Guest guest Posted August 21, 2002 Report Share Posted August 21, 2002 since I cannot seem to articulate my thoughts on the matter of the relationship between modern scientific thinking and traditional chinese logic, I would like to direct everyone to Belinda Anderson's 2 part article in the upcoming CAOM journal that addresses this matter using the philosophy of Ken Wilber as her template. In a nutshell, there is a way to integrate science and TCM without destroying the dignity of either. Chinese Herbs " Great spirits have always been violently opposed by mediocre minds " -- Albert Einstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2002 Report Share Posted August 21, 2002 , <@i...> wrote: In a nutshell, there is a way to integrate science and TCM without destroying the dignity of either. : We're not in disagreement on this point. Personally, I think it can be done when both are approached from the perspective of Complexity Theory. My earlier post concerned the political and philosophical consequences of the position taken by Kendal, Felix Mann, and others of " validating " CM through its similarity to Western medicine; not whether science and CM have a common ground. Sorry for the confusion. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2002 Report Share Posted August 21, 2002 I am really happy to hear this. Because it is really not us against them. I believe we need to learn to integrate, we are not *just* some alternative medicine, we are an Integrative Medicine. Although I am new to practice, the majority of my patients are under the care of at least -1- Western Medical Doctor, if not more. I see myself as being part of the team. Another team player hoping to bring any given patient back to a better state of health, and whole being. I am totally with you, no one needs to loose their dignity. The reality is that we can be TCM with a scientific bases. If they*practioneers* would have had more modern technology back in the days, that the Nei Jing was written, who is to say that the integration would not have started way back then?! In Health, Teresa Hall - cha Wednesday, August 21, 2002 11:28 AM CAOM since I cannot seem to articulate my thoughts on the matter of the relationship between modern scientific thinking and traditional chinese logic, I would like to direct everyone to Belinda Anderson's 2 part article in the upcoming CAOM journal that addresses this matter using the philosophy of Ken Wilber as her template. In a nutshell, there is a way to integrate science and TCM without destroying the dignity of either.Chinese Herbshttp://www..orgvoice: fax: "Great spirits have always been violently opposed by mediocre minds" -- Albert Einstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2002 Report Share Posted August 21, 2002 , " Teresa Hall " < > I am really happy to hear this. Because it is really not us against them. Teresa: Sometimes it really is us against them. In the past, there has been a great deal of political effort to to prevent licensing and to rein in our practice. The controversy over ephedra is a current example. They want to and may outlaw ephedra unless political clout is used to prevent it---damn the facts over its safety and efficacy. Many statements can have a political agenda attached to them---explicit or implied. The question is not whether there are scientific correlations that will help explain CM in Western terms---there are. The issue is about how CM will be integrated into the matrix of this society, and who will control it. When Kendall and others recast CM as merely a prototype of their own physiological medicine, it is an attempt to marginalize and control this profession. Why should we---as they do in a number of states---have to practice under a Western physician who may not have had any training? Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2002 Report Share Posted August 21, 2002 Dear Jim... Again someone says what I try to say only more elegantly (sophisticated) (Jim in this case). However thick as I am I maintain that not enough background analysis's has been done when one states we practice integrated medicine and believe "science" (a suspect term if you begin to analyse it) is an answer. Natan Sivin puts it very down to earth and well when: Western medicine nor Chinese medicine is a science it may draw from scientific paradigms... yet again not a direct quote nor do I want to put words in to other peoples mouths, however it is food for thought and something that could be detected by anyone if one considers-contemplates: What are the "aspects of clinical decision making" East West? Here I think it is worth mentioning the Patients. The Patients with our with out the proponents of various medical systems has always practice "multidisciplinaryinterdisplanarytransdisiplainary" action i.e. medical approach (whenever its been a active responsible patient). Our well intentions are whether we like it or not hindered by terms used (by now we know the embedded shadow of culture within a "term"). The real reason one needs to understand more East West paradigm(s) is to be able to articulate in-between potential health aids and agents of health, however this means that all "three" partners (I believe it is called threesome in USA) needs to be educated and aware of what derives good articulation and hence good "action": Patients-----Chinese medical practitioners------Western medical practitioner (again not in a linear nor predominant order). The medicine