Talk:Traditional Chinese medicine/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 7 November 2022. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

What's in the bundle?

Needs a list of the TCM bundle. Amusing bit: this will include reiki, which is neither traditional nor Chinese - David Gerard (talk) 00:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, maybe post-TCM. It might turn into a separate article.Wigitsune (talk) 05:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Phrasing of the article?

I might be mistaken, but this page seems to be the only one specifically about (traditional) Chinese medicine. At the time of this posting, however, the idea seems to be largely from the perspective of the West, with no mention of the (pseudo-scientific) principles it is based upon. So my question is; is this article about Chinese medicine as practiced in China, or is it just about the bastardized, New Age version that was exported to the West? - Gameboy (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Both, I would think. Blue (pester) 01:46, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

As it says right there in the text, I was thinking mostly of the Western TCM bundle. Which frequently includes non-traditional non-Chinese things like reiki, for example - David Gerard (talk) 10:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This doesn't look well informed or researched. TCM isn't a "Western tag": the Chinese term 中医, meaning the same, is used universally for traditional medical theory & practices in China, not "the Westernised bundle" whatever that means. TCM is still very widely studied & practised in China, not just in "parts where proper medical technology is thin on the ground" but at high profile institutions like Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, where it is usually studied alongside scientific medicine. Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 12:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, it's a wiki, here's your accordion ;-) If I'd had lotsa sources this wouldn't be a stub. I do think there is a "TCM" that is a Westernised foreign-branded bundle o' crap. The history of the term would be interesting, if you or anyone has a source - David Gerard (talk) 12:06, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, for the actual Chinese version, I have a few sources on hand, and I can find more. The ideas behind Chinese medicine are far more complex and interesting than our good friends in the New Age movement seem to think.

If only they actually worked... - Gameboy (talk) 17:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Endangered animals

Would this be a good place to talk about all the animals (esp the White Rhino, but hundreds of others) that are being hunted to extinction due to the TCm idea that they will help old chinese men keep their willies up? I think we need such an article/topic, but not sure where to put it.--En attendant Godot 21:22, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, 2-year-old post. I have satisfied your demand, I hope.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 19:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

This "article" seem to suggest that TCM alone is responsible for the extinction of endangered species. This is clearly false. The species mentioned here became at least as endangered or extinct because some privileged white guys went on a few "fun safaris" during the colonial era. As a matter of fact, those same privileged white folks still seem to enjoy the same fun today: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/us/walter-palmer-cecil-the-lion.html

FYI, rhino horn has never been used for "sexual potency" in TCM. It was used for treating high fever and is now always substituted with water buffalo horn (that is collected without incurring any harm to the animal). Please, get your facts right. ^{— Unsigned, by: 2403:6200:8856:1fe3:c0a0:c86a:700:e31b / talk 14:48, 8 July 2019}

Eye of newt and tongue of dog

Are these TCM remedies? It'd be hilarious if they were.. I recall some 19th century observer comparing TCM to the sort of witchcraft found in Shakespeare--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 00:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

In the Holy Farmer's Classic of Roots and Herbs dog penis. That's very early & today used as part of Three Whip Essence. I don't know about newts.Wigitsune (talk) 05:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

History

There should be something about Mao's role in creating TCM.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 19:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

This article so biased

The writer seems to not be aware of fairly basic information about Chinese medicine, like its empirical roots. Instead, the focus is on extreme examples are not reflective of Traditional Chinese Medicine as a whole. ^{— Unsigned, by: 50.131.201.120 / talk 07:02, 25 November 2013}

And your evidence as to its effectiveness and your proof that there are better examples? Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 07:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I will only address the first point for now. Although the collection of evidence in the past has not been up to the standards of modern science, the categorization of the ingredients are primarily based on experimental notions of what happens to people when ingested. The vocabulary is often taken too literally when viewed by naive critics; when someone has "excess fire", it is not the case that they are literally burning; rather, it is a description of the cluster of symptoms associated with "+fire". For example, the broad "fire" cluster of symptoms consists of swollen epithelial tissues in the nose and mouth, slightly increased body temperature, as well as an increased propensity to bleed in the nose; these are symptoms that empirically co-occur in Chinese people, in whom the evidence was originally gathered. Every food and herb has a number of flags indicating their effects, as expressed in this vocabulary of symptom clusters. Excessive consumption of certain foods have a tendency to lead to symptoms as described by certain clusters. The system is empirical and subjects to updates; for example, chocolate was introduce to China from the West; by observing people after they ingest excess amounts of chocoloate, the chinese medicine community determined that empirically, excess chocolate consumption leads to "+fire".

