subtle vs. gross (was Thyroiditis-Hashimoto)

[Guest guest]

, jramholz wrote:

 

You will need to use 5-Elements and 6-Energies in

> your diagnosis; knowing pulse diagnosis will be invaluable to track the

> relationships between the organs.

 

I think some of the contention within our field comes from a failure to

distinguish between subtle vs. gross and holisitc vs. reductionistic.

We all ostensibly to the practice of holism, however some of

us are more oriented towards the subtle (energetics, resonance low

dose, homeopathy, chakras, etc.) others towards the gross

(pharmacology, high doses, structural manipulation, etc.) I am

decidedly in the latter group. And while I believe I have seen

interesting and unexplainable results from subtle methodologies, I do

not believe chinese herbology has historically been practiced as a

subtle medicine. this is just one of the many fracture points between

herbology and acupuncture that practically make these two modalities

different forms of medicine altogether.

 

the modern practice of subtle herbology has been influenced by western

therapies and concepts, not chinese. I have inquired with several

authorities on chinese textual information in recent weeks and none of

them have been able to provide any citations supporting the idea of

subtle herbology in the historical tradition. Several professors at

PCOM actually teach that low dose patents work homeopathically and

claim this was taught to them by Ted Kapchuk. Yet while I have read

some of Ted's work in this area, what is conspicuously lacking are any

citations. can anyone support this position with some facts?

 

I bring this up to return in a roundabout way to the issue of

thyroiditis. I have very good results with all autoimmune diseases as

long as I follow the tenets of high dosage, long course of treatment

and differentiation of patterns. I always treat all the mutually

engendering pathomechanisms, but I do not use five element diagnosis

except in the most peripheral way. And my use of pulse is not near as

subtle and variegated as the style Jim advocates. To me, everything

relevant to herbal practice about five elements and six energies is

already incorporated into the TCM framework. Liver invading spleen is

wood overcoming earth; Heart and kd not communicating is water

controlling fire; etc. While I have no doubt that Jim's methodology is

valid in its own right, I believe it is hardly vital to success when

practicing modern standard professional chinese herbology. But if you

are using ultra low dose and other subtle methodologies, then TCM will

fail. This is why homeopathic reasoning does not apply to TCM either.

It is apples and oranges.

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Todd:

 

I wasn't necessarily arguing for a subtle or homoepathic style of

herbalism since I don't really do that. Most of my work is done with

acupuncture and using herbs to reinforce and support (in moderate

doses). But what I was trying to lay the groundwork for is a more

classical and precise diagnosis---incorporating more of the classical

Chinese material into the discussion for analysis. By using the pulse

material from the Nan Jing and Mai Jing it is often possible to arrive at

a unique and defining diagnosis for a particular disorder and see the

nested hierarchies of emotional (meridian level), functional (blood level),

and organic problems---beyond the symptoms the patient describes or

are overtly observable---rather than TCM's basic reduced set of

conditions.

 

Disoders will often have a characteristic " signature " in the pulses

that can be evident before symptoms occur. While the reduction offers

simplicity, there is often no way to distinguish one disorder from

another simply from the Chinese description alone. I suspect this is

one reason for its difficult acceptance in the West and the increasing

reliance on pharmacology to explain its actions.

 

Like you, I am not convinced of Kapchuk's contention that small doses

of patents work homeopathically. I suspect he has simply overlooked

how formulas enter and change the meridian balance and not just work

on the gross level. It seems most of the new literature discusses basic

function as if the herb only contained certain chemical properties or

that Western chemistry is required to ultimately explain all its functions;

the rest being incidental, foreign, and unmodern.

 

Jim Ramholz

 

 

 

, @i... wrote:

> , jramholz wrote:

>

> You will need to use 5-Elements and 6-Energies in

> > your diagnosis; knowing pulse diagnosis will be invaluable to

track

the

> > relationships between the organs.

>

> I think some of the contention within our field comes from a

failure to

> distinguish between subtle vs. gross and holisitc vs.

reductionistic.

