 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / July 2008How to deal with Acupuncture's acceptance within conventional medicine
My thanks to Richard for his invaluable help in composing this list. Please add any other methods I may have overlooked or you those you haven't yet employed. 1. Denial. Just pretend that it isn't happening 2. Write medical Schools and tell them that it is well known that Acupuncture does not work 3. Email medical Schools with "Cancel Acupuncture training" in the subject line 4. Email medical schools with "Cut Out Acupuncture, Occams Razor Attached" in the subject line 5. Ignore its close association with mainstream medicine and instead try to conflate it with Homeopathy or Reflexology (whatever that is). 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website 7. Accept that it is accepted but only because MD's can't pass a basic statistics class On Jun 11, 3:53 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > My thanks to Richard for his invaluable help in composing this list. > Please add any other methods I may have overlooked or you those you [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > 7. Accept that it is accepted but only because MD's can't pass a basic > statistics class You might want to add: 8. Intersperse the comments with the statement "when did I ever say", and "did you read" as though somehow, keeping track of every evasion, misrepresentation or omission that idiot spouts is vital to understanding his "argument". 9. End posts frequently with the some comment about not having a clue, as though everyone in the universe STILL has not caught up to the superiour (sic) intelligence authoring the post. Citizen Jimserac Citizen Jimserac > On Jun 11, 3:53 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > superiour (sic) intelligence > authoring the post. I await Richard's addendum to the list. I'm certain he won't disappoint. > Citizen Jimserac > > Citizen Jimserac- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - : My thanks to Richard for his invaluable help in composing this list. : Please add any other methods I may have overlooked or you those you : haven't yet employed. : : 1. Denial. Just pretend that it isn't happening You mean the way that you pretend that articles that present negative results of acupuncture studies were never published? : 2. Write medical Schools and tell them that it is well known that : Acupuncture does not work I have written to the dean of one medical school about his school's sponsoring a CME course in acupuncture. I do not recall posting the contents of that letter to usenet. : 3. Email medical Schools with "Cancel Acupuncture training" in the : subject line Whom do you know who has done that? : 4. Email medical schools with "Cut Out Acupuncture, Occams Razor : Attached" in the subject line Whom do you know who has done that? : 5. Ignore its close association with mainstream medicine and instead : try to conflate it with Homeopathy or Reflexology (whatever that is). I don't know anyone who has conflated acupuncture with either of them. That you are too dense to understand the arguments being made is not my problem, nor does it give you the right to make up your own versions of those arguments. : 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't : valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website I don't know of anyone who has made that argument. I *do* know of at least one person who has pointed out to you that the page one which the consensus statement appears specifically warns that it may be out of date, and of at least one person who has actually read the paper cited on current acupuncture web page (which is not the front page of the NCCAM website, as anyone who can use a web browser can easily verify) and found that its results are not nearly as significant as the press release would have the reader believe. I also know of at least one person who routinely cites that paper and yet refuses to read it (see #1 above). : 7. Accept that it is accepted but only because MD's can't pass a basic : statistics class I do not know of anyone who has made that argument. I do know of at least one person who has offered to discuss the statistical issues involved, which are not of the sort covered in a basic statistics class. And I know of at least two people who have refused to engage in that discussion (see #1 above). ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." > In article <10b3c905-0719-4f67-95a1-c830e431f...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > : My thanks to Richard for his invaluable help in composing this list. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You mean the way that you pretend that articles that present negative > results of acupuncture studies were never published? No, I'm referring to people who are or were in denial about Acupuncture's acceptance within mainstream medicine. Do try to read for comprehension, Richard. I'll help you through this one, its about you, Martin, and your ilk. > : 2. Write medical Schools and tell them that it is well known that > : Acupuncture does not work > > I have written to the dean of one medical school about his school's > sponsoring a CME course in acupuncture. I do not recall posting the > contents of that letter to usenet. I doubt that you will. I'm fairly certain your letter isn't going to have your desired result of terminating the program. You might as well go to the beach and tell the tide not to come in. > : 3. Email medical Schools with "Cancel Acupuncture training" in the > : subject line > > Whom do you know who has done that? Martin > : 4. Email medical schools with "Cut Out Acupuncture, Occams Razor > : Attached" in the subject line > > Whom do you know who has done that? John Doe. > : 5. Ignore its close association with mainstream medicine and instead > : try to conflate it with Homeopathy or Reflexology (whatever that is). > > I don't know anyone who has conflated acupuncture with either of them. Stop employing # 1 (Denial) and check the mirror. You've done that several times. That > you are too dense to understand the arguments being made is not my problem, > nor does it give you the right to make up your own versions of those arguments. Once again, you're in denial or lying. You've done this several times. You are the one who makes up your own version of my words. Yesterday, you said I defined Qi as homeostasis. Only you could be that wrong. > : 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't > : valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website > > I don't know of anyone who has made that argument. Well, it seems you really like #1 (Denial). You've made that argument and variations of that to discredit. I guess when it is pointed out, it looks as foolish to you as it does to the rest of MHA, even Jan Drew. I *do* know of at least > one person who has pointed out to you that the page one which the consensus > statement appears specifically warns that it may be out of date, and of at [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I do not know of anyone who has made that argument. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.breast-implant/msg/6fad598b4f25482d : 60% of US MD's say that Acupuncture is at least somewhat effective. What percentage of US MD's could pass an elementary course in statistics? I do know of at least > one person who has offered to discuss the statistical issues involved, which > are not of the sort covered in a basic statistics class. And I know of at > least two people who have refused to engage in that discussion (see #1 above). You need much guidance and personal growth before you're ready for that discussion. After all, it took nearly a year for you to be able to: A. Correctly articulate your own view about Qi & Meridians in regard to acupuncture's mechanism of action B. Accept the obvious fact that acupuncture is quite accepted within mainstream medicine C. Accept the fact that acupuncture acceptance is growing D. Accept the fact that MD's get training in and provide acupuncture at major medical schools and their affiliated hospitals You need to learn how to overcome your bias and disdain for acupuncture. To do that, you'll need much instruction and guidance in Critical Thinking. When you are able to apply those principles universally, then it might be possible to have a productive discussion on that topic. After all, you spent weeks arguing about how your definition of "standard" trumps the one used by medical schools, which you thought were accredited by the AMA. Yeah, that was a real productive discussion! When you're objectivity can overcome your fear & disdain of acupuncture, then, Grasshopper, you'll be ready. (Note to MHA readers: My post on Critical Thinking got lost. I'll have to rewrite it and hope to post it Friday or Sat) :> In article <10b3c905-0719-4f67-95a1-c830e431f...