其實中醫(yī)什么也治不了——評毛嘉陵《中醫(yī)到底能治哪些病 》
Songbie 今天在我們小區(qū)論壇看到有人轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)的毛嘉陵的文章《中醫(yī)到底能治哪些病 》，大致看了一下，覺得這個哥們也是思維混亂的。于是就大致答復(fù)了一下。也請大家指正。
1. 所謂的"病"和"證"的區(qū)別：
這是中醫(yī)的一貫做法，用"證"來混淆病。
他們一直希望告訴大家，他們和科學(xué)是兩個體系；他們常說，不要用科學(xué)的方法來驗證我們，我們是自成一體的。但是我們都知道科學(xué)是目前唯一正確的知識體系。中醫(yī)一方面拒絕科學(xué)，一方面又想靠科學(xué)給自己貼金，比如動輒來個假新聞：WHO承認(rèn)中醫(yī)為主流醫(yī)術(shù)啦；美國FDA承認(rèn)中醫(yī)中藥啦。。。到后來無一不被指出是騙人。
這點不想多說，反正是扯不清楚。我們來說點實際的。
2. 關(guān)于非典
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
中醫(yī)治乙腦，我沒有讀到過相關(guān)的文章，沒法評論。而且是解放初期的事情，什么神話都有。比如北京好多中醫(yī)都吹自己的祖上曾經(jīng)給毛澤東看過病，但是具有諷刺意味的是，毛澤東警衛(wèi)員回憶錄中說，毛自己清楚說過，自己不信中醫(yī)，雖然是他把中醫(yī)神化的。這種東西都是無法查證的了，中醫(yī)你就他媽的瞎吹吧。
但是對于非典，情況就不同了。我在新語絲上看過大量文章。大致說是在早期全部是西醫(yī)治的，中醫(yī)根本不敢碰。后來等到疫情穩(wěn)定，激素療法被驗證之后，中醫(yī)立馬就上了，立馬就功效無比，又開始包治百病了。
我們還是回到這個帖子里面說的內(nèi)容："2003年10月8日，由世界衛(wèi)生組織(WHO)和國家中醫(yī)藥管理局聯(lián)合主辦的"中醫(yī)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治療SARS國際研討會"。"然后是中醫(yī)抗非典的一大堆好話。。。。。。。
用google一搜，確實有這么一個會議，還有一個報告： http://www.who.int/medicinedocs/index.fcgi?sid=zNnGhaRZ9ee80ca600000000476162bf&a=d&d=Js6170e
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
我down下來看了一下。
首先介紹一下背景： In order to better understand the potential of complementary treatment for patients with SARS and to encourage robust clinical research on SARS and its treatment with traditional medicine, the Chinese Government requested the guidance of WHO and support for 13 clinical trials of integrated treatment with TCM and Western medicine for SARS patients. The Nippon Foundation provided the financial support for WHO to organize an International Expert Meeting on Review of Treatment of SARS by Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Integration of Traditional Chinese Medicine with Western Medicine, in Beijing, China from 8 to 10 October 2003. Sixty-eight experts from seven countriesincluding Hong Kong SAR, Japan, the Netherlands, the People's Republic of China, Thailand, Viet Nam and the United States of America, attended the meeting (Annex 1: list of participants).
, http://www.www.srpcoatings.com
原來是應(yīng)中國政府的請求，為了potential of complementary treatment而開的一個會議，討論的也是integrate d treatment with TCM and Western medicine for SARS patients(中西醫(yī)結(jié)合)，報告都是有中國政府提供的(大陸10個，香港3個，在報告后面提到的。)
我們再來看看人家的的review意見和結(jié)論：
Results of research based on the level of evidence First level There were sufficient data in the clinical reports to show that integrated treatment with TCM and Western medicine for patients with SARS is safe. (第一個層次上來說是安全的)
, http://www.www.srpcoatings.com
Second level Of the reported trials, only two clinical trials included patients who were randomly selected for the studies, the others were prospective cohort studies or retrospective studies. The experts considered that the data were insufficient although it was concluded that there could be potential clinical benefits from integrated treatment with TCM and Western medicine for patients with SARS. (第二個層次上說，這些實驗中只有兩個是包含了隨機選取的病例，其他的都是不嚴(yán)格的科學(xué)實驗；專家們認(rèn)為，數(shù)據(jù)是不夠充分的，雖然可以認(rèn)為采用中西醫(yī)結(jié)合會有一些潛在的好處)
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
Third level The experts noted that the data in the reports were inconclusive. An example of this is the clinical observation that the mortality rate is lower for the patients treated with integrated TCM and Western medicine than for those treated with Western medicine alone. As the diagnosis of SARS is very difficult to confirm, and some cases may be misdiagnosed, this could lead to a lower recorded mortality rate. In the prevention studies, the response rate to the questionnaires was only 40% among those subjects who had taken the prevention formula; this was too low to enable an accurate assessment of its effects. In the study on convalescence, the comparison was made between only two groups, one treated with TCM and one with exercise. There was no comparison group that received neither treatment nor exercise programmes.
