How do I explain Chinese medicine to people who think it's superstition?

[Cresselia~~]

I'm not sure if any of you have tried it before.

Most non-East Asian people think that Chinese medicine is superstition. In fact, a lot of self-proclaimed scientists in Hong Kong do not believe it neither. Some medical doctors despise and deny it as they see traditional Chinese medicine practitioners as financial rivals.

But what find particularly upsetting when I was dealing with wildlife conservation issues because of comments like "Rhinos are going to die because of this fucking superstition." and "Fuck ignorant people no science but only superstition."
This is also initiated by WWF's "this is not proven by science" in their articles.

But no, Chinese medicine is not superstition. Although there are certainly a lot of hoaxes that flies around (usually selling items from endangered/ rare animals, uneasily obtained parts), there is this real stuff that works for centuries.

Unfortunately, Western science is not complete and cannot explain it.
However, after Japan and Hong Kong put huge amount of efforts, more and more Chinese medicine theories are becoming scientifically proven nowadays.
Even acupuncture spots receive Latin names these days.
My university, one of the top 100 universities worldwide, has a dedicated Chinese medicine department near to its biology department. And has a full curriculum of Chinese medicine degrees from bachelors and so on.

Yet, there are still so much that is unknown to science.
"Why do so many people believe in this shit when it's not scientifically proven?"
This is a difficult question to answer. My only reply is that science is not complete. But then, this would probably make me look like a complete fool or lunatic to Westerners.
(A lot of people are science-believers, instead of knowing what science really is. Problem is, this is basically somewhat 80% of high school students. Real natural sciences college students are rare.)
-----------------

Point is, I don't know how to convince these angry people on facebook.
I don't know how to summarize what's above into a short facebook comment, but I really want to tell these people that they are the real ignorant ones, not us.
I really want people to respect and know that it's not superstition.

 

[Woodchuck]

Science might not be (or indeed, might never be) complete, but that isn't a proof for Chinese medicine working. Tradition cannot be assumed to be correct -- centuries of Western "traditional" medicine involved bleeding people in order to cure them. It is unreasonable to expect people to be willing to see x part of Chinese medicine as more than superstition when that x factor hasn't been rigorously proven to work. That's all that science is, really. Skepticism, and looking for proof.

 

[michael]

Tradition cannot be assumed to be correct -- centuries of Western "traditional" medicine involved bleeding people in order to cure them.

interestingly enough, this was carried out by barbers (barber-surgeons), not doctors, and this is the origin of the british tradition of referring to surgeons as "mr" and not "dr".

on traditional chinese medicine, it's true that there are some effective treatments -- acupuncture has been found to be effective in some trials but placebo for poking needles in someone is hard to implement, and so i'd take any trials with a grain of salt. use of traditional natural products and synthesis from their metabolites has led to many modern treatments: the antipyretic and analgesic aspirin from willow bark, the anti-cancer taxol (paclitaxel) from the yew tree, and the antiviral tamiflu via shikimic acid from star anise. there's no reason why chinese traditional medicines, and traditional medicines in general, can't be effective, but it's ridiculous to me to choose them over treatments whose mechanism has been trialled and tested. i'm from a japanese background and i have some superstitions and habits that seem strange in a western society, but life-saving medicine is an instance where i would put that aside and choose a modern pharmacological treatment. ymmv, and i won't push people to discard their beliefs.

 

[Cresselia~~]

Science might not be (or indeed, might never be) complete, but that isn't a proof for Chinese medicine working. Tradition cannot be assumed to be correct -- centuries of Western "traditional" medicine involved bleeding people in order to cure them. It is unreasonable to expect people to be willing to see x part of Chinese medicine as more than superstition when that x factor hasn't been rigorously proven to work. That's all that science is, really. Skepticism, and looking for proof.

Yes, that's the problem.
But everyone of us who have tried Chinese medicine from registered practitioners knows that it works. That's like the prove.
But you can't just get someone from the internet to try it.

Sometimes it's cheaper, and sometimes there are stuff that Western medicine can't cure that can be cured by Chinese medicine.
Chinese herb soups medicine things for curing flu/ colds come cheaper than pills. And it's all natural instead of chemically synthesized.
There's also this case that a lift fell, and people in the lift were paralyzed. Western medics said they can't do a thing. But Chinese practitioner made them walk again.
Chinese practitioners are also good at fixing people with problems for the spine positioning.

 

[billymills]

it sounds like homeopathy, but less harmless.

 

[Woodchuck]

Yeah, and the problem is that that feeling of "knowing that it works" can't be distinguished meaningfully from taking a sugar pill and "knowing that it works". You haven't controlled for the placebo effect.

