How to read case studies / multiple systems / bleeding example

[Guest guest]

{My morning Rant}

 

 

 

In thinking about this bleeding topic I want to elaborate (hopefully more

clearly) on what I said previously. Especially in regard to the power of

using multiple systems as well as how to read case studies, which is

something that Westerners are not used to doing.

 

 

 

It is not in principle, wrong, for example, to look at the case I presented

(or any case) (chronic, 6 months very heavy bleeding, night and day) through

the lens of TCM or FDC / FDM system. It is actually the first thing most

people would do. Any system albeit, through kampo, toyohari, 5 elements or

whatever, will come up with a treatment method, physiopathological

explanation for the problem, and treatment that makes sense. With a TCM

system, we " know " there are 4 types of bleeding and will say this is a qi xu

problem. With the pathomechanism of: qi xu --> leading to yang xu --> cold;

(or visa versa) Cold--> damaging the yang --> then damaging the qi (leading

to qi xu). Either way we have a decent explanation.

 

 

 

The question with using any of these systems is does its use come up with

the treatment that actually worked in the case. Does your explanation /

story aid you (or hinder you) in coming up with a treatment (in the case).

I ask the group, what kind of formula would one give in the above situation

(if you didn't know the punchline already)? Does it contain fu long gan?

Does it have astringing herbs because the problem is so severe and chronic?

Does it address the spleen qi (or yang), because the spleen holds the blood

and is the source of qi? Does the formula huang tu tang come to mind? There

are many possibilities in ways to look at this. If your answer is gui zhi

jia fu zi tang (or something very close to that) then your way of looking at

it makes " some " sense for this case.

 

 

 

But more importantly then seeing if your way is the right way, is to ask

yourself what can I learn from this case study and what is the doctor

thinking about for this condition. If your herb choice as well as DX and

explanation match that of the doctors, then the case is a) probably not that

useful, because you didn't learn much, b) the doctor is probably using a

similar system as yourself. If not, then you ask, is there something

different here that I would not have thought of? Merely analyzing the case

with your frame of reference, and second guessing that they could have done

this or that, or they should have diagnosed it like this are that, or they

should have explained the pathomechanism like this or that, then one

completely misses the boat of why this author chose to put this case study

in this book. These differences in approach are clearly what one must find

the answers to.

 

 

 

So of course TCM / FDM system can explain almost any condition. But this

doesn't mean that there is not a better ways that falls outside of such a

system. As with any system there are going to be clinical opportunities that

it misses. Being open to those through case studies is one aspect of

expanding one's perspectives.

 

 

 

Systems are helpful, especially if one does not know how to dx. But my

original point is that any system will have clinical flaws and this is what

I noticed when I read the definitive dx criteria. There are always

exceptions to the a=b approach and looking at other's systems and approaches

/ case studies can expand one's system whatever it may be.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<Chinese Medicine>

 

<Chinese Medicine>

 

tel:

<http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?src=jj_signature & To=303.545.5792+x102 & Em

ail=>

www.Chinese Medicine

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> Add me

to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a signature

like this?