What do you think about chinese medicine?

What do you think about chinese medicine?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=zrv78nG9R04
skeptoid.com/episodes/4259
skeptoid.com/episodes/4431
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Finngolians trying to find out about his roots.

Some shit surprisingly works. Tiger penis memes aside. You're probably gonna get better from a fever or a cold faster with Chinese medicine than Western medicine. Remember if they've used it for a thousand years, it's bound to work a bit.

Acupuncture /pressure is legit.

it works which is why they keep using it with western medicine

>medicine
kek

I have serious doubts that rhinoceros horn makes your pecker stay hard

This. Whenever you're sick just get a rock and put in your mouth so you don't grind your teeth from the head-ache or weakness.

For low energy drink your own urine, if you find it disgusting, use the feeling to get you driving

eventually you'll get better

Big fan! But, only when it is made in the West and only includes treatments that are recognized by mainstream western medicine.

The ingredients, some of them come from wild animals.
They are putting so many animals on the endangered species list.

Good way of wasting the discovery of black powder

ultimately it's chemistry, they figured out a way to non scientifically measure the dosage and get it right. keep in mind that the reason why it works and it's so mysterious is because of materials used and the way it's prepared. it's no different than pressing a bunch of chemicals into a pill and have you swallow it, problem is with western medicine it's TOO direct into your system. your body is not meant to take in synthetic things so people have crazy reactions and even side effects. with chinese medicine it's more holistic and easier on your body because they are all natural ingredients that can be broken down.
dont get me wrong, if i have cancer im gonna get chemo, but a common cold id much prefer to have some tea and get it over with.

I think it is great. Most of us don't use tiger dicks or rhino horns or any of that shit. I use very few animal products with the exception of e jiao or lu rong.

t. Dr. of Chinese medicine.

The angst this causes snowflakes is BY FAR the best thing about it, DESU.

MD here. There's plenty of validity to Eastern medicine. Does it make it the most efficacious? Hell no. But couple the placebo effect to the underlying scientific principles of many of these remedies, and you get a highly effective treatment method. For example, they may not know the root they're chewing just contains a COX inhibitor or acetaminophen, but they know it works, and feeling that it works amplifies its benefit.

Actually,
It is costing us our tourism.
Who would want to go to a game reserve where there are no white rhinos?

It isn't just that it is easier to take in. Some herbs have synergistic effects. Others have elements that buffer the active ingredient. For example, herba ephedra was used to make the prescription drug ephedra. The herb does not cause the problems that the concentrated prescription med does.

Also, yes go to MD for cancer. Everything has its place and for immediate or drastic interventions, western med is the best.

Herbal Ephedra was actually shown to be poorly efficacious in randomized studies. Most "alternatives" are worthless. (Black Cohosh and St. Johns Wort are the only 2 with known efficacy). The rest like milk thistle, Q10 supplements, cumin, echinacia, etc. are pretty garbage at doing what they claim. A generic isolate is usually 100x better.

Look at interventions with low success rates for example back pain, depression, or certain reproductive disorders. Look at the common intervention, for example vertebral fusion or injections, and look at the Acu success rate in he peer reviewed literature.

The thing is, most of western/artificial medicine is based on molecules that can be found in natural products.

The disadvantage of taking these natural products instead of the industrial produced ones are that they also contain lots of other substances and you can never know the actual content amount of the substance you are looking for.

So yes it works, but industrial medicine is better.

thanks for the info. nature works in very mysterious ways that never leaves you out in the cold if you know where to look. i remember reading something about how if there's something poisoning that grows in nature, you can find an antidote growing not too far from it. not sure if it's pure bull but i do believe that nature worked in a way that makes the herbs synergize and work with the human body because we all live and walk this earth, nobody, nothing is excluded from nature as a separate entity.

Go on pubmed quickly and look up the actual efficacy. It's low. The compounding factors of selection bias for studies (they used little old ladies of asian descent to improve placebo effect) is a huge issue they were combating with recent, real, studies. In double-blind trials its efficacy is minimal.

Herba ephedra in conjunction with the other herbs from the classic formula is pretty effective for asthma. No herb is used by itself. Also, there is a drug made from, I believe artemisia annuae, treats malaria and is a primary ingredient in the modern drug.

Traditional medicine works.
Why else would they invest billions in jungle research here in Brazil?
The only antibiotics I use come from the jungle and they work very quickly.
Redpilled a couple of my friends/family members that had so called bacteria
and every single time they work, without side effects.

I have done 2 meta analysis for peer review, I am aware of the literature. Surely as an MD you know how to use selection criteria to find meaningful studies.

When you lump multiple drugs together you're cheating. Interactions with CYP450 enzymes is a huge deal and makes your studies disingenuous to assert results without isolation.

As for your malaria treatment, Doxy, mefloquin, and all the others are 1000x better for prophylactic and normal treatment.

Let's see your studies then. As of the last boards certification exam, the official stance of the US is what I stated.

is a scam

grinding up tiger penis to treat your limp dick doesnt work bub, shut the fuck up. chinese medicine is complete garbage and fake

3 dogs a day keep the doctor away......

youtube.com/watch?v=zrv78nG9R04

>When you lump multiple drugs together you're cheating. Interactions with CYP450 enzymes is a huge deal and makes your studies disingenuous to assert results without isolation.

No it isn't because that isn't how it works. The ingredients are used together because the combined effect is the desired effect. Refusing to study the medicine how it is actually used is why you get weird results. If I test antibiotics by giving 1 per week and concluding they don't work, would you see a problem with my methodology?

