cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

[Guest guest]

It was either Farquar or Hsu who said that the doctor finds the pattern that

will fit a

previous case that he or she treated succesfully. Therefore a patient doesn't

really Have

Spleen Qi Xu, we just find the conditions that mimic past treatments. The

flexibility of the

system one finds to reach that end determines its global usefullness.

doug

 

 

, " " wrote:

>

> Sharon, et al,

>

>

>

> The more I think about this bleeding example the more I think it illustrates

> my point about people diagnosing differently as well as people trying to fit

> things into their own system (and what this circular logic means). For

> example it is the standard for us to believe that there are only four types

> of bleeding. When a fifth type is suggested, we try to explain it and fit

> it into one of the other four types. I find this phenomenon quite

> interesting. What is happening here is there is a different diagnosis system

> that conflicts with someone else's basic belief system. Not only is there a

> completely strange formula choice, but the basic diagnosis and

> pathomechanism does not conform to mainstream thought. What do we do with

> that?

>

>

>

> The FDM system relies on explaining things through their own specific

> understanding of pathomechanisms and physiology. If that system only

> acknowledges four types of bleeding then of course it must fit in with one

> of those four (to a FDMer). In the situation that I presented it is like

> fitting a square peg in a round hole, and doesn't realize the peg is square.

> One will try to explain the cold causing bleeding by a mechanism that is

> familiar to them, for example blood stasis (which was suggested), or even

> heat. I can assure you that the SHL expert (whose case this is) does not see

> it that way. On the contrary, he not only specifically states that this case

> / condition (chronic heavy nosebleeds) is one caused by " cold. " He goes on

> to explain his pathomechanism for this occurring. Essentially there is a

> cold damaging the yang (which becomes deficient, meaning that is unable to

> retain its function over the blood.) Hence bleeding.

>

>

>

> To hopefully nip any attempts to fit this into one of the four boxes I

> state: There is no blood stasis symptoms or reflection in the treatment or

> commentary. There is also no signs of heat nor in the treatment or

> commentary. There are no signs of qi xu in the case, treatment, commentary;

> and cold influencing the yang --> yang xu is not equivalent to qi xu. Since

> there is no organ involvement (Spleen or kidney) we can rule those out. In

> this case I can firmly say that trying to fit it into any of the above is

> just incorrect and defeats the purpose of reading a case study and listening

> to what the writer is trying to say. Furthermore, fitting it into one of the

> four basic patterns would in no way come up with the treatment given. This

> does not say that one may actually be able to treat this patient in another

> manner. It is just impossible to say for sure what would or would not have

> worked except for what did work!

>

>

>

> One can say, that is BS (because it doesn't fit within the four bleeding

> criteria), or we can somehow create a story on how it actually does.

> Actually one could take any case out there and force it into any diagnostic

> system they choose. Theory is fun like that, especially CM theory, which as

> we know, can essentially explain anything (if we let it). But this I feel

> defeats the purpose of reading such case studies. This expert sees things a

> different way and he explains his thinking. You have the right to disagree,

> but you also have the opportunity to view things a different way, his way.

> His diagnosis is clearly different then the FDM system, specifically because

> he says the bleeding and coming from cold (and makes no mention of the

> four). He gives two bags of Gui Zhi Fu Zi Tang and cures the condition.

> Therefore we can learn a different way of thinking, if we are open to it.

> This is a different way to view not only this specific problem, but bleeding

> in general. In his commentary he says specifically that

>

>

>

> " nosebleeds most of the time belong to a heat pattern, but also it can

> belong to a cold pattern. "

>

>

>

> And this is the point, period. One can take it or leave it. IMO saying there

> are only four types of bleeding is limiting and just incomplete.

>

>

>

> So to answer Sharon's question, the pathomechanism is important to me. But

> let us not forget that it is still a story that relies on the theory. That

> theory might be slightly different for another person, as is the case here.

> I do not believe CM or any medicine (or any one person, or one school of

> thought) has any monopoly on some inherent truth in understanding and

> describing the body. We have a strong theoretical medicine, but it is not

> uniform. Throughout history people have had a myriad of differing points of

> view, many contrary to each other. Herbs many times have differing

> attributes throughout the centuries because (same) conditions treated with

> that medicinal had different theoretical understandings/ pathomechanisms

> attached to it to explain why it happened.

>

>

>

> Take for example wen dan tang.

>

>

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

> -Jason

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Jason

It has been a very long time since i read SHL but if i remember correctly the

only formula that is described treating nose bleeding due to cold was ma huang

tong, am i mistaken?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

Sunday, May 13, 2007 3:17 PM

RE: Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

 

 

Sharon, et al,

 

The more I think about this bleeding example the more I think it illustrates

my point about people diagnosing differently as well as people trying to fit

things into their own system (and what this circular logic means). For

example it is the standard for us to believe that there are only four types

of bleeding. When a fifth type is suggested, we try to explain it and fit

it into one of the other four types. I find this phenomenon quite

interesting. What is happening here is there is a different diagnosis system

that conflicts with someone else's basic belief system. Not only is there a

completely strange formula choice, but the basic diagnosis and

pathomechanism does not conform to mainstream thought. What do we do with

that?