There's also this case that a lift fell, and people in the lift were paralyzed. Western medics said they can't do a thing. But Chinese practitioner made them walk again.

Are you referring to this incident?
Note that the man in question was "treated with a blend of eastern and western medicine, and up to 40 intensive therapy sessions a week."

 

[verbatim]

I've spent some time talking with my martial arts instructor on this issue (he practices Korean martial arts, but both are considered "eastern medicine", and I think that a lot of issues stem from such wide groupings. There are many things that could be grouped as eastern medicine, however, (just like western medicinal beliefs) some parts aren't effective (see abuse of endangered animals and such).

What I'm getting at is, Could you please articulate which exact thing that could be grouped under Chinese medicine you're talking about, because as a whole that topic contains things that both are and aren't superstition?

 

[Lavos]

why don't you just link some credible articles to back up your points? i see a lot of outrageous claims with no proof

that's the main reason westerners like me don't buy into eastern traditional medicine. if i get strep throat im heading down to the doctor's office and he's gonna prescribe me some antibiotics and i'll be better in a couple days. im sure there's an eastern equivalent to that but i don't know or care to know what it is because my western medicine works just fine thanks.

that and the analysis that woodchuck did on the placebo effect gives me no reason to trust it.

 

[verbatim]

I can't cite sources, since most of my martial arts conversations are informal, but when I think of their practices, I think of a lot of exercises and the like that my instructor has worked into recovery programs for himself and his family (the western equivalent being physical therapy) and some dietary decisions (as in stuff like the Gylcemic Index, [that specific example isn't Eastern in origin, but it's the most recent one that I recall]).

 

[Cresselia~~]

Cite scientific resources whilst the main problem is science itself?
Everyone is so obsessed with science.

TMC consists of a whole set of theories from an Eastern approach, of course it's going to be gibberish to wesyern science because you don't understand anyway.
No offense, it's really eurocentric. (but I know it's not intended)

I'm waiting for someone who have tried it.
I dont see why you guys are helping when you also are the same ones who call it superstitious.

 

[Chou Toshio]

@ facebok idiots -- maybe say something to the extent of: Not all Chinese medicinal practicioners are witch doctors. There are many accredited programs for its modern application. While it may not be a replacement for modern medical practices, there are many well-documented traditional treatment methods that are known to enhance various aspects of well-being, and licensed doctors dedicated to their use. Some aspects of Eastern medicine like acupuncture treatment are even covered by some insurance companies.

or something like that.

@others - Yes, there is such thing as a licensed doctor(ate) of Chinese medicine from accredited universities...

I'm not really familiar with it, but my aunty is licensed doctor of Chinese medicine, and I can tell she learned a lot about the workings of the human body. She could probably give you a much better (and more correct) answer than what I wrote above, but I'm not her. If you really want to be able to explain it well, I'd suggest studying it yourself, or barring that, find a licensed doctor or dedicated student with a strong grasp of English to give you some good, concise explanations to throw out.


edit:
To be fair, your explanation isn't helping. I don't want to jab a non-natives English speaker's mistakes (God knows, my Chinese is awful), but by chance it happens the mistakes in your grammar are leading to nuances that hurt your case.

For instance "most westerners don't believe in it." This grammar pattern gives the word "believe" in it the nuance of believing in something's existence-- like "do you believe in God?" or "Do you believe in unicorns?" which has the unfortunate effect of making your sentence make Chinese Medicine sound even more like hocus pocus. What you want is the word "believe" as in "acknowledge the effectiveness of"-- but to get that nuance, you have to say the whole sentence: "Most westerners do not believe in the effectiveness of Chinese Medicine." Skip out on the critical words here, and your argument sounds much less authoritative and legitimate; a major problem when you are trying to argue the legitimacy of something.

 

[Cresselia~~]

Fine... you want science, here's your science: (Hey look~ it's PubMed~~!!)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24716152
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC525422/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20192915
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14622624
http://www.scm.cuhk.edu.hk/en-GB/research/research-item/current-research-projects
http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/rao/research_profile/rpp1112/project/sci_bm.pdf

Well known universities do have doctorate for Chinese medicine practitioners, they aren't going to do that if it's solely superstition.

(And seriously, none of you bothered to search for "Chinese medicine" from PubMed? Come on.)

