To my surprise, the first sentence quoted by the author in the preface is also the first sentence of the text, called Huangdi Neijing, which is the earliest medical classic in China and one of the four classic works of traditional medicine. This also made me interested in continuing reading.
I used to have an opinion about Zhihu, but I found it unreasonable after quarreling with others. I will wait for you in front. If there is anything wrong with the theory of traditional Chinese medicine, it is based on yin-yang and five elements, which is simply ignorance for modern people. What about western medicine? I see that western medicine students who have no mathematics finally learn objective idealism. Isn't that ridiculous? I don't object to Chinese medicine because of Yin-Yang and Five Elements, and I don't object to Western medicine because of the influence of objective idealism. Both of them have their own theories, but they are written in two languages, namely "classical materialism" and "objective idealism". It is a limitation for a modern person to understand Chinese medicine with "classical materialism", which is not a problem of Chinese medicine.
Then why did you say "I'll wait for you in front"? This is like saying that one group of people know classical mechanics first, while another group knows quantum mechanics first. Let's call the former a and the latter b for the time being. We all know that classical mechanics has its scope of application, but for B, it will be regarded as fallacy, just like observing an elephant with a microscope, it is difficult to see that an elephant is a four-legged animal. So B will deny A first: "You are unscientific, pseudoscience." Until one day, B looked at the whole elephant with a microscope and drew a picture as complicated as the Milky Way. On the whole, it is found that A is also correct on the macro level. So is classical mechanics a science? When is it a science? Is it because B thinks that science is science, not that science is not science? Is science an objective attribute, or does it change because of B's cognitive change? Or, because B uses a microscope, it's pseudoscience, and it's science with myopia? Human cognition is limited in a period of time, and the tools used to observe the world are also limited. If you use observation to determine the conclusion, then this conclusion will change with time. In this case, how should we view the science of the present and the past? What do we think of classical mechanics now? Can we treat TCM in the way of classical mechanics?
Perhaps the present science cannot explain the theory of TCM, but it may also know the limitations of modern medicine. And through this book, I also see that the progress of modern medicine will gradually explain the problems that Chinese medicine did not explain before, and finally it seems that "all roads lead to the same goal." This is what I call "I'll wait for you in front". Therefore, I quite agree with the words used in Baidu Encyclopedia. Don't say "traditional Chinese medicine" and "western medicine". I use "traditional medicine" and "modern medicine" instead. Let's put down the debate about whether Chinese medicine is scientific or not. Maybe it's not the Chinese medicine, it's the eyes.
Many ideas in the preface will be discussed in detail below, so I won't repeat them here.
② Description of the Properties of Leigong's Processed Drugs: Entering the Heart and Lung Meridian.
3 "Herbal Classic": Entering Taiyin and Jueyin.
Functional indication
Breaking blood and activating qi, dredging menstruation and relieving pain. It can be used for treating heart pain, arm pain, abdominal mass, women's blood stasis amenorrhea, postpartum abdominal pain, traumatic injury and carbuncle.
For chest pain, dysmenorrhea and limb pain due to qi stagnation and blood stasis, it is often combined with Yuanhu and Xiangfu.
① "Herbal Medicine of Tang Dynasty": it focuses on internal accumulation, reduces qi and breaks blood, eliminates wind and heat, and eliminates carbuncle and swelling. Better than Yujin.
② "Rihuazi Materia Medica": treating blood clots, carbuncle swelling, dredging menstruation, treating traumatic stress and blood stasis, reducing swelling and detoxifying; Stop the storm, calm down and eat.
Materia Medica: Treating flatulence and postpartum septicemia.
④ Outline: Treating wind arthralgia and arm pain.
⑤ Materia Medica: In addition to qi stagnation and flatulence in the heart, cold food accumulates fatigue.
⑥ Compendium of Materia Medica: Treating fullness of qi, wheezing, epigastric pain, abdominal pain, shoulder pain, arm pain, joint pain and hernia.
⑦ Medical Forest Compilation: Treating cold-dampness arthralgia of limbs.
⑧ Modern and practical Chinese medicine: it is an aromatic stomach-invigorating medicine, which is beneficial to the disinfection of biliary tract and liver. Used for jaundice, chest distress and pain. It is also a hemostatic agent for hematemesis, nosebleed and hematuria, and hemorrhoids. External use for abscess and trauma.
dosage
Oral administration: decoction, 1 ~ 3 yuan; I still took the pills and dispersed them. External use: grinding and dressing.
Turmeric is really good, but don't use it indiscriminately. If you think turmeric is a panacea that can make the body produce all the antidote, then you are astray.
Both starch and glucose can cause the increase of glucose in blood.
Soda and fruit juice contain a lot of fructose.
I don't think it is necessary to strictly control the intake of carbohydrates, but the intake ratio must be greatly reduced. Because insufficient carbohydrate intake will inevitably lead to obesity. The main source of carbohydrates is staple food.
Increase the intake of fat, such as fish, milk, nuts, beans and peanuts.
There is no need to control cholesterol intake, such as eggs.