Do a search on:
Amazing Medicines the Drug Companies Don’t Want You to Discover
I worked for a major computer company for four years. The system worked on info hiding. It is the psychology of the culture not just one company. That is how our schools work. Why isn’t there a national recommended reading list? Would that make it too easy for too many people to learn too much?
the paranoid but researched, Dal Timgar
Becuase, you see- “t-cells” as opposed to the patient can’t be convinced by the “placebo effect”. TCM works to a great extent on the placebo effect- which indeed, for non- fatal diseases does make the patient “FEEL better” as opposed to actually “getting better”. Of course patients on TCM do often get better of their non-life-threatening conditions… because they’d get better anyway, TCM or no.
Sure, TCM does have some herbs that do work along normal “Western” (read= “scientific”) theories of medicine, and some of these have not been extensively studied yet, so there is room for worthwhile research into TCM. However, TCM is also the cause of many many endangered or rare animals & plants being killed for completely useless organs & such. Rhinos, Tigers, and such have all been bought near extinction by such sillyness. (Thank God for Viagra- since Viagra, (which really works) the demand for animal parts to increase mens “virility” has decreased.) In general, then, TCM cause more harm than it does good.
As to all of the whacko theories here about “Western medicine being only about the money”- there is some truth to that. But where do you think that $113K mentioned above went to? :dubious: TCM practitioners are in it for the money just as much as Western practitioners are- the big difference is that Western Medicine really works, and TCM works about as well as a sugar pill, some willow bark tea, and an echinichea pill does. Which is exactly and only what it is- placebos & some weak herbal meds.
Come on folks- we are here to FIGHT Ignorance, not spread it.
Susama- no thanks. Instead, I’ll just tear up some $20 bills, flush them down the toilet, take a few aspiring and a sugar pill, and I’ll have the same results as you without having to leave home.
Dal
So, based on your experience in the computer industry and a book written “the president of the International Academy of Holistic Medicine” has given you insights into the world of medicine unknown to us who actually work there for a living?
Before your next drive-by, would you care to take the time to address the comments I and others have made to your extremely superficial and under-informed posts?
ps. I took your advice and googled “amazing medicines yadda, yadda, yadda.” the top 10 were booksellers or reviews touting this fellows book, most of which offered the same blurb:
So, for me Chinese medicine is not within my understanding unless and until I have mastered the peculiar world of Chinese medicine concepts and principles, expounded in Chinese imagery language, which are not scientific as science is understood in the Western mind.
I’ve studied Traditional Chinese Medicine a bit, from books, and am not a medical practitioner, so have no clinical experience. I’ll weigh in as an interested student. Chinese medicine has a long history of empirical evidence and success, a great deal longer than the current pharmaceutical model. It’s hard to believe that a thousand years of treating human ailments wouldn’t have something to offer.
In trying to understand TCM, one hurdle, as the OP states, is to understand the language, and, of course, it’s a translation of the original writing. TCM uses a very different paradigm of the human body than Western medicine, with quite lyrical descriptions of physical ailments. In first reading, it seems like a bunch of hocus-pocus to a Western mind. Lots of talk about Five Element Energetics with simple names: Earth, Wood, Metal, Wind, Fire. What a bunch of simpletons! Like most endeavors, when you delve deeper, you see that it’s your ignorance that becomes apparent. I’ve learned that TCM is a very complex system, that focuses on the individual rather than only the symptoms. Two people can have a cold; but the treatment protocol can be quite different for each individual, depending on how the illness manifests, and personal constitutional differences. Remedies are specifically tailored to the individual. I think that Western medicine can learn a great deal from Chinese diagnostic technique and theory.
The statement that TCM has nothing to do with biochemistry is misguided. It uses medicinal herbs (note: TCM has nothing to do with homeopathy, they use herbs in a whole form) to effect a change in human beings; that’d be a biochemical reaction. Whoever wrote that wishes for a lot more mystical folderol than TCM deserves.
What is most interesting to me about Asian, and Ayurvedic (Traditional Indian) medicine, is that they combine a variety of herbs according to the individual patient. It’s not just one chemical for everyone. What I see happening in the future of world medicine, is that China, lurching into Western scientific training with the same sharp minds that have chronicled an incredibly complex pharmacopeia for a thousand years, will use Western analysis to further prove exactly why those herbs work so well. We’ve got a whole lot to learn.
Truth,
I understand your point and it has some validity. My quibble with it is that Western medicine is not scientific because it uses biochemistry as its model, it is scientific because it makes testable predictions which happen to use biochemistry (and other discplines) as its paradigm. I do not understand the paradigm of TCM and I am more than a little skeptical of its paradigm. BUT if it makes testable predictions correctly, if it works, then I am willing to accept it as good medicine. To the extent that any complementary system attempts to exclude itself from the burden of proof for efficacy and safety I am convinced that it is a potential danger. I have an open but skeptical mind.