 

The FDM system relies on explaining things through their own specific

understanding of pathomechanisms and physiology. If that system only

acknowledges four types of bleeding then of course it must fit in with one

of those four (to a FDMer). In the situation that I presented it is like

fitting a square peg in a round hole, and doesn't realize the peg is square.

One will try to explain the cold causing bleeding by a mechanism that is

familiar to them, for example blood stasis (which was suggested), or even

heat. I can assure you that the SHL expert (whose case this is) does not see

it that way. On the contrary, he not only specifically states that this case

/ condition (chronic heavy nosebleeds) is one caused by " cold. " He goes on

to explain his pathomechanism for this occurring. Essentially there is a

cold damaging the yang (which becomes deficient, meaning that is unable to

retain its function over the blood.) Hence bleeding.

 

To hopefully nip any attempts to fit this into one of the four boxes I

state: There is no blood stasis symptoms or reflection in the treatment or

commentary. There is also no signs of heat nor in the treatment or

commentary. There are no signs of qi xu in the case, treatment, commentary;

and cold influencing the yang --> yang xu is not equivalent to qi xu. Since

there is no organ involvement (Spleen or kidney) we can rule those out. In

this case I can firmly say that trying to fit it into any of the above is

just incorrect and defeats the purpose of reading a case study and listening

to what the writer is trying to say. Furthermore, fitting it into one of the

four basic patterns would in no way come up with the treatment given. This

does not say that one may actually be able to treat this patient in another

manner. It is just impossible to say for sure what would or would not have

worked except for what did work!

 

One can say, that is BS (because it doesn't fit within the four bleeding

criteria), or we can somehow create a story on how it actually does.

Actually one could take any case out there and force it into any diagnostic

system they choose. Theory is fun like that, especially CM theory, which as

we know, can essentially explain anything (if we let it). But this I feel

defeats the purpose of reading such case studies. This expert sees things a

different way and he explains his thinking. You have the right to disagree,

but you also have the opportunity to view things a different way, his way.

His diagnosis is clearly different then the FDM system, specifically because

he says the bleeding and coming from cold (and makes no mention of the

four). He gives two bags of Gui Zhi Fu Zi Tang and cures the condition.

Therefore we can learn a different way of thinking, if we are open to it.

This is a different way to view not only this specific problem, but bleeding

in general. In his commentary he says specifically that

 

" nosebleeds most of the time belong to a heat pattern, but also it can

belong to a cold pattern. "

 

And this is the point, period. One can take it or leave it. IMO saying there

are only four types of bleeding is limiting and just incomplete.

 

So to answer Sharon's question, the pathomechanism is important to me. But

let us not forget that it is still a story that relies on the theory. That

theory might be slightly different for another person, as is the case here.

I do not believe CM or any medicine (or any one person, or one school of

thought) has any monopoly on some inherent truth in understanding and

describing the body. We have a strong theoretical medicine, but it is not

uniform. Throughout history people have had a myriad of differing points of

view, many contrary to each other. Herbs many times have differing

attributes throughout the centuries because (same) conditions treated with

that medicinal had different theoretical understandings/ pathomechanisms

attached to it to explain why it happened.

 

Take for example wen dan tang.

 

Regards,

 

-Jason

 

_____

 

On Behalf Of sharon weizenbaum

Sunday, May 13, 2007 8:56 AM

Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL)

 

Hi Jason,

 

I get what you are saying but......

 

So a patient is definately cold and they are bleeding. How do you

explain how the cold is causing the bleeding? What is the

pathological mechanism that causes the blood to leave the vessels?

 

Part of the FDM is to base our diagnosis on what we know for sure -

in this case cold - and then explain the non-definitive symptom - in

this case bleeding - based on what we know for sure. We explain this

based on our knowledge of physiological and pathological mechanisms.

 

Now cold is an interesting one in terms of blood stasis - I find,

clinically blood stasis from cold is generally treated without using

and herbs to vitalize the blood. Other types of blood such as Qi

stasis congealed blood, Qi deficiency congealed blood, Blood

deficiency congealed blood etc - all require blood vitalizing herbs

in treatment. To a large extent in my clinical experience, when

there is cold - it is sufficient to warm the channels, or uterus or

stomach or what ever the location and the stasis, by itself,

disperses. This is why, when a woman comes to me with dysmenorrhea

and it is from cold - I think " good news! " because simply warming the

uterus will eliminate even very chronic, debilitating pain.

 

So, I wonder if this is not the issue here - that the bleeding is

actually from cold causing blood stasis but that blood vitalizing

herbs are not necessary so the blood stasis is not stated.

 

You may say that blood stasis is an " added idea " but I have two

questions:

 

1. what passage in the SHL are you referring to or could you give a

case example in which there is bleeding from cold.

