TCM discussion


#62

Sorry, I misread you. And as I told you yesterday, I’m sure that after many years of “practicing” these guys know TCM doesn’t do shit for the most of it. Last year I went to one of these TCM centers, almost like a temple with lots of nutters desperately looking for help, believers, and it was totally ridiculous. I went with a problem, the guy pushed here and there with his finger producing me a lot of pain, and said that I had a problem with a bone and that after rotating my foot a few times he magically had fixed it, but that I had to come back again for fully recovery. Needless to say I never went back. Well, so I’m sure this guy knows that what he’s doing and saying is totally bollocks and he’s lying to his “patients”. Otherwise he’s just mental.

Like this many other cases. Maybe some people really think that sticking some needles in a person cures something, and because people tend to believe what would makes them feel better, this feedback will make the practitioner believe his own bullshit. But overall this is a gigantic piece of shit and to be exposed to it with open eyes should make anybody realize how stupid it is.


#63

sure, but I’d always suspect of people using and selling them based on things like “qi”, “energy”, “chackras” and “heat” and other retarded concepts.


#64

If you want a scam, look at the odds offered in Taiwan Sports Betting parlors!


#65

Finally I found this thread. On the discussion about TCM being (partially) scam or not:

However, said Sina website, the procedures did not seem to work and her younger sister eventually convinced her to switch her course of treatment and said: “She was cheated by so many cheats that she’s only turned to chemo now.”


#66

You don’t know the difference in epistemological certainty between medicine and gender theories? Heaven help you.


#67

I think you can see my point if you try harder: both of them are bullshit based mainly on esoteric beliefs rather than on science and evidences. I wasn’t talking about standard medicine, but TCM, which is not different from other shamanism.


#68

That’s what I’m saying. You havent read the empirical studies on TCM.


#69

No, we are saying different things. you say someone has spent some time “studying” TCM with the aim of justifying it. Still better than what I’m pointing out, which is that TCM just follows bollocks theories, instead of being based on studies.


#70

No, that’s just their marketing gimmick.

There’s a phrase for it, coined by Richard Feynman: “cargo-cult science”. While science has been amazingly successful in figuring out how bodies work, what passes for science in the practice of Western medicine often isn’t. It’s more similar to the Chinese approach (“does this work?”) than most doctors would admit. And just as in Chinese medicine, they have no problem with using treatments that have been shown not to work - because if they admitted they were wrong too often, people would start losing faith in them.

In fact the authorities are keen not to use the word ‘science’ in relation to modern treatments. They say ‘evidence-based’ instead, which is not the same thing. Fortunately for them, the public can’t tell the difference. A good example would be the fashionable theories on obesity and heart disease, which is the most appalling mountain of bullshit I’ve ever had the misfortune to come across in a field that prides itself on being “scientific”.


#71

I posted earlier that we have no idea how much of conventional medicine works. At least there is a serious attempt to find out how.


#72

I really have no idea what they hell you’re saying. Probably a language barrier.

There have been studies on acupuncture done by western scientists.


#73

Those obesity studies were probably epidemiological not clinical trials. They probably should be long in that role and social sciences.


#74

There has never been a serious peer-reviewed attempt on any area of TCM.

Anyway, this thread is about beliefs. You may be right about acupuncture, but I find it highly unlikely. I’ll leave it at that.


#75

There were links to some of them on this thread.


#76

Actually there has. My sister worked with Edzard Ernst on a comprehensive study of “alternative medicine”. Unsurprisingly, a lot of it turned out to be bullshit. Apparently he’s not a very nice person, but he appears to have been basically honest. If something showed evidence of usefulness, he reported it accurately.

“Edzard Ernst, emeritus professor of complementary medicine at the University of Exeter, said that ‘the most fundamental problem is that TCM researchers use science not to test but to prove their assumptions. Strictly speaking, this amounts to an abuse of science. It introduces bias on all levels and to such a degree that it is often impossible to identify on the basis of the published research.”

Sounds about right to me. However the exact same thing is true of Western medicine, although admittedly to a less dysfunctional extent.


#77

Let’s go step by step so you can understand it:

“No, we are saying different things”
-> you said A, and I said B, A being different from B

“you say someone has spent some time “studying” TCM”
-> what you have said is that some people have taken TCM as the subject of their studies and tests, trying to figure out if there’s any TCM treatment that works and how. I added this bit though:

“with the aim of justifying it”
-> which means that I believe that they are biased. that’s my belief though

“Still better than what I’m pointing out”
-> this is the part that probably has confused you. I meant that what you said, A, is more positive or perhaps more optimistic than what I said (B).

“which is that TCM just follows bollocks theories, instead of being based on studies”

-> B is that TCM is not based on serious, scientific studies.


In short, even if you use science for studying something like TCM, that doesn’t mean at all that TCM is science, because TCM is NOT the result of science, but the result of applying bullshit premises, like qi and ying and yang.

Did you understand it now, or you prefer someone else to draw some diagrams?


#78

And yet national policies are based around them, with tragic results.


#79

Here is a metastudy. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1357513


#80

Forgive me, my qi must have been blocked.

An interesting test with acupuncture would be to have a control group with random needle insertion.


#81

They did do that in the study.