Guest guest Posted September 17, 2000 Report Share Posted September 17, 2000 In regards to Todd's statement that he has seen no reliable evidence that homeopathy has any more than a placebo effect, should tell that to the vets in my area who use such concoctions on animals with superb results. Tell that to the animal owners who use homeopathy, as prescibed by their vets, to maintain the health of their pets. There is NO placebo effect with animals, unless you know something about mammalian psychology that I do not. The British royal family, particularly the Queen Mother ( who can buy, sell or afford any physician in the world ) has used homeopathy for years and swears by it. She is in her hundredth decade. Although, it could be argued that it is her daily regimen of two double gins before 11AM that keep her young! I do not use homeopathy in my practice because I am not well versed in its use. I do know, however, several DOM's in New Mexico - where injection therapy is legal for use by acupuncturists - who use Taumeel, by the German company Heel, with great results in pain management. I see a real prejudice against homeopathy by a variety of Chinese medical professionals. The arguments they field strike a true parallel with MD's and others, who feel that " sticking needles in someone cannot possibly have any therapeutic effect " . I would respectfully suggest letting whatever works, work for others, whether or not it works for you. Gary - Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:49 AM Digest Number 330 Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. ------ There are 6 messages in this issue. Topics in this digest: 1. [Fwd: Welcome to ] Todd < 2. Re: herb safety, was placebo effects Karen S Vaughan <creationsgarden 3. Re: herb safety, was placebo effects <alonmarcus 4. Re: placebo effects " " <zrosenberg 5. Re: placebo effects " L.Ac. " 6. re: placebo effects Todd < ______________________ ______________________ Message: 1 Sat, 16 Sep 2000 09:17:14 -0700 Todd < [Fwd: Welcome to ] ChckAbra wrote: > I am a student of TCM under Dr. Wu in New York City. I hope to become a > competent practitioner of both acupuncture and herbal medicine. I am very > happy to be a member. > Thank you, > Paul Abraham -- Chinese Herbal Medicine ______________________ ______________________ Message: 2 Sat, 16 Sep 2000 15:46:59 -0400 Karen S Vaughan <creationsgarden Re: herb safety, was placebo effects Alon Marcus wrote: " For example, Digxin is safer than the herbal verity in equivalent therapeutic dose and Sudafed has less side-effects than Ma Huang (on equivalent effective dose). " Well not really. While it is true that digitalis (foxglove) needs to be assayed because the plant is variable in concentration, the so-called side effects of herbal digitalis (headache, etc.) were a warning sign that the narrow therapeutic window was being exceeded. It probably saved lives. With the drug, the warning sign has been lost and it is easier to induce fatalities. In any event there are better formulas for cardiac use. If you compare Ma huang to extracted ephederine, which was used for asthma for a number of years you will find that it fell out of favor because the drug caused racing of the heart. Ma huang contains compounds that slow the heartbeat as well as those which speed it up, so includes a buffering mechanism. And historic formulas and dosing, which account for most uses of these plants, have been adequately vetted for most conditions. I know of no evidence that Sudafed is superior to ma huang tang, a far better comparison. Karen Vaughan CreationsGarden *************************************** Email advice is not a substitute for medical treatment. Man, surrounded by facts, permitting himself no suprise, no intuitive flash, no great hypothesis, no risk, is in a locked cell. " -Lillian Smith ______________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ______________________ ______________________ Message: 3 Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:35:43 -0700 <alonmarcus Re: herb safety, was placebo effects Ma huang contains compounds that slow the heartbeat as well as those which speed it up, so includes a buffering mechanism. >>Yes but not for increasing blood pressure which ma huang does more than psudoephedrine. All I am saying is that there is two much dogmatic statements going on. I truly believe that it is better to include all available information before making obsolete statements. What may look one way when viewed from one perspective may look very different from another. It is just as foolish to engorge OM as it is to ignore other system including modern medicine. alon - Karen S Vaughan Saturday, September 16, 2000 12:46 PM Re: herb safety, was placebo effects My Groups | Main Page | Start a new group! Alon Marcus wrote: " For example, Digxin is safer than the herbal verity in equivalent therapeutic dose and Sudafed has less side-effects than Ma Huang (on equivalent effective dose). " Well not really. While it is true that digitalis (foxglove) needs to be assayed because the plant is variable in concentration, the