2. as above: What is the pathological mechanism that causes the blood

to leave the vessels? Or is this just not important for you?

 

Thanks,

 

Sharon

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

 

 

You are correct. Ma Huang Tang is indicated for a type of nose bleeding from

line 55 - It is the only Rx I can think of for nose bleeding. The gui zhi

jia fu zi tang is from a case study book using SHL formulas, not straight

from the text. It is based on the principle of expelling cold from the

channels that is causing the bleeding, a SHL idea (expelling cold). It is

these further adaptations / evolution of the formulas and principles, that I

find the most useful for applying SHL rxs and ideas to the clinic.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of Alon Marcus

Sunday, May 13, 2007 5:19 PM

 

Re: Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

 

 

 

Jason

It has been a very long time since i read SHL but if i remember correctly

the only formula that is described treating nose bleeding due to cold was ma

huang tong, am i mistaken?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

 

@ <%40>

 

Sunday, May 13, 2007 3:17 PM

RE: Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

 

Sharon, et al,

 

The more I think about this bleeding example the more I think it illustrates

my point about people diagnosing differently as well as people trying to fit

things into their own system (and what this circular logic means). For

example it is the standard for us to believe that there are only four types

of bleeding. When a fifth type is suggested, we try to explain it and fit

it into one of the other four types. I find this phenomenon quite

interesting. What is happening here is there is a different diagnosis system

that conflicts with someone else's basic belief system. Not only is there a

completely strange formula choice, but the basic diagnosis and

pathomechanism does not conform to mainstream thought. What do we do with

that?

 

The FDM system relies on explaining things through their own specific

understanding of pathomechanisms and physiology. If that system only

acknowledges four types of bleeding then of course it must fit in with one

of those four (to a FDMer). In the situation that I presented it is like

fitting a square peg in a round hole, and doesn't realize the peg is square.

One will try to explain the cold causing bleeding by a mechanism that is

familiar to them, for example blood stasis (which was suggested), or even

heat. I can assure you that the SHL expert (whose case this is) does not see

it that way. On the contrary, he not only specifically states that this case

/ condition (chronic heavy nosebleeds) is one caused by " cold. " He goes on

to explain his pathomechanism for this occurring. Essentially there is a

cold damaging the yang (which becomes deficient, meaning that is unable to

retain its function over the blood.) Hence bleeding.

 

To hopefully nip any attempts to fit this into one of the four boxes I

state: There is no blood stasis symptoms or reflection in the treatment or

commentary. There is also no signs of heat nor in the treatment or

commentary. There are no signs of qi xu in the case, treatment, commentary;

and cold influencing the yang --> yang xu is not equivalent to qi xu. Since

there is no organ involvement (Spleen or kidney) we can rule those out. In

this case I can firmly say that trying to fit it into any of the above is

just incorrect and defeats the purpose of reading a case study and listening

to what the writer is trying to say. Furthermore, fitting it into one of the

four basic patterns would in no way come up with the treatment given. This

does not say that one may actually be able to treat this patient in another

manner. It is just impossible to say for sure what would or would not have

worked except for what did work!

 

One can say, that is BS (because it doesn't fit within the four bleeding

criteria), or we can somehow create a story on how it actually does.

Actually one could take any case out there and force it into any diagnostic

system they choose. Theory is fun like that, especially CM theory, which as

we know, can essentially explain anything (if we let it). But this I feel

defeats the purpose of reading such case studies. This expert sees things a

different way and he explains his thinking. You have the right to disagree,

but you also have the opportunity to view things a different way, his way.

His diagnosis is clearly different then the FDM system, specifically because

he says the bleeding and coming from cold (and makes no mention of the

four). He gives two bags of Gui Zhi Fu Zi Tang and cures the condition.

Therefore we can learn a different way of thinking, if we are open to it.

This is a different way to view not only this specific problem, but bleeding

in general. In his commentary he says specifically that

 

" nosebleeds most of the time belong to a heat pattern, but also it can

belong to a cold pattern. "

 

And this is the point, period. One can take it or leave it. IMO saying there

are only four types of bleeding is limiting and just incomplete.

 

So to answer Sharon's question, the pathomechanism is important to me. But

let us not forget that it is still a story that relies on the theory. That

theory might be slightly different for another person, as is the case here.

I do not believe CM or any medicine (or any one person, or one school of

thought) has any monopoly on some inherent truth in understanding and

describing the body. We have a strong theoretical medicine, but it is not

uniform. Throughout history people have had a myriad of differing points of

view, many contrary to each other. Herbs many times have differing

attributes throughout the centuries because (same) conditions treated with

that medicinal had different theoretical understandings/ pathomechanisms

attached to it to explain why it happened.

 

Take for example wen dan tang.

 

Regards,

 

-Jason

 

_____

 

@ <%40>

 

[@ <%40>

] On Behalf Of sharon weizenbaum

Sunday, May 13, 2007 8:56 AM

@ <%40>

 

Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL)

 

Hi Jason,

 

I get what you are saying but......

