![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
(TCM) is a pretty bad disambiguator, as it in itself is ambigous. I suggest Meridian (physiology), Meridian (medicine) or Meridian (chinese medicine). -- Chuq 10:18, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
This section preserves history for GFDL licensing compliance; please do not remove.
The following text, inserted 07:28, 14 Apr 2005 Dpbsmith, is a copy of text that was solely authored in a rapid series of edits, the last on 23:33, 12 Apr 2005, by 67.127.72.243, in an article entitled "Aligned water theory." This notice is being provided so that history is preserved in the event that Aligned water theory is voted for deletion. Dpbsmith (talk) 12:30, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The above statement is contrary to the citation which identifies NO existence of meridians. I edited the statement to conform to the conclusion of the citation.
The above excerpted from Hooke, A Review of Thought Field Therapy, Vol. 3:2; Article 3, The International Electronic Journal of Innovations in the Study of the Traumatization Process and Methods for Reducing or Eliminating Related Human Suffering. -- Michael.spangler 13:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
This is a very bold yet vauge and unreferenced claim (which I removed). It sounds like something unsubstantiated that someone who believes in the system would repeat. If this claim is true, it needs to be much better supported. First of all what are the predictions of the "modern scientific theory of [the] meridian system"? Is there such a thing? What specific research results have upheld these predictions? Some references would definitely needed for such a potentially controversial claim.
I marked the section which lists the meridians of the arms and legs for cleanup for two reasons:
-- Beland 02:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Mugwumpjism ( talk) 07:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
So I am not sure this is the place to discuss exactly, but the reason as to why the stomach meridian is in the leg, is it actually runs from the head (two branches that come together near the chin), then proceeds down the torso all the way to the 2nd toe. It is eastern science or eastern medicine. I attempted to find / link to a source on the internet, but unfortunately I can't find a single source that one would consider reputable .. I expect it will have to be book references in Acupuncture. However, I would comment that Western scientific proof is not the way to go here.
-- User:Clear2Go 20:28 EDT (Sep 15, 2006)
What's the difference between References and Bibliography? If it's nonexistent maybe the section authors ought to merge them. Yasha 82.44.114.57 17:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I think recent re-discovery, in Korea, of the "Bonghan ducts" should also be discussed in this/related sections.
It would likewise be a good idea, I feel, to have at least a brief biographical entry for Kim, Bong Han (Bonghan). He was the researcher who originally discovered the existance of tubular "ducts" that seem to correspond to classical TCM meridians in their anatomical paths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valdi Yegorov ( talk • contribs) 18:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Fractal fractal dimension channels and collaterals shape and dissection structure
(non-gap, non-smooth, non-pipeline, rough (crude), cell backfill fractal fractal dimension channels and collaterals) in 1996, Deng Yu et al, Beijing Jiuxianqiao Hospital.
Channels and collaterals' fractal fractal dimension characteristic is the channels and collaterals shape dissection, the organizational structure foundation and the essence. Why is this also channels and collaterals' dissection structure not easily the basic reason which was discovered by the predecessor. It has promulgated channels and collaterals' fractal fractal dimension characteristic, also revealed for the channels and collaterals mass transfer mechanism opened the new path, enabled to have the fractal dimension characteristic, the similar fractal dimension membrane (filtration, ultra filtered with reverse osmosis) or the chromatographic analysis column type “microscopic dynamic `static shuts activity open' the fractal fractal dimension `cell backfill ' the channels and collaterals model” to arise at the historic moment.
7, Oct. 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.147.27.138 ( talk) 01:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Per consensus above (see "Page name" section above) I have restored the original page name, which was apparently changed using a redirect, without any discussion at all here where it counts. Meridian is the common English term, and this is the English Wikipedia. -- Fyslee / talk 01:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be such an overuse of Chinese characters as to make reading difficult. Especially the lead suffers from this problem. An old discussion about this problem and article exists here, and I propose doing something about the problem. Since some editors have made good faith efforts to do what they thought was an improvement of the article, and I'd hate to see such information get lost and such work get wasted, I suggest making the existing lead a footnote and then use it's exclusively English version as the new lead. If no objections are forthcoming soon, I'll make an attempt and see if it floats. -- Fyslee / talk 06:06, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Where's one or more pictures illustrating the position of meridians? So shockingly absent, makes me think it's still a stub level article. 69.196.191.134 ( talk) 14:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I've never done this before and am not familiar with how to make edits to Wikipedia pages, but I thought this quote might be rather fitting and helpful if someone else could properly add it to the article or reference it:
In a typical acupuncture study, researchers would inject a tracer or radio-isotope into an energy point along a specific meridian system or channel in a subjects body as directed by a skilled acupuncturist. The purpose was to see if the tracer would move and if it did, would it move along the meridians or channels as they appear on a classic meridian chart. Time and time again, they found the tracer would immediately flow along that same, specific, meridian channel where the tracer had been injected.