 

[Lavos]

yes! thank you, this is exactly what i wanted to see.

so it states in the third link that basically a TON of traditional chinese medicinal practices are being evaluated by labs and such for scientific proof that they work, and most of the studies end up inconclusive because there's too much variance in success or lack of a control group to firmly decide one way or the other. which is the analysis woodchuck was doing above, and one of the main reasons eastern medicine isn't widely accepted here in the western world. however, there are some studies that did conclude traditional medicine was effective, i'm reading through the caterpillar fungus one (first link) and it seems completely functional. i think that's really interesting and does some work for the case you're trying to make. however it seems like western medicine is essentially swallowing traditional chinese treatments since it states in the report that companies have already begun to synthesize this fungus for broader usage.

i think the main disconnect here is a perception issue between what individuals over here think chinese medicine is (herbal remedies, voodoo shit, witch doctors/shamans, superstitions...idk i'm not the average uneducated american but there are some very misguided people out there) and what chinese medicine actually is (the stuff you linked). i suppose it's not going to be treated as less of a joke until mainstream media tells the west that it isn't one. if you need to explain to idiots on facebook why it's real and works, throw science at them. you claim science is the "main problem itself" but it's the only thing we westerners have been brought up to understand, if you speak our language (pardon my pun) i think a reasonably intelligent person will be able to come to terms with you.

 

[whistle]

most of those were vague reviews... the one about hypocrellin (#2) was interesting though. also saw this in the abstract of #4:

lmao

Search engines on the Internet were also used. Examples of keywords used were "Traditional Chinese Medicine" and "heart".

I suspect that lots of traditional therapies have a valid biochemical basis. natural products are pretty useful -- there's huge western scientific literature support for this. TCM practitioners and the western scientific community are coming at the issue from radically different perspectives though. it's like two ships passing in the night.

and I feel like people are mostly outraged at traditional medicine because of substances like rhino horns and shark fins -- might be a conservation issue. from the western perspective, the lack of allopathic studies that verify the efficacy of these therapies makes TCM practitioners seem like obstinate dickheads who not only believe in some ancient hocus pocus, but want to kill endangered animals to practice it. I doubt anyone has a problem with chinese people eating caterpillar fungus, even if it seems ridiculous. (this value clash probably comes off very patronizing... it's okay to believe in your little stories, but only so long as they don't violate our standards of environmentalism?). but consider the TCM viewpoint, which is that these therapies are the most effective treatment for patients -- isn't that the goal of medicine?

edit/addendum: forgot to mention the most important thing which is that people (in the plural) will always be mad about something. it sounds like americans talking about religion or electoral politics. most of the time engaging is totally useless, regardless of who is correct, because there is no social benefit inherent to discussing these issues.

 

[Cresselia~~]

Ya. I should have thought about using PubMed earlier. (What took me so long?)
And if they don't know PubMed, they are fails.

 

[Yoshi King]

Yo back in university I had the flu and my Chinese friend gave me some herbs saying they'd be really bitter but to put them in hot water, I like bitter stuff so I was totally down to try it out and then I ended up feeling way better thanks to my friend.

People will be sceptical and pessimistic about anything and everything they can be-- I have a few militant atheist friends who dogpile on any religious posts they see with the usual anti-religion arguments-- and often times they just don't want to be convinced. I think it's admirable to try but honestly it's usually an exercise in frustration. I would say that the, "natural remedies" I've tried have often had very positive results but I would only take them alongside medicine that's been proven by science, not instead of.

 

[Bughouse]

I think a few people itt don't quite understand what people mean by comparing to placebo.

I'm reminded of dialogue from Harry Potter:
Harry Potter: "Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?"
Albus Dumbledore: "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?"

 

[Minwu]

I want to reiterate the importance of whistle 's first statement! "Natural" cures can be just as effective as "modern" medicine because they cause literally the same chemical reactions in your body, and, they can definitely be a lot more affordable due in no small part to the profit-hungriness of the healthcare industry!!! Modern medicine CAN be centuries late, a prime example of this being fecal bacteriotherapy, which has pretty much just become prominent in 2014. You don't have to tell me how funny it sounds, but it improves lives.

I also hope I don't have to inform everyone of this, but nobody has even mentioned the double-edged nature of antibiotics. They really should only be used when necessary, if you absolutely can't recover through warmth, rest, symptom relief, fluids and all. Fever relief can reduce the effectiveness of your immune system response as well. The last time I came down with a cold I slept it away within 30 hours and 3 doses of nyquil, and had the last half of the weekend free. If you need antibiotics and pain/fever relief to get through the day, you should of course take them, and we're all better off for the option, but most normal citizens are critically underinformed about medicine and that can lead to poor attitudes when it comes to situations basically like Jynx's.

