Guest guest Posted September 19, 2000 Report Share Posted September 19, 2000 Since Chai hu is bitter and drying, and therefore potentially harmful to the Yin, many herbalists opt instead for Xiang fu when they need to free the liver Qi in a Yin xu patient. However, though many books claim Xiang fu is thermally neutral, several respected Chinese docs have told me it is warm. So, in the case of Yin xu heat, I would think Xiang fu would also have a drawback. Since Chai hu is never prescribed alone, and most often in Xiao Yao Wan, which contains two blood tonics, is there anyone who really fears it (even in combination with moistening herbs) when there is Yin xu? And what do people make of Xiang fu's thermal nature? Also, I'd be interested to hear people's experience in comparing the following herbs in efficacy at alleviating liver Qi stagnation, particularly since these herbs operate in a number of different ways (e.g. Bai shao " softens " and subdues the liver; Mai ya frees liver Qi and helps liver Qi to properly rise, etc) : Bai Ji Li Bai Shao Bo He Chai Hu Chuan Lian Zi Fang Feng? Fo Shou He Huan Hua Jing Jie? Ju Hua Mei Gui Hua Mai Ya Mu Hu Die Qing Pi Wu Zhu Yu Xian He Cao Xiang Fu Xuan Fu Hua Yin Chen Hao Yu Jin Ze Lan Zi Cao? My inclusion of Fang Feng and Jing Jie was based on the teachings of two Chinese professors at OCOM, and that leads me to another question: do acrid, moving herbs have a general, non-sepcific tendency to free liver Qi? **************************** Finally, I must say it's disappointing to get a digest of maybe 15 submissions a day where 10 are long-winded rants about the effectiveness of Chinese medicine or the validity of lab tests or whose terminology is best. Maybe we can redirect the discussions around herbs. Also, I would like to request that, if possible, people turn off the " Include Message in Reply " function of their email program when replying to long messages, or just include the relevant section of the submission they are replying to (as some people do). I understand there is a need to remind us of context, but for those of us who just receive the daily digest, through repeated replies to the same message, there are often a half dozen or more repetitions of the same, growing submission. THANKS, Peter Borten Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2000 Report Share Posted September 19, 2000 Peter postulated: >>>Also, I would like to request that, if possible, people turn off the " Include Message in Reply " function of their email program when replying to long messages, or just include the relevant section of the submission they are replying to (as some people do). <<< Yeah, I agree. Its actually difficult to navigate through who's saying what, and so on, especially with all the ads that get pasted in there and so forth. As for Peter's problem with the discussion regarding the research, I myself enjoy these topics, in fact the topics that seem to have generated the most action have been about topics surrounding TCM rather than the actual herbs. I'm okay with this. It broadens my perspectives. But definately learn how to quote the essential text instead of just quoting the entire post. I can't figure out who's talking half the time. -- Al Stone L.Ac. <AlStone http://www.BeyondWellBeing.com Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. Attachment: vcard [not shown] 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.