The researchers also found if they injected the tracer even slightly outside of a specific energy point, all the tracer did was pool in that spot. It went nowhere. These results clearly demonstrated the existence of a system of otherwise invisible meridians or channels within the human body, just as Eastern scholars had been teaching for many millenia. Here was proof of a system that was previously unrecognized and unknown to modern medicine. I found that to be truly astounding.
Furthermore, these studies were not conducted just in China and Japan but also in Europe and even here in the United States including the highly regarded Menninger Foundation. The studies were significant enough that insurance companies began covering acupuncture treatments and most do today.(pp.268-9)
Chunyi Lin and Gary Rebstock (2003) Born a Healer. Spring Forest Publishing. ISBN 0-9740944-1-2
Soulstrummer ( talk) 16:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)soulstrummer
A web search for "meridian radioisotope" retrieves some references to experiments conducted by a "Pierre de Vernejoul" at the University of Paris: P. de Vernejoul et al., "Etude Des Meridiens D'Acupuncture par les Traceurs Radioactifs", published in 1985 in "Bulletin de l'Académie Nationale de Médecine", whatever that means. It seems he forgot to publish his article on le web, so I can't read it. However, I could download an English-language article, Kovacs et al, "Experimental Study on Radioactive Pathways of Hypodermically Injected Technetium-99m", 1992, which repeats the experiment in beagles in Barthelona. It appeared in a journal calling itself the "Journal of Nuclear Medicine", published by some group called the "Society of Nuclear Medicine". In any case I agree with Brangifer that we need to have some standards for reliable sources. A journal which publishes research about acupuncture could hardly be considered reputable enough to cite on Wikipedia. We don't want to mislead people away from proven treatments by letting them think that meridians are real! By the way, please don't give attention to Felix Mann, he says disreputable things like "It is unfortunately the case that many doctors, even when faced with one or several patients who have been cured by acupuncture where their own efforts have been fruitless, refuse to believe the evidence." (Mann, "Acupuncture", 1971, p. 1) What evidence? If acupuncture were really effective, then someone would have gotten a Nobel prize for it years ago. 80.189.139.93 ( talk) 12:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
I suggest that Eight Extraordinary Channels should be merged into Meridian (Chinese medicine) for the following reasons (in no particular order):
I don't think this should be a problematic move, but I wanted to list in out before doing it just to be sure. Thanks. -- Transity ( talk • contribs) 17:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
-- 222.64.222.219 ( talk) 08:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I realize that my recent addition of a link to Bonghan System is likely to be controversial but this new research has plenty of published science behind it and has been confirmed in different labs in a number of countries. With these new discoveries a statement which claims that there is no anatomical evidence of meridians misrepresents a truth that has become more controverial and less absolute. DavidWis ( talk) 18:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I removed the following from the end of the lead as it's not written properly, and since I don't read Chinese I can't fix it:
Brangifer ( talk) 18:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
This last section solely deals with the hypothesis of a certain Dr. Tsai from Taiwan. This hypothesis is not based on traditional knowledge and it definetely is not rooted in science. "The repair nerves in the brain (and spine?) are grouped into many serpentine chains which are called "meridians" (Dzingluo or Zingluo經絡) by the Chinese school of medicine" - a statement like this is bound to draw fire both from traditionalists and scientists alike (plus, Dr. Tsai doesn't have any evidence to back up his little theory). I will therefore remove this section. Mallexikon ( talk) 06:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Flow of qi through the meridians | ||
Zang-fu | Aspect | Hours |
Lung | taiyin | 0300-0500 |
Large Intestine | yangming | 0500-0700 |
Stomach | yangming | 0700-0900 |
Spleen | taiyin | 0900-1100 |
Heart | shaoyin | 1100–1300 |
Small Intestine | taiyang | 1300–1500 |
Bladder | taiyang | 1500–1700 |
Kidney | shaoyin | 1700–1900 |
Pericardium | jueyin | 1900–2100 |
San Jiao | shaoyang | 2100–2300 |
Gallbladder | shaoyang | 2300-0100 |
Liver | jueyin | 0100-0300 |
Lung (repeats cycle) |
I am looking for RS for anything I might have deleted from the acupuncture article as NRS. One thing was this table, part of which is in this article. Someone might want to check this for RS and integrate it into the existing table. PPdd ( talk) 03:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