, http://www.www.srpcoatings.com
(專家認(rèn)為報告中的數(shù)據(jù)是inconclusive的，也就是無法用來做定論用的。而且他們特別批判了中醫(yī)吹的最大的一個牛皮：中西醫(yī)結(jié)合的死亡率低于僅用西醫(yī)治療的。)
總而言之，WHO專家的結(jié)論是：中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治非典是安全的，可能有潛在的好處。其他的就沒有了。我就根本看不出來毛嘉陵文章中鼓吹的那么牛B的中醫(yī)能夠治非典的描述。
而且除了結(jié)論之外，人家還說的很清楚： Currently, the major challenges for the treatment of SARS are: the source of the SARS virus and mode of transmission are still not well understood; there are problems with diagnostic tools; there is no effective treatment; and there is no vaccine for SARS. The above-mentioned difficulties and challenges have motivated national authorities, health workers and scientists to explore the potential of complementary treatment. 最后一句話there is no vaccine for SARS 就是狠狠的抽了毛嘉陵一個嘴巴。(毛嘉陵在文章中居然敢批判現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學(xué)針對病毒研發(fā)疫苗的策略。他根本就不知道對付這些流行性的病毒感染最有效的方法就是疫苗。)
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
統(tǒng)觀全文，人家的報告對于中醫(yī)的作用的評價說的再清楚不過了，就是個potential clinical benefits (而且是在中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治療的基礎(chǔ)上)，對于中國政府提供的10份報告的評價其實再負面不過了。如果一般的博士論文要是攤上insufficient， inconclusive的字眼，應(yīng)該都是畢不了業(yè)的(我自己的理解，未必正確。)但是中醫(yī)的信徒們，從報告中摘出只言片語來吹牛，更是暴露了中醫(yī)信徒的無恥!!
Ps: 我還順便看了一下香港的第3份報告的abstract，第一份說的是藥方，看不懂。第二個和第三個報告都說得是在SARS病人康復(fù)階段用中醫(yī)藥可能會有一些效果。
其中第二份報告開篇第一句： It is unknown whether Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) can affect the course of recovery of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). (不知道中醫(yī)對于SARS病人康復(fù)是否有作用)
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
其中第三份報告開篇第一句： Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is not the first-line treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR). (中醫(yī)從來不是SARS治療的首要手段)
從這個角度看，香港人說的還是相對客觀些。
大陸提供的一份都沒有看，但是想必WHO專家專門批判的中醫(yī)治療SARS死亡率低于西醫(yī)的觀點應(yīng)該出自這10份報告中。所以根本不值得細看。
我還有一個感覺：中國政府提供這些素材，請WHO開了這個一個會，是不是有點自取其辱的味道？
3. 關(guān)于針灸
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
在WHO的網(wǎng)頁上，對于針灸的描述如下(http://www.who.int/topics/acupuncture/en/)：
Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese system of therapy, in which long, fine needles are inserted through the skin at specific points. Acupuncture has been shown to be effective in relieving postoperative pain, nausea during pregnancy, nausea and vomiting resulting from chemotherapy, and dental pain. It can also alleviate anxiety, panic disorders and insomnia, and has very few side-effects.
從這個描述中，根本看不出來針灸能治43種疾病。它說的只有：減輕手術(shù)后疼痛；懷孕期間惡心；化療引起的惡心和嘔吐；牙疼；焦慮；panic disorders(由驚嚇引起的神經(jīng)錯亂？)；失眠；所以一切的一切，應(yīng)該說人家認(rèn)可的只是針灸在輔助治療中的作用吧 ？!
