Medically speaking that is. There has been for eons a conflict between Eastern and Western medicine. I’d like to know where you all stand on the issue? Strictly Western, anatomical, specialized medicine that costs you out the yinyang? Strictly Eastern, naturalistic medicine that used the yin/yang as a basis? See how I worked that? A blend of the two?
There’s not much of a conflict between Western and Eastern medicine. They’re not identical, but traditionally, Western medicine was about balancing bodily humors, which isn’t all that different from traditional Eastern medicine. The big difference is between traditional medicine and modern medicine.
I have to defer to Dr. Qadgop here, since he taught me the vocabulary for the view I already had: evidence-based medicine. In other words, if powdered tamarind bark in scalded yak milk will effectively, demonstrably, and repeatably relieve and shorten a bout of influenza, then the fact that it’s a “natural treatment” and not the latest miracle drug from Glaxo Smith Kline is just 2FB. On the other hand, someone advancing the theory that massaging your foot will cure testicular cancer because they have related Kabbalistic sephiroth or chakras is likely not to echo.
The “Conflict” between “eastern” and “western” medicine hasn’t existed for “eons.” It’s largely a very recent invention, specifically created for the purpose of selling herbal remedies and such by creating a conflict and asking the consumer to show their worldliness by picking a side. It’s also a wild oversimplification; the world’s medicinal traditions can’t be clearly divided that way.
Largely speaking, though, isn’t ALL medicine “naturalistic” in the sense that almost all of it derives from nature one way or another?
Evidence-based here, too. And yes, if balancing your “energy flow” makes you feel better and happier and increases your quality-of-life, I’m all for it. But if something’s going majorly wrong with some vital organ or a colony of some hostile bacteria have taken residence therein, I’ll pick first such proposed remedies as have been successfully subjected to double-blind tests and clinical trials reported in peer-reviewed journals.
There seems to be a misconception that the Scientific Method is in some way “Western”. Needless to say, that’s a load of crap. Logic is universal.
I think the conflict is really between establsihed medical science (with the emphasis on “science”) and so-called “alternative” or “Eastern” medicine, some of which is based on traditional Chinese remedies or treatments, some of which is not. Whenever I hear the alleged “Western-Eastern” dichotomy expressed, it’s invariably by western devotees of alternative-medicine who have been taught by the con artists who practice that stuff that “western” medicine (code for the legitimate, research based medical industry and all its attendant safe guards and care in licensing practitioners, defining diagnoses and treatments, controlling the medical use of drugs, etc) are some sort of sinister cabal out to squelch the vastly superior and “threatening” use of “natural” medicine because it would destroy the vast, billon dollar empire that is the “western” medical industry.
The truth is that if you go to a hospital in Japan, you are going to get pretty much the same treatment as if you go to a hospital in Spokane. The scam “alternative medicine” industry contains folk remedies from both the east and west and can certainly not be called “Eastern” in the sense that any of it is actually what is practiced by medical doctors in China or Thailand.
There is medicine and there is fake medicine, and that’s true in every part of the world.
One thing I want to add is that contributions to real medical science come as much from the “East” as from the “West.” Asian medical doctors care as much about- and contribute as much towards- empirical, scientific research as western doctors do.
Now, though, western medicine is all about which chemicals will cure what disease.
This is a whoosh, right? Because everything is made up of chemicals, whether it’s a pill or a root…
But, again, it’s not a western/eastern division. Here’s a list of Japanese researchers who receive grant money from the NDIF for research on juvenile diabetes. All of these people are doing things like immunology and doing the same sort of work as researchers in Washington, DC or London.
http://www.ndif.org/rl-jap.html
Like other people have said, it’s not western v. eastern. It’s a modern, scientific approach to disease vs. a premodern, traditionalist, and religious approach.
Okay, to those that decry that there is no dichotomy, how often does your GP suggest you get accupuncture? This is legitimate medicine, based not on anatomy but on the flow of chi through the body. When was the last time you were referred to an Ayurvedic (Indian) doctor for treatment of the marmas? How many people even know what moxibustion is? I didn’t until two weeks ago. My point is that there are treatments that work that American and European doctors view as “primitive” and"shamanistic".
I’d link Japan as a special case. Remember they’ve been more and more western ever since that whole atom-bomb thing where we basically destroyed their way of life. It’s not the same in mainland Asia.
They are not dismissed because they are “primative” or “shamanistic.” They are dismissed because they are fucking bullshit.
There is no such fucking thing as fucking “chi.”
Um…I just had a brain fart and thought I was in the Pit. I apologize for the overly colorful adjectives above.
Let me rephrase that post to say that these things are not taken seriously because they have no scientific support.
The myth of “chi” is a perfect example. It’s supposed to be some sort of “energy” or “lifeforce” but when you get right down to it, it has no identifiable substance at all. You might as well be talking about “spirit.” Anything which purports to manipulate “chi” is nothing more than Chinese faith healing.
How many “mainland” Asian hospitals have you visited? I can assure that a hospital patient diagnosed with cancer in Thailand, Malaysia or South Korea (among others) receives appropriate evidence-based treatment such as chemotherapy, not manipulation of chi or other such nonsense.
How do you think Asian doctors tackled the SARS epidemic?
The thing, though, is that they are not all “dismissed.”
Maybe “chi” is not taken seriously because up until this point, people are not sure how to measure or study it. Perhaps that will change in the future. Perhaps no one will ever know. I don’t know, and neither do you. It wasn’t too long ago that people thought that it was utter bullsh*t, and even punishable by death, to think that the Earth revolved around the sun or that the Earth was not flat. It was just a belief or theory until the means were invented to prove otherwise.
Are you saying that everything that’s not “Western” science/medicine is unfounded? It’s all a big scam? You don’t believe in any herbal remedies of any kind? Or are you just against the practices that are rooted in ritual and religion?
I’m going to go out on a limb and assume that Dio agrees with Poly:
That’s pretty much it. Eastern" and “Western” has nothing to do with it. What matters is empirical method. Is it research based? Is there verifiable data that it works?
Some folk remedies can indeed be effective. Willow bark has aspirin in it. Some herbal remedies actually do have naturally occurring drugs in them. Other traditional treatments may work for other reasons. I am willing to research any and all of these remedies to see if there’s anything to them, but many of them are just out and out bullshit.
“Chi” is at the top of the bullshit list. I defy anyone to give me a scientific definition of “chi,” to tell me where it is in the body, what it’s made of, how it affects the body, etc. If you try to examine it in anything like a scientific manner, you’ll find you’re talking about nothing but a religious belief.
Well, here’s a paper authored by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences in Beijing about genetic links to esophageal cancer.