A number of websites and books (such as books on the Tao) claim that the existence of meridians has been demonstrated by Japanese and German researchers. They cite: Nakatani Y: Skin electric resistance and ryodoraku. J Autonomic Nerve 6:52, 1956. Voll R: Twenty years of electroacupuncture diagnosis in Germany: a progressive report. Am J Acupunct 3:7-17, 1975. In particular, they cite a paper by Sir Thomas Lewis, as having found an "unknown nervous system" published in the British Medical Journal in February, 1937 and entitled The NOCIFENSOR SYSTEM OF NERVES AND ITS REACTIONS. It seems me that a device like the German NMR-mouse could detect these elusive meridians once and for all. What is the hang-up with today's means? Isn't there a way of conclusively determining once and for all whether or not meridians exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyMath ( talk • contribs) 00:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
"Pseudoscience" should be added as a category for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.237.95.119 ( talk) 00:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
1)Why is the article biased against Chinese medicine? It seems that an article discussing TCM and meridian theory would be more open to exploring the possibility of its existence, or at least acknowledging the debate over its usage. Less anti-meridian rhetoric could greatly improve the neutrality of the article and the validity of its information. 2)Why are over half of the sources from the 1990s or earlier? Many of the sources, especially those condemning meridian theory, are over 20 years old. Since that time, more research has been done by the NIH and NSF, as well as internationally, that have influence the use and acceptance of meridian theory and TCM in Western cultures. References to such published, peer-review studies would provide important input into the scientific research of meridians. 3)Why is the history of meridians underdeveloped? A valuable improvement to this article would be the addition of the history of meridian development in TCM. More detailed explanations as to why the system developed, why people continue to use is, how it was started, and how it spread could all provide deeper insight into the meridian theory. Fimm23HM ( talk) 04:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
It is not true that scientists have not found anatomical structures which accord to meridians, some scientists are doing research on what they are calling the Primo Vascular System. This started with the research carried out by North Korean scientist Kim Bong-Han who discovered it.
https://www.lumennatura.com/2016/04/23/primo-vascular-system-the-anatomy-of-meridians/
Probrooks ( talk) 00:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: Could you explain this revert?
I honestly can't make head or tail of it, as your edit summary appears to have no relation to the content of your edit. I know that a meridian is a meridian; science is science
, but what does that have to do with mine being honestly a bad edit
?
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 09:34, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Wait ... is the problem that "theory" when not prefaced by "traditional" and "Chinese" makes it look "scientific"? I don't buy that, but I'm grasping at straws here. If it's that big a concern, how about Scientific view of meridian belief
or Scientific view of meridian-based alternative medicine
? I think both of these are inferior to my earlier wording, but would be amenable to them over the current wording.
Hijiri 88 (
聖
やや)
09:49, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
At the current discussion of this article on the fringe theories noticeboard, I've proposed replacing "Meridians do not exist", in the body of the article (not the lede, which has already been toned down a notch) with "Meridians exist only as a concept; there is no known anatomic or physiologic equivalent". This is a statement of fact, backed by cited sources, and is more encyclopedic and (IMHO) less condescending than flat "denial" language. Any objections? DoctorJoeE review transgressions/ talk to me! 20:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
"Unicorns exist only as a concept; scientists have found no evidence that supports their physical existence."It's unnecessary to specify that something exists as a concept - it's implicit in "unicorns do not exist" that there is a concept of unicorns. -- tronvillain ( talk) 23:00, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Kashmiri: The idea of meridians claims that the manipulation of specific points on the body will have physiological effects -- those are empirical premises, not existential claims. Meridians are not a philosophical concept, they are a scientifically testable hypothesis. The hypothesis has been tested, repeatedly, and the result was null.
