Guest guest Posted July 3, 2003 Report Share Posted July 3, 2003 The last practitioner was a (don't scream) NAET acupuncturist. These things are not in my tradition... I got to let it go as to my reactions. I've been doing a little research for another project on allergies and reconfirmed that true food allergies leave a person... dead. So if there is anything to NAET, muscle testing etc... it is as Z'ev suggests, food and substance sensitivity. I've for a long time wanted to do a trial based on muscle testing to see if my skepticism is warranted. Does anyone know of any studies and so save me the trouble? doug > The subject of allergies is open to speculation. I've found sometimes > that people get in their heads that they have an 'allergy' to > something, and avoid it, even though it isn't that specific substance > but reactivity caused by their internal condition (often spleen > vacuity). Yes, sometimes there may be a specific allergy, I've seen > problems with mold, hair and/or dust in raw herbs, but to gan cao or > herb binder will be relatively rare as to be suspect. One also has to > consider that the herbs interact with each other, so can we truly > single out one ingredient in a prescription as an allergen? Or is the > total prescription mismatched with the patient? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2003 Report Share Posted July 3, 2003 I'd be interested in seeing how many NAET acupuncturists are out there. I am concerned that our profession doesn't develop a phenomenon of muscle testing herbs without pattern diagnosis. On Thursday, July 3, 2003, at 10:02 AM, wrote: > The last practitioner was a (don't scream) NAET acupuncturist. These > things are not in my tradition... I got to let it go as to my > reactions. > I've been doing a little research for another project on allergies and > reconfirmed that true food allergies leave a person... dead. So if > there is anything to NAET, muscle testing etc... it is as Z'ev > suggests, food and substance sensitivity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2003 Report Share Posted July 3, 2003 I also completely agree with Z'ev. NAET is popular among Naturopaths and Chiros in the town I live in (Bend, Oregon). Bend, incidentally has a very high rate of tree and shrub pollens, and many people seek out "alternative" treatment for pollen allergies as well as food allergies. Naturopathy has been available to patients here much longer than CM (especially Chinese herbal medicine). Therefore, many of my patients have a working relationship with NAET via other practitioners (I do not use NAET). Occasionally, I'll get a patient in my office that has just had an NAET tx the day before at their Naturopath's office or whatever. What is interesting with these folks is since I see them on a regular basis, I have a baseline as to what their pulse presentation usually is, and even if the NAET tx alleviates some of their symptoms, their pulses don't change. What is even more interesting is that some weeks or months later, they inevitably become "newly allergic" to something they were never allergic to before. Kip Roseman - Thursday, July 03, 2003 10:02 AM no peanuts please The last practitioner was a (don't scream) NAET acupuncturist. These things are not in my tradition... I got to let it go as to my reactions.I've been doing a little research for another project on allergies and reconfirmed that true food allergies leave a person... dead. So if there is anything to NAET, muscle testing etc... it is as Z'ev suggests, food and substance sensitivity.I've for a long time wanted to do a trial based on muscle testing to see if my skepticism is warranted. Does anyone know of any studies and so save me the trouble?doug> The subject of allergies is open to speculation. I've found sometimes> that people get in their heads that they have an 'allergy' to> something, and avoid it, even though it isn't that specific substance> but reactivity caused by their internal condition (often spleen> vacuity). Yes, sometimes there may be a specific allergy, I've seen> problems with mold, hair and/or dust in raw herbs, but to gan cao or> herb binder will be relatively rare as to be suspect. One also has to> consider that the herbs interact with each other, so can we truly> single out one ingredient in a prescription as an allergen? Or is the> total prescription mismatched with the patient?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 July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 , " Kip Roseman " <kip@r...> wrote: What is even more interesting is that some weeks or months later, they inevitably become " newly allergic " to something they were never allergic to before. that doesn't surprise me since most of these patients really have no true allergies, so all it takes is the presence of any new symptoms (or recurrence) to arise and all of a sudden there is a " new " allergy to contend with. These patients have real compaints that need to be addressed, but they are rarely allegies, IMO. and I firmly believe the NAET crowd is witnessing placebo effects and would have never turned to NAET if they had actually learned TCM in the first place. People turn away from TCM because they claim it doesn't work. find me an NAET practitioner who reads medical chinese. I have never met one. If you have zero access to a tradition, how can you dismiss it as ineffective. And then adopt a mishmash of pseudoscience and newageism as your solution. I think its a disgrace to our profession. there, I said it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 People turn away from TCM because they claim it doesn't work. >>>>>Todd i think this is quite a simplification. First i would be surprised to find people saying TCM does not work! That is way to swiping a statement and as swiping as saying TCM works and if you read Chinese. By the time somebody spends the time to learn Chinese he/she is quite invested in it. The question is always about real and specific conditions. TCM works for some and other interventions work better for others. We need to take the discussion beyond this simplistic level. Since a test like a muscle test for an allergy is easy to test/study, and since all of the good studies show that even the best cant do it, I have to think that the results are placebo. (especially as placebo can be as high as 68% in some studies). The draw that some people find to techniques such as NAET is not difference than the draw people find toward some Tong-style acupuncture or Richard Tan techniques. Anything that can be applied with little thought, is simple and technical is popular. In our course we resist this desire from student to learn "tricks" and we loose people all the time. They want to hear things like "trigger points" work great do this and that you will get great results etc.People do not want to hear that to learn good musculoskeletal medicine it takes a whole commitment in learning a complete way of thinking, having to understand multiple models that work in some situations but not in others, and most of all that they may not have the tools or the license to do the best intervention for some conditions. Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 , " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote: > >>>>>Todd i think this is quite a simplification. First i would be surprised to find people saying TCM does not work! Maybe I am missing your point, but I have heard many people say this kind of statement... It might not be as specific as, `CM does not work at all for anything' (and I don't think that is what Todd was saying)... What I hear is stuff like CM does not really work with these type of conditions (fill in the blank) - Many times the statement might be correct (for that practitioner or for CM as a whole), but many times it seems to come down to that person not having the tools (maybe access to Chinese literature) to treat that condition.... People do go elsewhere because they can't treat X or Y conditions with the tools they have... If other practitioners can treat those conditions then it is purely about either access to the correct information or just some skill that practitioner does not have... Many internal medicine complaints can only be dealt with (from a CM perspective) with a strong herbal writing ability, if you don't have that ability you go elsewhere. Furthermore, I.e. Many dermatological conditions require an a skill set that most western practitioners just do not have (i.e. tricky internal formulas as well as external applications). -Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 to take the discussion beyond this simplistic level. > Since a test like a muscle test for an allergy is easy to test/study, and since all of the good studies show that even the best cant do it, I have to think that the results are placebo. (especially as placebo can be as high as 68% in some studies). > Can you elborate on this.. I thought placebo hovered around 30%... I would think that if someone was getting something as high as 68%, there is something going on much more than a placebo.??? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 as Eti previously said " there is plenty in the deep well of CM, more than enough to keep us going for life " . Unfortunately - in California - there is not an infrastructure to support it. Ed Kasper LAc, Santa Cruz, CA Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:22:40 -0500 " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus Re: Re: no peanuts please >>>> The draw that some people find to techniques such as NAET is not difference than the draw people find toward some Tong-style acupuncture or Richard Tan techniques. ... Anything that can be applied with little thought, is simple and technical is popular... ..... They want to hear things like " trigger points " work great do this and that you will get great results etc. ..................People do not want to hear that to learn good musculoskeletal medicine it takes a whole commitment in learning a complete way of thinking, having to understand multiple models that work in some situations but not in others, .........................>>>>>. Alon --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.495 / Virus Database: 294 - Release 6/30/2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 If other practitioners can treat those conditions then it is purely about either access to the correct information or just some skill that practitioner does not have... Many internal medicine complaints can only be dealt with (from a CM perspective) with a strong herbal writing ability, if you don't have that ability you go elsewhere. >>>>>Probably true but then muscle testing would not help these as well Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 Can you elborate on this.. I thought placebo hovered around 30%... I would think that if someone was getting something as high as 68%, there is something going on much more than a placebo.???>>>>A 35% placebo is found almost at most studies, however there are many studies that had a placebo effect as high as 68%. For example see: Binder HJ et al. Cimentadine in the treatment of duodenal ulcers Gastroenterology 74:380, 1978 Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2003 Report Share Posted July 7, 2003 In a message dated 7/4/03 11:02:03 AM, writes: These patients have real compaints that need to be addressed, but they are rarely allegies, IMO. and I firmly believe the NAET crowd is witnessing placebo effects and would have never turned to NAET if they had actually learned TCM in the first place. People turn away from TCM because they claim it doesn't work. find me an NAET practitioner who reads medical chinese. I have never met one. If you have zero access to a tradition, how can you dismiss it as ineffective. And then adopt a mishmash of pseudoscience and newageism as your solution. I think its a disgrace to our profession. there, I said it. That is what is great about our society. Everyone can have a view and judge others, with or without understanding or even a real attempt to do so past ones own filters, be they the time an effort to learn medical Chinese or communistic medical Chinese or any pseudoscience (they are all psuedosciences if they pretend objectivity but have their own approach, aren't they?), WEstern or whatever. While I do think that many NAET folks go way too far with what they say they can do with it, and attempt to do, there is some utility to it when used as indicated. I have gotten patients who could not tolerate most any herbs to be able to take them, and look at NAET (the basic stuff, not the woo woo stuff) as sort of removing the brakes to recovery that Oriental Medicine in the rest of its capability can bring. While you may say that all things can be treated well with , herbs utmost, and I won't say that this is not essentially true, you undoubtedly have patients who cannot use the medicine you provide and just don't come to you, but to these other (many time woo-woo) practitioners who can put a band aid over the problem that you refuse to look at and and use until the patient can handle your effective long term treatments. While I may be branded a heretic, it is my opinion that Oriental Medicne is a vantage point from which we look at disorders and treatments with every observation of results being viable. I have no doubt of the viability of using only ancient methods for some practitioners, but do consider it a limitation chosen from all the limitations available given our short time in this clinical lifespan we each are in. Each of us choses our limitations and while I am sure that our basic training must be in OUR basic medicine and that we do need to develop criteria for discerning what is viable treatment within our paradigm, I do think that it needs to be done non-judgementally and without bias for our patients sake. Our professions treatment of the NAET phenomena is shabby from both directions (pro and anti) and will only bring harm to us if we don't start to take it seriously and find out what, exactly, is useful and what is not from the standpoint of our own field. David Molony 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.