Traditional Chinese Medicine
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-04-2016, 11:29 PM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
(29-04-2016 08:52 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Western medicine is to the point where it can identify and isolate specific mechanisms of action for TCM ingredients. Why would they do this? If they didn't think there was money in it by formulating a new pill they wouldn't.
The problem is the classification of it as "Western" medicine.
In actual fact it is "science based" or "evidence based" medicine. Many cultures and countries have contributed to science based medicine.

TCM is not based on evidence. It is a traditional "medicine" handed down from the times before the scientific method was around. It seems there is very little evidence supporting TCM.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Stevil's post
30-04-2016, 12:03 AM (This post was last modified: 30-04-2016 01:05 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
(29-04-2016 11:29 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-04-2016 08:52 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Western medicine is to the point where it can identify and isolate specific mechanisms of action for TCM ingredients. Why would they do this? If they didn't think there was money in it by formulating a new pill they wouldn't.
The problem is the classification of it as "Western" medicine.
In actual fact it is "science based" or "evidence based" medicine. Many cultures and countries have contributed to science based medicine.

TCM is not based on evidence. It is a traditional "medicine" handed down from the times before the scientific method was around. It seems there is very little evidence supporting TCM.

Except it's even worse than that. It's widespread popularity in China was fueled by Mao Zedong for practical political reasons after the Communists took control. Most of it is not nearly as ancient as many are lead to believe, and can trace either it's origins or popularity back only half a century. It was a way to placate the people, appearing to provide genuine health services while also promoting Chinese nationalism. As for the higher ups in the Communist party itself? They sure as shit had access to 'western' medicine, they weren't fools.


https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ret...-medicine/

Here's an except from an article over at the Science Based Medicine blog; home of Steve Novella, the host of the Skeptics Guide to the Universe podcast. For reference, TCM stands for Traditional Chinese Medicine.

Retconning the story of traditional Chinese medicine


...


Unfortunately, false historical revisionism is a very common practice. Perhaps the key difference between retconning fiction and retconning history (i.e., historical revisionism) is that for fiction the reasons for changing or ignoring past narratives are often convenience, lazy plotting, and/or a genuine desire to flesh out a character. For history, the motivation tends to be ideological. Such is the case with TCM, beginning with one of the greatest retconners/revisionists of all, Chairman Mao Zedong. After all, totalitarian regimes, as Orwell so astutely noticed, rely on controlling history in order to control present-day narratives. Given that TCM is, by and large, prescientific, pseudoscientific, and religion-based quackery grounded in vitalistic beliefs, to make it palatable to doctors who are ostensibly advocates of evidence-based medicine requires the retconning of its history on a massive scale. Of course, retconning/revisionism can only work if the original narrative that is replaced is not well known.

Particularly galling about the ascendency of TCM in the US is the myth that is swallowed whole by its advocates and promoted as truth. That myth is the very history of TCM, whose true origins are unknown by all but a very few. Contrary to popular belief (particularly about acupuncture), TCM does not go back thousands of years into antiquity, when the ancient healing wisdom of the Chinese was supposedly first discovered and codified and acupuncture discovered. In actuality, very few people are aware that the single person most responsible for the current popularity of TCM was not an ancient Chinese healer but rather Chairman Mao Zedong, as described in an excellent summary by Alan Levinovitz in Slate.com last year, “Chairman Mao Invented Traditional Chinese Medicine“:

…Mao was under no illusion that Chinese medicine—a key component of naturopathic education—actually worked. In The Private Life of Chairman Mao, Li Zhisui, one of Mao’s personal physicians, recounts a conversation they had on the subject. Trained as an M.D. in Western medicine, Li admitted to being baffled by ancient Chinese medical books, especially their theories relating to the five elements. It turns out his employer also found them implausible.

“Even though I believe we should promote Chinese medicine,” Mao told him, “I personally do not believe in it. I don’t take Chinese medicine.”


Much of the reason for the popularity of TCM in China and its spread to the US and beyond was actually because Chairman Mao promoted it. The reason, as has been explained by our very own Kimball Atwood, Steve Novella, Harriet Hall, and Ben Kavoussi, is because there simply weren’t enough doctors in China trained in scientific medicine, as admitted by Mao (quoted by Levinovitz):

Our nation’s health work teams are large. They have to concern themselves with over 500 million people [including the] young, old, and ill. … At present, doctors of Western medicine are few, and thus the broad masses of the people, and in particular the peasants, rely on Chinese medicine to treat illness. Therefore, we must strive for the complete unification of Chinese medicine. (Translations from Kim Taylor’s Chinese Medicine in Early Communist China, 1945-1963: A Medicine of Revolution.)

Who knew? (Well, I did.) I also knew, as Levinovitz relates, that this was the very first “integrative” medicine, “integrating quackery with science-based medicine more than five decades before the term “integrative medicine” caught on in the US. A particularly pertinent quote sums this idea up:

“This One Medicine,” exulted the president of the Chinese Medical Association in 1952, “will possess a basis in modern natural sciences, will have absorbed the ancient and the new, the Chinese and the foreign, all medical achievements—and will be China’s New Medicine!”