I could begin to grant that your argument would apply to something like Chakras when authors discuss chakras as facets of the soul or even the mind (as some do) instead of as physical structures with physical effects (as some do as well). That's not the case with meridians, though, it's always in the context of physical health (not spiritual development). I'm totally for theology heading toward Fideism and encouraging the view of Non-overlapping magisteria. However, meridians aren't actually a religious concept: they were proto-medicine that was completely secularized by the Chinese government and remains pseudoscience. Even where some religions adopt the idea of meridians, meridians still fall under testable premises and (to be extremely generous) there is a significant disconnect between the hypothesis and reality. Ian.thomson ( talk) 10:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
@ TBarraganTX: Discuss matters here before attempting to restore the material again.
Wikipedia does not create artificial balance between two opposing views, it summarizes professionally-published mainstream academic sources, particularly medical sources. Metastudies and tertiary sources have found no evidence for the existence of meridians. This does not mean "they exist but haven't been found," this means "they have found an absence of meridians."
It is not some scientists who "claim" meridians do not exist, it is what any legitimate scientist who has researched the matter will tell you.
This article you cited is not funded by the NIH, it is simply hosted on their website. It was funded by Shenzhen University. Chinese universities are funded by the Chinese government, and the Chinese government has been pushing the study of TCM not because they believe in it (Mao, whose idea this was, sure didn't) but to entice foreign doctors to come into China to teach science-based medicine while saving face. The article was published by the Hindawi Publishing Corporation, which has been noted for low-quality output. Ian.thomson ( talk) 01:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The sources and information presented in this article about the scientific value of the meridian system are well outdated. All new research opposes what is written here. The meridian system has been proven to have some scientific value, though the specifics are beyond my knowledge. This article also does not speak of the history of the meridian system, or what it has been and continues to be used for. Therefore this article does not contain enough accurate information to be considered credible now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daredevildovahkiin ( talk • contribs) 15:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Meridian (Chinese medicine). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
(TCM) is a pretty bad disambiguator, as it in itself is ambigous. I suggest Meridian (physiology), Meridian (medicine) or Meridian (chinese medicine). -- Chuq 10:18, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
This section preserves history for GFDL licensing compliance; please do not remove.
The following text, inserted 07:28, 14 Apr 2005 Dpbsmith, is a copy of text that was solely authored in a rapid series of edits, the last on 23:33, 12 Apr 2005, by 67.127.72.243, in an article entitled "Aligned water theory." This notice is being provided so that history is preserved in the event that Aligned water theory is voted for deletion. Dpbsmith (talk) 12:30, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The above statement is contrary to the citation which identifies NO existence of meridians. I edited the statement to conform to the conclusion of the citation.
The above excerpted from Hooke, A Review of Thought Field Therapy, Vol. 3:2; Article 3, The International Electronic Journal of Innovations in the Study of the Traumatization Process and Methods for Reducing or Eliminating Related Human Suffering. -- Michael.spangler 13:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
This is a very bold yet vauge and unreferenced claim (which I removed). It sounds like something unsubstantiated that someone who believes in the system would repeat. If this claim is true, it needs to be much better supported. First of all what are the predictions of the "modern scientific theory of [the] meridian system"? Is there such a thing? What specific research results have upheld these predictions? Some references would definitely needed for such a potentially controversial claim.
I marked the section which lists the meridians of the arms and legs for cleanup for two reasons:
-- Beland 02:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Mugwumpjism ( talk) 07:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
So I am not sure this is the place to discuss exactly, but the reason as to why the stomach meridian is in the leg, is it actually runs from the head (two branches that come together near the chin), then proceeds down the torso all the way to the 2nd toe. It is eastern science or eastern medicine. I attempted to find / link to a source on the internet, but unfortunately I can't find a single source that one would consider reputable .. I expect it will have to be book references in Acupuncture. However, I would comment that Western scientific proof is not the way to go here.
-- User:Clear2Go 20:28 EDT (Sep 15, 2006)
What's the difference between References and Bibliography? If it's nonexistent maybe the section authors ought to merge them. Yasha 82.44.114.57 17:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I think recent re-discovery, in Korea, of the "Bonghan ducts" should also be discussed in this/related sections.