practice in clinic needs only be a well informed practice and not a integrated ( a term not well define in any case sense by know we know there are difference form of "integration"), and "pluralistical" ( a illusion in any case the so call boundaries of medicine exist more as an construct from the medical practitioner view (i.e. East West North South), the patients has always practice some from of hetrogenic pluralistical multidisplinary interdisciplinary transdisiplinary approach to health (when it is an active responsible person in question). Hence I maintain that when a public health system is pluralisical in infrastructure the demand of patients actually raises in a good sense). And finally... What ever makes people believe that we are ready to define so call integrated medicine with out knowing the source(ies) and more comprehension of the medical paradigm(s) in questions beats me.... Marco Bergh - jramholz Wednesday, August 21, 2002 7:17 PM Re: CAOM , "Teresa Hall" <> I am really happy to hear this. Because it is really not us against them.Teresa: Sometimes it really is us against them. In the past, there has been a great deal of political effort to to prevent licensing and to rein in our practice. The controversy over ephedra is a current example. They want to and may outlaw ephedra unless political clout is used to prevent it---damn the facts over its safety and efficacy. Many statements can have a political agenda attached to them---explicit or implied.The question is not whether there are scientific correlations that will help explain CM in Western terms---there are. The issue is about how CM will be integrated into the matrix of this society, and who will control it. When Kendall and others recast CM as merely a prototype of their own physiological medicine, it is an attempt to marginalize and control this profession. Why should we---as they do in a number of states---have to practice under a Western physician who may not have had any training? Jim RamholzChinese 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2002 Report Share Posted August 25, 2002 Yes, an excellent article, Todd. I'm also a fan of Ken Wilber's work. On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 12:28 PM, wrote: > since I cannot seem to articulate my thoughts on the matter of the > relationship between modern scientific thinking and traditional chinese > logic, I would like to direct everyone to Belinda Anderson's 2 part > article in the upcoming CAOM journal that addresses this matter using > the philosophy of Ken Wilber as her template. In a nutshell, there is > a way to integrate science and TCM without destroying the dignity of > either. > > > Chinese Herbs > > voice: > fax: > > " Great spirits have always been violently opposed by mediocre minds " -- > Albert Einstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2002 Report Share Posted August 25, 2002 Jim, You'll be glad to know that I met with one of the originators of complexity theory, Stuart Kauffman, while in New Mexico this past week, and began a dialogue on how to do this practically (integrate from the perspective of complexity theory). By the way, Dave Weininger had an interesting question for me. We talk about integrating Chinese and Western medicine, why no talk about integration with Ayurvedic, Tibetan or other traditional systems? On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 01:06 PM, jramholz wrote: > , <@i...> wrote: > In a nutshell, there is a way to integrate science and TCM without > destroying the dignity of either. > > : > We're not in disagreement on this point. Personally, I think it can > be done when both are approached from the perspective of Complexity > Theory. My earlier post concerned the political and philosophical > consequences of the position taken by Kendal, Felix Mann, and others > of " validating " CM through its similarity to Western medicine; not > whether science and CM have a common ground. > > Sorry for the confusion. > > > Jim Ramholz > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2002 Report Share Posted August 25, 2002 In , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: You'll be glad to know that I met with one of the originators of > complexity theory, Stuart Kauffman, while in New Mexico this past week, and began a dialogue on how to do this practically (integrate from the perspective of complexity theory). Z'ev: Sounds like an interesting dialogue. There are a number of interesting correlations to discuss between Complexity Theory and CM since they both attempt to describe living systems. I mentioned several that interest me the most in my last post. The most interesting correlations seem best accessible or demonstrable in pulse diagnosis---but that's a personal opinion. > By the way, Dave Weininger had an interesting question for me. We > talk about integrating Chinese and Western medicine, why no talk > about integration with Ayurvedic, Tibetan or other traditional > systems? So what did you answer? While there have been a few books that include both Ayurvedic and Chinese, they will probably become more integrated as the others become more popular and have more literature available. But then, they get the middle jiao pulses backward, and I can't figure out why. