Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 Z'ev, et al, I agree with Z'ev's point(s) below. There's no one here who isn't passionate about CM. So what's going on? I think the following interchange contains several of the basic points: " As we know with one of the St. Johnswort studies, it was totally biased and the intentions were malevolent. A German study was done by a pharmaceutical company that bought out a company producing a St. Johnswort product, measuring treatment of patients with major depression by St. Johnswort. After the poor showing in the study, the drug company apparently discontinued the product. >>>>And this is my point. Do you want others to do the research. They are already doing it. All it will take is a few very large and publicized studies to turn around a trend in CAM therapy. We are now practicing in a society that gives us the benefit without much good evidence. This same society still gives much credence to so-called medical research. And again look at St Johns example Alon " 1)We don't disagree that research is being done 2)We are concerned about the nature of that research 3)We agree that research issues could have a bearing on the standing of CM in the community. Now, to simply call for research, without qualification, does not take into account legitimate (in my opinion) concerns about the nature of that research. Careful thinking has to be done about what constitutes research into CM that is valuable, or indeed harmful, to CM. I hope we all agree about this. If not, please express reasons so that we can move on. If we do agree, that's at least 50% of any contention in this forum resolved. If we don't agree, then my own feeling is that people who have expressed concerns about research have stated their positions explicitly, and in detail, and it's up to others to refute those points systematically. Assuming that we all basically agree about the problematic issues about research, then the next step is, taking these concerns into account, to think about what to do next. It all seems quite straightforward to me. I'll welcome any disagreement, however. Perhaps this thread shouldn't be entitled " Stagnation " v " Stasis " . Otherwise, people may have to chose which of these two sides they're on! Best wishes, Wainwright - " " <zrosenbe Monday, November 17, 2003 5:13 PM Re: " Stagnation " v " Stasis " (Zhi v Yu) > OK, I accept this. > > For me the point is that we all have points of view that we are > passionate about. > One thing we can all agree on is that we are all passionate about > Chinese medicine. We have different points of view on the subject, and > this is to be expected, especially with a subject like medicine, which > is complex and multi-faceted like human beings themselves. > > What concerns me is that people are getting more and more strident, not > listening, and the tone of the conversations is getting abusive. > People are being pigeonholed unfairly, dismissed, and words are being > used as hammers rather than tools for further communication. . > > I am asking you, as moderator, to help moderate the tone of these > discussions, set parameters, and bring things back to a common ground. > > I think we should read Simcha's recent posting again. I agree with him > that there is a point of view that can embrace and reconcile opposites. > > It may seem idealistic, but idealism sometimes is a good tool. > > The mind may rule the heart, but sometimes the heart must prevail. > > Let's find common cause, and move on. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 I am asking you, as moderator, to help moderate the tone of these discussions, set parameters, and bring things back to a common ground. >>>>I apologize for my mouth and fingers running away with me, sorry again Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 It is not just you, Alon. I consider you, and Ken (along with several others) all to be friends of mine. And it pains me to see the level of discussion descend from friendly discourse to the present dilemma. On Nov 17, 2003, at 11:41 AM, ALON MARCUS wrote: > I am asking you, as moderator, to help moderate the tone of these > discussions, set parameters, and bring things back to a common ground. >>>>> I apologize for my mouth and fingers running away with me, sorry >>>>> again > Alon > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 I consider you, and Ken (along with several others) all to be friends of mine. And it pains me to see the level of discussion descend from friendly discourse to the present dilemma. >>>>>Just realize i have no malice when i say such things. It is just my unfortunate nature to sometimes just say what comes to mind when for example i read Bobs example. I have a huge respect for bob, especially his ways with words and his contributions through out the last 20 years, his web information shows great care Alon 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.