That's completely unfair to assert, bud. Antibiotics prove efficacy through assays and proof of mechanism of action. Dosages is more what you're trying to argue. Similarly, your assertion of synergistic drug protocols without individual efficacy of components is not verifiable. RIPE therapy for TB is synergistic. But each component is also individually efficacious. What you're asserting is essentially pouring assorted beakers together and claiming the new concoction works, no ascertainable regimen treatment.

I am also still waiting on your meta-analytical studies. I don't need your name, but a reference article / journal publication would be beneficial.

It's bullshit that is driving the destruction of valuable species through poaching and overfishing
Fuck the chinks and their fake medicine

caring about your enviorment and animals is probably one of the whitest things you can do, without going peta overboard

>chinese medicine is complete garbage and fake
Naw, it ranges from dangerous scam to very useful things, most medicine is like that. Some dentist's are great, some will do $2000 dollars worth of work you didn't need, the very (((worst))) will torture children.

ive lived in china, but keep telling me crushed up bugs and little boys piss cures my cold. the rise in black market western medicine is just coincidence right?

>Similarly, your assertion of synergistic drug protocols without individual efficacy of components is not verifiable
It could be, but a single plant or fungi can contain hundreds of compounds, so it could take thousands of experiments to figure out what components were modifying the results. Not really practical, it's more in the domain of science working with a single extracted compound. The human body is quite complex with many systems interacting, figuring out ALL the effects of even a single compound scientifically is similarly not practical. Science has limits, and it's limited when dealing with exquisitely complex systems.

No I am talking about using something the way it is intended to be used and the way it is actually used. If I study something in a different framework than how it is actually used, my results are meaningless. That is what I meant about the 1 per week example.

I take your point about the TB treatment, but the foundational thinking behind herbalism is different in that you are talking about isolated compounds within a substance and I am talking about a set of symptoms that appear together. There is a language of metaphors used in Chinese herbalism that ties functions together, that will not make sense outside of that framework. For example, let's say one herb "clears heat" and another herb augments another herb's ability to clear heat. The synergy is there, without the second ingredient being tied to resolving the underlying problem itself.
Do not think I believe in the metaphors themselves, because I don't. But they are extremely useful in using this type of medicine, because that is the framework under which it was developed. Surely there is some physiological explanation for what this synergy is, but there is also wisdom in the way it was originally developed.

I get what you're saying, but we can narrow things down far easier than you think. If I'm looking for something that acts on a tyrosine kinase, I'm not going to be looking at aquaporin channels for example. Similarly, if a drug acts on COX enzymes, there's no reason for me to look at surfactant production. Likewise, I don't care about the DNA polymerase subtypes of a penicillin producing bacteria. I look at the pathway for said penicllin production using radio-isotype labeling.

>but keep telling me crushed up bugs and little boys piss cures my cold
Most value in chinese medicine comes from useful herbs, which probably don't work well if they are grown in contaminated soil and water. I'm saying there are useful parts of old chinese medicine to be tested, not that it should be trusted without verification. China has gotten pretty toxic last I heard, I pretty much assume about any product from china is laced with toxic crap.

>Most value in chinese medicine comes from useful herbs
Really it is just that there are plants with great medicinal value growing all over, so there is some value in about every medical tradition. For heavens sake, they even know some useful stuff in African traditions. Hell, chimpanzees show signs of using herbal medicine.

I am not tying my identity to pol, sorry. There are plenty of studies out there. The herbal malaria research for example won the nobel prize for physiology and medicine in 2015.
From the wiki:
While most TCM herbs are boiled at high temperature that can damage the active ingredient in Artemisia annua,[27] one traditional source says that this herb is to be steeped in cold water;[28] knowing this, scientists found that a better extract was obtained by using a low-temperature ether-based extraction method. Purification processes were used to isolate the active molecule, and clinical trials showed the active ingredient to be an effective drug.[27]

They used a traditional source to find the most usable form. This is what I meant about looking at the traditional framework. Might not always be helpful, but sometimes it is.

You don't need to give me your name. Just a journal article....

I highly doubt you did 2 meta-analytical studies, both of which were peer-reviews, without a co-author / publication.

>Post something even peripherally related to your IRL identity on Sup Forums!

Pass.

I will say that both have been on acupuncture and not herbalism as I mostly work in ortho. If you look into any studies about acupuncture you will see the same phenomenon I was talking about with herbs though. When you use the framework of actual use (personalized point prescriptions etc) you will notice a better result. Any study with generalized point prescriptions will have weaker results, and using 1 point will have very weak results. That isn't how it is actually done.
The syndromes are metaphors, but very useful. I don't believe any of the spiritual stuff, but I do use that reasoning to get better results if that makes sense.

You asserted a peer-reviewed, meta-analytic study suggesting that the US Boards is incorrect. And now you can't provide it?... A study of that magnitude would be 5+ primaries and 20+ citation articles....

Ching chong chow.

Go read these, good analysis:

skeptoid.com/episodes/4259
skeptoid.com/episodes/4431

Plants are quite interesting for pharmacologically active ingredients. Funnily, many of those do target microtubules either directly or indirectly (that is why many of them may be effective against cancer). Seems to be a common strategy of plants in their defense against fungus.

No I didn't actually. I just told you that I am familiar with the literature as someone who has done meta analysis. You are the one claiming to speak for the US boards. What I saw was a similar level of efficacy or greater (with back pain at least) with the most common interventions, with none of the negative side effects.

I have seen people tracked down from a tiny reflection in the background of a photo on this site. Maybe I am paranoid, but fuck that shit. My comment was never meant to imply some sort of proof in my work anyway. I am stating that I have looked at the evidence. Have you?