BTW, physicians in China generally use the Western medicine model. The big problem there is over use. A huge problem with inapprpiate antibiotic use, especially in the injectable form with incompletely sterilized needles.
DSeid, I hear ya, and agree. Though TCM has a different paradigm,or, approach, I think the effect of herbal remedies on the human body can always be tested in a scientific manner. The problem is, with our system, is that testing is quite expensive, and the patentability of natural substances:ie; the TCM pharmacopeia, is not profitable.
I do know that the plant medicines of China, India, and Tibet (an amazing medical system) are under intense scrutiny by pharmaceutical interests. I have friends doing that research, at a cellular level. But, it’s not pure research, it’s a drug mine, in order to synthesize and patent substances. It has nothing to do with integrating other systems of of medicine, or researching how a thousand years of experience might contribute to human health. I have yet to see a welcoming scientific approach in the US. Again, I think the Chinese will take the forefront on this research in the next decade.
I gotta add, though, if you do not understand it’s paradigm, how can you be skeptical of it?
elelle
Here’s why I can be skeptical of it.
On the one hand (“Western medicine”) you have literally mountains of empirical data explaining in painstaking detail what a molecule is and what it does. There are peer-reviewed journal articles which describe in great detail what the present theory is, disseminated for all to see and (if possible) poke holes in.
On the other hand(“TCM”), there are…testimonials and fuzzy-headed hand-waving.
In case you haven’t been present at the birth of a new drug, allow me to explain the process. I’ll dispense with all the biochemistry and just focus on the nitty-gritty.
Once something looks promising in the test tube, it is time to put it into rats and mice and stuff. Not to see if it works, mind you; just to make sure that it doesn’t immediately kill said rat. At this point, “Good Laboratory Practice” (GLP) steps in.
A chemist makes a large amount of drug. They document everything they do in this process. It must be written in blue or black ink. Red is a no-no, as is the use of a pencil. Why? because these colors show up best in a Xerox and a pencil can be erased. Similarly, any solution they prepare in this process must be labelled with permanent ink listing what it is, what it’s concentration is, who made it, and when it will expire. If you make a typo, you must draw a single line throught the mistake, write the correct version, initial and date said remarks and indicate exactly why you made the change. Why? Simple answer: GLP.
Once they make the molecule, they must purify it and characterize it. That is, they must demonstrate that they made the molecule they intended to.
How does one do this? Through a variety of chemical and instrumental tests. In the case of instrumental analyses, of course, you need to verify that the instrument is working properly, and that you are operating it in a manner shown to produce accurate and precise (the two terms are not interchangable btw) results.
How do you prove this? Easy. You develop a procedure to test the instrument, codify it in a protocol which is then reviewed and archived. You then write another protocol describing how people will be trained to use the instrument, laying out specific targets to demonstrate profficiency and maintain strict records of everyone’s training.
Okay, fine. you have made you molecule and run it through the tests. Does it pass? Only if it has been demonstrated to be 99.98% pure. Current practices dictate that anything besides your desired material which is present in excess of 0.02% be characterized. That means that you have to determine what it is and how it got there (as a guideline, pretty much the only thing you’ll ever experience with that kind of purity is granulated sugar and aluminum foil).
Ok. Let’s say that the drug substance is sufficiently pure. The next step is to shove it into a rat. Of course, you don’t just stuff it down their throats. The amount administered is too small to be able to handle conveniently. Typically, you make a solution of the drug and inject it, or mix in with some inert material and feed it to the animal. This is called “formulation”
Next hurdle. How do you know that the drug doesn’t decompose when you formulate it? How do you know the pure compound is stable at all? Once again, you write up a plan of how you’re going to verify this, and what tests you will do. The formulation is made and tested. Did I mention that you must also prove proper storage conditions? That is, say you plan on sticking it in a refrigerator for a week. Fine. Just be prepared to prove that the refrigerator was working properly. How? Simple. Devise a plan to monitor the refrigerator’s temperature, write it up, have it verified and traceable to an appropriate standard, and do it.
I think that you catch my drift. Let’s just say that I have covered about 1-2% of the work involved in proving a drugs safety, efficacy, or dose setting.
I should also point out that the Food and Drug Administration has every right to march into any lab involved in the manufacture of drugs and demand to see and inspect absolutely everything. At any time they want.
