Guest guest Posted November 10, 2002 Report Share Posted November 10, 2002 Z'ev, Is this book available? Redwing's site says that it is not in print yet. Where did you get your copy? Thanks, Fernando , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > In addition, Jiao Shu-de says the following in " Ten Lectures in the Use > of Medicinals " : combined with warm, acrid, effusing and dissipating > medicinals such as ma huang, gui zhi, and xing ren, it makes their > natures more harmonious and moderate and safeguards the stomach qi, in > order to avoid damaging the fluids through the promotion of sweating " . > I think this makes my case pretty well. > > So, we see here that zhi gan cao potentiates the effects of other > medicinals according to the main focus of the prescription. However, > in my mind, this doesn't negate the ability of zhi gan cao to preserve > yin and qi in a prescription like ma huang tang. > > > > > > On Thursday, November 7, 2002, at 08:51 AM, wrote: > > > Z'ev, can you cite a commentary to back up your position on ma > > huang tang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2002 Report Share Posted November 10, 2002 The book will be out in December 2003. I have a review copy. On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 02:52 AM, Fernando Bernall wrote: > Z'ev, > > Is this book available? Redwing's site says that it is not in print > yet. Where did you get your copy? Thanks, > > > Fernando > > , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > >> In addition, Jiao Shu-de says the following in " Ten Lectures in the >> Use >> of Medicinals " : combined with warm, acrid, effusing and dissipating >> medicinals such as ma huang, gui zhi, and xing ren, it makes their >> natures more harmonious and moderate and safeguards the stomach qi, in >> order to avoid damaging the fluids through the promotion of sweating " . >> I think this makes my case pretty well. >> >> So, we see here that zhi gan cao potentiates the effects of other >> medicinals according to the main focus of the prescription. However, >> in my mind, this doesn't negate the ability of zhi gan cao to preserve >> yin and qi in a prescription like ma huang tang. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thursday, November 7, 2002, at 08:51 AM, wrote: >> >>> Z'ev, can you cite a commentary to back up your position on ma >>> huang tang. > > > 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. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2002 Report Share Posted November 10, 2002 , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > The book will be out in December 2003. I have a review copy. > > > On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 02:52 AM, Fernando Bernall wrote: > > > Z'ev, Thanks, Fernando Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2003 Report Share Posted March 5, 2003 Bob I like the way you dealt the language issues in Ten Lectures on Use of Medicinals. When a term is introduced there is a page reference to the glossary. I wish it was throughout every time one is used Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2003 Report Share Posted March 12, 2003 I am reading ten lectures on use of meds and under hai jin sha the authors writes: on the bases of experience in recent years using hai jin sha with....produces highly satisfactory results in the treatment of urinary calculus. Than he writes: I have encountered 2 or 3 cases, verified by xray, of urethral calculi being expelled through the ureter. Now since most calculi are expelled on their own. I have to wander how often this kind of "supporting" evidence is used by modern and premodern authors. Certainly many old authors make conclusion and then give an example that led to that conclusion of one or two patients Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2003 Report Share Posted March 12, 2003 Ken wrote: >>>What does constitute the process whereby ideas become valid? <<< Considering that Chinese medicine has been around for a very long time, and much junk that tried to creep in has been purged from it over that time, and the wisdom of all concerned, and the fact that people sometimes unquestioningly accept things just because "we've always done it that way....." And considering that double-blind controlled random research trials on the subject often agree with one another and often do not, and many many drugs that pass all the trials are later pulled from the market, and what is true today in science is often not true tomorrow... When I want to decide an issue, I study on it, read the teachings, the classics, read the modern thought and research, and then....I go with my gut instinct. What else can one ultimately, thoughtfully do? Joseph Garner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2003 Report Share Posted March 12, 2003 , " ALON MARCUS " < alonmarcus@w...