It would likewise be a good idea, I feel, to have at least a brief biographical entry for Kim, Bong Han (Bonghan). He was the researcher who originally discovered the existance of tubular "ducts" that seem to correspond to classical TCM meridians in their anatomical paths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valdi Yegorov ( talk • contribs) 18:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Fractal fractal dimension channels and collaterals shape and dissection structure
(non-gap, non-smooth, non-pipeline, rough (crude), cell backfill fractal fractal dimension channels and collaterals) in 1996, Deng Yu et al, Beijing Jiuxianqiao Hospital.
Channels and collaterals' fractal fractal dimension characteristic is the channels and collaterals shape dissection, the organizational structure foundation and the essence. Why is this also channels and collaterals' dissection structure not easily the basic reason which was discovered by the predecessor. It has promulgated channels and collaterals' fractal fractal dimension characteristic, also revealed for the channels and collaterals mass transfer mechanism opened the new path, enabled to have the fractal dimension characteristic, the similar fractal dimension membrane (filtration, ultra filtered with reverse osmosis) or the chromatographic analysis column type “microscopic dynamic `static shuts activity open' the fractal fractal dimension `cell backfill ' the channels and collaterals model” to arise at the historic moment.
7, Oct. 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.147.27.138 ( talk) 01:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Per consensus above (see "Page name" section above) I have restored the original page name, which was apparently changed using a redirect, without any discussion at all here where it counts. Meridian is the common English term, and this is the English Wikipedia. -- Fyslee / talk 01:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be such an overuse of Chinese characters as to make reading difficult. Especially the lead suffers from this problem. An old discussion about this problem and article exists here, and I propose doing something about the problem. Since some editors have made good faith efforts to do what they thought was an improvement of the article, and I'd hate to see such information get lost and such work get wasted, I suggest making the existing lead a footnote and then use it's exclusively English version as the new lead. If no objections are forthcoming soon, I'll make an attempt and see if it floats. -- Fyslee / talk 06:06, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Where's one or more pictures illustrating the position of meridians? So shockingly absent, makes me think it's still a stub level article. 69.196.191.134 ( talk) 14:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I've never done this before and am not familiar with how to make edits to Wikipedia pages, but I thought this quote might be rather fitting and helpful if someone else could properly add it to the article or reference it:
In a typical acupuncture study, researchers would inject a tracer or radio-isotope into an energy point along a specific meridian system or channel in a subjects body as directed by a skilled acupuncturist. The purpose was to see if the tracer would move and if it did, would it move along the meridians or channels as they appear on a classic meridian chart. Time and time again, they found the tracer would immediately flow along that same, specific, meridian channel where the tracer had been injected.
The researchers also found if they injected the tracer even slightly outside of a specific energy point, all the tracer did was pool in that spot. It went nowhere. These results clearly demonstrated the existence of a system of otherwise invisible meridians or channels within the human body, just as Eastern scholars had been teaching for many millenia. Here was proof of a system that was previously unrecognized and unknown to modern medicine. I found that to be truly astounding.