我沒有找到WHO推薦用針灸治療43種疾病的出處，有知道的大家可以共享一下來分析分析。但是我敢打賭，WHO如果真有這個list，也肯定是用的alternative， complementary的字眼。, 百拇醫(yī)藥
1. 所謂的"病"和"證"的區(qū)別：
這是中醫(yī)的一貫做法，用"證"來混淆病。
他們一直希望告訴大家，他們和科學(xué)是兩個體系；他們常說，不要用科學(xué)的方法來驗證我們，我們是自成一體的。但是我們都知道科學(xué)是目前唯一正確的知識體系。中醫(yī)一方面拒絕科學(xué)，一方面又想靠科學(xué)給自己貼金，比如動輒來個假新聞：WHO承認(rèn)中醫(yī)為主流醫(yī)術(shù)啦；美國FDA承認(rèn)中醫(yī)中藥啦。。。到后來無一不被指出是騙人。
這點不想多說，反正是扯不清楚。我們來說點實際的。
2. 關(guān)于非典
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
中醫(yī)治乙腦，我沒有讀到過相關(guān)的文章，沒法評論。而且是解放初期的事情，什么神話都有。比如北京好多中醫(yī)都吹自己的祖上曾經(jīng)給毛澤東看過病，但是具有諷刺意味的是，毛澤東警衛(wèi)員回憶錄中說，毛自己清楚說過，自己不信中醫(yī)，雖然是他把中醫(yī)神化的。這種東西都是無法查證的了，中醫(yī)你就他媽的瞎吹吧。
但是對于非典，情況就不同了。我在新語絲上看過大量文章。大致說是在早期全部是西醫(yī)治的，中醫(yī)根本不敢碰。后來等到疫情穩(wěn)定，激素療法被驗證之后，中醫(yī)立馬就上了，立馬就功效無比，又開始包治百病了。
我們還是回到這個帖子里面說的內(nèi)容："2003年10月8日，由世界衛(wèi)生組織(WHO)和國家中醫(yī)藥管理局聯(lián)合主辦的"中醫(yī)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治療SARS國際研討會"。"然后是中醫(yī)抗非典的一大堆好話。。。。。。。
用google一搜，確實有這么一個會議，還有一個報告： http://www.who.int/medicinedocs/index.fcgi?sid=zNnGhaRZ9ee80ca600000000476162bf&a=d&d=Js6170e
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
我down下來看了一下。
首先介紹一下背景： In order to better understand the potential of complementary treatment for patients with SARS and to encourage robust clinical research on SARS and its treatment with traditional medicine, the Chinese Government requested the guidance of WHO and support for 13 clinical trials of integrated treatment with TCM and Western medicine for SARS patients. The Nippon Foundation provided the financial support for WHO to organize an International Expert Meeting on Review of Treatment of SARS by Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Integration of Traditional Chinese Medicine with Western Medicine, in Beijing, China from 8 to 10 October 2003. Sixty-eight experts from seven countriesincluding Hong Kong SAR, Japan, the Netherlands, the People's Republic of China, Thailand, Viet Nam and the United States of America, attended the meeting (Annex 1: list of participants).
, http://www.www.srpcoatings.com
原來是應(yīng)中國政府的請求，為了potential of complementary treatment而開的一個會議，討論的也是integrate d treatment with TCM and Western medicine for SARS patients(中西醫(yī)結(jié)合)，報告都是有中國政府提供的(大陸10個，香港3個，在報告后面提到的。)
我們再來看看人家的的review意見和結(jié)論：
Results of research based on the level of evidence First level There were sufficient data in the clinical reports to show that integrated treatment with TCM and Western medicine for patients with SARS is safe. (第一個層次上來說是安全的)
, http://www.www.srpcoatings.com
Second level Of the reported trials, only two clinical trials included patients who were randomly selected for the studies, the others were prospective cohort studies or retrospective studies. The experts considered that the data were insufficient although it was concluded that there could be potential clinical benefits from integrated treatment with TCM and Western medicine for patients with SARS. (第二個層次上說，這些實驗中只有兩個是包含了隨機選取的病例，其他的都是不嚴(yán)格的科學(xué)實驗；專家們認(rèn)為，數(shù)據(jù)是不夠充分的，雖然可以認(rèn)為采用中西醫(yī)結(jié)合會有一些潛在的好處)
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
Third level The experts noted that the data in the reports were inconclusive. An example of this is the clinical observation that the mortality rate is lower for the patients treated with integrated TCM and Western medicine than for those treated with Western medicine alone. As the diagnosis of SARS is very difficult to confirm, and some cases may be misdiagnosed, this could lead to a lower recorded mortality rate. In the prevention studies, the response rate to the questionnaires was only 40% among those subjects who had taken the prevention formula; this was too low to enable an accurate assessment of its effects. In the study on convalescence, the comparison was made between only two groups, one treated with TCM and one with exercise. There was no comparison group that received neither treatment nor exercise programmes.