so-called side effects of herbal digitalis (headache, etc.) were a warning sign that the narrow therapeutic window was being exceeded. It probably saved lives. With the drug, the warning sign has been lost and it is easier to induce fatalities. In any event there are better formulas for cardiac use. If you compare Ma huang to extracted ephederine, which was used for asthma for a number of years you will find that it fell out of favor because the drug caused racing of the heart. Ma huang contains compounds that slow the heartbeat as well as those which speed it up, so includes a buffering mechanism. And historic formulas and dosing, which account for most uses of these plants, have been adequately vetted for most conditions. I know of no evidence that Sudafed is superior to ma huang tang, a far better comparison. Karen Vaughan CreationsGarden *************************************** Email advice is not a substitute for medical treatment. Man, surrounded by facts, permitting himself no suprise, no intuitive flash, no great hypothesis, no risk, is in a locked cell. " -Lillian Smith ______________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. [This message contained attachments] ______________________ ______________________ Message: 4 Sat, 16 Sep 2000 19:53:24 -0700 " " <zrosenberg Re: placebo effects What is your rationale for comparing Sudafed and ma Huang? How do you compare the pharmacology of the two? How do you consider dosage, or the fact that ma Hung is NEVER used alone in Chinese medicine?. >>>>>First you have to look at a large population being treated w/ Sudafed and TCM formulas contain ma huang. You need to be able to have objective parameters to compare. You need to take out belief system out of the picture by using blind techniques. And you have to track all reported and measurable side-effects. When looking at ma huang as a single herb you have to look at the effects of the whole drug which for example is much more likely to increase blood pressure. The problem with using 'blind techniques' is that it violates one of the core principles of Chinese medicine, which is individualizing the prescription for individual patients. The actions of medicines are modified by climate, body type, and disease. For example, Tao Hong-jing states that in northern China, the people are more thick-skinned, and the weather cold. One needs to use 9-12 gms. of ma huang per dose to induce sweating and disperse wind cold. In southern regions, the people have less body fat, sweat easily, therefore, if used at all, ma huang should be used in 2-3 gm. dosage. How can you get out of belief systems of medicine if you use a clinical trial method established by biomedicine? >>>>I have worked in China and Japan, studied with Miriam Lee for 2 years, Angela wu for Six months, followed Dr Yat Kai Lai for 1yr. And w/ all of them took notes as well as phone numbers of patients that I followed. A year following the termination of their treatments I called and followed up on many of them. These are all very well known practitioners with great reputations. I did as much follow up as I could in China as well. You will be very surprise if you new what was promised or predicated by the above practitioners and what I found on follow-up. I have also seen over 2 dozens of Michael Broffman patients and read many of their written reports (or more accurately poems) most of which to my reading were not impressive at all. They can be interpreted in many ways and do not give a clear clinical diagnosis prognosis and often even treatments. You can project on to them what ever you want and thus ether confirm what you want or reject other points. As in a famous Chinese medical statement, " the inferior physician will cure 30% of his patients, as they will have gotten better anyway. " >>>>Yes there are many such general statements but that does not cut it for me. I believe in OM very much, however, I am not willing to just except old writings, especially when considering the great amount of cultural exaggeration found in Chinese poems and other old writings Alon Alon, If you think Michael Broffman's case histories are poems, and not clear, and that 'old writings' are culturally exaggerated, there really is not much else to discuss in this forum. The principles of Chinese medicine are sound, well established, and worthy of study. This is a subject we have only scratched the surface of. . . .if you don't want to examine this further, I rest my case. [This message contained attachments] ______________________ ______________________ Message: 5 Sat, 16 Sep 2000 21:46:50 -0700 " L.Ac. " Re: placebo effects I've wanted to stay out of this but... Alon seems to take a position that I see many of my colleagues and students take. There is a frustration which frankly I don't see. As for me, and perhaps many of us, I came to this medicine as an artist, interested in the philosophical paradigms and ended up to some extent another kind of healer. If I were 20 again and knew what I was going to be doing 25 years later I don't know if I would have changed things, gritted my teeth, put