Furthermore, these studies were not conducted just in China and Japan but also in Europe and even here in the United States including the highly regarded Menninger Foundation. The studies were significant enough that insurance companies began covering acupuncture treatments and most do today.(pp.268-9)
Chunyi Lin and Gary Rebstock (2003) Born a Healer. Spring Forest Publishing. ISBN 0-9740944-1-2
Soulstrummer ( talk) 16:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)soulstrummer
A web search for "meridian radioisotope" retrieves some references to experiments conducted by a "Pierre de Vernejoul" at the University of Paris: P. de Vernejoul et al., "Etude Des Meridiens D'Acupuncture par les Traceurs Radioactifs", published in 1985 in "Bulletin de l'Académie Nationale de Médecine", whatever that means. It seems he forgot to publish his article on le web, so I can't read it. However, I could download an English-language article, Kovacs et al, "Experimental Study on Radioactive Pathways of Hypodermically Injected Technetium-99m", 1992, which repeats the experiment in beagles in Barthelona. It appeared in a journal calling itself the "Journal of Nuclear Medicine", published by some group called the "Society of Nuclear Medicine". In any case I agree with Brangifer that we need to have some standards for reliable sources. A journal which publishes research about acupuncture could hardly be considered reputable enough to cite on Wikipedia. We don't want to mislead people away from proven treatments by letting them think that meridians are real! By the way, please don't give attention to Felix Mann, he says disreputable things like "It is unfortunately the case that many doctors, even when faced with one or several patients who have been cured by acupuncture where their own efforts have been fruitless, refuse to believe the evidence." (Mann, "Acupuncture", 1971, p. 1) What evidence? If acupuncture were really effective, then someone would have gotten a Nobel prize for it years ago. 80.189.139.93 ( talk) 12:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
I suggest that Eight Extraordinary Channels should be merged into Meridian (Chinese medicine) for the following reasons (in no particular order):
I don't think this should be a problematic move, but I wanted to list in out before doing it just to be sure. Thanks. -- Transity ( talk • contribs) 17:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
-- 222.64.222.219 ( talk) 08:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I realize that my recent addition of a link to Bonghan System is likely to be controversial but this new research has plenty of published science behind it and has been confirmed in different labs in a number of countries. With these new discoveries a statement which claims that there is no anatomical evidence of meridians misrepresents a truth that has become more controverial and less absolute. DavidWis ( talk) 18:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I removed the following from the end of the lead as it's not written properly, and since I don't read Chinese I can't fix it:
Brangifer ( talk) 18:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
This last section solely deals with the hypothesis of a certain Dr. Tsai from Taiwan. This hypothesis is not based on traditional knowledge and it definetely is not rooted in science. "The repair nerves in the brain (and spine?) are grouped into many serpentine chains which are called "meridians" (Dzingluo or Zingluo經絡) by the Chinese school of medicine" - a statement like this is bound to draw fire both from traditionalists and scientists alike (plus, Dr. Tsai doesn't have any evidence to back up his little theory). I will therefore remove this section. Mallexikon ( talk) 06:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Flow of qi through the meridians | ||
Zang-fu | Aspect | Hours |
Lung | taiyin | 0300-0500 |
Large Intestine | yangming | 0500-0700 |
Stomach | yangming | 0700-0900 |
Spleen | taiyin | 0900-1100 |
Heart | shaoyin | 1100–1300 |
Small Intestine | taiyang | 1300–1500 |
Bladder | taiyang | 1500–1700 |
Kidney | shaoyin | 1700–1900 |
Pericardium | jueyin | 1900–2100 |
San Jiao | shaoyang | 2100–2300 |
Gallbladder | shaoyang | 2300-0100 |
Liver | jueyin | 0100-0300 |
Lung (repeats cycle) |
I am looking for RS for anything I might have deleted from the acupuncture article as NRS. One thing was this table, part of which is in this article. Someone might want to check this for RS and integrate it into the existing table. PPdd ( talk) 03:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
A number of websites and books (such as books on the Tao) claim that the existence of meridians has been demonstrated by Japanese and German researchers. They cite: Nakatani Y: Skin electric resistance and ryodoraku. J Autonomic Nerve 6:52, 1956. Voll R: Twenty years of electroacupuncture diagnosis in Germany: a progressive report. Am J Acupunct 3:7-17, 1975. In particular, they cite a paper by Sir Thomas Lewis, as having found an "unknown nervous system" published in the British Medical Journal in February, 1937 and entitled The NOCIFENSOR SYSTEM OF NERVES AND ITS REACTIONS. It seems me that a device like the German NMR-mouse could detect these elusive meridians once and for all. What is the hang-up with today's means? Isn't there a way of conclusively determining once and for all whether or not meridians exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyMath ( talk • contribs) 00:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
"Pseudoscience" should be added as a category for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.237.95.119 ( talk) 00:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
1)Why is the article biased against Chinese medicine? It seems that an article discussing TCM and meridian theory would be more open to exploring the possibility of its existence, or at least acknowledging the debate over its usage. Less anti-meridian rhetoric could greatly improve the neutrality of the article and the validity of its information. 2)Why are over half of the sources from the 1990s or earlier? Many of the sources, especially those condemning meridian theory, are over 20 years old. Since that time, more research has been done by the NIH and NSF, as well as internationally, that have influence the use and acceptance of meridian theory and TCM in Western cultures. References to such published, peer-review studies would provide important input into the scientific research of meridians. 3)Why is the history of meridians underdeveloped? A valuable improvement to this article would be the addition of the history of meridian development in TCM. More detailed explanations as to why the system developed, why people continue to use is, how it was started, and how it spread could all provide deeper insight into the meridian theory. Fimm23HM ( talk) 04:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
It is not true that scientists have not found anatomical structures which accord to meridians, some scientists are doing research on what they are calling the Primo Vascular System. This started with the research carried out by North Korean scientist Kim Bong-Han who discovered it.