Indeed, what’s interesting about Levinovitz’s article is his description of how the exportation of TCM to the world was quite deliberate, as part of a strategy to popularize it among the Chinese. There was a problem, however. As Levinovitz noted, there was no such thing as “traditional Chinese medicine.” Rather, there were traditional Chinese medicines. For many centuries, healing practices in China had been highly variable. Attempts at institutionalizing medical education were mostly unsuccessful and “most practitioners drew at will on a mixture of demonology, astrology, yin-yang five phases theory, classic texts, folk wisdom, and personal experience.” Mao realized that TCM would be unappealing to foreigners, as even many Chinese, particularly those with an education, understood that TCM was mostly quackery. For instance, in 1923, Lu Xun realized that “Chinese doctors are no more than a type of swindler, either intentional or unintentional, and I sympathize with deceived sick people and their families.” Such sentiments were common among the upper classes and the educated. Indeed, as we have seen, Mao himself didn’t use TCM practitioners. He wanted scientific “Western” medicine. The same was true of educated Chinese. It still is.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
30-04-2016, 03:27 AM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
Isn't the notion of it being traditional itself even heavily nonsensical. Those are phrases usually added to make it sound superior while it wouldn't make it so, it isn't so as well.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
30-04-2016, 04:09 AM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
(30-04-2016 03:27 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Isn't the notion of it being traditional itself even heavily nonsensical. Those are phrases usually added to make it sound superior while it wouldn't make it so, it isn't so as well.

The 'traditional' part of 'traditional Chinese medicine' was fist coined in English, so yeah... Rolleyes

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2016, 05:52 AM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
(29-04-2016 07:01 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(29-04-2016 06:57 PM)Chas Wrote:  There's no clinical evidence that any of it even works. Drinking Beverage

When I search for "traditional chinese medicine" on pubmed I get 41,167 results. Don't seem like woo to me with that many refereed research papers.

And those pages all say "It's bullshit". Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
30-04-2016, 05:54 AM (This post was last modified: 30-04-2016 06:06 AM by Chas.)
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
(29-04-2016 08:41 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(29-04-2016 08:32 PM)yakherder Wrote:  And even otherwise well educated people, such as my western classmates at the university where I was taking Chinese classes, would have perfectly reasonable conversations about the vast majority of subjects, but the second you start talking about acupuncture ...

My Aetna plan covers acupuncture if it is performed by a board certified physician. Can't be all woo if Aetna covers it.

Yes, it can. Aetna is an insurance company, not a scientific lab. They also make many other coverage decisions that are not based on science.

It is likely that their actuaries have calculated it is cheaper to cover acupuncture than to cover the cost of actual medical care.

In 1980, I joined one of the first HMOs.
It was run by doctors who knew that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and that a stitch in time saves nine.
The only thing health insurance companies know is a penny saved is a penny earned.

Sadly, HMOs have been taken over by bean counters.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
30-04-2016, 06:25 AM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
The entire notion of traditional Chinese medicine having any relevancy or validity is unsupported by any empirical scientific evidence. Or to put it more succinctly; it's all bullshit.

For anybody interested in a thorough exposition of TCM, check out THIS site.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
30-04-2016, 07:24 PM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
I've had acupuncture several times. Now I know it's all placebo effect. It relaxes me and some scientists think it releases endorphins which ease pain. I'd probably get the same effect from a good massage but I can't stand people putting their hands all over me, well except for my husband, so once in awhile I go in and get an acupuncture treatment. The gal I go to has neat soft music and a little tinkling waterfall nearby and low lighting. Yeah, I gotta admit, it's all placebo effect. Blush

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
30-04-2016, 07:37 PM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
You can get the same from massages, right, in all their variations and fads. You can also get it from meditating and chanting/humming, aroma therapy and jogging and working out and whatnot.

It all works in that it relaxes you and stimulates endorphins. So you feel especially good for a while after doing any of these.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dom's post
30-04-2016, 07:46 PM
RE: Traditional Chinese Medicine
(30-04-2016 07:24 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  I've had acupuncture several times. Now I know it's all placebo effect. It relaxes me and some scientists think it releases endorphins which ease pain. I'd probably get the same effect from a good massage but I can't stand people putting their hands all over me, well except for my husband, so once in awhile I go in and get an acupuncture treatment. The gal I go to has neat soft music and a little tinkling waterfall nearby and low lighting. Yeah, I gotta admit, it's all placebo effect. Blush
LOL
I hate massages too. Went on a holiday to Fiji a couple of years ago. Wanted to give my complimentary massage to my wife but they wouldn't let me transfer it to her. So wife talked me into having one with her.

I absolutely hated it. The massage lady kept telling me to relax, she kept going down low on my backside and I kept pulling my pants back up, she was pulling them down a bit low for my liking. At the end of it, when we were leaving the staff were all lined up and had smirks on their faces. I guess they thought it was funny seeing how uncomfortable I was about the whole ordeal.

I don't see any value in massage. It has no lasting effects, no medical benefit. May as well just sleep in or listen to some music if you want to relax, or play guitar, or paint or something..

BTW, I don't see how getting pins stuck into you can be relaxing. WTF!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: