加载中…
个人资料
  • 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:
  • 博客访问:
  • 关注人气:
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
正文 字体大小:

Unnecessary.Sophistry(19.Autonomy.In.Formulating.TCMs.Standards.2)

(2024-07-22 14:57:32)
分类: 医学通论.医学绝不是诡辩
Unnecessary Sophistry
( 19. Autonomy In Formulating 
TCM's Standards .2)




Actually, there is another hidden reason here, 
which is “Western centrism”.

For a long time, this "Western centrism" has 
had an adverse impact on us, leading to many 
persons blindly following the trend without 
principles and causing many serious problems. 

In terms of science and technology, TCM
 ( Traditional Chinese Medicine ) is the 
biggest victim.


Although those persons often say that science 
knows no borders, when it comes to TCM, they 
immediately become hysterical, unreasonable 
and devoid of scholarly demeanor !

Faced with the numerous objective facts that 
TCM can effectively treat diseases, those guys 
have long regarded ignorance as their own 
authority, shamelessness as their own courage, 
and refusal to admit all the facts as their 
own abilities .

As long as the effectiveness and scientificity 
of TCM in treating diseases can be denied, 
even if these guys are shameless, they 
themselves will not care at all !

 
So, for a long time, they have been treating 
traditional Chinese medicine mercilessly. 

Of course, they are particularly adept at 
using professional terminology to conceal 
their bad behavior, such as something like
double-blind experiments.


But if we think carefully about why those 
guys dared to let a large number of facts 
make way for their own superstitious 
double-blind experiments ,we will 
understand that  it is because double-blind 
experiments are a classic method of 
western medicine after all, and they also 
believe that "Everything inherited or 
localized is backward".

Therefore, those guys dare to let a large 
number of facts for a long time make way 
for their own desires ! 

They also dare to ignore the pain and 
helplessness of a large number of similar 
patients for a long time !


So, they know very well that double-blind 
experiments are not suitable for evaluating 
TCM treatment plans, but they insist on 
using double-blind experiments to cause 
trouble for TCM.

In fact, this is malicious harassment !

And the driving force behind this malicious 
is their inherent "Western centrism", which 
is a typical manifestation of Western medicine 
in the field of medicine !

Of course, they do have a seemingly 
plausible reason, which is that western 
medicine can be validated through 
double-blind experiments, why can't 
traditional Chinese medicine be used ?


In fact, traditional Chinese medicine can 
effectively treat many diseases, which 
has been widely reported on television.

Meanwhile, for a long time, double-blind 
experiments have indeed been unable to 
effectively verify such facts, and in the 
face of such situations, their logic is 
simply of gangster !

Because the core essence of medical science 
is to be based on facts, guided by efficacy, 
patient-centered and dedicated to treating 
diseases, rather than something like 
double-blind experiments !


In fact, if certain double-blind experiments 
hinder medical scienec development for a 
long time, then they should be sternly 
questioned:

What qualifications does this double-blind 
experiment have to hinder the development 
of medical scienec for a long time ? 

Can the development of medicine only be 
based on the western medicine model ?

Is medical science just a collection of 
double-blind experimental analysis reports ?


For example, a few years ago, I vomited for 
two or three days due to indigestion, but in 
the end, I only drank two bowls of radish 
soup and completely recovered. 

Do I still need to make a self-criticism 
because this method has not undergone 
double-blind experiments ?


It can be seen that in the face of many 
effective treatment methods, double-blind 
experiments are so insignificant !



0

阅读 收藏 喜欢 打印举报/Report
  

新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 欢迎批评指正

新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 产品答疑

新浪公司 版权所有