5 ms·

A while ago I studied traditional medicine like Ayurveda for a while. A lot of them state that disease starts from the gut . At the time western medicine tota

A while ago I studied traditional medicine like Ayurveda for a while. A lot of them state that disease starts from the gut . At the time western medicine totally rejected this idea and most likely not all disease starts that way. But over the last years I read more and more news that the gut flora and nutrition may have more influence than previously thought. This makes me wonder in what other areas we have blinders on and don’t want to see things that may be beneficial. Meditation is another area that was considered BS when started but suddenly is looked at more seriously.

alexpetralia 6y ago
I've long thought that Western science rediscovers what Eastern mysticism has known for ages. (That being said, this is no slight against Western science - it's discovered a lot more as well!)
- LargeWu 6y ago
  Well, yes and no. People have known that the sky is blue for as long as we've had a word for the concept "blue". It's only more recently that we've discovered the sky is blue because of how different wavelengths of light interact with the atmosphere. It's not that we rediscovered that the sky is blue, it's that we have a more precise understanding of the underlying physics. Medicine isn't that much different. Most eastern medicine is based on cumulative observations made over centuries. If it's effective at treating disease it's the result of understanding the relationships between symptoms, food, and other inputs, even if the underlying pathways are unknown. Western medicine operates at a much lower level of abstraction, which necessarily means more discoveries that clarify the mechanisms of eastern or folk medicine.
  - haltingproblem 6y ago
    Can you name one mechanism of eastern medicine clarified by "Western" medicine? I am looking for clarification beyond a statistical effect (e.g. a clinical trial) which illustrates the underlying biological effect: in-vivo ideally but will take in-vitro or even in-silico.
    - LargeWu 6y ago
      I think inflammation is something we understand at a much deeper level due to western medicine. Chinese medicine has a number of herbs that are thought to reduce inflammation, without necessarily having an understanding of what is happening at a cellular or chemical level understood by western medicine. Western medicine would describe inflammation in terms of immune or hormonal response, down to a cellular, or even sub-cellular level.
  - kingnothing 6y ago
    Said more simply, Western medicine is founded on scientific proof while Eastern medicine is founded on folklore and word of mouth. This isn't to say that Eastern medicine is bad or doesn't work, it simply doesn't have scientific proof behind it (yet).
    - spaetzleesser 6y ago
      I think that’s too simplistic. Eastern medicine is based a lot on observation. Their explanation may be questionable but the observations are often very useful.
kungato 6y ago
"When started"? I don't think it was ever really considered BS other than maybe specifically western medicine in the past max 100 years. Doesn't it make sense that with the progress medicine has done in the last century that we would scrutinise methods which couldn't be scientifically proven?
- viraptor 6y ago
  "eastern" practices are often described in such generic way that any "works / doesn't work" becomes meaningless. Especially in case of ideas connected to mysticism. What does "does meditation work?" even mean. It's like "do pills work?" What kind of pills, what kind of meditation, what kind of effect are we looking at. I've heard many people describing it as BS, but they also heard of it as a miracle cure. I think what changed recently is that a lot more details are included in the conversations.
  - spaetzleesser 6y ago
    “I've heard many people describing it as BS, but they also heard of it as a miracle cure.“ This may actually be true. For some people it works and for others it doesn’t. I think western medicine’s main mistake is to come up with things that work for as many people as possible. But we are very different and may need different things to be healthy.
    - viraptor 6y ago
      It's more cost effective if things work for everyone, but it's not like we reject things because they are not generic enough. See how many different statins you can be on for example if one doesn't work for you. If RNA testing was cheaper we could skip the guessing part (for statins) though and know which one to start with. Same with different techniques in psychology. I don't think any serious professional disagrees with different needs.
abledon 6y ago
yeah, try and explain the concept of 'agni' to people on HN lol
- haltingproblem 6y ago
  Or Panch maha bhuta.
- spaetzleesser 6y ago
  That’s one of the easier ones :).

alexpetralia 6y ago

I've long thought that Western science rediscovers what Eastern mysticism has known for ages. (That being said, this is no slight against Western science - it's discovered a lot more as well!)

LargeWu 6y ago
Well, yes and no. People have known that the sky is blue for as long as we've had a word for the concept "blue". It's only more recently that we've discovered the sky is blue because of how different wavelengths of light interact with the atmosphere. It's not that we rediscovered that the sky is blue, it's that we have a more precise understanding of the underlying physics. Medicine isn't that much different. Most eastern medicine is based on cumulative observations made over centuries. If it's effective at treating disease it's the result of understanding the relationships between symptoms, food, and other inputs, even if the underlying pathways are unknown. Western medicine operates at a much lower level of abstraction, which necessarily means more discoveries that clarify the mechanisms of eastern or folk medicine.
- haltingproblem 6y ago
  Can you name one mechanism of eastern medicine clarified by "Western" medicine? I am looking for clarification beyond a statistical effect (e.g. a clinical trial) which illustrates the underlying biological effect: in-vivo ideally but will take in-vitro or even in-silico.
  - LargeWu 6y ago
    I think inflammation is something we understand at a much deeper level due to western medicine. Chinese medicine has a number of herbs that are thought to reduce inflammation, without necessarily having an understanding of what is happening at a cellular or chemical level understood by western medicine. Western medicine would describe inflammation in terms of immune or hormonal response, down to a cellular, or even sub-cellular level.
- kingnothing 6y ago
  Said more simply, Western medicine is founded on scientific proof while Eastern medicine is founded on folklore and word of mouth. This isn't to say that Eastern medicine is bad or doesn't work, it simply doesn't have scientific proof behind it (yet).
  - spaetzleesser 6y ago
    I think that’s too simplistic. Eastern medicine is based a lot on observation. Their explanation may be questionable but the observations are often very useful.

kungato 6y ago

"When started"? I don't think it was ever really considered BS other than maybe specifically western medicine in the past max 100 years. Doesn't it make sense that with the progress medicine has done in the last century that we would scrutinise methods which couldn't be scientifically proven?

viraptor 6y ago
"eastern" practices are often described in such generic way that any "works / doesn't work" becomes meaningless. Especially in case of ideas connected to mysticism. What does "does meditation work?" even mean. It's like "do pills work?" What kind of pills, what kind of meditation, what kind of effect are we looking at. I've heard many people describing it as BS, but they also heard of it as a miracle cure. I think what changed recently is that a lot more details are included in the conversations.
- spaetzleesser 6y ago
  “I've heard many people describing it as BS, but they also heard of it as a miracle cure.“ This may actually be true. For some people it works and for others it doesn’t. I think western medicine’s main mistake is to come up with things that work for as many people as possible. But we are very different and may need different things to be healthy.
  - viraptor 6y ago
    It's more cost effective if things work for everyone, but it's not like we reject things because they are not generic enough. See how many different statins you can be on for example if one doesn't work for you. If RNA testing was cheaper we could skip the guessing part (for statins) though and know which one to start with. Same with different techniques in psychology. I don't think any serious professional disagrees with different needs.

abledon 6y ago

yeah, try and explain the concept of 'agni' to people on HN lol

haltingproblem 6y ago
Or Panch maha bhuta.
spaetzleesser 6y ago
That’s one of the easier ones :).