And they do it, too. I once had a new asshole chewed out of me. My crime? I developed an analytical method, wrote it up, verified that it worked and analyzed a large batch of clinical samples. However, I did this before a relevant protocol was counter-signed by our QA department. My science was impeccable, the results were excellent, but because I had contravened GLP, I could not report the results, had to re-do the work (at a cost of app $30,000) and technically could have gone to jail.
Can proponents of traditional Chinese medicine offer anything remotely similar to this kind of rigor? Call me an old stick-in-the-mud, but something either works, or it doesn’t. The “western paradigm” provides a universal yardstick for determining this. I would think that if TCM works according to a “different paradigm,” it’s champions would be champing at the bit to demonstrate its superiority.
Often one is most skeptical of what one doesn’t understand.* Maybe I don’t understand it because it is too complex for me, maybe because I haven’t given understanding it enough effort, maybe because it is pile of hooha. I highly supect the hooha hypothesis is correct. But I remain open minded to proof of its efficacy and for some interventions have had such standards met.
*Of course I’m often skeptical of what I do understand as well, because I am aware that such understanding is often only an illusion resulting from the fact that I don’t yet know enough to be really confused. 
Bizzwire, thanks for the eloquent explaination of the process for gaining absolute information on a chemical drug. I agree wholeheartedly that this is the way to go; good science should always be practiced. Unfortunately, the way things go in our world, it is rare that medicinal herbs are given the same good scrutiny. Not because they don’t work for human ailments, but because they can’t be patented. They are well-researched in other countries, but under the current US system, there is no financial recoup in undertaking the rigorous method needed. I can understand that, given our current system.
A great deal of the substance of the current herbal interest comes from better scientific technique that proves the medicinal activity of plants. The main hurdle now is that we have yet to learn the biochemical complexity of plants used traditionally for thousands of years. One plant may contain many compounds, that all contribute to ther action medicinally. I see this as an exciting challenge to medicine. This is a plant that people have found to be useful, over hundreds of years experience, so let’s figure out why that is.
The paradigm of Traditional Chinese Medicine is not one of biochemistry of plant remedies; it’s a different way of looking at the human body. The concept of energetics comes into play. TCM has a very detailed diagnostic technique, and individually oriented. You might have a Fever, but is it a Hot fever, or a Cold fever? In my study, I am amazed at the detail of symptoms of the individual patient that is the basis of TCM diagnosis. Remedies are then tailored to that individual.Herbal medicines have been indicated with qualities that are best used for the conditions in need.
.
I agree that all medicinal herbs should be scientifically evaluated, in order to best benefit human health. In my study, there is an immense wealth of knowledge that benefits everyone. Traditional Chinese Medicine is a tremendous well of knowledge , 10 times our American experience. We should start to explore that experience, with all stringent scientific means, before we are left in the dust
Elelle
How am I supposed to get all snarky if you’re going to present a sane, rational argument?
Plants? Hell, I have no truck with plants.
I guess when I hear the phrase “traditional Chinese medicine” I think of tiger’s paws, bear bile, tortoise plectron and rhinocerous horn. Somehow, that aspect of traditional Chinese medicine has been sidestepped. I suppose some sort of definition might be in order.
I think that a lot of its boosters, such as Susma (what ever happened to him/her, anyway?) are willing to turn a blind eye or to be less than totally critical when it comes to TCM because it’s, well, you know…Asian. And that’s like, so totally kewl…
But if you’re talking specifically about the potential of traditional ethnic medicine (doesn’t have to be Chinese, does it?), well, I’m right behind’ja on that. And, as you say, since it can’t be patented, no company is going to invest millions to define the efficacy and safety of something that anyone can then grow in their backyard. It’s not because “big pharma” is especially evil, it’s just that it would be corporate suicide.
I worked in the comupter department in a hospital. I got involved with one of the women in the accounting department. She talked about how they had to kick back bills to the doctors that they knew wouldn’t get by the doctors.
check the books:
THE SCREWING OF THE AVERAGE MAN by David Hapgood
THE POWER ELITE (don’t recall author)
THE DARK SIDE OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY by Hellen Ellerbe
The Ellerbe book talks about European doctors who used to bleed people have women who knew about herbs and atually helped people being accused of witchcraft and burned at the stake. The socialpsychology of the culture permeates all activities.
Almost all computer are von Neumann machines see how many computer books don’t mention it and try finding a good explanation of how they work. I can find people who have been n the computer industry for years and have never heard of them. The system works on information hiding and it affects medicine also.
I think it is part of the educational system training all of us to compete with each other for grades rather than pursuing knowledge out of curiosity.
I taught myself to ignore teachers in grammar school.