https://www.lumennatura.com/2016/04/23/primo-vascular-system-the-anatomy-of-meridians/
Probrooks ( talk) 00:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: Could you explain this revert?
I honestly can't make head or tail of it, as your edit summary appears to have no relation to the content of your edit. I know that a meridian is a meridian; science is science
, but what does that have to do with mine being honestly a bad edit
?
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 09:34, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Wait ... is the problem that "theory" when not prefaced by "traditional" and "Chinese" makes it look "scientific"? I don't buy that, but I'm grasping at straws here. If it's that big a concern, how about Scientific view of meridian belief
or Scientific view of meridian-based alternative medicine
? I think both of these are inferior to my earlier wording, but would be amenable to them over the current wording.
Hijiri 88 (
聖
やや)
09:49, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
At the current discussion of this article on the fringe theories noticeboard, I've proposed replacing "Meridians do not exist", in the body of the article (not the lede, which has already been toned down a notch) with "Meridians exist only as a concept; there is no known anatomic or physiologic equivalent". This is a statement of fact, backed by cited sources, and is more encyclopedic and (IMHO) less condescending than flat "denial" language. Any objections? DoctorJoeE review transgressions/ talk to me! 20:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
"Unicorns exist only as a concept; scientists have found no evidence that supports their physical existence."It's unnecessary to specify that something exists as a concept - it's implicit in "unicorns do not exist" that there is a concept of unicorns. -- tronvillain ( talk) 23:00, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Kashmiri: The idea of meridians claims that the manipulation of specific points on the body will have physiological effects -- those are empirical premises, not existential claims. Meridians are not a philosophical concept, they are a scientifically testable hypothesis. The hypothesis has been tested, repeatedly, and the result was null.
I could begin to grant that your argument would apply to something like Chakras when authors discuss chakras as facets of the soul or even the mind (as some do) instead of as physical structures with physical effects (as some do as well). That's not the case with meridians, though, it's always in the context of physical health (not spiritual development). I'm totally for theology heading toward Fideism and encouraging the view of Non-overlapping magisteria. However, meridians aren't actually a religious concept: they were proto-medicine that was completely secularized by the Chinese government and remains pseudoscience. Even where some religions adopt the idea of meridians, meridians still fall under testable premises and (to be extremely generous) there is a significant disconnect between the hypothesis and reality. Ian.thomson ( talk) 10:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
@ TBarraganTX: Discuss matters here before attempting to restore the material again.
Wikipedia does not create artificial balance between two opposing views, it summarizes professionally-published mainstream academic sources, particularly medical sources. Metastudies and tertiary sources have found no evidence for the existence of meridians. This does not mean "they exist but haven't been found," this means "they have found an absence of meridians."
It is not some scientists who "claim" meridians do not exist, it is what any legitimate scientist who has researched the matter will tell you.
This article you cited is not funded by the NIH, it is simply hosted on their website. It was funded by Shenzhen University. Chinese universities are funded by the Chinese government, and the Chinese government has been pushing the study of TCM not because they believe in it (Mao, whose idea this was, sure didn't) but to entice foreign doctors to come into China to teach science-based medicine while saving face. The article was published by the Hindawi Publishing Corporation, which has been noted for low-quality output. Ian.thomson ( talk) 01:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The sources and information presented in this article about the scientific value of the meridian system are well outdated. All new research opposes what is written here. The meridian system has been proven to have some scientific value, though the specifics are beyond my knowledge. This article also does not speak of the history of the meridian system, or what it has been and continues to be used for. Therefore this article does not contain enough accurate information to be considered credible now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daredevildovahkiin ( talk • contribs) 15:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Meridian (Chinese medicine). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)