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2002 Report Share Posted August 25, 2002 Jim, I said that the work of integrating Chinese with Ayurvedic or Tibetan medicine has been largely overlooked in the West. Tibetan medicine may be an early example of integrated medicine, if its often quoted 'medical conference' centuries ago is true (with representatives from China, Persia and India present). Clearly there are both Chinese and Indian Ayurvedic elements in it. At the same time, it would take scholars of each tradition who can cross-translate to do anything of substance. By the way, I agree about Kurayama's work. I think anyone interested in comparing Eastern and Western medical thought (Greek and Chinese) should read his book. His work has also greatly influenced Judith Farquhar's " Knowing Practice " , a great anthropological work on Chinese medicine in China, and has influenced how I teach SHL and Wen Bing theory at PCOM as well. On Sunday, August 25, 2002, at 09:35 PM, jramholz wrote: > > > By the way, Dave Weininger had an interesting question for me. We > > talk about integrating Chinese and Western medicine, why no talk > > about integration with Ayurvedic, Tibetan or other traditional > > systems? > > So what did you answer? While there have been a few books that > include both Ayurvedic and Chinese, they will probably become more > integrated as the others become more popular and have more > literature available. But then, they get the middle jiao pulses > backward, and I can't figure out why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2002 Report Share Posted August 26, 2002 Dear Zev and Jim and Tod... Less I am mistaking there are academics working on such topics and once started would "unravel" such aspects (integrating new-outside knowledge into....) it would probably be evident that medical interaction and "inter-exchange" has always taken place. The very fact that Chinese medicine never has been static is an example of this. The question Why not integrate/compare/contrast "other" Traditional medical paradigms with China has been posed by an promising academic in Arazona, at least in my opinion. She is dealing with the question of women and Chinese medicine. I am sure others have pondered on this question too. A possible answer is: i) Contact between medical practices ii) Articulation iii) Politics i) In Mexico someone has written a book "wind in the blood" and it proposes to compare and contrast Maya medicine with Chinese medicine. For historical reasons it will be much easier to detect that Maya medicine is very hetrogenical, however the Spanish version that I have is fraught with mistakes and misleading information, it is also non representative of the actual traditions i.e. to much personal interpretation as opposed to personal understanding (which are not the same thing.) iii) If there are enough of people that have internalised the (or at least a substantial "part") knowledge and hence the though process with respective medical system then the compare-contrast-integrate between Chinese medicine and ....medical systems could take place. i.e. articulation between them for the purpose of treating the patients in a more comprehensive and or being able to respond better to the patient needs in terms of treatment... ii) Hmm, what are the reasons to "integrate", we know that the fascinating complex move by Vietnam and China (Vietnam adopted a similar policy of "modernisation" of Chinese medicine four years after main land China (whereas most countries are still to recognise Chinese medicine, hmm...) It was a period when the two countries would have had more political ties, in a "friendly" manner. But closer to the west the "subliminal" reason is power and sometimes this is justified by "having a share of the cake". Hence integrated medicine actually means to have more say in a public space manner, and not only that a so call new paradigm is needed. (ie. why approach other "fringe" systems they will give no real power, although they surely would empowered one to possibly treat a patients better hence why I referred to these topics as how can we developed well informed medicine and medical practice?) I personally find these topics interesting BUT still maintain that the AIMS and OBJECTIVES has not been elaborated, nor the logistical implication of such great endower. For example are we happy with the coinage of so call medical acupuncture, this if any thing is a misnomer and hijacking of a term, however is this not integrated medicine? If so what purpose has it got in theory and practice? Is it better for the patients? Does it lead to know how (i.e. how to treat the patients?) The wishful desire is clear the aim is to adopt a technique and claim it is enough. And if it is enough why not adopt it straight away, and do away with all Asian doctors from Asia (thereby eliminating competition...) as well as practitioners that have trained in the west. The good western doctors, that also practice acumoxa that I have come across clearly use Chinese medical thinking and logistic, have trained after so call medical acupuncture acumoxa, for a minimum of three years and or more. Is it fare both for the medical paradigm and the patients to deny what "you" are doing by referring to "your" practice as "western". This is a great social injustice that I personally oppose to when one talks about so call medical acupuncture an claim to "integrated" medicine, or is it not purported as such? We know that China undertook this them to be more respectable and accepted and to market its medical system(s), which is fare enough but it is not fare enough to deny the know how that leads to clinical decision