Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 Oh, but shouldn't WS be able to solve any debate and prove who is correct? BTW- If qi and channels are see easy to evaluate how come WS has not been able to prove it, Oh that's right they don't exist right? I think it is naïve to think WS can measure anything.. It has great limitations. >>>>>>This is defiantly one of my points lets look at it. Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 I think the evidence is it's utility and success in treating patients... Is this not real? Theory guids treatment, if treatment works, then theory works.. IMO But you did answer the question..; The question was show me a theory that western medicine has disprove. You said 5 phases. So the burden is on you in this situation. >>>>>That is my point. In science something is not excepted until it is proven. In faith based system things are excepted before proof. I totally agree the proof is in clinical outcomes and that is what I am talking about Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 this sounds like a good idea... lets put some stuff in action... although it is a student clinic and IMO not a good represtation of true CM. >>>>I thought that many patients are treated by the supervisors? Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 In fact, those who have tried to measure meridians and electrical conductivity (Voll, et al) have been summarily dismissed in light of evidence to the contrary. Ken >>>>There have been many problems with the equipment such as Voll but Pomeranz has used some better more reliable equipment and has mixed results. The technology is getting better all the time and we can measure now without influencing what we measure Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 Your point, if I understand it is still well taken. For CM or TCM to compete and gain credibilty, it will have to play by the rules of the ruling system of the time. I acknowledge this but feel there has to be some " wiggle " room as the technologies develop to measure the success of CM in contempoprary society. >>>>No question. What i am really trying to say is do we even ask questions. There has been much reaction to my questions and that is what i want. I am against just doing things the old way just because that is what has been done. Some think that people such as my self have no right to ask such questions because we have not read everything there is out there in Chinese. I do not agree and just want to bring up the question of do we treat CM as a science, that is challenging and trying to both prove and disprove our beliefs. Or as a religion in which we have faith and only need to be more devout. 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.