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: :> : 1. Denial. ?Just pretend that it isn't happening :> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : for comprehension, Richard. I'll help you through this one, its about : you, Martin, and your ilk. Thank you for proving my point. :> : 2. Write medical Schools and tell them that it is well known that :> : Acupuncture does not work :> I have written to the dean of one medical school about his school's :> sponsoring a CME course in acupuncture. ?I do not recall posting the :> contents of that letter to usenet. : I doubt that you will. I'm fairly certain your letter isn't going to : have your desired result of terminating the program. You might as : well go to the beach and tell the tide not to come in. You have no idea what my letter said or whether its desired result was terminating the program. So shall I add point #2 to your list of lies? :> : 3. Email medical Schools with "Cancel Acupuncture training" in the :> : subject line :> Whom do you know who has done that? : Martin :> : 4. Email medical schools with "Cut Out Acupuncture, Occams Razor :> : Attached" in the subject line :> Whom do you know who has done that? : John Doe. How do you know that these people sent those emails? Were you cc'd? :> : 5. Ignore its close association with mainstream medicine and instead :> : try to conflate it with Homeopathy or Reflexology (whatever that is). :> :> I don't know anyone who has conflated acupuncture with either of them. : Stop employing # 1 (Denial) and check the mirror. You've done that : several times. I have not conflated acupuncture with reflexology. I have pointed out -- correctly -- that *both* acupuncturists *and* reflexologists claim (THEY claim, not I) that their treatment is based on a theory that involves some kind of mysterious and ill-defined energy that travels more or less vertically along the body. I'm not conflating the two, or claiming that they are identical -- I am stating a *fact*, namely, that the *proponents* of the two therapies make remarkably similar claims about the "theoretical" basis for them. Since you are an expert in one, I have *asked* you to explain the differences, but since you are in denial about anything that might call into question the validity of acupuncture, you intentionally remain ignorant of reflexology. : ?That :> you are too dense to understand the arguments being made is not my problem, :> nor does it give you the right to make up your own versions of those :> arguments. : Once again, you're in denial or lying. You've done this several : times. You are the one who makes up your own version of my words. : Yesterday, you said I defined Qi as homeostasis. Only you could be : that wrong. In article <cdd73685-fe58-489a-9e40-7306c0292344@e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, you said "If it makes you feel better, use "homeostasis" instead of "balancing qi". That sure sounds like a definition of "Qi" as "homeostasis." Then again, you were the one who said that "heat is always Qi," demonstrating your fundamental ignorance of physics. :> : 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't :> : valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] :> reader believe. ?I also know of at least one person who routinely cites that :> paper and yet refuses to read it (see #1 above). Note that the part in which I detailed exactly what it was that I said, and the part in which I pointed out that Mr. Kingoff *still* hasn't read the study that he himself has touted, received no response (see #1 above). :> : 7. Accept that it is accepted but only because MD's can't pass a basic :> : statistics class :> I do not know of anyone who has made that argument. : http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.breast-implant/msg/6fad598b4f25482d You should learn either how to use tinyurl.com or how to refer to an article by its Message-ID. : : 60% of US MD's say that Acupuncture is at least somewhat effective. : : What percentage of US MD's could pass an elementary course in statistics? Note that the words that you quote of mine do not state that no MD can pass a basic statistics course. : ?I do know of at least :> one person who has offered to discuss the statistical issues involved, which :> are not of the sort covered in a basic statistics class. ?And I know of at :> least two people who have refused to engage in that discussion :> (see #1 above). : You need much guidance and personal growth before you're ready for : that discussion. You don't know a damn thing about statistics or about the problem to which I am referring. When Dr. Moran introduced you to the problem, you ignored him completely. See #1 above. : To do that, you'll need much instruction and guidance in : Critical Thinking. If you are so much better than I am at Critical Thinking: Have you read the original article that reported the results of the 2004 osteoarthritis study? Have you read any of the citations that I posted in February? Have you read either of the citations that I posted that present evidence that acupuncture is no more effective than a placebo in treating people addicted to smoking? Have you read the article that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not effective against constipation? Have you read the articles that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not an effective means for treating infertility? <crickets chirping> ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" > In article <397a71f9-905e-4489-9976-bd785f2c1...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > :> In article <10b3c905-0719-4f67-95a1-c830e431f...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > You have no idea what my letter said or whether its desired result was > terminating the program. So shall I add point #2 to your list of lies? Why don't you post it and prove me wrong? > :> : 3. Email medical Schools with "Cancel Acupuncture training" in the > :> : subject line [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > of the two therapies make remarkably similar claims about the "theoretical" > basis for them. TCM is mostly based on Yin & Yang, 5 Elements, Zang-Fu, 8 Principles, 3 Treasures, 4 Levels, 6 Divisions. Unless reflexology is based on some or most of those, you're comparison fails. Otherwise, you should learn a little about TCM before you make baseless comparisons. Since you are an expert in one, I have *asked* you to > explain the differences, but since you are in denial about anything that > might call into question the validity of acupuncture, you intentionally > remain ignorant of reflexology. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of alternative methods. I don't have time nor inclination to explore them all. I've come out in favor of a few and against a few. I don't recall having discussed reflexology much before you brought it up. It is like NASCAR to me, I just don't care. > : ?That > :> you are too dense to understand the arguments being made is not my problem, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > In article <cdd73685-fe58-489a-9e40-7306c0292...@e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > you said "If it makes you feel better, use "homeostasis" instead of "balancingqi". That sure sounds like a definition of "Qi" as "homeostasis." This is a perfect example of why you need help with critical thinking. If I had said that restoring fluids & electrolytes will help a dehydrated person return to homeostasis, you wouldn't have said that the definition of "homeostatis" is "fluids & electrolytes". But, since the topic is acupuncture, you've abandoned criticial thinking. Qi isn't homeostasis, otherwise, the mere presence of it would constitute homeostasis. That would imply that nobody would be out of homestasis unless they were totally devoid of Qi. That is what you're implying and you should be incapable of that level of stupidity. The TCM concept of balance, which refers to balanced Qi, Jing, & Shen, is roughly equivalent to the biomedical concept of homeostasis. The terms Jing & Shen are often left out as shorthand. In discussing TCM, you may use the phrase "restore homeostasis" instead of "balancing qi". Just try not to do so in a way that paints you as devoid of reading comprehension, incapable of reasoning by analogy, or being intellectually dishonest. If you can't do that, try not to be so obvious about it as I just might not notice. Then > again, you were the one who said that "heat is alwaysQi," demonstrating > your fundamental ignorance of physics. Here we are, discussing Qi and you don't even know that all heat is Qi. Yet, you think *I'm* being ignorant. Funny! Within the TCM paradigm, all heat is qi. All cold is qi. All wind is qi. I believe that is pretty much universal among all definitions of qi, my own included. You see, when I was in physics class, we didn't discuss qi or other TCM terms. In learning TCM, we briefly talked about the fact that the TCM paradigm is not physics. Then, we talked in great detail about what it actually is. > :> : 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't > :> : valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Note that the words that you quote of mine do not state that no MD can > pass a basic statistics course. No, you're just implying that if 60% of MDs believe acupuncture is somewhat effective, there must be a bunch of them that can't pass an elementary course in statistics. Or, did you mean to cast doubt on the statistical acumen of the MDs that don't believe it is effective? Hmmm? > : ?I do know of at least > :> one person who has offered to discuss the statistical issues involved, which [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You don't know a damn thing about statistics Au contraire! >or about the problem to which I am referring. I'm refering to the problem you have keeping your bias in check. Of course, you're still unwilling to take the first step and admit that you have a problem. You're no skeptic, you just assumed that acupuncture had to be well known not to work. You assumed wrongly. That's fine, you can choose to deny & submit to your prejudices. Just don't expect *anyone* here, with the possible exception of yourself, to believe that you aren't anti-acupuncture. Peter Bowditch is not an acupuncture proponent and of the few comments he's made on the topic was that you are against acupuncture. QED. > : To do that, you'll need much instruction and guidance in > : Critical Thinking. > > If you are so much better than I am at Critical Thinking: If I weren't, I'd just dismiss everything I don't understand out of fear that it might challenege my smugness. This process would go a lot faster if you'll try to be aware of your bias. Seriously, a major component of critical thinking is the ability to consider the possibility that you could be mistaken. That is merely one of the essential aspects of personal growth you'll have to achieve in order to apply critical thinking. :> : I doubt that you will. ?I'm fairly certain your letter isn't going to :> : have your desired result of terminating the program. ?You might as :> : well go to the beach and tell the tide not to come in. :> You have no idea what my letter said or whether its desired result was :> terminating the program. ?So shall I add point #2 to your list of lies? : Why don't you post it and prove me wrong? Because at this point I see no reason to do so. :> How do you know that these people sent those emails? ?Were you cc'd? Another question that didn't