By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: What do Chinese think of Western homeopathic medicine?
12 years 11 weeks ago in Health & Safety - China
To be able to think they would have to know what homeopatic medicine really is, and I have serious doubts that many here would.
Now, to me, when it comes to infection and trauma, homeopathy can excell in many respects compared to conventional medicine, although there are many things that conventional medicine can provide that homeoapthy can not of course. Homeopathy can stop hemorraghe. My first choice for fighting an infection is ALWAYS homeopathy. Homeopathy can stop serious allergic reaction dead in its tracks. My first choice for pain relief is homoepathy. My first choice for rapid and accelerated repair of broken bones and laceration is homeoapthy after the surgeon has done his good work. Conventional medicine offers little to nothing in that regard.
TCM cures many diseases also, and like homeopathy it is done though elimination of pathogens and assisting the vital force to elevate and charge the system, but the work is more time consuming, over a longer period of time generally. The most skilled are found in the orient of course. Training in the US has not been as it should be but is likely getting better over time. Although I know of several master homeoapths I know of no master TMC provider.... I'm sure there has to be a few around. I never pursued it because I find homeopathy more cost effective.
Homeopathy can cure the most serious of diseases, including cancer and diabetes, arthritis, lupus and so many more.... according to some.
These two systems of medicine do not cross over, they are not combined. So, both TCM and homepathy use plants. They just use different plants to treat the same conditions.
Does TCM (traditional Chinese medicine) treat more serious conditions? Whereas homepathy treats just minor diseases?
Have the TCM people learned and used anything from the homeopathy people? And have the homeopathy people learned and used anything from the TCM people? They are completely different. Homeopathy uses plants extracts or poisons that are highly, highly diluted to the point where in many cases, the actual material is not even present. Although it sounds like a load of crap, double blind studies have shown effectiveness.
TCM uses herbs, accupuncture, balancing the diet and martial arts such as Tai Chi. TCM is highly effective if you do it right. Also, the big difference between TCM and western medicine is TCM highly values herbs/tonics that take time to work, they work slowly and have few side effects, where as western medicine uses powerful chemicals with loads of side effects.
If you get hurt in an accident or have a nasty bacterial infection; western medicine works, but if you have a degenerative disease, auto immune conditions, or want to basically improve your health, use TCM. Western medicine fails with these big time.
Also, TCM can actually reverse conditions where as western med just controls symptoms.
Wow, nice write-up Happy!!!
I'll just add, yes, there has been some investigation in combining TCM and homoeopathy. When I was doing my acupuncture training, I was training alongside herbalists, naturopaths, homoeopaths, etc, and since we were having lunch together frequently, some were of course interested in the other, and some research was being looked at.
I'll also just say, TCM is more about getting a person's energies back into balance - with the hypothetical possibility of longeviity. Which is why you may hear 'ridiculous' diagnoses in China, and treatments, but they're designed to help a person get back to balance long term... and the problem is a problem that has come about due to long term issues. If we were perfectly in balance and in perfect health, we wouldn't get sick, and infections wouldn't negatively affect us much!
Here we go again with people talking about witch-doctor magic.
Homeopathy, contrary to any websites that offer "proof", has been shown to be no more effective than placebos in actual scientific research. In fact, most homeopathic "medicines" are nothing but alcohol and water. The ass-clown proponents of this stuff bring up all these great and wonderful ideas like "water has a memory, so it doesn't matter if there anren't even traces of the original plants inside, the water REMEMBERS and that's how the drug works!" ( http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Homeop... )
Pure, unadulterated HOKUM. Same with most TCM.
People don't get sick because some magical energy is out of balance. There are these things that medical science has discovered called "germs" and "viruses" and "bacteria" that cause a lot of illnesses. They even found out that some illnesses are "genetic" and controlled by "DNA".
Amazingly, even if there WAS a magic energy, these viruses and things evolve over time to become more effective at invading a host. That's what they do. Even if you were to take an entire city of people who religiously practice TCM or homeopathy, and could be considered to be "in perfect balance", see what happens if you drop a little small pox or bubonic plague in there. People would get sick and people would die.