 

[Vaz]

When comparing Western Medicine to TCM, we need to first acknowledge that both have two different modus operandi.

Western Medicine is the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease. The Western mindset is "What is the problem? What is at fault here?". Western Medicine, in order to diagnose the problem and proceed to further treatment etc, needs to use the scientific method to identify such. The ultimate negative of Western Medicine is that it is ever changing. A cure one day, could be poison the next, and vice versa.

TCM is primarily about balance - overall health of oneself - focusing on the vital energy; "chi". The Oriental mindset is "How are you overall? Let's look at the bigger picture." TCM, not operating under any such method of empiricism cannot, and is not able do any type of diagnosis, therefor cannot directly solve problems pertaining to disease, cancer or the like.

Practically, TCM is fine for everyday nuances including headaches, exercise or possibly even diet. But when you've chipped a tooth, suffered a serious injury or find yourself on the floor clutching your heart, it's probably best to call the hospital and leave your appointment with Dr Chan for another time.

When you speak of "science" as the issue, you must be referring to empirical knowledge being limited. As the practices of TCM are traditional, the knowledge of the medicine is immaterial, formless. The philosophy of TCM may very well be beneficial to long-term health, however most people of the West as a matter of fact only care about the short-term; fixing the problem now. This is why TCM does not diagnose disease or anything similar to it. Because it is not going to provide a quick and easy short-term solution. So when people claim superstition, it may very well be, but does that mean it isn't true? You will not be able to dissuade such people in an easy discussion because just like you, they don't understand the other side of the argument. You see things from the Oriental way, they see things from the Western way. TCM is a lifestyle, Western Medicine offers a short-term solution.

There are also deeper elements at play here, misinformation about what really is good about our health, and what directly harms us. If you want to start learning more, you need to be willing to look at the other side. Once you start understanding the foundations of opposing sides, it will help you determine the good and bad in both.

 

[Knots]

Why is it about "chinese medicine"? That seems to expect that all "chinese medicine" works. That seems unlikely. It's better to approach each practice and belief individually and test those independent of each other.

 

[cookie]

we have a name for chinese medicine that works - it's called medicine

(paraphrased from dara o briain)

 

[Cresselia~~]

Why is it about "chinese medicine"? That seems to expect that all "chinese medicine" works. That seems unlikely. It's better to approach each practice and belief individually and test those independent of each other.

Of course all (real) traditional Chinese medicine works.
It's not a belief. It is a system.

It's just "newly discovered" by white scientists, that's why there are so few documentaries about it.
They are putting a large project of testing it, which definitely will come out positive.

Most white people though, only think of hoaxes such as rhino horn harvesting. That's like the only situation you hear about "Chinese medicine" which isn't real Chinese medicine.

It's the same as how Norway is harvesting krills for "health supplements". Which doesn't mean that health supplements are superstition.
Simple as that!

End your bigoted discriminatory actions please!

 

[internet]

If it's a specific system it might be a good idea to find a better name for it than something that implies it describes a collection of all medicinal practices from a certain region, because as-is you at least sound like you're no-true-Scotsmanning or using another bullshit tactic e.g. "All Chinese medicine works, because everything that doesn't work has no medicinal function, so it's not medicine, so it's not Chinese medicine! Hah!" (though maybe that counts as a no-true-Scotsman fallacy)

 

[Rugi]

A lot of modern medicine were discovered by a certain culture. To use Minwu's example of fecal bacteriotherapy, the basis of the idea originated from China as "Yellow soup" which is fecal matter mixed with water. Sure it possibly worked to an extent but I'm almost certain that it would've had some pretty nasty side effects. Thanks to modern medicine this process has now been refined and can now be done with not much risk and a much higher reward. The same can be applied to several other medicinal discoveries such as the chewing of willow being made into aspirin.

Point is that a lot of "Chinese medicine" that works is quite possibly just an unrefined version of modern medicine where they give you the plant or material that the drug is extracted from rather then the drug itself.

Also the Chinese medicine that doesn't work is still Chinese medicine, sorry bud.

 

[Cresselia~~]

If it's a specific system it might be a good idea to find a better name for it than something that implies it describes a collection of all medicinal practices from a certain region, because as-is you at least sound like you're no-true-Scotsmanning or using another bullshit tactic e.g. "All Chinese medicine works, because everything that doesn't work has no medicinal function, so it's not medicine, so it's not Chinese medicine! Hah!" (though maybe that counts as a no-true-Scotsman fallacy)

I'm starting to understand more, but I'm still interested.
Can you talk a bit more about the Scotsmanning?
Thanks