Guest guest Posted October 21, 2003 Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 Yehuda, That's a very moving email. Thank you for your comments. I'm certainly not going to sit around waiting for biomedical practitioners and the scientific establishment to 'validate' CM, and biomedicalize and appropriate it in the process. I think you're absolutely right that the only way forward is for us to continue to develop a well thought out, cogent position, educate ourselves and others, and be vocal and pro-active. This forum is not a bad place to be getting on with some of that. I actually believe that we're in the vanguard of a cultural shift in our society, but that's no reason for complacency - the hard work still needs to be done as well as possible. Best wishes, Wainwright - " yehuda l frischman " < Tuesday, October 21, 2003 9:57 AM Science and Rhinos > Emmanuel, Wainwright, Ken, Rory and all you wonderful enlightened souls > who dare to resist mediocrity, > > I am reminded of Ionesco's wonderful play (later a movie staring the late > Zero Mostel) " Rhinoceros " . It starts off with these two guys sitting in > a bar, when all of a sudden in charges a rhinoceros. But instead of a > reaction of horror and fear, the people are astounded by the strength, > the power. To make a long story short, one by one, each person in the > town turns into a rhinoceros. Written in the 30's the play is an > allegory as to how an entire nation, seduced by power and drawn in by a > herd mentality could become Nazis. > > That being said, it will be a very slow process changing the way > scientists, educators and physicians think, after a century dominated by > wonderful technological advances, and a giddy belief that with enough > money, any illness can be conquered. I'm sure, that all of us who grew > up in the 50s and 60s recall how the cure for cancer was just around the > corner. Remember? Just a few more million and for sure it will be > conquered . Well the only thing around the corner has been earlier > detection. It is the rhinoceros mentality, the ooing and ahing in > admiration of all of the magnificant technology, such as genetic > engineering, that has dulled bright people to stop thinking, and stop > considering with appropriate analysis whether there are inherent flaws in > the foundations of scientific method. > > What will change this inertia? The same thing that spurred the great > Italian renaissance: a few brilliant and charismatic heretics willing to > think differently, to dare to challenge the accepted assumptions, to be > unafraid to publish their innovations, and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, TO DEVELOP > MANY STUDENTS. The money will come around, I am sure of it. But it is > critically important that ideas be packaged attractively. That is what > sold Carnegie 100 some odd years ago to endow allopathic medicine and > essentially cut off any funding to homeopathic or eclectic medicine. > Until that time there was no dominent medicine in America. With > incredible clinical success, little funding, an educational farm system > which leaves room by in large for much improvement, and all this in the > face of a hostile and suspicious allopathic medical establishment, > Oriental Medicine has already made astounding inroads into how medical > consumers spend their money. I happened to pick up a book written in the > 80s by a popular western MD today, and just 15 years ago, the accepted > belief was that acupuncture efficacy was due to placebo. Few MDs believe > that today. So don't be afraid. > > remember, the line " we can change the world? " Well we can! > > Yehuda > > On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:34:09 -0700 " Emmanuel Segmen " > <susegmen writes: > > Yehuda, > > > > I, for one, am more than happy to describe CM in the English > > language by the following tenets of Wainwright. I would then go on > > to tell you this .... my Chinese-born friends who are scientists in > > the U.S. are in some cases the most anti Chinese medicine people > > that I know. They are personally embarrassed by Chinese medicine. > > Others of this same cohort are secretly supportive of CM for > > personal use, but they tend to keep their use of it very low > > profile. Your views, Yehuda, are certainly my views. I agree with > > you completely. The truth is we've been out-voted. If you and I > > apply for a teaching post at a public college or university in some > > department of science and we present our honest views of CM, we will > > likely not get the job on that basis alone. The level of teasing I > > get from my science faculty colleagues who know of my daytime work > > at Asia Natural is fairly intense. It keeps me amused. That said, > > I completely share your views. > > > > Emmanuel Segmen > > > > > > Wainwright wrote: > > >It is pluralistic and heterogenous > > >It is incoherent > > >It is not scientific in any narrow, modern Western cultural sense > > >It is associated with ways of thinking and approaching reality > > which are different from the modern Western worldview Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2003 Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 Ken, I love your idea of a meeting ... or a meming ... between individuals of various points of view. Some days it will be a circus while on other days it will be what ever the tao chooses for that day. All of it will lead to clear vision for those who are paying attention. This is not a caravan of despair ... come, come, come again ... or in this case meme, meme, meme again ... though you've broken your vow a thousand times ... Emmanuel Segmen - kenrose2008 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 9:46 AM Re: Science and Rhinos Yehuda, The most absurd piece of theater we could perform would be to replicate in our own acculturation of medical traditions from China the same propensity to become rhinoceri that you and Ionesco worry about. I worry, too. Your mention of the placebo effect as being thought of as the effective agent or essence of acupuncture is both a poignant and highly pertinent reminder of the presence of this danger in our midst. One of the reasons that I became concerned with the work of Dr. Kaptchuk in the way expressed in my recent criticism and questioning of him here, is that after three years editing a journal