyone is interested in my article on cancer and pulse diagnosis,

they should send me their email address since it is off topic for

this group. I'd be happy to send them an attached copy. Right now I'm

trying to write an introduction to a series of articles on pulse

diagnosis.

 

 

 

 

 

, " "

<zrosenberg@p...> wrote:

> >Zev:

> >

> >Even accepting Wiseman's definitions without reservation (which is

> >difficult since he translates hu shan as " foxy mounting " instead of

> >hernia), the question that I was trying to raise to the group

is 'how

> >do we distinguish, in the Chinese models, the differences between

> >types of gu' or should we use this as a very broad category. In the

> >Wiseman definition, the poison can come from either insects or

> >reptiles, and he also defines gu as " sexual taxation in males " and

> >the " poison derived from insects as mentioned in the Book of

Rites. "

>

> Jim,

> You should read Bob Felt's reply to Peter Deadman on his objections

to the

> translation 'foxy mounting' .. . ..if you look at the Chinese

characters,

> you see that this translation makes much more sense than 'hernia',

which is

> in this situation a generalization which deprives the practitioner

of the

> tools to provide effective treatment. Each type of shan or mounting

> disorder has a pattern, diagnosis and specific treatment,

information that

> is lost when one translates shan as 'hernial disorder'.

> >

> >Common American use of the term seems to include a much broader

> >understanding, if I read these discussions correctly.

> >

> >How robust can we make our Chinese models? Western medicine seems

to

> >have lots of the details, but no sense of how they all fit

together.

> >My feeling has been that Chinese medicine goes too far in the other

> >direction, trying to include everything in very broad descriptions,

> >almost to the point of ambiguity.

>

> I don't think it is the fault of Chinese medicine. . . .on one

hand, you

> want to use a generality like 'hernia' for shan, which obscures the

> technical meaning, on the other hand, you say that Chinese medical

language

> is ambiguous.

> >

> >Using a deeper approach to 5 elements could expand upon those

> >details. For example, when I make up a herbal formula I consider

the

> >way it will work 5 elementally, and how it will move in 6 energies.

> >Often following it's effect on the pulses.

>

> Again, what is 'six energies'? What is the pinyin? Is this six

channel

> theory? I certainly agree with you on the five phase model.

Perhaps you

> can submit your excellant article on cancer pulse diagnosis to this

site,

> so people can share in your important insights? I love the

holographic 5

> phase model you present in this article.

> >

> >Another example: the discussion of yin fire seems difficult in 8-

> >Principles, but deceptively simple in 5 elements seeing it as the

> >interaction of pancreas (Earth), adrenal (Water), and liver (Wood).

> >We can even create a reliable prognosis, using it.

>

> Jim, the yin fire model IS a five phase model. Li Dong-yuan's

explanation

> is purely five phase. I assume you've read the text, so what is

the

> problem here? It is clearly stated in the text (for example, pg.

105:

> " spleen vacuity is the result of hyperactive heart fire which

overwhelms

> earth " ).

>

> >

> >The foundation of how we do this is by combining the Nan Jing

methods

> >of pulse diagnosis with Li Shi zhen's pulse qualities to construct

a

> >much larger, classical system of pulse diagnosis that will be much

> >more detailed and more specific than TCM (8-Principle) patterns.

This

> >info is from the class I'm teaching this semester. Later, if enough

> >people are interested and want to continue, I'll do the second

level

> >of advanced classical pulse diagnosis.

>

> Sounds great. Go for it.

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

It is too long to send. Check bluepoppypress.com, open up the bar at the

top for the discussion group. It is in there.

 

 

 

 

>Can you send me a copy of Felt's rebutal to Deadman, or an address to

>find it? Being an English major, I take Deadman's remarks to heart.

>In fact, my favorite book about translation from the Chinese is

>Nineteen Ways of Looking At Wang Wei by Eliot Weinberger and Octavio

>Paz (Moyer Bell, 1987).

>

>If anyone is interested in my article on cancer and pulse diagnosis,

>they should send me their email address since it is off topic for

>this group. I'd be happy to send them an attached copy. Right now I'm

>trying to write an introduction to a series of articles on pulse

>diagnosis.

>

>

[Guest guest]

James,

 

Regarding:

 

<< Even accepting Wiseman's definitions without reservation (which is

difficult since he translates hu shan as " foxy mounting " instead of

hernia), >>

 

I wonder if anyone else is bothered by this new, stilted, 'politically &

gramatically correct " , and thoroughly unreadable " pseudolatin " terminology

that most of the newer books on TCM seem to be written in ?

 

On the positive side, the new books have so much greater depth of information

than the references I had back when I was in school, but on the negative

side, now that more of the good books are being " translated " this way from

the original Chinese, it drives me to distraction to have to re-translate

them from this new " pseudolatin " /TCMbabble " back into English just so I can

understand them.

 

I am sure that the academics who are " translating " the texts this way have a

reason for doing this (having probably to do with cross referencing the new

texts with various dictionaries so that you can look up the original

characters), but this renders them so unreadable it seems almost more trouble

than its worth to bother with these new works.

 

Any thoughts, or comments?