on a stethoscope and turned M.D. But right now, today.. no regrets. When I was deep into making art, the point was to go beyond the present, stretch the boundaries and push into new frontiers. Now I accept that is accepting the ancient. (Maybe this is my Yin to my former Yang.) I don't think that one can do without this acceptance. You can USE but there has to be that leap of fate. As Kaptchuk said, it will be Western Medicine that will accept but never the other way around. I'm very comfortable with that. I don't know why Alon continues to do medicine if the results from his mentors were so poor. Gee, that would be extremely discouraging. I'm amazed at the miracles I've pulled off, on cases that I thought would take months if at all, and frustrated at the " easy " stuff that just won't respond. But I'll continue, seems like I have no other choice and the patients aren't complaining, (at least the ones that come back). ;-) I'm reminded of another Kaptchuk story from his " other " book: Some M.D.'s did a trial where they did a heart procedure on some patients and just made an incision on others, fooling them into thinking they had the procedure. Both groups improved their condition to a great extent but because the " placebo " (Ren 17?) worked just as well as the actual procedure it was felt that it wasn't a legitimate therapy and BOTH the operation and the " placebo " were discontinued. Now there is Western thought for you. > >>>>Yes there are many such general statements but that does not cut it > for me. >I believe in OM very much, however, I am not willing to just except old >writings, especially when considering the great amount of cultural >exaggeration found in Chinese poems and other old writings >Alon > >Alon, > If you think Michael Broffman's case histories are poems, and not > clear, and that 'old writings' are culturally exaggerated, there really > is not much else to discuss in this forum. The principles of Chinese > medicine are sound, well established, and worthy of study. This is a > subject we have only scratched the surface of. . . .if you don't want to > examine this further, I rest my case. > > > > >Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare >practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics >specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of >professional services, including board approved online continuing education. > ><http://www..org>http://www..org L.Ac. acupuncture & herbs safe, compassionate care 1823 Wilshire Blvd. #610 Santa Monica, CA 90403 310 264-9197 [This message contained attachments] ______________________ ______________________ Message: 6 Sun, 17 Sep 2000 00:22:23 -0700 Todd < re: placebo effects I think people may be missing Alon's point and they are certainly missing mine on this subject. I would not suggest to practice TCM according to biomedical parameters nor reduce the understanding of herbs to the current scientific paradigm. However, I stand by my original statements. I believe herbs are dose dependent in function. I have seen no reliable evidence that homeopathy does anything beyond placebo effect. And when I say evidence, I refer to actual measures of outcome. I do not see how measuring an outcome using objective modern parameters does anything but assess TCM. It does not impact the practice of TCM to step back and assess a purely traditional and classical approach. If we claim to be able to help seriously ill patients recover, then in those cases where an objective measure exists, then should not this measure change over the course of a successful traditional treatment? If not, what basis do we ultimately use to determine cure? If we change the tongue and pulse to our satisfaction, but the patient's tumor meanwhile metastasizes, then I consider that a failure. Or perhaps proteinuria in kidney disease increases and the patient needs dialysis. Again failure. And I think this sort of confirmation should make one reconsider whether they have chosen the correct therapy. One may still have accomplished the more nebulous goals of art or healing, but in my experience, patients themselves are rather looking to survive or be relieved of immense physical suffering. I also know from examining thousands of clinical abstracts from china over the years that such objective measures typically go hand in hand with cures as assessed by a group of TCM experts. This does nothing to rend the conceptual fabric of TCM, however it does everything to legitimize TCM to mainstream critics. Perhaps some master physician whom I've never met could actually rely on naked sense observation alone and be right every time, but I defer to something outside myself for proof. Likewise, though I have spent thousands and thousands of hours handling bulk herbs, I think I know a good quality herb from a bad one, but I lay any odds that I would not be able to assess the actual potency of any given batch without actually ingesting a sample and feeling its effects. -- Chinese Herbal Medicine ______________________ ______________________ 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.