 

So a patient is definately cold and they are bleeding. How do you

explain how the cold is causing the bleeding? What is the

pathological mechanism that causes the blood to leave the vessels?

 

Part of the FDM is to base our diagnosis on what we know for sure -

in this case cold - and then explain the non-definitive symptom - in

this case bleeding - based on what we know for sure. We explain this

based on our knowledge of physiological and pathological mechanisms.

 

Now cold is an interesting one in terms of blood stasis - I find,

clinically blood stasis from cold is generally treated without using

and herbs to vitalize the blood. Other types of blood such as Qi

stasis congealed blood, Qi deficiency congealed blood, Blood

deficiency congealed blood etc - all require blood vitalizing herbs

in treatment. To a large extent in my clinical experience, when

there is cold - it is sufficient to warm the channels, or uterus or

stomach or what ever the location and the stasis, by itself,

disperses. This is why, when a woman comes to me with dysmenorrhea

and it is from cold - I think " good news! " because simply warming the

uterus will eliminate even very chronic, debilitating pain.

 

So, I wonder if this is not the issue here - that the bleeding is

actually from cold causing blood stasis but that blood vitalizing

herbs are not necessary so the blood stasis is not stated.

 

You may say that blood stasis is an " added idea " but I have two

questions:

 

1. what passage in the SHL are you referring to or could you give a

case example in which there is bleeding from cold.

2. as above: What is the pathological mechanism that causes the blood

to leave the vessels? Or is this just not important for you?

 

Thanks,

 

Sharon

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Jason,

 

thanks for giving the case example - so, obviously in this case there

is not blood stasis or heat as a result of the cold.

Yes, I hear that the SHL doctor nixes this bleeding coming from one

of the four categories but you have not explained the mechanism for

how the cold lead to blood leaving the vessels I guess because it was

not cold causing bleeding but the result of the cold -Yang is damaged

and looses it's hold on the vessels.

The Yang Xu leads to bleeding- that's not the same as cold. Cold

by itself did not cause the bleeding but caused Yang Xu which allowed

the bleeding. right?

 

I think this is just rhetorical - They can say " this is definitely

not Qi deficiency " but come on - what is Qi? In my understanding,

generally when we talk about holding blood in it is a Qi function

that depends on Yang. So here is Yang Xu but since the symptom is

bleeding than it is the Qi wrapping function within the Yang that is

lacking. In this case, the root of the Qi deficiency is Yang

deficiency so it makes sense to use Gui Zhi Jia Fu Zi Tang. In other

places in our discussion I've noted that the 4 causes of bleeding do

not limit us to 4 methods. We always have to look more deeply - of

course one of the causes of the Qi failing it's duty to hold blood is

that the underlying Yang is deficient. These Doctors don't say " Qi

deficiency " but it is a totally valid way to understand the bleeding

imho. One does not have to tonify Qi directly in treatment because

simply warming the Yang will cause the Qi to be able to retain the

blood.

 

For each of the 4 causes of Bleeding one must look at and treat the

causes of the cause. Wrapping the blood is a Qi function. What are

the causes of Qi Xu? One is Yang Xu. So, im(not so)ho, we are still

with the 4 causes of bleeding. Your doctor here did what any good

herbalist would do - treat, not just the Qi Xu but the cause of the

Qi Xu to stop the bleeding- cold and yang xu. Not so mysterious or

" out of the box " .

 

Sharon

 

 

Sharon Weizenbaum

86 Henry Street

Amherst, MA 01002

413-549-4021

sweiz

www.whitepinehealingarts.com

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

 

 

 

I do not agree with your thinking. Your logic is IMHO merely justifying what

you believe to be true and you are getting wrapped up in " your version " of

the story. You are forcing this case into a model you believe in. In this

scenario though, since cold is the problem, and the elimination of the cold

is the solution, then cold is causing the bleeding. This is not my

interpretation but exactly what the doctor who treated the case says in the

commentary. This case is not about qi xu, nor just yang xu. It is much more

than that, and essentially a different model of dx, tx, and FOCUS.

 

 

 

Furthermore, one will not find gui zhi jia fu zi tang in any TCM book for

nose bleeding, nor would I bet that any graduate from your FDM would choose

such a formula in such a case like this: chronic high volume long term nose

bleeds. Therefore it is clear to me that it is outside the TCM, and hence

FDM, box, and I see no way it fits within your 4 causes of bleeding. Sorry I

just can't agree with your logic.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of sharon weizenbaum

Monday, May 14, 2007 8:07 AM

 

Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

 

 

 

Hi Jason,

 

thanks for giving the case example - so, obviously in this case there

is not blood stasis or heat as a result of the cold.

Yes, I hear that the SHL doctor nixes this bleeding coming from one

of the four categories but you have not explained the mechanism for

how the cold lead to blood leaving the vessels I guess because it was

not cold causing bleeding but the result of the cold -Yang is damaged

and looses it's hold on the vessels.