that had pretensions of being peer-reviewed, I came to see his research concerning the placebo effect as an effort to prove in terms that scientists can accept that acupuncture is a placebo. I began to wonder why someone would intent on demonstrating this. I still can't say that I have a grasp of that. I believe that this is the view held by his boss, David Eisenberg. I tend to see the whole effort at Harvard as an attempt on the part of an important agency of " the medical establishment " to coopt the marketing momentum of acupuncture and bring it into alignment with the interests of mainstream medical personnel. Integration, in other words. Remember that Eisenberg's most influential foray into the field of compaltmed remains the market survey. It woke a lot of people up. I heard an email written by a fellow in Nigeria in response to learning that some recent survey of the world's happiest and saddest people revealed that Nigerians were the happiest people on earth. This fellow was writing to point out that surveys are like binkinis. They reveal a lot but leave the critical things out of view. It is all too often the aim of scientific research to bring the facts into alignment with the economic requirements of those who fund the research. Fact of life, I'd say. Can't be avoided. Of course we are talking not only about the meanings of words and the design of (and intention behind) scientific studies, we are talking about values...the meaning we place on our lives. I think more strongly now than ever that it is urgent that we discuss these matters. I believe we must challenge the sources of our ideas and beliefs. And I believe that what was in evidence here over the past couple of weeks was a display of the degree to which Web and Kaptchuk have been permitted to go unchallenged far too long. I think that the impact of that book on the field and on the public that it serves reaches far and wide. People seek harmony and balance associating these ideas with the essence of Chinese medicine. But Chinese medicine is also about warfare and about clinging to codes of conduct. How do you stop yourself from becoming a rhinoceros? I would like to propose a series of debates during which individuals who espouse various points of view that come to bear on the development of our memetic complex can directly confront one another with their questions and criticisms. Such a format would allow for a careful inspection of ideas, beliefs, opinions, etc. and help give us all a better and clearer understanding of who we are and why we think the way we do. Perhaps they can be arranged in the context of one of the large gatherings that take place routinely. Of course such a thing could degenerate into a circus, but I believe that with apt moderation, such debates could prove immeasurably valuable to the whole profession as it continues to try and grapple with a growing agenda of unsolvable problems. I would certainly like to hear such discussions and would be willing to take part in one or two. I'm going to be suggesting this in the context of the ongoing discussion related to truth and reconciliation in the field that began in the wake of the week in the woods with Paul Unschld. It is very important that people hear what Paul has to say in San Diego. As Wainwright has so eloquently pointed out in recent days, it is very important that we engage in these kinds of discussions. Paul's appearance at the PCOM symposium will be a rare opportunity for people to question him and to hear first hand what he has to say. I feel apologetic for having attempted to represent his views here. Paul does far better at explaining himself than I could ever do. So don't anybody take my word for anything I've attributed to him. Come and hear what he has to say. It is most important for individual clinicians to pay attention and to take an active part in such discussions. People often feel like turning away taking it all as bad news. That's what happens in the play or is that the Bald Soprano? I would really like to hear from more people, particularly those who take offense at the notion that someone of Ted's calibre should come under this kind of scrutiny. Or that I should be so heavily beating the drum. I think it's an important way to make sure that we don't turn into a rhinoceros. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 , yehuda l frischman < @j...> wrote: I happened to pick up a book written in the > 80s by a popular western MD today, and just 15 years ago, the accepted > belief was that acupuncture efficacy was due to placebo. Few MDs believe > that today. Z'ev told me that harvard research is about to begin that will attempt to prove just that. acupuncture is a placebo. if so, then little has actually changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 , " " wrote: > Z'ev told me that harvard research is about to begin that will attempt to prove just that. acupuncture is a placebo. if so, then little has actually changed. and Z'ev: If the Harvard research is attempting to " prove " acupuncture is a placebo from the outset, it seems dishonest to me. What is their protocol? Where is the money for this study coming from? It reminds me of, then, Vice President Spiro Agnew's comment that an incomplete Whitehouse study would prove that marijuana was like narcotics. Media people caught the obvious prejudice and the study was discredited---if I remember correctly, never finished. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 At 4:45 PM +0000 10/22/03, James Ramholz wrote: > , " " wrote: >> Z'ev told me that harvard research is about to begin that will >attempt to prove just that. acupuncture is a placebo. if so, then >little has actually changed. -- At 4:45 PM +0000 10/22/03, James Ramholz wrote: >If the Harvard research is attempting to " prove " acupuncture is a >placebo from the outset, it seems dishonest to me. What is their >protocol? Where is the money for this study coming from? -- Jim et al, Are we really sure what their intentions are? In order to prove whether or not acupuncture is a placebo, you'd have to test the hypothesis that it is a placebo, wouldn't you? I'm not sure you could effectively test the opposite hypothesis, ie that it is not a placebo. I think we need more details before we get up in arms about it. Rory -- 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.