, http://www.www.srpcoatings.com
(專家認(rèn)為報告中的數(shù)據(jù)是inconclusive的，也就是無法用來做定論用的。而且他們特別批判了中醫(yī)吹的最大的一個牛皮：中西醫(yī)結(jié)合的死亡率低于僅用西醫(yī)治療的。)
總而言之，WHO專家的結(jié)論是：中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治非典是安全的，可能有潛在的好處。其他的就沒有了。我就根本看不出來毛嘉陵文章中鼓吹的那么牛B的中醫(yī)能夠治非典的描述。
而且除了結(jié)論之外，人家還說的很清楚： Currently, the major challenges for the treatment of SARS are: the source of the SARS virus and mode of transmission are still not well understood; there are problems with diagnostic tools; there is no effective treatment; and there is no vaccine for SARS. The above-mentioned difficulties and challenges have motivated national authorities, health workers and scientists to explore the potential of complementary treatment. 最后一句話there is no vaccine for SARS 就是狠狠的抽了毛嘉陵一個嘴巴。(毛嘉陵在文章中居然敢批判現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學(xué)針對病毒研發(fā)疫苗的策略。他根本就不知道對付這些流行性的病毒感染最有效的方法就是疫苗。)
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
統(tǒng)觀全文，人家的報告對于中醫(yī)的作用的評價說的再清楚不過了，就是個potential clinical benefits (而且是在中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治療的基礎(chǔ)上)，對于中國政府提供的10份報告的評價其實再負面不過了。如果一般的博士論文要是攤上insufficient， inconclusive的字眼，應(yīng)該都是畢不了業(yè)的(我自己的理解，未必正確。)但是中醫(yī)的信徒們，從報告中摘出只言片語來吹牛，更是暴露了中醫(yī)信徒的無恥!!
Ps: 我還順便看了一下香港的第3份報告的abstract，第一份說的是藥方，看不懂。第二個和第三個報告都說得是在SARS病人康復(fù)階段用中醫(yī)藥可能會有一些效果。
其中第二份報告開篇第一句： It is unknown whether Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) can affect the course of recovery of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). (不知道中醫(yī)對于SARS病人康復(fù)是否有作用)
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
其中第三份報告開篇第一句： Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is not the first-line treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR). (中醫(yī)從來不是SARS治療的首要手段)
從這個角度看，香港人說的還是相對客觀些。
大陸提供的一份都沒有看，但是想必WHO專家專門批判的中醫(yī)治療SARS死亡率低于西醫(yī)的觀點應(yīng)該出自這10份報告中。所以根本不值得細看。
我還有一個感覺：中國政府提供這些素材，請WHO開了這個一個會，是不是有點自取其辱的味道？
3. 關(guān)于針灸
, 百拇醫(yī)藥
在WHO的網(wǎng)頁上，對于針灸的描述如下(http://www.who.int/topics/acupuncture/en/)：
Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese system of therapy, in which long, fine needles are inserted through the skin at specific points. Acupuncture has been shown to be effective in relieving postoperative pain, nausea during pregnancy, nausea and vomiting resulting from chemotherapy, and dental pain. It can also alleviate anxiety, panic disorders and insomnia, and has very few side-effects.
從這個描述中，根本看不出來針灸能治43種疾病。它說的只有：減輕手術(shù)后疼痛；懷孕期間惡心；化療引起的惡心和嘔吐；牙疼；焦慮；panic disorders(由驚嚇引起的神經(jīng)錯亂？)；失眠；所以一切的一切，應(yīng)該說人家認(rèn)可的只是針灸在輔助治療中的作用吧 ？!
我沒有找到WHO推薦用針灸治療43種疾病的出處，有知道的大家可以共享一下來分析分析。但是我敢打賭，WHO如果真有這個list，也肯定是用的alternative， complementary的字眼。, 百拇醫(yī)藥
百拇醫(yī)藥網(wǎng) http://www.www.srpcoatings.com/html/200802/1355/7917.htm