making. What is the know how-that leads to clinical decision making? Interferon is a expensive drug and I am yet to meat a Guatemalan identified as having from a western classification Hepatitis C taking interferon. When I state this in various meetings with a fairly heterogeneous bunch of western doctors (sarcasm intended) no response, no iniative to look into the issue what happens to the patients, a blank stare is the norm. Here if integrated medicine meant that with out fare of negative retribution both by patients and practitioners from other practitioners and laws and so forth, one could legally attend to the patients is that some form of integrated medicine and or rather integrated medical public/privet systems? Should one treat the "hep C" and exclude the Chinese medical technical terminology (that I still need to learn and understand), thereby using just the western technical terminology and hence what is clinical know how that leads to treatment? Or what is wrong with Patterns identification treatment determination? Does it not work? Is it not a fundamental part of know how that leads to clinical decision making? Do we in the west have a full grasp of Patterns identification treatment determination? (Am I the only one that feel/recognise a lack of capabilities with regard to this logistical scheme?) Does not a Practical Dictionary of Chinese medicine introduce Patterns never talked about before in the English language? Has the prescriptions in Formulas and Strategies been exhaustively used both with regard to no modification and subtraction addition of agents and of dosages? And with regard to Western define diseases and Eastern define dis-eases and patterns has the prescriptions in Formula and Strategies in the manner mention above been exhaustively applied? Are even all the natural drugs mention available even in such a great country as USA and AUSTRALIA? (with regard to Chinese medicine) There is a saying that being stupid is a blessing, but in my case it is only a frustration However is it not worth mentioning that at least in the introduction of a Practical Therapeutics of Traditional Yan Wu Warren Fisher a form of integrated medicine has/is developed/ing in China, page 2: "For example, "bi patterns" is a general term that includes several disorders know in Western medicine osteoarthrities, rheumatoid arthrities, rheumatic arthritis, fibrosities, gout and sciatica. Each of these types has its own etiological and pathological characteristics. Thus in the treatment of arthrities, in addition to the differentiation of traditional Chinese disease (bi patterns) and a further pattern identification (wind bi, cold bi, dampness bi or heat bi), practitioners may also take into account the western disease entity by consulting objective indices such as labatory test and other examinations. The herbal or acupuncture formula prescribed will depend primarily on the disease pattern. In addition, other medicinal or acupoints may be added to treat the specific disease. For example, in cases of rheumatoid arthrities, because it is an autoimmune disorder, xian ling pi (epimedium) and lu feng fang (hornet's nest) may be added to regulate the body's immune functions. For gout, ametabolic disorder causing an excess of uric acid to be produced and insufficiently disarge, tu fu ling (smooth greenbrier root) and bi xie (fish poisen yam) may be added to reduce production uric acid. Osteoarthiresties is a degenerative pathologic change of the cartilage that produces bone spurs. Gu su bu (dryanaria) and lu han cao (pyrolae) may be added to added to slow the degenerative process and prohibit the growth of bone spurs. For spurs of the cervical vertebrae, xu duan (dipsacus root) may be added. The application of those particular medicinal is based on the experience of many practitioners over years of practice, and the efficacy of some of these medicinal has already been proven through modern scientific research." "For example, "bi patterns" impediment pattern in a practical dictionary. osteoarthrities, rheumatoid arthrities rheumatic arthritis fibrosities gout sciatica (Others?) Each of these types has its own etiological and pathological characteristics. With regard to Western medicine and or Chinese medicine, and or both? What are the clinical implications...? Thus in the treatment of arthritis, in addition to the differentiation of traditional Chinese disease (bi patterns) and a further pattern identification (wind bi, cold bi, dampness bi or heat bi), practitioners may also take into account the western disease entity by consulting objective indices such as labatory test and other examinations. How will it really change the Fang ji - implementations practice of prescription (i.e.. the Art-Science of using the prescriptions?) Will it change the treatment? (implicit that change here means for the better in treatment out come terms...) The herbal or acupuncture formula prescribed will depend primarily on the disease pattern. By looking at the content of the book it seams to me that what they meant was ... primarily on pattern (bian zheng). In addition, other medicinal or acupoints may be added to treat the specific disease. East West concept of dis-ease and disease, interesting and challenging since it actually amplifies and specififies at the same time. For example, in cases of rheumatoid arthrities, because it is an autoimmune disorder, xian ling pi (epimedium) and lu feng fang (hornet's nest) may be added to