Search the Community

I do have hopes that this thread will not turn into personal attacks and kindly ask that all keep civil as this IS an important topic. TAOism - Everything. Why Not World Medicine? My personal experience has led me to the concept of "World Medicine". Although some on here have not read my previous postings and apparently some think I practice "alternative medicine" (I was actually amazed to learn that some thought this as I have posted quite a bit on medical therapeutics) I actually do not like or agree with alternative medicine. Why? Alternative to what? That would depend on what culture one was brought up in and on what education level one has concerning medicines of the world. In the west, most think of the term "alternative" medicine to be against western medicine. And I do believe this to be true. In my career I have run across many practitioners of many forms of therapeutics and, IMO it is unfortunate for anyone not to have an open mind concerning therapeutics that work. Although western medicine does indeed have its problems, it is amazing for those things that it will address. So my personal viewpoint is that anyone totally against western medicine is simply not looking at the big picture. By the same token, those that close their minds to therapeutics utilized across the world are also missing the big picture. How about let us all form a system of medicine that encompasses "all that works". Wouldn't this be a grand concept? The closest I have personally seen to this concept is in the hospitals of China. Currently one does not see this as much if at all, but before the crackdown of about 13 years ago many hospitals had a western medicine department (many with Harvard trained MD's), a TCM department including acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine, a tui na department, and a medical qigong department. It was very interesting to see the patient sent to whichever department they needed to go through. Of course often this could be very broad, as the patient was sent through many of the departments, usually not just one. If a person was having a stroke they of course sent them to the acupuncture department - NOT. That would have been dumb; they were immediately sent to the western medicine department. On the other hand, if a person had neuro-muscular problems they were usually sent to Tui Na, medical qigong and acupuncture departments. This makes sense as these therapeutics excel with neuro muscular problems. I would like to point out that the Chinese herbal medicine departments had their own pharmacists. These folks were amazing as they had over 5,000 ingredients in the parmacopeia. The closest I have personally been involved with this concept was when I had the opportunity to work side by side with a western trained MD in my pain clinic. All sort of arguments can be made, some with merit and others through pure ignorance, about "proof" of what works. In western medicine, "proof" is established through chemical analysis leading to double blind studies then submittal of drugs to the FDA for approval. What many do not realize is that this process is rife with corruption and that the FDA is not the organization that actually goes through the drug company's data. These are independent reviewers who are subject to all sorts of corruption. I am not sure as I can't recall which major network did this (possibly NBC), but not too long ago they took all the data from one of the drugs that was previously approved and submitted the data under a fictitious drug company name for approval. And guess what? Even though HISTORY OF USE had found that particular drug to cause many fatal and near fatal problems with people and had indeed been taken off the market, it was approved with the reviewer finding no problems at all with the drug! So we have double blind studies as one process of "proof". History of use is the other. IMO history of use wins out every time. I totally support western medicine. But I personally would much rather take a proven drug than a newly developed one. Far too many of the newly developed drugs end up having problems, although some of them are amazing, and, if it was a life and death situation, I personally would not hesitate to take a newly developed drug. And this leads into what are mentioned above and are considered, here in the west, COMPLEMENTARY therapies. The Chinese people have proven the efficacy, through history of use, of therapies such as acupuncture, tui na, and medical qigong. Why no double blind studies? Actually there are but they are few and far between - no rich drug company to pay for such. And, to be fair, the Chinese people did not need western double blind studies for many of these therapies had been performed for quite some time. A valid question was asked on the other thread about how these therapies could be seen as not having conflict and I posted a link to a physician based organization, www.medicalacupuncture.org, that had resolved a part of this question. Unfortunately, a couple of people did not bother to look at the site and immediately talked sarcastically about them being an "alternative" medicine site. They absolutely are not such. It is a quite-large group of western trained physicians who add medical acupuncture to the services they offer. And they are all certified in acupuncture with very good training. I went through (unofficially) the training program. I have studied acupuncture in China and thought their program was very good. I have stated, though, that I wasn't a particular fan of acupuncture or TCM. But that is mostly due to the efficacy I found with medical qigong so there was no need for me personally to continue with needle acupuncture (I do Qigong-style acupuncture - no needle inserted). I have seen many people get results with acupuncture. I also personally take Chinese herbal medicines when needed - with excellent results. Tui Na? NOBODY who has ever had Tui Na doesn't like it. HA HA. At least I have never seen anyone that didn't like it. Tui Na encompasses the full extent of physical medicine, massage, manipulation, etc. Yep. Chinese Tui Na practitioners did manipulation WAY before the Osteopaths and WAY WAY before the Chiropractors. In China I saw great results with Tui Na and had the opportunity to study with the head doctor of the Chinese Olympic team as well as with other doctors. Here in the US it is fairly easy to find a Tui Na practitioner although their scope of practice will probably be limited to be much less than the training. Some massage therapy programs here in the USA have initiated Tui Na into the training. Medical Qigong? As I stated previously, once in China there were many medical qigong hospitals. Unfortunately, in the last decade or so these have diminished with most of them being shut down. Why? Falun Gong was the main culprit. The government had a reversal in their policy and now, when qigong is taught, it must be referred to as "scientific breathing exercise". The government has also mandated which exercises can be taught. Think "CONTROL" here. If people were continued to be taught spiritual freedom they were much more likely to be against strict control and therefore anti-government. Such a waste and such a shame that this has happened. Fortunately, many visited China and were taught prior to the last 13 or so years and the knowledge of medical qigong has multiplied big time over the last 15 years here in the west. For those that do not know, I ran a pain clinic utilizing medical qigong, qigong tui na (of a style mostly built into the Taoist medicine form), and Chinese Taoist medicine for right around 30 years before I retired to teach full time. We had outstanding results in the clinic with these amazing therapeutics. No need for anyone to argue about forms of medicine - I say lets use the world medicine concept, giving us CHOICE. I highly suggest those that do not understand these forms, as well as MANY others not mentioned, educate themselves about each forms efficacy and make intelligent choices - not choices based on bias or ignorance. As a footnote I will say I do like homeopathy and studied the British Institute of Homeopathy program. Unfortunately or fortunately as the case may be, it came down to the problem that, if I had of practiced it on the public, I would have been beyond my own license scope of practice. So I never practiced it. I encourage ALL practitioners of therapeutics not to go beyond their individual scope of practice. DANG, I can't believe I made that long of post. I hope it helps people broaden their understanding of these therapeutics as well as their own choices.