As for the second point, the primary contributors of this article suffers from observation bias. Most of Chinese medicine is fairly benign, and relies little on scarce resources, like animal body parts. Most likely, the primary contributors receive their information from tabloids and activists who present only the most extreme of evidences to support their points. Of course, this is not a defense, in absolute terms, of the cruelty towards animals that do occur; however, it should be made clear that, in a relative sense, this is not the primary characteristic of Traditional Chinese Medicine. ^{— Unsigned, by: 50.131.201.120 / talk 0:37, 26 November 2013}

So basically you used anecdotal evidence to come to the conclusion that chocolate promotes "fire". Right. And this proves TCM is effective how?--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 01:48, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

This is not a discussion about its effectiveness, which is a separate topic. I am merely stating the fact that it is EMPIRICAL; this is important, and not mentioned in the main article. Also, it is not an anecdote -- I am EXPLAINING something new to you -- please keep an open mind, as there is no "story". I am explaining a new system of describing the effects of various foods on one's body; I make no claims about effectiveness.^{— Unsigned, by: 50.131.201.120 / talk 02:34, 26 November 2013}

So instead of explaining it to us, why not add a section called "the foundations of TCM" or some such.Godot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 03:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't sound very empirical. How can we measure this "+fire"? ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 09:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

"Most of Chinese medicine is fairly benign, and relies little on scarce resources, like animal body parts. Most likely, the primary contributors receive their information from tabloids and activists who present only the most extreme of evidences to support their points. Of course, this is not a defense, in absolute terms, of the cruelty towards animals that do occur; however, it should be made clear that, in a relative sense, this is not the primary characteristic of Traditional Chinese Medicine."

But does that actually matter? It's well established fact that the very recent rise in the practice of TCM is the single largest contributor to the wiping out of, for example, the rhino, even though rhino horn has been 100% proven to do jack shit for healing. Granted, TCM itself doesn't do much for actual healing, but let's focus on rhino horn. Demand from China and Vietnam has skyrocketed in the last 20 years, bringing the rhino population down over 90%. To me, that is proof that TCM is far more dangerous than you are attempting to lead us to believe. Who cares if it's not the "primary" characteristic? That it's a characteristic at all proves the inherent dangerous nonsense that is traditional Chinese medicine. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 10:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Bile Harvesting anyone? --Revolverman (talk) 12:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

"This article so biased" = "This article is so SPOV." So? Wigitsune (talk) 05:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Bias against Bear Bile

Shame on you Ratwiki, for denying the obvious benefits of bear bile! You just haven't been using it right! The proper way to obtain the healing effects of bear bile is to pass through a bear's digestive system. Bears are 100% natural, and as the bear massages you with its mouth, the healing process begins. Each piece of you it coated in all natural stomach juice, which is known to destroy any and all viruses and bacteria you may have. In a process that lasts several hours, the bear will drop you off in the woods. It's also an effective weight loss method. CorruptUser (talk) 01:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

The bear also knows all of your acupuncture meridians and accurately taps them with its teeth. Bongolian (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Recent Nobel in Medicine?

A lot of quacks are trying to trump up the recent Nobel prize for medicine to being an achievement of TCM. Can we get a blurb on that? My only source is the Skeptics Guide to the Universe, but I'm sure there's more reliable sources documenting the stupidity. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 19:25, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

The Nobel was for the development of the chemical artemisinin, which was extracted from Artemisia annua used in TCM. But artemisinin is also extractable from A. absinthium, which is used in Western herbal medicine. I updated the wormwood section in List of medicinal plants for the Nobel recently. Bongolian (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

While this particular plant may contain a compound proven to be effective for the traditionally indicated disease, many others do not. It's cherry-picking.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 01:12, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

And while artemisinin may have a good benefit-risk ratio for some diseases, that is not to say that wormwood does. There remain questions about neurotoxicity of Artemisia species even though commercially produced absinthe was shown to not have significant amounts of thujone.[1] Bongolian (talk) 01:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Article expansion idea

or this could be its own article but here it goes; how about adding the legal status of TCM by state including scope of practice.--Rationalzombie94 (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

feel free to get researching and writing it up! (There might be a few suitable cribs in Wikipedia, for example.) - David Gerard (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)