regulate the body's immune functions. Thus a part of the prescription will have incorporated the term usage and hence recognition of rheumatoid arthritis and the western etilogy strictly speaking idiopathic but affecting the immune system in a "auto-since", hence two natural drugs that have by the sound of it been investigated from a western pysio-bio-chemical frame work. very interesting how it will affect Art-Science of implementing prescriptions in the long run I assume is still inconclusive? For gout, a metabolic disorder causing an excess of uric acid to be produced and insufficiently disarge, tu fu ling (smooth greenbrier root) and bi xie (fish poisen yam) may be added to reduce production uric acid. Osteoarthiresties is a degenerative pathologic change of the cartilage that produces bone spurs. Gu su bu (dryanaria) and lu han cao (pyrolae) may be added to added to slow the degenerative process and prohibit the growth of bone spurs. For spurs of the cervical vertebrae, xu duan (dipsacus root) may be added. Very interesting information and obviously needed yet the underlying logics remains Chinese medicine or? What knowing leads to clinical decisions? The application of those particular medicinal is based on the experience of many practitioners over years of practice, and the efficacy of some of these medicinal has already been proven through modern scientific research." What is "never" mention the intrigues-complexities of theory practice that lead to the decisions of the treatments in the "first" place. i.e. What know how leads to treatment implemented? Thus I think that it is fairly fare to say that AIMS OBJECTIVES LOGISTICS and IMPLICATION with regard of so call integrated medicine has not been sufficiently approached in the west. And once we are all sure of still being on the list after the move, I sent a e-mail explaining why I want a profile with CRANEHERBS, how many days should I wait before one worries? Either way once the move maybe a policy of what are aims objectives...research integrated medicine (which is?) transformative medicine (a term that I feel is more accurately in descriptive terms if one does not opt for "informative" medicine). What then is "pure" Chinese medicine or non integrative Chinese medicine? Non integrative Western medicine etc...? I for better or worst maintain that a patients in their quest for better health has always practice by going to various health healers-practitioners (what really is needed are public-privet health systems that aids that natural tendency): Multidisciplinary Inter-disciplinary Trans-disciplinary (By the way what is the differences between the three terms from a practitioners view point and patients view point?) Marco Bergh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2002 Report Share Posted August 26, 2002 , " Marco " <bergh@i...> wrote: > Less I am mistaking there are academics working on such topics and once started would " unravel " such aspects (integrating new-outside knowledge into....) it would probably be evident that medical interaction and " inter-exchange " has always taken place. Marco: My teacher always spoke in both Western and Chinese diagnositic terms, so mixing the two is a comfortable way for me to think and communicate about a patient's condition. The Dong Han system already presumes this integration; most pulse findings are discussed in both Western and Chinese terms---using the point of view of complex systems interacting. For example, examining the combined functions of the spleen and lung would be the equivalent way of talking about the immune system (you also need to examine the water phase for marrow). An autoimmune response in the body can be described energetically as a failure of the Revenge Cycle in the 5-Phases of Metal itself (each phase has its own 5-Phase pattern on a smaller, fractal scale). Rather than find a balanced pulse movement in Metal, we find heat in the part of the pulse wave where the water element should be. The Mai Jing talks sikilarly about these kinds of patterns out of phase (or season) on a larger, general scale as often portending death. In the case of an autoimmune response, it can be the death of a targeted organ or tissue. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2002 Report Share Posted August 26, 2002 Dear Jim thanks..., Jim: so mixing the two is a comfortable way for me to think and communicate about a patient's condition Marco: mixing and integration is not necessarily the same thing. Jim: The Dong Han system already presumes this integration; most pulse findings are discussed in both Western and Chinese terms---using the point of view of complex systems interacting. Marco: very interesting not sure why I have the impression this comes and or is heavily influence from Korea? Jim: For example, examining the combined functions of the spleen and lung would be the equivalent way of talking about the immune system (you also need to examine the water phase for marrow). Marco: Would that be a "constant" correlation or could after a pattern identification other aspects and functional entities such as yin vacuity not inhibiting heat and or yang qi. Whom was it that had the axiom as a clinical landscape and guidance?: "Yang is always in repletion and yin is always insufficient" For example also be a contributing "part" aspect, or say yin fire (a phenomena that I need to grasp more...) Jim: An autoimmune response in the body can be described energetically as a failure of the Revenge Cycle in the 5-Phases of Metal itself (each phase has its own 5-Phase pattern on a smaller, fractal scale). Rather than find a balanced pulse movement in Metal, we find heat in the part of the pulse wave where the water element should be. Marco: Very interesting hope I will have the chance to attend classes and maybe even clinical observation with you and others before say 2010... Jim: The Mai Jing talks sikilarly about these kinds of patterns out of phase (or season) on a larger, general scale as often portending death. In the case of an autoimmune response, it can be the death of a targeted organ or tissue. How does all this terminology affect your clinical decision making? Does it change the prescription you may "call upon", vital arias (loci) to needle or moxa? I am not trying to be dum nor rude (at least I am trying) when I state to the list and people at large that I am under the impression that so call "integrated" medicine has not been well define in: PURPOSE AIMS OBJECTIVES EXPECTANCY and such "hidden factors": POLITICS (for whom by whom) this does not mean that I am against "integrative" medicine and I suspect most practitioner need to or find it easier to resort to western cosmovision and termelogy to explain and communicate with the patient, which brings up different issues but related to society culture acceptance and "non-specific efficacy"... Started to down load your essays on CHAcademy web site, some minor problems, and checked out some of the web destinations suggested. However I am laying low because the tel. bill where more then my income last month. Any chance of suing Tod for having iniatied such a great web site and list?:-) Marco Bergh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2002 Report Share Posted August 26, 2002 >> Marco: very interesting not sure why I have the impression this >> comes and or is heavily influence from Korea? My teacher was Korean. >> Marco: Would that be a " constant " correlation or could after a >> pattern identification other aspects and functional entities such >> as yin vacuity not inhibiting heat and or yang qi. It is a constant correlation. I've pointed it out several times to my students during school clinic. TCM pattern identification is the generalized background information to these kinds of features in the pulse. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2002 Report Share Posted August 28, 2002 Marco, You've asked some profound questions, but I don't have the time to answer them all. I wouldn't know where to begin. . . .perhaps over a cup of yerba mate in a nice cafe sometime would be good On Monday, August 26, 2002, at 10:52 AM, Marco wrote: > Dear Zev and Jim and Tod... > > Less I am mistaking there are academics working on such topics and > once started would " unravel " such aspects (integrating new-outside > knowledge into....) it would probably be evident that medical > interaction and " inter-exchange " has always taken place. The very fact > that Chinese medicine never has been static is an example of this. > > The question Why not integrate/compare/contrast " other " Traditional > medical paradigms with China has been posed by an promising academic > in Arazona, at least in my opinion. She is dealing with the question > of women and Chinese medicine. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2002 Report Share Posted August 29, 2002 > On Monday, August 26, 2002, at 10:52 AM, Marco wrote: > > The question Why not integrate/compare/contrast " other " Traditional medical paradigms with China has been posed by an promising academic in Arazona, at least in my opinion. Marco: I'm not much familiar with much traditional medicine(s) outside of my small niche, and such a project presumes a deep familiarity with all the traditions in the comparison. I suspect they eventually will be compared in the future once more literature is available in English for the other traditions. There is some evidence now of the very beginnings of " integration " in the limited respect that herbs with similar functions are getting lumped together in formulas and books irregardless of their origin or theoretical backgrounds. But when it comes to pulses I haven't a clue why Aryuvedic and Tibetan doctors shift all the positions and reverse the middle jiao positions to put the liver on the right and spleen on the left. Bad editors leading to bad translations? Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2002 Report Share Posted August 29, 2002 Dear Zev, That would be nice maybe next year:) Marco - Thursday, August 29, 2002 12:02 AM Re: Re: CAOM Marco,You've asked some profound questions, but I don't have the time to answer them all. I wouldn't know where to begin. . . .perhaps over a cup of yerba mate in a nice cafe sometime would be good :)On Monday, August 26, 2002, at 10:52 AM, Marco wrote: Dear Zev and Jim and Tod... Less I am mistaking there are academics working on such topics and once started would "unravel" such aspects (integrating new-outside knowledge into....) it would probably be evident that medical interaction and "inter-exchange" has always taken place. The very fact that Chinese medicine never has been static is an example of this. The question Why not integrate/compare/contrast "other" Traditional medical paradigms with China has been posed by an promising academic in Arazona, at least in my opinion. She is dealing with the question of women and Chinese 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.