> wrote: Certainly many old authors make conclusion and then give an example that led to that conclusion of one or two patients > Alon You are no doubt correct about this. It is why I feel that TCM should be mainly practiced according to a model of consensus. I tend to shy away from anything that is more marginal because it is likely to be based upon patient samples that were biased or small. People dismiss the modern chinese consensus on TCM practice in some circles, but I would submit that this consensus is based upon widely held positions by 1000's of respected doctors. While practicing outside this consensus may not constitute " making stuff up " , it still constitutes a much less sure undertaking. Just cause someone wrote it don't make it so. It is when the community of like minded scholars and clinicians come to a consensus that an idea becomes valid, either that or double blind controlled research. There is a general consensus that hai jin sha is good for stone lin. Whether this proves in any given case that hai jin sha was responsible for expelling stones is another question. However, we all make clinical assessments of efficacy based upon sudden changes in unrelenting illnesses. Nevertheless I would want to see more than 3 cases of such incidents to be satisfied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2003 Report Share Posted March 12, 2003 In this case, however, Jiao Shu-de is not just anybody. He has taught a generation of practitioners, and I doubt in mainland China he worked without consideration of consensus or mainstream TCM thought. On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:37 PM, wrote: > Just cause someone wrote it don't make it so. It is when the > community of like > minded scholars and clinicians come to a consensus that an idea becomes > valid, either that or double blind controlled research. There is a > general > consensus that hai jin sha is good for stone lin. Whether this proves > in any > given case that hai jin sha was responsible for expelling stones is > another > question. However, we all make clinical assessments of efficacy based > upon > sudden changes in unrelenting illnesses. Nevertheless I would want to > see > more than 3 cases of such incidents to be satisfied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2003 Report Share Posted March 12, 2003 However, we all make clinical assessments of efficacy based upon sudden changes in unrelenting illnesses. Nevertheless I would want to see more than 3 cases of such incidents to be satisfied.>>>>In a condition such as this its not only the numbers. First since almost all stones pass anyway. You have to show that in comparable group there is a real difference.This means knowing the size of stone, where it is, condition of the anatomy etc. Clinical impression without such data on a condition such as this one is useless, Even if it is from1000 Dr think so Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2003 Report Share Posted March 12, 2003 It is when the community of like > minded scholars and clinicians come to a consensus that an idea becomes > valid, either that or double blind controlled research. I don't dispute your point that you want to see more than a few cases to make up your mind concerning the efficacy of a particular formula or treatment, but I wanted to question the accuracy of the statement I've snipped from the same post. Is that what makes an idea valid? Like-minded scholars tend to agree about, well, most things, which is how you can identify them as being like-minded. And consensus has ratified a wide range of ideas, treatments, substances, and so on that have later been found and demonstrated to the satisfaction of yet another group of like minded individuals to be utterly invalid. I also question your assertion that double-blind controlled research can be relied upon to demonstrate the validity of traditional Chinese medical procedures, since according to the most basic theories, seeing the patient (and perhaps this extends to the patient's awareness of having been seen and to the patient's seeing the doctor) is an integral aspect of any therapeutic intervention. In modern pharmaceutical research, the quest for effective molecules is, theoretically at least, well served by the method of double blind controlled research. But the factors that are " controlled " through blinding may well be included on the list of " key ingredients " in traditional Chinese medical interventions. I had a fascinating conversation a couple of days ago with the director of a traditional Chinese medicine clinic in downtown Beijing (just off Chang An Jie, for those who are familiar with Beijing, right across from Wang Fu Jing). He was waxing poetic about his bitter disappointment over what the current consensus concerning valid ideas in Chinese medicine has done and threatens to do to the subject... and we were discussing the situation not just overseas but here in China. What does constitute the process whereby ideas become valid? Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 , " " < zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > In this case, however, Jiao Shu-de is not just anybody. He has taught > a generation of practitioners, and I doubt in mainland China he worked > without consideration of consensus or mainstream TCM thought. > > I was not referring to Jiao when I said, " just because somebody wrote it don't make it true " . That was just a general statement in regard to trusting literature blindly. What I wrote, quoted below, is that Jiao Shu de WAS following general TCM consensus on the use of hai jin sha. However I also agree with Alon that 2-3 cases of verified explusion of stone does not PROVE anything scientifically because this happens spontaneously quite often. You would need to verify a much larger sample before making such a claim that the use of the medicine is somehow connected with expelling of the stone. None of that has any bearing on my use of hai jin sha, which I will still continue to use in patients with stones small enough to pass. History of use and modern