Now, if ANYWHERE there was evidence that somewhere, somehow, TCM or homeopathy medications could produce viral and bacterial antibodies WITHOUT INTRODUCTION OF A VACCINE (which is a tamed down version of said infection introduced into the body so it can make it's own antibodies), I might be willing to believe some of it's claims. But, since it doesn't do that, how are these types of "medicine" any different than getting exercise and having a healthy, balanced diet? I agree that a human body, not running at optimal performance (lack of proper nutrition, poor exercise and diet, stress and lack of sleep, etc.) will weaken the body. But it doesn't get "sick" because of a magic energy flowing the wrong way. It's just not able to combat the invading entities and gets overpowered until it can produce it's own method to fight them off.
It's basic modern medical science. I don't understand how in this day and age people still can believe in these concepts.
Proof and point: TCM and homeopathy have been around for a REALLY long time. Considering that, for example, in the 1800s the average lifespan in China was 35, I'm leaning towards TCM not being as effective as people want to say. Even today, China is ranked 94th in the world for life-span. 2000 years of "advanced TCM knowledge" and 94th.
Lifespans have increased because of modern medicine and knowledge of anatomy, dietary needs, and the need for cleanliness and sanitation. Not magic pills - it's understanding and science.
Now, as a disclaimer, if it works for you, more power to you.
Shining_brow:
"Now, if ANYWHERE there was evidence that somewhere, somehow, TCM or homeopathy medications ...
Actually, no, you wouldn't! You've already proved you wouldn't with your opening statement. Come back to me with an OPEN mind on the subject, and we could have a really good intelligent discussion.
AND should any evidence be found that correlates the use of 'alternative' medicines and an increase in (insert specific health benefit), you'll STILL try and justify it in terms of western science and medicine...
(FTR, I'm not saying that all the concepts used are true and accurate, but at this moment in time, they are still useful for assessing treatment protocols)
MrTibbles:
The word you mentioned was "evidence". That's my problem. There is none. In China, you will find a lot of people who swear that eating a tiger penis will give you a powerful erection. There is no proof of this. No medical evidence to show that eating tiger penis has any benefits other than being "food". Prove to me that water and alcohol can "remember" what was in it after there are no traces left chemically and then I'll say "wow! that's cool!". But I find that highly unlikely. I have an open mind, but in no way does that mean I will throw away actual research and evidence in favor of fairy tales. Again, research has shown that a majority of homeopathic medications are no more effective than a placebo. That means if you test people and they THINK the medicine is doing something it skews the results. The only "evidence" for homeopathic medications is people who believe they work. I don't need to open my mind further to understand this or have a conversation about it. It's western tiger penis. If people believe it works, then maybe they'll see some results. But it has nothing to do with actual physical compounds or even science.
Shining_brow:
Firstly, you're asking for 2 different things... in one sentence (your opening stance that I C&P'd), you asked for ''evidence"... then, in following sentences, you're asking for 'proof'... which one do you want?? No, it's not pedantic... because so many people think the same way you do... they seek 'proof', but choose to ignore 'evidence'... but you won't ever get any proof, until people accept the evidence and then start honestly attempting to find proof! (ie, "you can't 'prove' it, so we'll ignore any and all forms of evidence, and just call it all baloney". Oddly, those in the scientific community tend not to use that absurd logic for their own vested interests....).
Now, please don't get me wrong. I am not stupid enough to believe every single little claim that comes along... nor even claims that go back for 5000 years and are well known throughout a particular culture (eg, tiger penis). There's a lot of money involved in keeping people healthy (and, even more so, virile!), and while money is more important than health, then it's always subject to suspicion... same with the pharmaceuticals industry. (and, not really relevant, but since you seem to be so gung-ho about it, how 'research' had disproved the harmful side-effects of tobacco smoking? Sorry, I'm not so trusting of all research carried out, nor the apparent results of it).