The Yang Xu leads to bleeding- that's not the same as cold. Cold

by itself did not cause the bleeding but caused Yang Xu which allowed

the bleeding. right?

 

I think this is just rhetorical - They can say " this is definitely

not Qi deficiency " but come on - what is Qi? In my understanding,

generally when we talk about holding blood in it is a Qi function

that depends on Yang. So here is Yang Xu but since the symptom is

bleeding than it is the Qi wrapping function within the Yang that is

lacking. In this case, the root of the Qi deficiency is Yang

deficiency so it makes sense to use Gui Zhi Jia Fu Zi Tang. In other

places in our discussion I've noted that the 4 causes of bleeding do

not limit us to 4 methods. We always have to look more deeply - of

course one of the causes of the Qi failing it's duty to hold blood is

that the underlying Yang is deficient. These Doctors don't say " Qi

deficiency " but it is a totally valid way to understand the bleeding

imho. One does not have to tonify Qi directly in treatment because

simply warming the Yang will cause the Qi to be able to retain the

blood.

 

For each of the 4 causes of Bleeding one must look at and treat the

causes of the cause. Wrapping the blood is a Qi function. What are

the causes of Qi Xu? One is Yang Xu. So, im(not so)ho, we are still

with the 4 causes of bleeding. Your doctor here did what any good

herbalist would do - treat, not just the Qi Xu but the cause of the

Qi Xu to stop the bleeding- cold and yang xu. Not so mysterious or

" out of the box " .

 

Sharon

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I do not agree with your thinking. Your logic is IMHO merely

justifying what

you believe to be true and you are getting wrapped up in " your

version " of

the story. You are forcing this case into a model you believe in. In

this

scenario though, since cold is the problem, and the elimination of

the cold

is the solution, then cold is causing the bleeding. This is not my

interpretation but exactly what the doctor who treated the case says

in the

commentary. This case is not about qi xu, nor just yang xu. It is

much more

than that, and essentially a different model of dx, tx, and FOCUS.

 

 

Furthermore, one will not find gui zhi jia fu zi tang in any TCM book

for

nose bleeding, nor would I bet that any graduate from your FDM would

choose

such a formula in such a case like this: chronic high volume long

term nose

bleeds. Therefore it is clear to me that it is outside the TCM, and

hence

FDM, box, and I see no way it fits within your 4 causes of bleeding.

Sorry I

just can't agree with your logic.

 

Regards,

 

-Jason

 

 

(Sharon)

 

Well, we can disagree. I'm okay with you being wrong and you are

clearly okay with me being wrong too - so no problem! It's semantics

if you ask me. You are right that Gui Zhi Jia Fu Zi Tang would not

be in a text for stopping bleeding - This is my point exactly - that

the " pattern " texts are not the way to go. Using a sound diagnostic

method, I have come up with many many treatments that are not in any

book and have used Gui Zhi and Fu Zi to stop bleeding in Yang

deficiency. This is because there is a method that allows and

encourages one to see what's really there as opposed to a construct.

I would use my language to understand this case regardless of whether

the famous doctor said Qi Xu or not Qi Xu. As a reader of the text I

try to understand the commentary. Why would this commentator or

doctor say there is not Qi Xu? Perhaps because he wanted us to

understand why he didn't use Qi tonics. He may want us to see that

the blood wrapping function of Qi is WITHIN the yang. This is my

commentary on the text and it adds another level of understanding

without contradicting your commentator, the dx, treatment or FOCUS.

This is another way to describe how things really work in the body.

I am not adding something " of my own story " that is not there. I am

turning to look at the case in a valid way that adds to

understanding. Really, it's just semantics.

 

My curiosity is as to why it is so important to you to put Shang Han

Lun theory and other theories as " outside the box " as if the box must

be so limited. Maybe the question is really - What is TCM? I

believe the problem is that the way TCM is taught misses the

Classical roots and IS very limited. The problem is with the box if

it doesn't help us understand texts such as the Nei Jing and Shang

Han Lun. As I think about it, I can see that my whole growth process

as a practitioner has been one of expanding the " box " , i.e. the

limitations of my understanding so that it could include the depths

of the medicine. But I don't have lots of different boxes. There

are different expressions of the underlying cosmology but, when we

are grounded in this underlying cosmology the various expressions do

hold together.

 

But - maybe what I am talking about isn't TCM if it is what is

currently taught in schools but rather CCM (Classical Chinese

Medicine). This is what I think of as the warp (Jing ç»ï¼‰of the

pluralistic tapestry of . It is like the warp of a

weaving. It is more of an open scaffolding for understanding so many

of the classic texts such as the Shang Han Lun. In fact, the

character for the warp of a weaving, Jing, is the same character for

" Classic " such as the Nei Jing (inner classic), the Nan Jing

(difficult classic) etc. It is also the character for channel/

meridian. We could say the Jing speaks to the deep underpinning of

something like the body or Chinese medicine or a woven tapestry. The

images on a tapestry can be quite varied but they all come from the

same warp.

