SV: ref: one needle treatment

[Guest guest]

Usually I find that in treating the deficiency, one needle is better. In

treating excess, more needles are better. To drain the excess feels more

relaxing, but in treating the deficiency the disease is treated more

effectively ……

 

 

 

Are Thoresen

 

Gisleröd

 

N-3175 Ramnes

 

arethore

 

http://home.online/~arethore/

 

 

 

_____

 

Fra:

På vegne av

Sendt: 23. mai 2007 19:08

Til:

Emne: Re: ref: one needle treatment

 

 

 

Sorry, doc, but i really object, or should I say, have no interest in

these explanations. I prefer to view the CM paradigm as complete and

having no need of justification.

 

Just to be nit-picking consider your sentence:

" These " modern " theories are just now beginning to reveal the fact

that meta-physical concepts that are thousands of years old are,

indeed, rooted in reality. "

 

I know that quoting is perhaps unfair but again, I consider CM reality

enough. My interest in CM works for me because it expresses a

world-body view that is more consistent with my own, not because it

makes sense in the Western terms. " What the Bleep " and others

represent a type of patronizing view of others cultures.

 

The one needle approach isn't new-age, as has been astutely pointed

out, is actually a more classical method. I just find that patients

come in for more than just the disease but need the time to relax.

Ironically, I find more needles help with this.

 

Sorry, to be harsh, but I'll not censure my thoughts (this time) in

order to get the point across.

Doug

 

@ <%40>

, " waldropeww "

<dr.w.w.waldrope wrote:

>

> Hi all,

>

> I have been reading with great interest, the thread on one needle

tech. and " new age-

> iness " in CM.

> IMO, acupuncture is a quantum process. Recent (past 15 - 20 years or

so) evolution of

> quantum theory has revealed (explored?) an empirical, scientific,

viewpoint about the

> fundamental nature of reality. This having to do with concepts like

non-local action,

> Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle, Schroendingers Cat thought

experiment, zero point

> energy, superposition of particle - wave entities and the like.

These " modern " theories are

> just now beginning to reveal the fact that meta-physical concepts

that are thousands of

> years old are, indeed, rooted in reality.

> I will try to find the time:) to give a more complete overview of

some of these concepts,

> but the gist is this:

> All things are inter-connected, the very act of observing something

affects the thing being

> observed and causes it to collapse from a superposed state to a

quantifiable state.

> Conciousness is a quantum process. Ergo... even thinking about an

acupuncture point

> affects it at some level.

>

> A little time spent on researching quantum theory will be time well

spent. Here are a

> couple of places to start.

>

> www.quantumconsciousness.org/interviews/alternative.html

>

> ...and this is a very plausible " western " explanation of what Qi is.

Stuart Hameroff wrote

> this way back and I am surprised it hasn't really survived for

current discussion in todays

> acu-world...maybe this will revive it and lead to a new and/or

deeper understanding (at

> least from an empirical perspective) of what Qi is... at any rate,

it is very interesting.

>

> www.quantumconsciousness.org/documents/chi_hameroff_000.pdf

>

> You may also want to watch the PBS Nova special The Elegant Universe

you can view it

> online...

>

> www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/int_phys.html

>

> ... or you can rent a copy of " What the Bleep " at your local video

store. Both are very

> interesting.

>

> All of this is pertinent to the current thread regarding one needle

treatments, etc. I have

> seen the Dr. Tan " show " and he is very impressive. I've tried it and

it works quite well with

> a little practice. Of course, I do practice Qi Gong;)

>

> If you really want get into the quantum fray, join the forum at...

>

> www.toequest.com/

>

> You will find quite a dialogue... much of it between the Empiricists

and the Meta-

> physisists. I have tried to bridge the two camps, but you know how

those darned

> reductionists can be;)

>

> Warm regards,

> dr.w

>