XCHT & shaoyang

[Guest guest]

After reading the previous posts and listening to people discuss XCHT/ shaoyang, I am starting to see some patterns. It seems to me that

a) shaoyang seems to be exclusively linked with XCHT and visa versa –I believe this is an outright error.

b) The use of XCHT has obviously been expanded to include many other patterns, diseases, dx protocols etc…

c) Because of a & b, shaoyang is ‘backwards’ expanded also. I.e. a doctor starts to use XCHT for presentation X and it works, and therefore presentation X must belong to some expanded understanding of shaoyang. I again think this is incorrect and misses not only the point of shaoyang but does not allow for the many other formulas that can be given for shaoyang. It is clinically useful for XCHT, but that is a separate issue. With understanding the essence of shaoyang (and not uses for XCHT) one can understand how and why for example, the modification (from the SHL) of taking out huang qin and fuling is necessary. I ask all of you, how often do you see shaoyang dx and instantly people say XCHT? Especially since most people are operating on this huge understanding of shaoyang. There is so much more to it than that. The pervious modification shows that shaoyang doesn’t even mean that shaoyang = heat in the GB, as many believe. I again ask what is the traditional meaning of shaoyang? Let’s put it into words, and explain the symptoms, tx principle, PATHOMECHANISMS in these terms. I have previous mentioned ideas (i.e. the fight) and explained how the symptoms fit with this. Once we understand this, then we can understand how to expand it. After looking through all the modifications, and other patterns, I think that 1 symptom and i.e. history is not enough to grasp the essence. Especially since the line that the ‘1 symptom phrase’ is taken from is specifically talking about XCHT. If this is true for all shaoyang disorders is yet to be decided. All that I know is I have yet to hear anything that explains the whole shaoyang experience better than needing alternating fever and chills… I am definitely open to some ideas and explanations.

Expansion is necessary: So how do we go about this? Do we change the theory or change the formulas or both? Can our clinical experience with the use of a formula be used to expand the meaning of i.e. the theory of a shaoyang disorder? Or is it better to just understand the expansions in context of that formula. I think it can with proper GROUNDED theoretical understanding… My current believe stated above, is so, because I think by this type of expansion we blur the lines for using the other ideas and formulas originally listed in the shaoyang section. I.e. subtracting huangqin and adding fuling. How would we ever get to that if we just understand it in this new expanded XCHT based meaning, i.e. because of an abdominal presentation or something. Kampo medicine seems to have taken this methodology to an extreme and has completely loss the essence of diagnosis in terms of flexibility and understanding of the SHL. (just my opnion– I know little about kampo.)

Enough for now, comments?

-