 

FDM seeks to ground our diagnosis in this warp so that a wide grasp

of different styles can easily be accessed for formula selection. It

does not contradict or rule out expanding skills to include Shang Han

Lun style. In fact it gives a basis for such an expansion to happen

easily.

 

A continued musing leads me to become aware of a bias I come in with

and that informs my teaching as well as these replies. I have a

basic mistrust of any trend that smacks of elitism - meaning any one

saying explicitly or implicitly that a certain teaching is superior

and that only superior people can get it. That there are subtle

almost magical ways of working that ordinary practitioners can't

possibly understand.

 

On the other hand I also have grave concerns about the reification

and watering down of Chinese medicine to make it ready for the masses.

 

But it isn't that it is EITHER watered down and rendered lifeless OR

it is lofty and inaccessible. This is a separation of Yin and Yang -

dualistic. My experience with students it that they are very bright,

very enthusiastic and ready to be the best doctors they can be. Yet,

the tools they are offered ARE the watered down lifeless tools. As a

result they are tempted to go to something lofty but don't yet have

the foundation to understand the higher teachings. So they feel that

these higher teachings are inaccessible and only for the elite " sage/

scholar " doctors.

 

What I see is that when these eager minds are introduced to the

fundamentals as the " Jing " - which I think FDM does - they are given

the tools to really start expanding.

 

My experience as a practitioner is that the more I work from a simple

ordinary base, the more profound my diagnostic vision becomes. The

subtleties start to become obvious. An observer may wonder at a

weird or cryptic choice of prescription if they just memorized

" patterns " . But for me, the choice of treatment seems quite ordinary

and obvious.

 

I want to teach students in a way that opens up a lifetime of

fruitful study. Now, I see students feeling that their base is

inadequate so they have to learn MORE stuff. They are inundated with

stuff to learn but without the basics they have no place to put it or

any way to integrate it. It does become a bit of this a bit of

that. It blocks the Qi mechanism of learning so it becomes

overwhelming like stuck food. A good foundation activates the Qi

mechanism of learning so that new teachings and styles can be

welcomed and integrated.

 

oy, the ramblings!

 

Sharon

 

 

 

 

Sharon Weizenbaum

86 Henry Street

Amherst, MA 01002

413-549-4021

sweiz

www.whitepinehealingarts.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

 

 

 

My simple answer to why I think viewing systems as multiple distinct boxes

(or systems) has an advantage over simply lumping them all together is this:

when we put multiple ideas into one system (i.e. TCM) one must make certain

concessions and simplifications (no matter what) and must rectify

contradictions to allow it to fit within the (new) system.

 

 

 

Just as when modern TCM integrates and merges both Western and Chinese

medicine, each one is hence weakened. Studying Western medicine in and of

itself is therefore superior to studying Western medicine within the context

of Chinese medicine and vice a versa. There is no doubt that Chinese

medicine contains a multitude of differing opinions and contradictions

within various schools of thought throughout history. What do we do with

that? Remedying all of the contradictions is of course appealing, but

weakening to the systems being swallowed up. SHL is a perfect example, IMO.

This is why I choose to take off one hat and put another on. This allows me

to truly understand a system in its entirety instead of the bite-size

extraction through the lens of some modern amalgamation. This is why I like

to consider such a system, outside the box and hence allows me to see

multiple solutions for a single clinical dilemma, where such solutions may

contradict each other. As soon as one integrates and merges treatment

strategies and diagnosis (etc) for a specific pattern or condition into a

pre-existing system, it remedies contradiction within the system by just

absorbing whatever it can make sense of (something that does not have

contradiction), or weeds out contradictions (by not including it). This is

why I like to view things outside the box or just as multiple boxes.

 

 

 

Otherwise I agree with all your below comments, and if you can do what you

say with your system, then more power to you. But I have to say the sheets

that I saw were more a reflection of narrowing then widening, therefore I

look forward to when I can see the whole system in the full context that it

deserves.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of sharon weizenbaum

Tuesday, May 15, 2007 9:50 AM

 

Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

 

 

 

I do not agree with your thinking. Your logic is IMHO merely

justifying what

you believe to be true and you are getting wrapped up in " your

version " of

the story. You are forcing this case into a model you believe in. In

this

scenario though, since cold is the problem, and the elimination of

the cold

is the solution, then cold is causing the bleeding. This is not my

interpretation but exactly what the doctor who treated the case says

in the

commentary. This case is not about qi xu, nor just yang xu. It is

much more

than that, and essentially a different model of dx, tx, and FOCUS.

 

Furthermore, one will not find gui zhi jia fu zi tang in any TCM book

for

nose bleeding, nor would I bet that any graduate from your FDM would

choose

such a formula in such a case like this: chronic high volume long

term nose

bleeds. Therefore it is clear to me that it is outside the TCM, and

hence

FDM, box, and I see no way it fits within your 4 causes of bleeding.

Sorry I

just can't agree with your logic.