receive a response. CJ take note. :> I have not conflated acupuncture with reflexology. ?I have pointed out -- :> correctly -- that *both* acupuncturists *and* reflexologists claim (THEY [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] :> of the two therapies make remarkably similar claims about the "theoretical" :> basis for them. : TCM is mostly based on Yin & Yang, 5 Elements, Zang-Fu, 8 Principles, : 3 Treasures, 4 Levels, 6 Divisions. Unless reflexology is based on : some or most of those, you're comparison fails. Otherwise, you should : learn a little about TCM before you make baseless comparisons. I'm not talking about TCM, I am talking about acupuncture. Please do try to read for comprehension. Or would you rather that I started posting information about acupuncture from acupuncture-related web sites (including the CME that teaches a different form of acupuncture than the one you practice)? : ?Since you are an expert in one, I have *asked* you to :> explain the differences, but since you are in denial about anything that [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] : reflexology much before you brought it up. It is like NASCAR to me, I : just don't care. What is your basis for concluding that of all of the alternative methods available, the only one worth practicing is TCM? : What I am stating outright is that you have claimed that : The TCM concept of balance, which refers to balanced Qi, Jing, & Shen, : is roughly equivalent to the biomedical concept of homeostasis. Do you have any evidence that TCM can cure cancer? : Then :> again, you were the one who said that "heat is always Qi," demonstrating :> your fundamental ignorance of physics. : : Here we are, discussing Qi and you don't even know that all heat is Qi. : Yet, you think *I'm* being ignorant. I don't "think" that you are ignorant, I *know* that you are ignorant. "Heat" is a very well understood concept and can be explained in its entirety without any need for invoking "qi." : Within the TCM paradigm, all heat is qi. All cold is qi. All wind is : qi. I believe that is pretty much universal among all definitions of : qi, my own included. You see, when I was in physics class, we didn't : discuss qi or other TCM terms. Which should be a very good indication to you that the TCM paradigm is unnecessary at best, and useless at worst, for describing how the world works. : In learning TCM, we briefly talked : about the fact that the TCM paradigm is not physics. Then, we talked : in great detail about what it actually is. Moonshine, as far as I can tell. :> :> : 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't :> :> : valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] :> :> reader believe. ?I also know of at least one person who routinely cites :> :> that paper and yet refuses to read it (see #1 above). :> Note that the part in which I detailed exactly what it was that I said, :> and the part in which I pointed out that Mr. Kingoff *still* hasn't read :> the study that he himself has touted, received no response (see #1 above). And note that Mr. Kingoff *still* refuses to address this issue. Talk about being in denial. :> : : 60% of US MD's say that Acupuncture is at least somewhat effective. :> : [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] : elementary course in statistics. Or, did you mean to cast doubt on : the statistical acumen of the MDs that don't believe it is effective? I asked a question. Provide a response to the question and we can proceed from there. In retrospect, it occurs to me that there is an alternative interpretation of the original statement. Since we don't know in what context the MD's surveyed were asked about their opinions of the effectiveness of acupuncture, we don't know what "at least somewhat effective" means exactly. An example that comes to mind was a report that some large fraction of scientists surveyed believed that UFO's should be studied. It turned out that the question that was actually asked was "Do you believe that the UFO problem warrants study?" I believe it was Martin Gardner who pointed out that he would have answered "yes" to that question because he believed that the "UFO problem" was trying to understand why so many people believe that UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft. I can think of a way of asking the question of rating acupuncture's efficacy that *I* might answer "somewhat effective" even though I have repeatedly stated my opinion that the efficacy of acupuncture has yet to be proven. :> : You need much guidance and personal growth before you're ready for :> : that discussion. ? :> You don't know a damn thing about statistics : Au contraire! I seriously doubt that you even know the difference between an F-test and a t-test. But if I'm wrong and you understand statistics so well, why do you refuse even to acknowledge the problem? Why do you believe that accepting results that agree with your preconceived notions and ignoring ones that disagree with them is even remotely a statistically valid procedure (or, for that matter, the kind of thing that someone as expert in "critical thinking" as you claim to be would do)? :>or about the problem to which I am referring. ? : I'm refering to the problem you have keeping your bias in check. Of : course, you're still unwilling to take the first step and admit that : you have a problem. Since I have read papers that claim positive results for acupuncture, while you refuse even to acknowledge the existence of papers that claim negative results, it is not at all clear to me why anyone who is not delusional would think that I am the one who is biased. : That's fine, you can choose to deny & submit to your prejudices. Just : don't expect *anyone* here, with the possible exception of yourself, : to believe that you aren't anti-acupuncture. Peter Bowditch is not an : acupuncture proponent and of the few comments he's made on the topic : was that you are against acupuncture. QED. I get it -- the new version of critical thinking is to take a comment out of context and then to use it as the basis for an Argument from Authority. :> : To do that, you'll need much instruction and guidance in :> : Critical Thinking. ? :> If you are so much better than I am at Critical Thinking: : If I weren't, I'd just dismiss everything I don't understand out of : fear that it might challenege my smugness. But that is precisely what you do -- you refuse to *acknowledge* the existence of *any* evidence that might indicate that acupuncture is not effective beyond a placebo effect. Let's put it another way: I have stated what it would take for me to accept the efficacy of acupuncture (depending on what condition is being treated, the conditions might be slightly different, but I have suggested more than one experiment that could indicate the efficacy of acupuncture). Can you propose an experiment that *in principle* would be able to *disprove* the efficacy of acupuncture? Can you propose and experiment that *in principle* would be able to prove or disprove the existence of meridians? ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "I love people. But I don't suffer fools gladly." -- Deborah Lipstadt > In article <e58278d5-7fec-413b-95be-b1abdfd17...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > I'm not talking about TCM, I am talking about acupuncture. Please do try to read for comprehension. I’m a practitioner of TCM. Acupuncture is merely one facet thereof. There are many different methods of acupuncture as there are many different languages. To assume that all acupuncture has the same basis and methods would be like assuming all languages are the same. It would take a pretty strong bias not to realize that. To further stymie oneself by conflating all of them with reflexology (whatever that is) is contrary to the principles of critical thinking. Or would you rather that I started posting > information about acupuncture from acupuncture-related web sites (including > the CME that teaches a different form of acupuncture than the one you > practice)? Post whatever you want, Richard. You can do it, if you put your mind to it! > : ?Since you are an expert in one, I have *asked* you to > :> explain the differences, but since you are in denial about anything that [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > What is your basis for concluding that of all of the alternative methods > available, the only one worth practicing is TCM? Why do you assume that I believe TCM is the only alternative method worth practicing? By that “rationale” one would ask why you think that chemistry is the only science worth pursuing. It would be akin to an electrician being asked why he doesn’t feel plumbing is good enough. > : What I am stating outright is that you have claimed that > : The TCM concept of balance, which refers to balanced Qi, Jing, & Shen, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > "Heat" is a very well understood concept and can be explained in its > entirety without any need for invoking "qi." So, you want to talk about ignorance. Well, lets go back to your homeostasis example: > In article <cdd73685-fe58-489a-9e40-7306c0292...