Thank you!
Question Details
Pemphigus Case
by
Lewter
-
January 6, 2021
Thank you!
Replies
by
naturevet
January 7, 2021
Hi there,
Hoxsey-like Combination is generally my old stand-by for Pemphigus
Now if the pulse is hard, wide, firm and deep, then Qing Ying Tang coupled with Xiao Chai Hu Tang may work here as well. The XCHT is especially indicated with personality changes in response to pred.
There would be no issue in using all three together if you were uncertain
Hope that helps!
Steve
Hoxsey-like Combination is generally my old stand-by for Pemphigus
Now if the pulse is hard, wide, firm and deep, then Qing Ying Tang coupled with Xiao Chai Hu Tang may work here as well. The XCHT is especially indicated with personality changes in response to pred.
There would be no issue in using all three together if you were uncertain
Hope that helps!
Steve
by
Lewter
January 7, 2021
Thanks!
by
Lewter
January 8, 2021
Dear Steve, I had this patient on dietary changes and Damp Heat Derma formula. I have had numerous suggestions including Jing Tang's Blood heat formula and Mu Dan Pi from the AAVA lectures on Immune diseases. I read your article in AHVMA journal on the subject. I have always been curious about the differences between K'an suggestions and Jing Tang suggestions for herbs. It seems that Folks from Chi usually use Jing Tang formulas, whereas I use both. Your cancer formulas seem a much different approach than the Jing Tang approach. Are there two different schools of thought regarding herbal prescriptions?
by
naturevet
January 8, 2021
Hi again,
Yes, there are different approaches, to be sure. My training is in Classical Chinese medicine, which is more broad than Traditional Chinese medicine. As a result, I draw heavily from formulas in the Shang Han Lun and other classics, which are otherwise uncommonly used in TCM. TCM focuses on Zang-Fu physiology almost exclusively, in order to keep the curriculum concise, I guess. My bias is to use whatever formula seems most indicated, even if it is not a Zang-Fu formula.
The other big difference is that I emphasize classical formulas, meaning formulas that have been in use for several centuries at a minimum. Jing Tang uses almost entirely their own proprietary formulas, citing classical formulas as a source of inspiration, but then going on to add so many new herbs that they create a defacto new formula which no longer has been tested by time.
My own view of herbal medicine (and that of my teachers) is that herbal medicine is more finicky than that, and that one wrong ingredient can spoil the effect, much like one wrong spice (or even too much of the right one) can ruin your dinner. Their bias is that formulas that have withstood the test of time and which were developed by the great masters of Chinese medicine must surely be almost the very best we can do, so I have been taught to know them intimately, lean on them heavily and alter them only very sparingly in the same manner as the masters themselves, to ensure their effects are not only preserved but enhanced.
JT herbs are developed and promoted by the Chi Institute and carry monikers which, on the surface of it, make them easy to use and prescribe. The fact that they are developed solely by the Chi Institute explains why you aren't finding them anywhere else. Clinical expectations for each formula vary as to exactly how well they are expected to work in their respective diseases. Many Chi graduates still lean heavily on conventional treatment options and have to pick and choose the conditions they decide to tackle with herbs.
The classical school requires a lot more knowledge of Chinese medicine and is more the focus of CIVT and the Kan Essentials line. The formulas they teach reflect the maxim in Classical Chinese medicine of "One disease, many treatments; One treatment, many diseases", which means you can't label in good conscience a formula as being the treatment for a particular disease, since many others may also work, and since that one formula may also treat a lot of other conditions. This makes classical formulas harder to learn and prescribe, but the clinical expectation is that if you master that art, you will be able to treat almost anything and do it very effectively, eliminating reliance on drugs and surgery.
So what is the better approach? In the end, it's a personal choice depending on your interest level and whether you want to be beholden to just one company, or be able to use herbs from lots of different sources. We have mostly Chi graduates in our ranks because their approach is easier to learn but they don't know how to use anyone's products but Jing Tang's, because they haven't really learned Chinese herbal medicine, just Jing Tang herbal medicine.
For me, and for many of my students, I can say there is a very high level of professional satisfaction born from getting consistent success regardless what we are treating; and from being able to use products from lots of different sources, while understanding fully what they might bring to the table, because of a broad and detailed level of training.
Naturally, I see a role for both approaches, because we are all different. Hopefully that answers your questions and helps you choose a path for yourself going forward
Steve
Yes, there are different approaches, to be sure. My training is in Classical Chinese medicine, which is more broad than Traditional Chinese medicine. As a result, I draw heavily from formulas in the Shang Han Lun and other classics, which are otherwise uncommonly used in TCM. TCM focuses on Zang-Fu physiology almost exclusively, in order to keep the curriculum concise, I guess. My bias is to use whatever formula seems most indicated, even if it is not a Zang-Fu formula.
The other big difference is that I emphasize classical formulas, meaning formulas that have been in use for several centuries at a minimum. Jing Tang uses almost entirely their own proprietary formulas, citing classical formulas as a source of inspiration, but then going on to add so many new herbs that they create a defacto new formula which no longer has been tested by time.
My own view of herbal medicine (and that of my teachers) is that herbal medicine is more finicky than that, and that one wrong ingredient can spoil the effect, much like one wrong spice (or even too much of the right one) can ruin your dinner. Their bias is that formulas that have withstood the test of time and which were developed by the great masters of Chinese medicine must surely be almost the very best we can do, so I have been taught to know them intimately, lean on them heavily and alter them only very sparingly in the same manner as the masters themselves, to ensure their effects are not only preserved but enhanced.
JT herbs are developed and promoted by the Chi Institute and carry monikers which, on the surface of it, make them easy to use and prescribe. The fact that they are developed solely by the Chi Institute explains why you aren't finding them anywhere else. Clinical expectations for each formula vary as to exactly how well they are expected to work in their respective diseases. Many Chi graduates still lean heavily on conventional treatment options and have to pick and choose the conditions they decide to tackle with herbs.
The classical school requires a lot more knowledge of Chinese medicine and is more the focus of CIVT and the Kan Essentials line. The formulas they teach reflect the maxim in Classical Chinese medicine of "One disease, many treatments; One treatment, many diseases", which means you can't label in good conscience a formula as being the treatment for a particular disease, since many others may also work, and since that one formula may also treat a lot of other conditions. This makes classical formulas harder to learn and prescribe, but the clinical expectation is that if you master that art, you will be able to treat almost anything and do it very effectively, eliminating reliance on drugs and surgery.
So what is the better approach? In the end, it's a personal choice depending on your interest level and whether you want to be beholden to just one company, or be able to use herbs from lots of different sources. We have mostly Chi graduates in our ranks because their approach is easier to learn but they don't know how to use anyone's products but Jing Tang's, because they haven't really learned Chinese herbal medicine, just Jing Tang herbal medicine.
For me, and for many of my students, I can say there is a very high level of professional satisfaction born from getting consistent success regardless what we are treating; and from being able to use products from lots of different sources, while understanding fully what they might bring to the table, because of a broad and detailed level of training.
Naturally, I see a role for both approaches, because we are all different. Hopefully that answers your questions and helps you choose a path for yourself going forward
Steve
Reply to this question.
You must be logged in to reply