 

Regards,

 

-Jason

 

(Sharon)

 

Well, we can disagree. I'm okay with you being wrong and you are

clearly okay with me being wrong too - so no problem! It's semantics

if you ask me. You are right that Gui Zhi Jia Fu Zi Tang would not

be in a text for stopping bleeding - This is my point exactly - that

the " pattern " texts are not the way to go. Using a sound diagnostic

method, I have come up with many many treatments that are not in any

book and have used Gui Zhi and Fu Zi to stop bleeding in Yang

deficiency. This is because there is a method that allows and

encourages one to see what's really there as opposed to a construct.

I would use my language to understand this case regardless of whether

the famous doctor said Qi Xu or not Qi Xu. As a reader of the text I

try to understand the commentary. Why would this commentator or

doctor say there is not Qi Xu? Perhaps because he wanted us to

understand why he didn't use Qi tonics. He may want us to see that

the blood wrapping function of Qi is WITHIN the yang. This is my

commentary on the text and it adds another level of understanding

without contradicting your commentator, the dx, treatment or FOCUS.

This is another way to describe how things really work in the body.

I am not adding something " of my own story " that is not there. I am

turning to look at the case in a valid way that adds to

understanding. Really, it's just semantics.

 

My curiosity is as to why it is so important to you to put Shang Han

Lun theory and other theories as " outside the box " as if the box must

be so limited. Maybe the question is really - What is TCM? I

believe the problem is that the way TCM is taught misses the

Classical roots and IS very limited. The problem is with the box if

it doesn't help us understand texts such as the Nei Jing and Shang

Han Lun. As I think about it, I can see that my whole growth process

as a practitioner has been one of expanding the " box " , i.e. the

limitations of my understanding so that it could include the depths

of the medicine. But I don't have lots of different boxes. There

are different expressions of the underlying cosmology but, when we

are grounded in this underlying cosmology the various expressions do

hold together.

 

But - maybe what I am talking about isn't TCM if it is what is

currently taught in schools but rather CCM (Classical Chinese

Medicine). This is what I think of as the warp (Jing ¾­£©of the

pluralistic tapestry of . It is like the warp of a

weaving. It is more of an open scaffolding for understanding so many

of the classic texts such as the Shang Han Lun. In fact, the

character for the warp of a weaving, Jing, is the same character for

" Classic " such as the Nei Jing (inner classic), the Nan Jing

(difficult classic) etc. It is also the character for channel/

meridian. We could say the Jing speaks to the deep underpinning of

something like the body or Chinese medicine or a woven tapestry. The

images on a tapestry can be quite varied but they all come from the

same warp.

 

FDM seeks to ground our diagnosis in this warp so that a wide grasp

of different styles can easily be accessed for formula selection. It

does not contradict or rule out expanding skills to include Shang Han

Lun style. In fact it gives a basis for such an expansion to happen

easily.

 

A continued musing leads me to become aware of a bias I come in with

and that informs my teaching as well as these replies. I have a

basic mistrust of any trend that smacks of elitism - meaning any one

saying explicitly or implicitly that a certain teaching is superior

and that only superior people can get it. That there are subtle

almost magical ways of working that ordinary practitioners can't

possibly understand.

 

On the other hand I also have grave concerns about the reification

and watering down of Chinese medicine to make it ready for the masses.

 

But it isn't that it is EITHER watered down and rendered lifeless OR

it is lofty and inaccessible. This is a separation of Yin and Yang -

dualistic. My experience with students it that they are very bright,

very enthusiastic and ready to be the best doctors they can be. Yet,

the tools they are offered ARE the watered down lifeless tools. As a

result they are tempted to go to something lofty but don't yet have

the foundation to understand the higher teachings. So they feel that

these higher teachings are inaccessible and only for the elite " sage/

scholar " doctors.

 

What I see is that when these eager minds are introduced to the

fundamentals as the " Jing " - which I think FDM does - they are given

the tools to really start expanding.

 

My experience as a practitioner is that the more I work from a simple

ordinary base, the more profound my diagnostic vision becomes. The

subtleties start to become obvious. An observer may wonder at a

weird or cryptic choice of prescription if they just memorized

" patterns " . But for me, the choice of treatment seems quite ordinary

and obvious.

 

I want to teach students in a way that opens up a lifetime of

fruitful study. Now, I see students feeling that their base is

inadequate so they have to learn MORE stuff. They are inundated with

stuff to learn but without the basics they have no place to put it or

any way to integrate it. It does become a bit of this a bit of

that. It blocks the Qi mechanism of learning so it becomes

overwhelming like stuck food. A good foundation activates the Qi

mechanism of learning so that new teachings and styles can be

welcomed and integrated.

 

oy, the ramblings!

 

Sharon

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Jason, Ze'v et. al.

 

 

 

Is diagnosis itself the art of telling a story that helps us connect

our patient's reality with the potency of the medicinals we use? Are

there problems with trying to integrate Shang Han Lun, Nei Jing, Wen

Bing methods with a more universal understanding? Are they ways such

an integration could be helpful? Are there problems with keeping a

classic such as the Shang Han Lun in a totally separate box? Are

there ways keeping it separate could be helpful too?