@e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > you said "If it makes you feel better, use "homeostasis" instead of "balancingqi". That sure sounds like a definition of "Qi" as "homeostasis." Why does that sound, to you, like a definition of of “Qi” as “homeostasis”? By what logic or method of critical thinking did you arrive at that conclusion? If I had said that restoring fluids & electrolytes will help a dehydrated person return to homeostasis, you wouldn't have said that the definition of "homeostatis" is "fluids & electrolytes". But, since the topic is acupuncture, you've abandoned criticial thinking. Qi isn't homeostasis, otherwise, the mere presence of it would constitute homeostasis. That would imply that nobody would be out of homestasis unless they were totally devoid of Qi. That is what you're implying and you should be incapable of that level of stupidity. > : Within the TCM paradigm, all heat is qi. All cold is qi. All wind is > : qi. I believe that is pretty much universal among all definitions of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > unnecessary at best, and useless at worst, for describing how the world > works. You don’t have enough awareness of the TCM paradigm to make any meaningful comments about it. All you can do is make silly comments about Qi = homeostasis. Maybe you ought to stick to pontificating about Star Trek, a subject you actually care about. > : In learning TCM, we briefly talked > : about the fact that the TCM paradigm is not physics. Then, we talked > : in great detail about what it actually is. > > Moonshine, as far as I can tell. Lay off the booze. > :> :> : 6. Make specious arguments that the NIH's consensus statement isn't > :> :> : valid because it isn't on the front page of the NCCAM website [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > I asked a question. Provide a response to the question and we can proceed > from there. The answer to your question is that 100%. You can’t get through the program without taking statistics. Its very important in science, Richard. Do try to keep up with the class. Speaking of class, here are some of the statistics and statistics based courses taken by MD’s at a prestigeous university that teaches MD’s to perform acupuncture. Only one of them is an elective. After all, what is well known about US medical schools curriculums is that all standard courses are required. http://www.medcatalog.harvard.edu/courselist.aspx?search=y AC511.0 Clinical Epidemiology and Population Health Directors: J. A. Finkelstein, S. R. Simon Credits: 0 CREDITS (Required) Offered: January Time: 01/03/2008 Place: HMS, TMEC Description: Clinical Epidemiology and Population Health (CEPH) combines teaching of core skills of clinical epidemiology (including biostatistics, study design, and critical reading) as they apply to the care of individuals ... HC703.0 Statistical Methods in Medical Research Directors: B. A. Rosner Credits: 2 CREDITS (Required) Offered: Fall. Time: 09/11/2007, TU, 3:00-5:30 pm Place: TMEC 426 Description: The course is a detailed study of statistical methods used in medical research. The objective is to familiarize medical students interested in research with current statistical techniques so they will ... HT190.0 Introduction to Biostatistics and Epidemiology Directors: R. A. Betensky, M. A. Hernan Prerequisites: Knowledge of calculus. Medical and graduate students only Credits: 2 CREDITS (Required) Offered: Offered January. Time: 01/07/2008; MWF; 1:30- 4:00 PM Place: TMEC 209 Description: This course will present the fundamentals of biostatistics and epidemiology with the aim of training students how to comprehend critique and communicate findings from the biomedical literature. In the ... HT390.0 Introduction to Clinical Investigation Directors: A. N. Hollenberg, R. H. Rubin Prerequisites: Open only to participants in the BIDMC Clinical Investigator Training Program. Credits: 2 CREDITS (Required) Offered: July 2005 June 2006. Time: Call Linda Bard (617) 667-4816 Place: Call Linda Bard (617) 667-4816 Description: Seminar series introducing the student to the following topics crucial to clinical investigation: biostatistics, study design and biomedical ethics. HT391.0 Principles of Clinical Investigation Seminar Directors: A. N. Hollenberg, R. H. Rubin Prerequisites: Open only to participants in the BIDMC Clinical Investigator Training Program. Credits: 10 CREDITS (Required) Offered: Year long. 2 year long seminar. Time: Linda Bard, (617) 667-4816 Place: Linda Bard, (617) 667-4816 Description: This seminar series forms the core curriculum of the Clinical Investigator Training Program. It covers the essential elements of biomedical ethics, study design, biostatistics, pharmacokinetics, data analysis, ... ME548.0 Epidemiologic Approaches to Major Clinical Problems Directors: F. . Grodstein Prerequisites: Basic epidemiology Credits: 4 CREDITS (Non-Clinical Elective) Offered: Full time for one month. Offered only in April. Time: 9:00 am- 11:30 am, MWFand Tues. afternoon. Place: MEC 448. Description: The course will consist of four week-long problems that allow students to develop advanced skills in study design and implementation by addressing major unresolved clinical and prevention related questions. ... ME732.0 Fundamental Methods of Clinical Trials Directors: D. E. Cutlip, L. . Mauri Prerequisites: Biostatistics 206, Epidemiology 208 (HSPH courses). Open to Scholars in Clinical Sciences Program participants only. Credits: 3 CREDITS (Required) Offered: Spring Time: Place: Call Allison White, (617) 732-8936 Description: The scope of research in human health and disease ranges from observational and epidemiological studies (of small case series to large populations), to outcomes and health services research, to prospectively ... > In retrospect, it occurs to me that there is analternativeinterpretation > of the original statement. Since we don't know in what context the MD's [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > even though I have repeatedly stated my opinion that the efficacy of > acupuncture has yet to be proven. If you had any bona-fide interest in the facts, you could have researched the matter. I guess its easier to reach your predetermined conclusion by speculating than it is to find out what the facts are. That is yet another reason why you need much instruction & guidance in Critical Thinking. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Sept_9/ai_n15378095/pg_1 Physicians Divided on Impact of CAM on U.S. Health Care; Aromatherapy Fares Poorly; Acupuncture Touted http://web.archive.org/web/20060110033955/http://publish.hcdhealth.com/P1007/Cum ulativeReport.htm > :> : You need much guidance and personal growth before you're ready for > :> : that discussion. ? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > results, it is not at all clear to me why anyone who is not delusional > would think that I am the one who is biased. You're definitely the last to know. Perhaps you would be more receptive to hearing this from Peter Bowditch. > : That's fine, you can choose to deny & submit to your prejudices. Just > : don't expect *anyone* here, with the possible exception of yourself, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I get it -- the new version of critical thinking is to take a comment out > of context and then to use it as the basis for an Argument from Authority. Sigh. You really can’t accept the fact that other people see you differently that you see yourself. You are seen on MHA as being on the anti-acupuncture side of a long running flame war. You can hate it all you want, but that is how your words and behavior are seen by most. The fact that Peter Bowditch, MHA’s Ben Franklin, said it means you need to take it to heart. > :> : To do that, you'll need much instruction and guidance in > :> : Critical Thinking. ? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > of *any* evidence that might indicate that acupuncture is not effective > beyond a placebo effect. That is clearly wrong. I’ve not only posted a study that I considered properly done that showed a negative result, I’ve even stated specific conditions for which I think there is no acupuncture efficacy. You, on the other hand, won’t accept that your bias is holding you back. If you hadn’t sincerely believed that acupuncture was well known not to work, you might have paid attention to what I was telling you. But, No! You knew better, didn’t you? You knew that it wasn’t possible that acupuncture could be well accepted within mainstream medicine. It wasn’t more than an elective in a few schools, perhaps the subject of some research, and maybe some crazy faculty member had a CME program in California. You couldn’t imagine living in a world where acupuncture is being taught to and practiced by growing numbers of MD’s in the USA, UK, France, FDR, el al. Richard, prejudice is a handicap, not a shortcut. Sure, we all need some giggle test to squelch the high noise to signal ratio in the world of alternative health. But, critical thinking is not a rhetorical tool for justifying assumptions or to dispel facts that would invalidate your heartfelt beliefs. Critical thinking is about understanding the objective reality, not the championing of one’s subjective reality. Only the most vain would think that their arguments, not the facts, determine what *is*. About 11 months ago, you were certain that acupuncture wasn’t accepted within mainstream medicine. Now, you’ve realized it is being practiced in a whole lot of mainstream medical facilities. They range from private clinics to major universities, the armed forces, and the UK’s Health Trust. All these facts were obvious from the beginning, so why did it take you so long that have this epiphany? It was prejudice, arrogance, contrariness, and more than a little fear. Don’t fear acupuncture, it is a good thing and its spreading like buttah! : Why do you assume that I believe TCM is the only alternative method : worth practicing? Because whenever another method is brought up, you make a point of telling us how you are uninterested in learning about it or you explain why you believe that it is not worth practicing. Put it another way: name a single alternative method of medicine that you *do* think is worth practicing other than TCM, and explain what you do to resolve conflicts between the two. :> But that is precisely what you do -- you refuse to *acknowledge* the :> existence of *any* evidence that might indicate that acupuncture is not :> effective beyond a placebo effect. : That is clearly wrong. I??ve not only posted a study that I considered : properly done that showed a negative result, I??ve even stated specific : conditions for which I think there is no acupuncture efficacy. The only study that I remember you agreeing that showed a negative effect was one in which you claimed that the acupuncture was improperly applied. No doubt my memory is playing tricks, and you will remind me of which *other* one you were talking about. : Richard, prejudice is a handicap, not a shortcut. : Critical thinking is about understanding the objective reality, Coming from someone who pracitices a form of "medicine" that is based on something that objectively does not exist, that's pretty hilarious. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." > In article <9657f98b-ac7d-49b3-990a-f1c2fd58d...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > single alternative method of medicine that you *do* think is worth practicing > other than TCM, and explain what you do to resolve conflicts between the two. Massage therapy is worth practicing. There is no conflict between it and TCM, as far as I am aware. > :> But that is precisely what you do -- you refuse to *acknowledge* the > :> existence of *any* evidence that might indicate that acupuncture is not [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > No doubt my memory is playing tricks, and you will remind me of which > *other* one you were talking about. I've stated that acupuncture doesn't work for male pattern baldness. No doubt, you remember saying this: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/0bb5ea5ffc02d9e2 : To the best of my knowledge, only two had tried acupuncture. One of : them went for several visits for male pattern baldness, a condition : that acupuncture is unlikely help at all. (I am NOT speaking of : anyone on MHA, FWIF) Why not? If ever there was clear evidence of unbalanced Qi, it would have to be someone's going bald > : Richard, prejudice is a handicap, not a shortcut. > > : Critical thinking is about understanding the objective reality, > > Coming from someone who pracitices a form of "medicine" that is based on > something that objectively does not exist, that's pretty hilarious. Pain and disease don't exist? It sounds like *you* need to put down the moonshine. : Massage therapy is worth practicing. There is no conflict between it : and TCM, as far as I am aware. What conditions do you believe can be successfully treated by massage therapy? (I realize that the likelihood of my getting an answer is about the same as the likelihood of my having gotten an answer when I asked a similar question about homeopathy, but I have to ask anyway.) :> :> But that is precisely what you do -- you refuse to *acknowledge* the :> :> existence of *any* evidence that might indicate that acupuncture is not :> :> effective beyond a placebo effect. :> : That is clearly wrong. ?I??ve not only posted a study that I considered :> : properly done that showed a negative result, I??ve even stated specific :> : conditions for which I think there is no acupuncture efficacy. :> The only study that I remember you agreeing that showed a negative effect :> was one in which you claimed that the acupuncture was improperly applied. :> No doubt my memory is playing tricks, and you will remind me of which :> *other* one you were talking about. : I've stated that acupuncture doesn't work for male pattern baldness. Have there been any studies of the efficacy of acupuncture against male pattern baldness? : No doubt, you remember saying this: : : http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/0bb5ea5ffc02d9e2 And perhaps you remember your vague reply, which specifically avoided explaining how it is that male pattern baldness is *not* caused by unbalanced Qi. It seems to me that there are two possibilities (within your paradigm): either some conditions are caused by unbalanced Qi while others are not, or acupuncture is only partially effective as a means of balancing Qi. If the former, how can I tell which condition is in which category? If the latter, why does acupuncture sometimes succeed in balancing Qi and other times fails? : : To the best of my knowledge, only two had tried acupuncture. One :> : Critical thinking is about understanding the objective reality, :> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : Pain and disease don't exist? It sounds like *you* need to put down : the moonshine. "Qi" and "meridians" don't exist. Do you really enjoy playing the fool? In the meantime, perhaps you can explain to us which of your changing positions on your ability to cure the flu is the truth and which is the lie. Perhaps you can explain why acupuncture cannot cure cancer, which is a disease of lack of homeostasis if ever there was one. Perhaps, if you really believe your (faulty) definition of "critical thinking," you can explain to us why for just about every condition for which there is a study reporting positive results with acupuncture, there is at least one reporting negative results? Remember, those of us who in your opinion are incapable of "critical thinking" have a hypothesis that not only explains *all* of the data (as opposed to yours which is apparently based on ignoring the reality of any data that doesn't support your prior opinion), but also makes testable predictions. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." > In article <bdb66302-2917-497c-8c3f-d170fe034...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the same as the likelihood of my having gotten an answer when I asked a > similar question about homeopathy, but I have to ask anyway.) Its great for muscle aches, stiffness, and cramping. I’ve gotten great relief from muscle tension headaches and improved ROM in my neck. As for homeopathy, I’m not really aware of anything it treats, but some remedies seem to have some potential in treating thirst, at least temporarily. > :> :> But that is precisely what you do -- you refuse to *acknowledge* the > :> :> existence of *any* evidence that might indicate that acupuncture is not [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Have there been any studies of the efficacy of acupuncture against male > pattern baldness? As one of my teachers said with a smile, “there are far too many bald Chinese doctors for there to be a known cure”. > : No doubt, you remember saying this: > : [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > paradigm): either some conditions are caused by unbalanced Qi while others > are not, or acupuncture is only partially effective as a means of balancing Qi. Are you suggesting that it is *possible* that doesn’t always work perfectly? Do you dare to suggest that if it were *properly* applied that it would not instantly rectify any & all imbalances of Qi? If so, you’d be quite right. This time, you’ve actually made a reasonable inference. Acupuncture is the newest, but not the only, modality of TCM. Herbs, Tuina, Diet, & exercise are also part of our training. > If the former, how can I tell which condition is in which category? Go ask a Zhen Jueologist. > If the latter, why does acupuncture sometimes succeed in balancing Qi and > other times fails? That is another good question. Conditions that are predominately a stagnation of Qi, such as pain, are more treatable with acupuncture. Even if acupuncture can be successful, it must be properly performed, just like surgery. Some conditions are not well treated with acupuncture alone or acupuncture period. They may involve disorders of Xue, Jin Ye, Shen, or Jing. Those conditions are usually require lifestyle changes, herbs, dietary therapy, etc. > : : To the best of my knowledge, only two had tried acupuncture. One > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > "Qi" and "meridians" don't exist. Do you really enjoy playing the fool? Oh, it is to laugh! You probably would tell people not to use a GPS because those meridians don’t exist, either. I can see it now, we'll have to get rid of all the airline guidance systems because the meridians aren't up to Richard's standards. We can start doing line of sight navigation again because you find the meridian system implausable. > In the meantime, perhaps you can explain to us which of your changing positions on your ability to cure the flu is the truth and which is the lie. The lie here is 100% Richard Schultz’s. I have claimed to treat the flu, not cure it. Of course, you know that, it just doesn’t suit your agenda. > Perhaps you can explain why acupuncture cannot cure cancer, which is a > disease of lack of homeostasis if ever there was one. Perhaps, if you > really believe your (faulty) definition of "critical thinking," you can > explain to us why for just about every condition for which there is a > study reporting positive results with acupuncture, there is at least one reporting negative results? Please illustrate that fact. Show us the studies of the top 12 conditions treated with Acupuncture (you can find at least that many conditions listed on the WHO’s website) and summarize that for us. If you can establish that as a fact, it will be worth addressing. Otherwise, it is like your conjecture on the 60% of US MD’s who rate acupuncture as at least somewhat effective or better, a total sci-fi fantasy. Remember, those of us who in your opinion are > incapable of "critical thinking" have a hypothesis that not only explains > *all* of the data (as opposed to yours which is apparently based on ignoring > the reality of any data that doesn't support your prior opinion), but also > makes testable predictions. The only thing you’ve tested is the structural integrity of irony meters. You *still* don’t see that you are an anti-acupuncture crank. If you were so darn skeptical, you wouldn’t have to constantly lie about what I say & make the most ridiculous conjectures. In this one post, you’ve lied about me saying I cure the flu. I, like MD’s, treat the flu. I treat rheumatoid arthritis, just as MD’s, but neither of us cure it. I treat broken bones, just as MD’s do, but we don’t cure them. Of course, that would be obvious to you if the mere mention of acupuncture didn’t derange you. Seriously, Richard, have you ever participated in another usenet thread where you repeatedly attributed your citations to another person? Did you ever find yourself making baseless accusations or conjecture in nearly every single post? You remember the one about Stanford’s acupuncture program being a one-man show. You remember that howler about Qi = Homeostasis. You remember that the notion of the AMA accrediting medical schools. You remember saying that Osteopaths aren’t part of mainstream medicine. You remember repeatedly claiming that the NIH website doesn’t specify any conditions for acupuncture efficacy AFTER you had commented on that very list. You also remember suggesting that mainstream medicine only accepts the methods it trains MD’s to perform. I suggest that this is probably the only topic that fits that description. Despite behaving so differently than you normally do, you show zero awareness of this. You’ve even contended that you haven’t acted unreasonable in the least. I suggest that you ask yourself if this is really typical of how you interact with people in general and post to usenet in particular. Even if you are unwilling to accept any personal responsibility for your behavior, can't you at least acknowledge you are acting far out of character. If you believe this is typical behavior for you and that it is in no way unreasonable, then you really need to get in touch with yourself. :> In article <bdb66302-2917-497c-8c3f-d170fe034...