> We all ostensibly to the practice of holism, however some

of

> us are more oriented towards the subtle (energetics, resonance low

> dose, homeopathy, chakras, etc.) others towards the gross

> (pharmacology, high doses, structural manipulation, etc.) I am

> decidedly in the latter group. And while I believe I have seen

> interesting and unexplainable results from subtle methodologies, I

do

> not believe chinese herbology has historically been practiced as a

> subtle medicine. this is just one of the many fracture points

between

> herbology and acupuncture that practically make these two

modalities

> different forms of medicine altogether.

>

> the modern practice of subtle herbology has been influenced by

western

> therapies and concepts, not chinese. I have inquired with several

> authorities on chinese textual information in recent weeks and none

of

> them have been able to provide any citations supporting the idea of

> subtle herbology in the historical tradition. Several professors

at

> PCOM actually teach that low dose patents work homeopathically

and

> claim this was taught to them by Ted Kapchuk. Yet while I have

read

> some of Ted's work in this area, what is conspicuously lacking are

any

> citations. can anyone support this position with some facts?

>

> I bring this up to return in a roundabout way to the issue of

> thyroiditis. I have very good results with all autoimmune diseases

as

> long as I follow the tenets of high dosage, long course of

treatment

> and differentiation of patterns. I always treat all the mutually

> engendering pathomechanisms, but I do not use five element

diagnosis

> except in the most peripheral way. And my use of pulse is not near

as

> subtle and variegated as the style Jim advocates. To me,

everything

> relevant to herbal practice about five elements and six energies is

> already incorporated into the TCM framework. Liver invading spleen

is

> wood overcoming earth; Heart and kd not communicating is water

> controlling fire; etc. While I have no doubt that Jim's

methodology is

> valid in its own right, I believe it is hardly vital to success

when

> practicing modern standard professional chinese herbology. But if

you

> are using ultra low dose and other subtle methodologies, then TCM

will

> fail. This is why homeopathic reasoning does not apply to TCM

either.

> It is apples and oranges.

>

 

[Guest guest]

 

[zrosenberg]

Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:18 AM

 

Re: subtle vs. gross (was

Thyroiditis-Hashimoto)

 

 

 

In George Soulie de Morant's " Chinese Acupuncture " , another very interesting

work influenced by homeopathy, he mentions that Hua Tuo used the 'sweat of

the five animals' prepared in dilution to treat disease. Again, interesting

quote, but whether there is anything in the literature to back it up, I

don't know. So, I am open to the possibility, but cannot say I can use

these ideas clinically without more precedent in the tradition to do so.

 

 

>

 

To add to the above, it says that the disease of the animals that the sweat

was collected from was used to treat the same disease as in the person. Not

just diluted, but infinitesimal doses/... Interesting... especially when you

think about if patterns (of the animals) were used.. or symptoms..? Does

one find 5 animals with liver qi stag., gather there sweat, and treat

someone.. . I guess tongue and pulse were not too important? The whole

thing sounds somewhat strange... Probably an interpolation of homeopathy, as

Z'ev suggests...

 

-

[Guest guest]

Disregard my last msg. (below) Let me clarify:

1) Morant quotes, " ... he most often used infinitesimal doses, taking the

diluted sweat from one of the five animals affected with the same disease as

the patient. "

2) There was no zang-fu patterns at that period (Han) I think- - just

symptoms/ disease names or 5 element disharmonies.

3) So.. One would find a (i.e.) sheep with liver problems to treat a patient

with liver disharmony. Or if a patient had a hiccup one would find an ox

with a similar symptom and gather his sweat...

 

This is interesting...

 

-

 

 

1)

 

In George Soulie de Morant's " Chinese Acupuncture " , another very interesting

work influenced by homeopathy, he mentions that Hua Tuo used the 'sweat of

the five animals' prepared in dilution to treat disease. Again, interesting

quote, but whether there is anything in the literature to back it up, I

don't know. So, I am open to the possibility, but cannot say I can use

these ideas clinically without more precedent in the tradition to do so.