 

I would say yes to all of the above.

 

How separate a " system " is the Shang Han Lun? Did Zhang Zhong-jing

even see it as a " system " or do we impose a system on it as sort of a

story we tell ourselves? " I will give a very precise answer: I DONT

KNOW! " (this is a quote from the dalai lama who was here last week)

 

I must say though that from my understanding of FDM - none of the

cases you have brought up seem " out of the box " to me.

 

In terms of FDM, it's too hard to talk about something online that no

one has seen or learned. I will say though that it attempts to do

what I said in the last post - " FDM seeks to ground our diagnosis in

this warp so that a wide grasp

of different styles can easily be accessed for formula selection. It

does not contradict or rule out expanding skills to include Shang Han

Lun style. In fact it gives a basis for such an expansion to happen

easily. "

 

I think FDM is a topic that lends itself more to a person to person

at this stage in its game. I look forward to conversations and to

hearing what thoughts you (Jason and Z'ev) have you both being such

strong scholars and clinicians. It is, above all, a work in progress

so thanks so much for this conversation.

 

 

Sharon Weizenbaum

86 Henry Street

Amherst, MA 01002

413-549-4021

sweiz

www.whitepinehealingarts.com

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jason,

One of the problems I see with this discussion is that it

similar to discussing the Shang Han Lun without having ever read the

book. Sharon has put out multiple DVD's that come with her course,

and your impression of her approach just isn't accurate. I would

suggest making an arrangement with Sharon to view her DVD's,

otherwise I think this thread just generates more misunderstanding

than comprehension. There is always a problem with trying to

understand logic through abbreviated e-mail exchanges.

 

 

On May 14, 2007, at 5:03 PM, wrote:

 

> I do not agree with your thinking. Your logic is IMHO merely

> justifying what

> you believe to be true and you are getting wrapped up in " your

> version " of

> the story. You are forcing this case into a model you believe in.

> In this

> scenario though, since cold is the problem, and the elimination of

> the cold

> is the solution, then cold is causing the bleeding. This is not my

> interpretation but exactly what the doctor who treated the case

> says in the

> commentary. This case is not about qi xu, nor just yang xu. It is

> much more

> than that, and essentially a different model of dx, tx, and FOCUS.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sharon

Can you post some details about your DVDs

thanks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

Friday, May 18, 2007 11:15 AM

Re: Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

 

 

Jason,

One of the problems I see with this discussion is that it

similar to discussing the Shang Han Lun without having ever read the

book. Sharon has put out multiple DVD's that come with her course,

and your impression of her approach just isn't accurate. I would

suggest making an arrangement with Sharon to view her DVD's,

otherwise I think this thread just generates more misunderstanding

than comprehension. There is always a problem with trying to

understand logic through abbreviated e-mail exchanges.

 

On May 14, 2007, at 5:03 PM, wrote:

 

> I do not agree with your thinking. Your logic is IMHO merely

> justifying what

> you believe to be true and you are getting wrapped up in " your

> version " of

> the story. You are forcing this case into a model you believe in.

> In this

> scenario though, since cold is the problem, and the elimination of

> the cold

> is the solution, then cold is causing the bleeding. This is not my

> interpretation but exactly what the doctor who treated the case

> says in the

> commentary. This case is not about qi xu, nor just yang xu. It is

> much more

> than that, and essentially a different model of dx, tx, and FOCUS.

 

[Guest guest]

yes that would be great to get some more info on the dvds

 

thanks,

Warren Cargal

>

> " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus

> 2007/05/18 Fri PM 02:20:22 EDT

>

> Re: Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

>

> Sharon

> Can you post some details about your DVDs

> thanks

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> -

>

>

> Friday, May 18, 2007 11:15 AM

> Re: Re: cold causing bleeding (SHL) 4 causes incomplete?

>

>

> Jason,

> One of the problems I see with this discussion is that it

> similar to discussing the Shang Han Lun without having ever read the

> book. Sharon has put out multiple DVD's that come with her course,

> and your impression of her approach just isn't accurate. I would

> suggest making an arrangement with Sharon to view her DVD's,

> otherwise I think this thread just generates more misunderstanding

> than comprehension. There is always a problem with trying to

> understand logic through abbreviated e-mail exchanges.

>

>

> On May 14, 2007, at 5:03 PM, wrote:

>

> > I do not agree with your thinking. Your logic is IMHO merely

> > justifying what

> > you believe to be true and you are getting wrapped up in " your

> > version " of

> > the story. You are forcing this case into a model you believe in.

> > In this

> > scenario though, since cold is the problem, and the elimination of

> > the cold

> > is the solution, then cold is causing the bleeding. This is not my

> > interpretation but exactly what the doctor who treated the case

> > says in the

> > commentary. This case is not about qi xu, nor just yang xu. It is

> > much more

> > than that, and essentially a different model of dx, tx, and FOCUS.

>

>