(EDIT: Gah! I wrote more, but it's all gone :( )
MrTibbles:
Evidence leads to proof. There is no evidence, other than people saying "it works" (re: tiger penis) to lead me to believe otherwise. So, if anyone can prove to me, by providing ACTUAL evidence, that these "medicines" actually do something and live up to their claimed benefits OTHER than a true believer who says "it works!" then I'd be more inclined to have a serious look at these things. As for the research stuff, there is a huge difference between legitimate clinical studies and "research" carried out by corporations looking to improve their bottom line. If Phillip Morris puts out a research paper saying that tobacco is harmless, I am not likely to believe it, but if a university does a 20 year study and makes the same conclusion (and they're not receiving money from Phillip Morris...) I would tend to believe the research. I've talked to many true believers in homeopathy and TCM and they absolutely refuse to accept actual evidence against their beliefs. Their only defense is "I've seen it/experienced it working with my own eyes!". Well, that's great. Let's get 100 people together with the same illness and treat them with the medicine and see the results. When they come back the same as giving people sugar pills, it's a safe bet to say that these "medicines" have no value other than the psychological perceived value patients THINK they have. Sure, some research can be falsified, but more often than not, it's pretty accurate because scientists, doctors, and researchers want to excel in their fields and making crap up doesn't aid that. Homeopathy is a business in the west, just like any other but people defend it because they think it's natural or magical or whatever. I get more upset by those companies than I do with big pharma, because at least big pharma MUST report findings and make them public. The snake oil salesmen don't have to publish reports. They just need to list ingredients. They sell bark and twigs to people that believe they are getting sound medical attention but they're really getting bark and twigs.
Shining_brow:
"Evidence leads to proof"... well, yes and no. You can't have proof without evidence, but certainly you can have the opposite - and it WAS evidence you sought... NOT proof!
Part of what didn't go through last time is that because some forms of alternative medicine have as their basis of understanding that the human isn't just meat and bones, you have to investigate it the same way... merely looking at the physical compounds won't be enough. Similarly, just looking at a western disease won't be enough to determine effectiveness of a remedy.
Let me use my personal knowledge - TCM (acupuncture). In the west, if you have a headache, you take one of a few different types of medicine... because in the west, a headache is a headache... or is it? Is a headache from a normal cold or flu the same as a headache from a growth? Or a tension headache? Or a migraine? Or a severe blow to the head?? There are different treatment protocols, and the way you treat one type of headache is completely different to how you would (or should) treat a different one (other than using painkillers). Giving Sudafed for a tumourous growth isn't going to do a lot... so, when Sudafed was researched for it's headache relieving properties, did they include all the people who had tumours?? Does Ibuprofen work ALL the time??
Similarly, in TCM, there can be many different causes for a headache. Kidney Yin Xu, Heart Fire Blazing, Liver Fire Rising, Wind Cold attack, Wind Heat attack, Phlegm, Damp Heat, Stomach Yang Xu, Gall Bladder Fire, etc etc etc... Each of these manifest differently - from extremely sharp and stabbing, to dull and moving, throbbing, pulsing, achey, mild, different locations. If you treat a Fire attack with a Yin deficiency protocol, you'll make the headache worse!
So, if you really want to research TCM (acupuncture) you NEED to take all of that into account - and NOT just take 100 random people off the street and see what happens. TCM is NOT western medicine.
You can't just automatically apply western terms and research protocols to determine effectiveness. They don't map perfectly.
Now, take 100 headache sufferers who are diagnosed as having Liver Fire Rising, give them a treatment protocol based on that - THEN see what the research finds! (AND, for all you who might argue diferrently, you can actually use SIGNS, not just symptoms for your data.. there will be correlating changes in other ways - the PULSE and TONGUE being perfect examples!)
There are ways to do effective research, but that needs to be researched first!
They probably don't know it exists, but I bet some would just say it's a copy of TCM, or that it's not as good.
This video is worth watching before investing in any homeopathy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN6U6cpGzss&feature=share&list=FLDzBre0X3...
The only link I see between homeopathy and TCM is the lack of scientific evidence for both of them.