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: :> : Massage therapy is worth practicing. There is no conflict between it :> : and TCM, as far as I am aware. :> What conditions do you believe can be successfully treated by massage :> therapy? : Its great for muscle aches, stiffness, and cramping. That hardly puts it in the category of "alternative medicine." Now let's see if you can think of a category of *alternative* medicine other than acupuncture/TCM that you believe has enough efficacy to be worth using. :> Have there been any studies of the efficacy of acupuncture against male :> pattern baldness? : : As one of my teachers said with a smile, ??there are far too many bald : Chinese doctors for there to be a known cure??. That doesn't answer my question. :> : No doubt, you remember saying this: :> : [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] : so, you'd be quite right. This time, you've actually made a : reasonable inference. Yes, the inference that you are a fool is a reasonable one. :> If the former, how can I tell which condition is in which category? : : Go ask a Zhen Jueologist. In other words, you can only tell post hoc whether a condition was caused by unbalanced Qi. Which makes sense, given that you yourself agree that Qi doesn't exist. :> If the latter, why does acupuncture sometimes succeed in balancing Qi and :> other times fails? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] : of Xue, Jin Ye, Shen, or Jing. Those conditions are usually require : lifestyle changes, herbs, dietary therapy, etc. This does not quite correspond to your earlier description of balancing Qi as restoring homeostasis. I note that you haven't answered my question about why acupuncture cannot cure cancer. :> :> : Critical thinking is about understanding the objective reality, :> :> Coming from someone who pracitices a form of "medicine" that is based on :> :> something that objectively does not exist, that's pretty hilarious. :> : Pain and disease don't exist? It sounds like *you* need to put down :> : the moonshine. :> "Qi" and "meridians" don't exist. Do you really enjoy playing the fool? : : Oh, it is to laugh! You probably would tell people not to use a GPS : because those meridians don??t exist, either. Huh? Do you really enjoy playing the fool? A GPS provides an accurate position of an object on the globe; it can report those results according to any set of coordinates that you care to choose. For convenience, we generally use a set of coordinates that defines the zero of latitude at the equator and the zero of longitude as the line of longitude that passes through Greenwich, England. One could use a set of coordinates that defines the zero of latitude as the north pole and the zero of longitude as the line of longitude that passes 1 meter east of the previously mentioned line, and the position reported by a GPS would be equally accurate. From everything that I have read about acupuncture, it is based on the notion that a mysterious energy called Qi (which even you admit doesn't exist) that passes along certain lines called "meridians," and that according to its practitioners, it only works if the needles are inserted in specific locations determined by the positions of those meridians. If you are now claiming that the meridians do not exist, and it does not actually matter where the needles are inserted, congratulations -- you now agree with Martin (although you are contradicting some of your earlier posts). :> In the meantime, perhaps you can explain to us which of your changing : ?? positions on your ability to cure the flu is the truth and which is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : flu, not cure it. Of course, you know that, it just doesn??t suit your : agenda. If you cannot cure the flu, then why do you take money from patients to treat it, when they could do just as well by staying in bed and/or eating chicken soup? :> Perhaps you can explain why acupuncture cannot cure cancer, which is a :> disease of lack of homeostasis if ever there was one. Perhaps, if you [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : : Please illustrate that fact. I have given many, many citations to articles that report negative results for conditions that *you* have claimed acupuncture can cure. You have ignored every single one of them -- including the one that you claim supports your position but on close reading turns out not to. When you have addressed the articles that I have already brought to your attention, then we can talk about which articles I shall investigate in the future. : Remember, those of us who in your opinion are :> incapable of "critical thinking" have a hypothesis that not only explains :> *all* of the data (as opposed to yours which is apparently based on ignoring :> the reality of any data that doesn't support your prior opinion), but also :> makes testable predictions. : The only thing you've tested is the structural integrity of irony : meters. You *still* don't see that you are an anti-acupuncture crank. Someone who is not convinced of the efficacy of acupuncture; who believes that the TCM explanation of why acupuncture works is almost certainly not true; who has examined all of the evidence, both pro and con; is not a "crank" just because he happens to disagree with you. Your total inability to deal with evidence that contradicts your previously held opinions shows that you, not I, are the crank. Or to put it more simply: can you describe an experiment that would *in principle* disprove the accuracy of acupuncture? In the meantime, while you're thinking about that one: Have you read the original article that reported the results of the 2004 osteoarthritis study? Have you read any of the citations that I posted in February? Have you read either of the citations that I posted that present evidence that acupuncture is no more effective than a placebo in treating people addicted to smoking? Have you read the article that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not effective against constipation? Have you read the articles that I cited that presented evidence that acupuncture is not an effective therapy for infertility? When are you going to demonstrate your claimed understanding of statistics by explaining to us what the t-test and the F-test are? <crickets chirping while we remember that osteoarthritis, addiction to smoking, constipation, and infertility are conditions that Mr. Kingoff claims acupuncture can cure> ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." > In article <3e316d50-e1a3-496d-af4d-3e137ecc3...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > :> In article <bdb66302-2917-497c-8c3f-d170fe034...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > : Its great for muscle aches, stiffness, and cramping. > That hardly puts it in the category of "alternative medicine." Au contraire! Massage is a form of CAM. http://nccam.nih.gov/health/massage/ Has it ever occurred to you that your prejudiced views don’t constitute the accepted definition of “alternative medicine?” I should hope that you would give it some thought; it would save us both a lot of time and you some further embarrassment. Now let's > see if you can think of a category of *alternative* medicine other than > acupuncture/TCM that you believe has enough efficacy to be worth using. Now, let’s see if you can think of a way of acknowledging your mistake. Let me rephrase that a bit less optimistically, are you now aware that massage is a form of alternative medicine? > :> Have there been any studies of the efficacy of acupuncture against male > :> pattern baldness? > : > : As one of my teachers said with a smile, ??there are far too many bald > : Chinese doctors for there to be a known cure??. That doesn't answer my question. Perhaps you should learn how to make a reasonable inference. In the meantime, read this slowly, 3x: “I do not know of any studies showing efficacy for acupuncture in treating male pattern baldness.” > :> : No doubt, you remember saying this: > :> : [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > : so, you'd be quite right. This time, you've actually made a > : reasonable inference. Yes, the inference that you are a fool is a reasonable one. To you, perhaps it is. Of course, you thought it was a reasonable inference that the AMA accredits medical schools. You also thought it was reasonable to assume Stanford’s acupuncture program, which includes a Fellowship, was a one-man show. You even thought it was reasonable to say that the NIH doesn’t specify any conditions for which acupuncture is efficacious. Recently, you’ve thought it was reasonable to use the words “cure” and “treat” interchangeably. On the topic of acupuncture, what you think is reasonable is usually hilarious. > :> If the former, how can I tell which condition is in which category? > : [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > by unbalanced Qi. Which makes sense, given that you yourself agree that > Qi doesn't exist. Whoa, sport! You’re reusing the munged thinking process that led you to conclude that Qi = Homeostasis. For some bizarre reason, you’ve been assuming that unbalanced qi causes all disease. You are laboring under a misapprehension borne out of an inability to think critically on the topic of acupuncture. While I may appreciate you adding another data point, the rest of MHA finds it tedious. Read this carefully. Diseases are frequently NOT caused by unbalanced Qi. The disorder of Qi is often an effect, not the etiology, of disease. Pestilential factors (virus, bacteria, mold, etc) cause many diseases. Environmental and lifestyle factors cause many diseases. Disorders of Jing (genetic & developmental factors) may also cause diseases. Trauma is yet another factor. What this illustrates is just how poorly you comprehend the topic. If what you were suggesting were true, all diseases would be of internal origin and none would be from external causes. I realize that your feelings toward acupuncture in general and me in particular derange your thought processes, so please try to manage that anger offline. If you wish to make honest criticism, you must first understand what TCM actually is and apply critical thinking instead of raging against strawmen. > :> If the latter, why does acupuncture sometimes succeed in balancing Qi and > :> other times fails? Why does CPR sometimes succeed and sometimes fail? Why does surgery sometimes succeed and sometimes fail? Why do hair or organ transplants sometimes succeed and sometimes fail? The skill of the practitioner and the condition of the patient often make that difference. It is the same for acupuncture. > : That is another good question. Conditions that are predominately a > : stagnation of Qi, such as pain, are more treatable with acupuncture. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > This does not quite correspond to your earlier description of balancing Qi > as restoring homeostasis. That may not correspond to the false assumptions you’ve made. I can’t be responsible for your inability to apply reason in general and critical thinking in particular on this topic. I can and will to point out your numerous errors, but I can’t make you learn from them. You have to make the choice to take personal responsibility for your dishonesty and your failure to apply reason before you can grow as a person. Food for thought; eat up, Richard. Please follow the logic. Restoring electrolytes may return a dehydrated person to homeostasis. However, that does not in any way imply that a lack of homeostasis is always due to a lack of electrolytes. It does not imply that electrolytes always return someone to homeostasis. > I note that you haven't answered my question about why acupuncture cannot cure cancer. I’ll take a page from your book of passive aggressive debating tactics and ask you to provide proof that that it can’t cure cancer. Go ahead and post it and I’ll be delighted to comment upon it. Otherwise, you’ll just have to get in line behind Kelley Eidem and scoff at me for not proclaiming that acupuncture can cure cancer. > :> :> : Critical thinking is about understanding the objective reality, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > : Oh, it is to laugh! You probably would tell people not to use a GPS > : because those meridians don??t exist, either. Huh? Do you really enjoy playing the fool? Richard, you’ve been dancing to my tune for nearly 11 months. In the process, you’ve come around to my way of thinking, at least in regard to the acceptance of acupuncture in mainstream medicine. In the process, you’ve lied about your comments, intentions, and even your web citations. You’ve tried to attribute your arguments to me, gone way beyond twisting my words, and have made many false accusations against me. You’ve done all that without the slightest insight into your behavior. I enjoy the fact that you project your foolishness on me. A GPS provides an accurate > position of an object on the globe; it can report those results according > to any set of coordinates that you care to choose. For convenience, we [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > of longitude that passes 1 meter east of the previously mentioned line, and > the position reported by a GPS would be equally accurate. In other words, GPS does for one celestial body what the Oriental meridian system does for every human body. One difference is that GPS accuracy is measured in meters, meridians are much more precise. > From everything that I have read about acupuncture, it is based on the notion > that a mysterious energy called Qi (which even you admit doesn't exist) > that passes along certain lines called "meridians," and that according > to its practitioners, it only works if the needles are inserted in specific locations determined by the positions of those meridians. This is an excellent example of how a little learning is not only dangerous, but also undignified. Qi isn’t mysterious. You also seem to think that the meridians are separate from the body itself. They are not lines and they aren’t tubes. They aren’t predominately on the surface and the 12 primary channels are only a small portion of the whole. Your conception of the meridian system is very primitive and yet highly prejudiced. Why waste your energy fighting your strawmen when you could channel it into learning about the meridians before denouncing them? That is a big part of critical thinking, getting the evidence before making final conclusions. If you are now > claiming that the meridians do not exist, and it does not actually matter > where the needles are inserted, congratulations -- you now agree with > Martin (although you are contradicting some of your earlier posts). This is a beauty. You’ve agreed that they work better for navigation than anything that objectively exists, even though they are not clearly marked on the planet’s surface. The OM meridians, like the ones used in cartography, are not black lines. Like those used in cartography and Cartesian plotting, they provide excellent utility in solving problems. > :> In the meantime, perhaps you can explain to us which of your changing > : ?? positions on your ability to cure the flu is the truth and which is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > treat it, when they could do just as well by staying in bed and/or eating > chicken soup? Once again, you’re not applying critical thinking, you’re just venting your rage. Since I never claimed to cure the flu, why have you twice accused me of claiming to cure the flu? I keep catching you in your lies but that doesn’t seem to deter you. Why doesn’t that deter you? Do you have the same contempt for your own credibility as you do for the truth? <Cue the crickets to chirp as Richard refuses to take any responsibility for lying> Let’s see who charges to *treat* the flu. Conventional medicine charges for tamiflu and without a single cure! How about asking them for a refund, Richard? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flu Roche estimates that 50 million people have been treated with oseltamivir.[1] The majority of these have been in Japan, where an estimated 35 million have been treated.[2] Secondly, chicken soup isn’t even listed on the NIH website regarding flu. Sure, chicken soup is a time honored home remedy that was used by Maimonides. If someone wants to try a safe, simple folk remedy, that is fine by me, but it does not rise to the level of medicine. http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/topics/Flu/understandingFlu/Treatment.htm Thirdly, I don’t charge for house calls. You could have asked me about that before making your false accusation, but that isn’t how you roll. So, you were outraged that I visit and treat the sick. What other forms of tzedukah do you find offensive? Is it tzedukah in particular or all forms of tikun olum that anger you? > :> Perhaps you can explain why acupuncture cannot cure cancer, which is a > :> disease of lack of homeostasis if ever there was one. Perhaps, if you [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > ignored every single one of them -- including the one that you claim supports > your position but on close reading turns out not to. You’ve done absolutely nothing to establish as fact that what you claimed above. You must establish your fanciful notion as fact before it can be declared a fact. After all, you’ve done a miserable job of speaking things into existence. > When you have addressed the articles that I have already brought to your > attention, then we can talk about which articles I shall investigate in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > that the TCM explanation of why acupuncture works is almost certainly not > true; who has examined all of the evidence, both pro and con; is not a "crank" just because he happens to disagree with you. Of course not. I’ve made this point more than once, but you need frequent reminders. Peter Bowditch & Peter Moran are not cranks and they think acupuncture is bollocks. They are sincere players while you’re merely a player hater. You are dishonest, even about your own beliefs. Perhaps by denying this to yourself, you can claim that you aren’t lying, but that is a pretty sad argument to make in your defense. Your total inability > to deal with evidence that contradicts your previously held opinions shows > that you, not I, are the crank. Your penchant for irony is growing tiresome. If you acquire any insight into your own behavior, you’ll decide not to accuse others of the things that you are most guilty. Until then, I’ll recommend that people buy stock in irony meters. > Or to put it more simply: can you describe an experiment that would *in > principle* disprove the accuracy of acupuncture? The “accuracy” of acupuncture? Do you mean “efficacy”? > In the meantime, while you're thinking about that one: In the meantime, count all the false accusations, unfounded conclusions, and outright errors in critical thinking you’ve made in just this post. Again, I ask if this level of error and anger is typical of your other usenet threads. Would you say that you typically make such baseless assumptions, errors in logic, and false accusations on topics you truly care about, such as chemistry or Star Trek? On Jun 30, 4:15 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > In article <3e316d50-e1a3-496d-af4d-3e137ecc3...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > :> In article <bdb66302-2917-497c-8c3f-d170fe034...