 

 

>

 

To add to the above, it says that the disease of the animals that the sweat

was collected from was used to treat the same disease as in the person. Not

just diluted, but infinitesimal doses/... Interesting... especially when you

think about if patterns (of the animals) were used.. or symptoms..? Does

one find 5 animals with liver qi stag., gather there sweat, and treat

someone.. . I guess tongue and pulse were not too important? The whole

thing sounds somewhat strange... Probably an interpolation of homeopathy, as

Z'ev suggests...

 

-

 

 

 

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.

 

 

[Guest guest]

on 2/12/01 8:33 AM, at wrote:

 

 

>

> the modern practice of subtle herbology has been influenced by western

> therapies and concepts, not chinese. I have inquired with several

> authorities on chinese textual information in recent weeks and none of

> them have been able to provide any citations supporting the idea of

> subtle herbology in the historical tradition. Several professors at

> PCOM actually teach that low dose patents work homeopathically and

> claim this was taught to them by Ted Kapchuk. Yet while I have read

> some of Ted's work in this area, what is conspicuously lacking are any

> citations. can anyone support this position with some facts?

 

Yes, in the Kan Herb literature and at PCOM ten years ago Ted did teach a

low dose, neo-homeopathic approach to herbal medicine, reducing dosages for

more subtle, emotional-psychological disorders up to a stronger dosage for

more 'physical' complaints. Since then, Ted has moved on to other pursuits,

and he has not elaborated further on this subject. I assume much of his

inspiration came from Sun Si-Miao's " Qian Jin Yao Fang " , from attending many

of his lectures over the years. But I cannot confirm or refute these claims

without extensive research into this source material.

 

In George Soulie de Morant's " Chinese Acupuncture " , another very interesting

work influenced by homeopathy, he mentions that Hua Tuo used the 'sweat of

the five animals' prepared in dilution to treat disease. Again, interesting

quote, but whether there is anything in the literature to back it up, I

don't know. So, I am open to the possibility, but cannot say I can use

these ideas clinically without more precedent in the tradition to do so.

 

 

>

[Guest guest]

, jramholz wrote:

 

rather than TCM's basic reduced set of

> conditions.

>

 

We must be defining TCM differently. I do not see TCM to be a

reduction in possibilities. TCM includes all the classical texts in my

opinion. In fact, without the classics, TCM appears simplistic. with

the classics as a backdrop, TCM takes on a dynamic quality.

 

>

> Like you, I am not convinced of Kapchuk's contention that small doses

> of patents work homeopathically. I suspect he has simply overlooked

> how formulas enter and change the meridian balance and not just work

> on the gross level.

 

Perhaps this is also what Ted means. It is secondhand to me.

 

It seems most of the new literature discusses basic

> function as if the herb only contained certain chemical properties or

> that Western chemistry is required to ultimately explain all its functions;

> the rest being incidental, foreign, and unmodern.

>

 

I do think it is pharmacology that explans the actions of herbs, albeit

a sophisticated polypharmacology. I think " energetics " is merely a

holistic macrocosmic view of pharmacology, not a science of " energy " at

all.

 

[Guest guest]

, " " <zrosenberg@e...>

wrote:

 

> Yes, in the Kan Herb literature and at PCOM ten years ago Ted did teach a

> low dose, neo-homeopathic approach to herbal medicine, reducing dosages for

> more subtle, emotional-psychological disorders up to a stronger dosage for

> more 'physical' complaints. Since then, Ted has moved on to other pursuits,

> and he has not elaborated further on this subject.

 

while TED has moved on, his careless words have continued to haunt the

field in the formof techers who do not realize that these words are

unsupported by citations

 

I assume much of his

> inspiration came from Sun Si-Miao's " Qian Jin Yao Fang " , from attending many

> of his lectures over the years. But I cannot confirm or refute these claims

> without extensive research into this source material.

 

others have told me that his interpretation of this material is highly

speculative and idiosyncratic and clearly unsupported by the hundreds

of int. med texts written since the tang dynasty.

 

[Guest guest]

TCM includes all the classical texts in my opinion. In fact, without the classics, TCM appears simplistic.

>>>The question is what do you include as the classics

Alon