consensus are enough for me in deciding what to do in clinic. But if one is going to make a claim based upon western science, then one has to play by the rules of that game. And the rules say, 3 cases proves nothing in this condition. However I like that Jiao shares whatever biomedical data he has, because perhaps a larger metanalysis of data collected by many doctors would be convincing proof. Everything about his style is great, but, IMO, everyone should always read everything with discrimination and open- minded skepticism, no matter how great or revered the writer. > On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:37 PM, wrote: > There is a > > general > > consensus that hai jin sha is good for stone lin. Whether this proves > > in any > > given case that hai jin sha was responsible for expelling stones is > > another > > question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 Can anyone give some feedback regarding the book Ten Lectures on the use of Medicinals? Like/dislike, etc..... GZ < wrote: , "" <zrosenbe@s...> wrote:> In this case, however, Jiao Shu-de is not just anybody. He has taught > a generation of practitioners, and I doubt in mainland China he worked > without consideration of consensus or mainstream TCM thought.> > I was not referring to Jiao when I said, "just because somebody wrote it don't make it true". That was just a general statement in regard to trusting literature blindly. What I wrote, quoted below, is that Jiao Shu de WAS following general TCM consensus on the use of hai jin sha. However I also agree with Alon that 2-3 cases of verified explusion of stone does not PROVE anything scientifically because this happens spontaneously quite often. You would need to verify a much larger sample before making such a claim that the use of the medicine is somehow connected with expelling of the stone. None of that has any bearing on my use of hai jin sha, which I will still continue to use in patients with stones small enough to pass. History of use and modern consensus are enough for me in deciding what to do in clinic. But if one is going to make a claim based upon western science, then one has to play by the rules of that game. And the rules say, 3 cases proves nothing in this condition. However I like that Jiao shares whatever biomedical data he has, because perhaps a larger metanalysis of data collected by many doctors would be convincing proof. Everything about his style is great, but, IMO, everyone should always read everything with discrimination and open-minded skepticism, no matter how great or revered the writer. > On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:37 PM, wrote:> There is a > > general> > consensus that hai jin sha is good for stone lin. Whether this proves > > in any> > given case that hai jin sha was responsible for expelling stones is > > another> > question. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 However I like that Jiao shares whatever biomedical data he has, because perhaps a larger metanalysis of data collected by many doctors would be convincing proof. Everything about his style is great, but, IMO, everyone should always read everything with discrimination and open-minded skepticism, no matter how great or revered the writer. >>>>I think people kind missed my point. I also like the book so far, nothing really new but nicely organized and written, My point is that many great CM writers (including some of the classics) often refer to an idea and support it with one to three cases. I have always wandered to what extent such information was just excepted to become dogma and then "confirmed"by other dr in conditions that are self limiting etc. Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 Greg - The book has personal experience of Jiao Shude (need more - maybe next one). In addition, there are citations of studies. It is my favorite TCM read of the moment - I spread the message about this book as much as possible. I would really like to see a translation of his works on bi syndromes since that is his specialty. We have a woman on faculty who has carried the Chinese version of Ten Lecturers with her continuously in clinic - she is a seasoned practitioner who has a Master's in integrated medicine with a focus on cardiology. In my opinion it is a valuable addition to your library. Will Morris Can anyone give some feedback regarding the book Ten Lectures on the use of Medicinals? Like/dislike, etc..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 14, 2003 Report Share Posted March 14, 2003 Will- Thanks for input! It is appreciated. How are things over there at the college? Greg Z WMorris116 wrote: Greg - The book has personal experience of Jiao Shude (need more - maybe next one). In addition, there are citations of studies. It is my favorite TCM read of the moment - I spread the message about this book as much as possible. I would really like to see a translation of his works on bi syndromes since that is his specialty. We have a woman on faculty who has carried the Chinese version of Ten Lecturers with her continuously in clinic - she is a seasoned practitioner who has a Master's in integrated medicine with a focus on cardiology. In my opinion it is a valuable addition to your library. Will Morris Can anyone give some feedback regarding the book Ten Lectures on the use of Medicinals? Like/dislike, etc..... 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. 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.