Dal Timgar
BTW Elelle, there actually is quite a bit of research already done on the safety and efficacy of herbal meds. I’ve got a wonderful reference on my shelf at the office. Lots of studies done. Name an herbal med and I can look it up and find out a fair bit about it. Licorice … great evidence that it works to relieve the pain of sore throats, little for ulcers, potential hypertension in excessive amounts (occurs when people drink a lot of licorice tea), ma haung … bad shit, ginkoa … potential interaction with clotting factors, do not take if on chronic aspirin of coumadin, may have some small effect on cognition but studies have been conflicting and inconclusive, feverfew … works well if used regularly for migraine prophylaxis with few side effects except for rebound headaches if weaned too fast, not any more effective that cycloheptadine or proprananol though … so on.
The research is done often. Despite the fact that there is no huge profit involved. There is in fact a fair amount of governmental research budget specifically earmarked just for this purpose.
And if you want to see what kind of research is geting done, or just want to get to some on-line resources to check out what is known about particular herbs then see below:
http://nccam.nih.gov/research/priorities/index.htm An NIH site devoted to complentary medicine research
http://www.iom.edu/project.asp?ID=4829 Institute of Medicine’s seperate site.
http://www.unmc.edu/library/consumer/altmed.html A list of links for studies about herbal meds
See, this is where I think that TCM goes from being somewhat useful to being less than credible. Lots of people seem to embrace alternative medicine because it has a more lovey-dovey “holistic” approach that “treats the individual, not the disease.” Well, I’ve found that the great majority of people don’t realize how biology actually works. They seem to think that there’s a huge variation in how different people’s body’s function. There can be individual differences in metabolic rate, allergies, etc. But BY AND LARGE, there are no signicant biochemical differences between different people.
You don’t need to tailor medicines to a “Hot” fever or a “Cold” fever - whatever that’s supposed to mean. If someone more severely sick then their temperature may be higher than another person, but if they have the same disease then the same medicine works equally well on both of them.
Definitely, as Truthseekeer said,
There may be some TCM rememedies that are actually efficacious. But you need to have proper studies conducted to determine what actually works. Not just someone saying “You all go and try it! You’ll see it works!” Anectodal evidence is absolutely useless for determining is a rememdy is actually effective.
Well, since this has boiled down to a cozy chat between Dseid, Elelle, and myself (with the occasional tourette-like outburst from Dal for leavening), all I can say is…erm…what Dseid said.
DSeid, thanks for the references; I’m aware of them, and well aware of research in medicinal herbs. For those interested in pursuing a good source of information on herbal medicine, including research on traditional forms of medicine: the publication of the Journal of the American Botanical Council, Herbalgram, is excellent. It also has an excellent website, www.herbalgram.org.
If your volume of reference is the German Commission E Monographs, DSeid, the ABC is the publisher of that fine work.
So, yes, there is plenty of ongoing research with medicinal herbs, but the US lags behind Germany and Japan in pure research. Traditional Chinese Medicine relies on a combination of herbal substances, with a long term empirically tested use.There is not much research in the US on these combination compounds. I have seen some Swiss research on Tibetan herbal compounds done in Switzerland and Israel, with efficacy substantiated. I feel that our analysis is just not accurate enough to determine why combinations of herbs work better that singular herbs. I have enough faith in scientific technique to know we will find out how to learn how those combinations work.
And, Bizzwire, I have a lot of truck with plants. In studying them, I am constantly amazed by their properties and strengths. As to their medicinal properties, here’s my basic thought: Plants have been around longer than humans, and their necessary defenses have arised to battle the various bacteria, fungi, insect predators, etc. present in the natural ecosystem. It is quite incredible to see how well these plant-synthesised substances work for the plants defense. Wouldn’t these substances merit study? They have thousands of years of use in defending against the yecchy biological crap of being. The main thing is, they are complex compounds, and we are just learning how their mechanism works.
Traditional medical systems have a long term use of plant medicine with good effect. In many cases, chemical medicines may be a better way to go. Under the current system of research in the US, though, we do not have a system that explores whole medicinal herbs, and certainly not herbs in combination, as used in TCM. I’m an optimist, and think that will come with time and foresight. That will result in a better medicine for all.
Sorry elelle
I may have mis-spoke. I was always under the impression that the term “I have no truck with “X”” was a slangy way of saying “I have no problem with “X”” …One of those things you thought you knew, but actualy didn’t. I just tried some on-line dictionaries, but couldn’t find a definition for this use of the word.
So, for the record, I am all for the study of plants and phytochemicals. As DSeid has said, these things do merit study. Many colleges and universities have pharmacognosy departments and degrees.
I hear ya, Bizzwire, didn’t understand your meaning. Live and learn, Always…