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 325 lines] > accusations on topics you truly care about, such as chemistry or Star > Trek? OUTSTANDING post which COMPLETELY refutes the mistaken positions on Acupuncture, there are several, taken by Doc Schultz. Imagine for a moment that one were to run around shouting about bloodletting and phrenology of hundreds of years ago and then telling everyone that's why modern medicine is unsound. Although not his argument, that is about the way Doc Schultz sounds when he comments on Acupuncture. In this topic, HE is the one without the clue. Citizen Jimserac > In article <9657f98b-ac7d-49b3-990a-f1c2fd58d...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > ----- > "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." YOU are hilarious Doc Rich - while One True Zhen is beating the crap out of you with logical arguments, links, examples and reasoning, you're still sputtering away with your one liners, pathetic denials and "don't have a clue" assertions. It's getting rather stale Doc Rich -> now get to work and come up with something. Get some new material from somewhere (Mad magazine maybe?) Citizen Jimserac : YOU are hilarious Doc Rich - while One True Zhen : is beating the crap out of you with logical arguments, Since when is ignoring any evidence that disagrees with your thesis a "logical" argument? (I mean, here on earth, rather than Bizarro World, which is where you two appear to come from.) ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- ". . . for while he was not dumber than an ox, he was not any smarter." -- James Thurber, _My Life and Hard Times_ The same OLD, same OLD repeated, repeated--repeatedly. Poor Richey baby. : After all, it took nearly a year for you to be able to: : A. Correctly articulate your own view about Qi & Meridians in regard : to acupuncture's mechanism of action I realize that doing a search of Google groups is not always the most accurate method of retrieving usenet articles, but a search for articles posted by me to misc.health.alternative that contain the word "acupuncture" gives 24 May 2007 as the first date on which I began to engage in any kind of sustained discussion of acupuncture (in article <f34ea2$gjl$2@news.iucc.ac.il>), and 26 July 2007 as the first date on which I stated my position that *if* acupuncture works, it is almost certainly *not* because it balances the body's qi (in article <f89apt$faf$7@news.iucc.ac.il>). I would greatly appreciate an explanation of how that period of time constitutes "nearly a year." ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" > In article <397a71f9-905e-4489-9976-bd785f2c1...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > <f89apt$fa...@news.iucc.ac.il>). I would greatly appreciate an explanation > of how that period of time constitutes "nearly a year." I am mistaken. While you did misarticulate your belief during these past 10.5 months, you *did* also properly articulate it during that time. Mea culpa. I'm sure you'll now go back and admit you're mistaken in saying that I claimed to cure the flu. Unless, of course, you *meant* to falsely portray what I wrote. However, over the past 5 years, you still haven't reconciled your heartfelt, prejudicial beliefs with what is actually well known about acupuncture. How long will it take for you to admit to yourself that you meant what you said then? Even Peter Bowditch, who doesn't advocate acupuncture, said you were against acupuncture. How long will it take you to catch up with the rest of us regarding your bias against and disdain for acupuncture? Will you ever be able to free your mind from your anti-acupuncture prejudice? As I've said before, I'll leave no child behind, not even the contrary one. For lo, though it may take 40 years, I'll see to it that you get to the promised land. > ----- > Richard Schultz schu...@mail.biu.ac.il [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your > truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" <Andrew_Kingoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7e7bb496-2ef8-46c9-b5e0-d9081885e60f@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... On Jun 12, 10:08 am, schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote: > In article > <397a71f9-905e-4489-9976-bd785f2c1...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > <f89apt$fa...@news.iucc.ac.il>). I would greatly appreciate an explanation > of how that period of time constitutes "nearly a year." I am mistaken. While you did misarticulate your belief during these past 10.5 months, you *did* also properly articulate it during that time. Mea culpa. I'm sure you'll now go back and admit you're mistaken in saying that I claimed to cure the flu. Unless, of course, you *meant* to falsely portray what I wrote. However, over the past 5 years, you still haven't reconciled your heartfelt, prejudicial beliefs with what is actually well known about acupuncture. How long will it take for you to admit to yourself that you meant what you said then? Even Peter Bowditch, who doesn't advocate acupuncture, said you were against acupuncture. How long will it take you to catch up with the rest of us regarding your bias against and disdain for acupuncture? Will you ever be able to free your mind from your anti-acupuncture prejudice? As I've said before, I'll leave no child behind, not even the contrary one. For lo, though it may take 40 years, I'll see to it that you get to the promised land. The only way to get there in to believe in Jesus Christ the son. > ----- > Richard Schultz schu...@mail.biu.ac.il [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your > truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" : The only way to get there in to believe in Jesus Christ the son. Please explain to me why this is not off-topic. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- ". . . for while he was not dumber than an ox, he was not any smarter." -- James Thurber, _My Life and Hard Times_ > : The only way to get there in to believe in Jesus Christ the son. > > Please explain to me why this is not off-topic. Sure thing. > ----- > Richard Schultz : I am mistaken. While you did misarticulate your belief during these : past 10.5 months, you *did* also properly articulate it during that : time. No, you were lying. And you are lying now. I have repeatedly over the past year stated my opinions that (a) to the best of my knowledge and understanding, the efficacy of acupuncture has yet to be demonstrated and (b) *if* acupuncture works, it is almost certainly *not* by "balancing qi." : Mea culpa. I'm sure you'll now go back and admit you're mistaken in : saying that I claimed to cure the flu. Unless, of course, you *meant* : to falsely portray what I wrote. In article <135416ff-72aa-4427-93f7-dc252ca893af@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> you wrote "Acupuncture is an excellent treatment for colds & flu. I don't want this to be generally known, but I have made housecalls to treat pneumonia, flu, & colds." ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" > In article > <7e7bb496-2ef8-46c9-b5e0-d9081885e60f@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, The [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > want this to be generally known, but I have made housecalls to treat > pneumonia, flu, & colds." Poor Richey baby shows his own lie. *I claimed to cure the flu.* > ----- > Richard Schultz > In article > <397a71f9-905e-4489-9976-bd785f2c175a@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, The [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > kind of sustained discussion of acupuncture (in article > <f34ea2$gjl$2@news.iucc.ac.il>), New message. and 26 July 2007 as the first date on which > I stated my position that *if* acupuncture works, it is almost certainly > *not* because it balances the body's qi (in article > <f89apt$faf$7@news.iucc.ac.il> New message. Learn to post correctly. ). I would greatly appreciate an explanation > of how that period of time constitutes "nearly a year." > > ----- > Richard Schultz >My thanks to Richard for his invaluable help in composing this list. >Please add any other methods I may have overlooked or you those you [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >7. Accept that it is accepted but only because MD's can't pass a basic >statistics class You still have nothing more than the argument ad populum? You're posting it so often, one would start to think that you're getting desperate. :>1. Denial. Just pretend that it isn't happening :> [etc.] : You still have nothing more than the argument ad populum? You're : posting it so often, one would start to think that you're getting desperate. You don't get it, Martin. That's not "argument ad populum" -- that's Critical Thinking [tm]. ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "It's certainly easy to mock things," agreed Trefusis. "Oddly enough though I've never found it easy to mock anything of value. Only things that are tawdry and fatuous -- perhaps it's just me." > In article <q1h254ls8n60lijqmfv08qum0ols4oj...@4ax.com>, Martin <idontwan...@spam.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > You don't get it, Martin. That's not "argument ad populum" -- that's > Critical Thinking [tm]. That is *your* twisted take on critical thinking. Its the same lack of reason that led you to believe and proclaim that medical schools are accredited by the AMA. Heck, a mo-ron who'd believe and proclaim that would probably think that it is well known that acupuncture does not work. > ----- > Richard Schultz schu...@mail.biu.ac.il [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > though I've never found it easy to mock anything of value. Only things > that are tawdry and fatuous -- perhaps it's just me." :> : You still have nothing more than the argument ad populum? You're :> : posting it so often, one would start to think that you're getting :> : desperate. :> You don't get it, Martin. ?That's not "argument ad populum" -- that's :> Critical Thinking [tm]. : That is *your* twisted take on critical thinking. I really think that it's time for you to check your meds. *You* are the one who is making grandiose claims about his Critical Thinking [tm] abilities, and it is *you* whose logic is being criticized by Martin. In case yo |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message