 

Bruce

[Guest guest]

No, I am not only not bothered, my understanding of the medicine, and that

of the students I teach, has increased exponentially. I don't see any

latin influences here (certainly not to the degree of Manfred Porkert's

work, which is also excellant), and I don't think we need to 'dumb down'

English word choices as has often been done in the past.

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

>I wonder if anyone else is bothered by this new, stilted, 'politically &

>gramatically correct " , and thoroughly unreadable " pseudolatin " terminology

>that most of the newer books on TCM seem to be written in ?

>

>On the positive side, the new books have so much greater depth of information

>than the references I had back when I was in school, but on the negative

>side, now that more of the good books are being " translated " this way from

>the original Chinese, it drives me to distraction to have to re-translate

>them from this new " pseudolatin " /TCMbabble " back into English just so I can

>understand them.

>

>I am sure that the academics who are " translating " the texts this way have a

>reason for doing this (having probably to do with cross referencing the new

>texts with various dictionaries so that you can look up the original

>characters), but this renders them so unreadable it seems almost more trouble

>than its worth to bother with these new works.

>

>Any thoughts, or comments?

>

>Bruce

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Jim,

 

Please send me a copy of your article on pulse diagnosis and cancer.

 

Adolfo

acphc

 

James Ramholz [OMJournal]

Sunday, May 07, 2000 8:30 PM

Re: Re: TCM challenge: parasites/shen

bridge

 

 

Can you send me a copy of Felt's rebutal to Deadman, or an address to

find it? Being an English major, I take Deadman's remarks to heart.

In fact, my favorite book about translation from the Chinese is

Nineteen Ways of Looking At Wang Wei by Eliot Weinberger and Octavio

Paz (Moyer Bell, 1987).

 

If anyone is interested in my article on cancer and pulse diagnosis,

they should send me their email address since it is off topic for

this group. I'd be happy to send them an attached copy. Right now I'm

trying to write an introduction to a series of articles on pulse

diagnosis.

 

 

 

 

 

, " "

<zrosenberg@p...> wrote:

> >Zev:

> >

> >Even accepting Wiseman's definitions without reservation (which is

> >difficult since he translates hu shan as " foxy mounting " instead of

> >hernia), the question that I was trying to raise to the group

is 'how

> >do we distinguish, in the Chinese models, the differences between

> >types of gu' or should we use this as a very broad category. In the

> >Wiseman definition, the poison can come from either insects or

> >reptiles, and he also defines gu as " sexual taxation in males " and

> >the " poison derived from insects as mentioned in the Book of

Rites. "

>

> Jim,

> You should read Bob Felt's reply to Peter Deadman on his objections

to the

> translation 'foxy mounting' .. . ..if you look at the Chinese

characters,

> you see that this translation makes much more sense than 'hernia',

which is

> in this situation a generalization which deprives the practitioner

of the

> tools to provide effective treatment. Each type of shan or mounting

> disorder has a pattern, diagnosis and specific treatment,

information that

> is lost when one translates shan as 'hernial disorder'.

> >

> >Common American use of the term seems to include a much broader

> >understanding, if I read these discussions correctly.

> >

> >How robust can we make our Chinese models? Western medicine seems

to

> >have lots of the details, but no sense of how they all fit

together.

> >My feeling has been that Chinese medicine goes too far in the other

> >direction, trying to include everything in very broad descriptions,

> >almost to the point of ambiguity.

>

> I don't think it is the fault of Chinese medicine. . . .on one

hand, you

> want to use a generality like 'hernia' for shan, which obscures the

> technical meaning, on the other hand, you say that Chinese medical

language

> is ambiguous.

> >

> >Using a deeper approach to 5 elements could expand upon those

> >details. For example, when I make up a herbal formula I consider

the

> >way it will work 5 elementally, and how it will move in 6 energies.

> >Often following it's effect on the pulses.

>

> Again, what is 'six energies'? What is the pinyin? Is this six

channel

> theory? I certainly agree with you on the five phase model.

Perhaps you

> can submit your excellant article on cancer pulse diagnosis to this

site,

> so people can share in your important insights? I love the

holographic 5

> phase model you present in this article.

> >

> >Another example: the discussion of yin fire seems difficult in 8-

> >Principles, but deceptively simple in 5 elements seeing it as the

> >interaction of pancreas (Earth), adrenal (Water), and liver (Wood).

> >We can even create a reliable prognosis, using it.

>

> Jim, the yin fire model IS a five phase model. Li Dong-yuan's

explanation

> is purely five phase. I assume you've read the text, so what is

the

> problem here? It is clearly stated in the text (for example, pg.

105:

> " spleen vacuity is the result of hyperactive heart fire which

overwhelms

> earth " ).

>

> >

> >The foundation of how we do this is by combining the Nan Jing

methods

> >of pulse diagnosis with Li Shi zhen's pulse qualities to construct

a

> >much larger, classical system of pulse diagnosis that will be much

> >more detailed and more specific than TCM (8-Principle) patterns.

This

> >info is from the class I'm teaching this semester. Later, if enough

> >people are interested and want to continue, I'll do the second

level

> >of advanced classical pulse diagnosis.

>

> Sounds great. Go for it.

>

>

> >

 

 

------

You have a voice mail message waiting for you at iHello.com:

http://click./1/3555/9/_/542111/_/957756667/

------

 

Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

 

 

___________

NetZero - Defenders of the Free World

Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email

http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html