Chinese Medicine is Not Science(3)

In reality, mainstream Chinese medicine has traditionally not respected experience and has despised aiding common citizens in filling out prescriptions. Chinese medicine is not based on accumulated experience, but instead on the subjective, superstitious philosophies of yin and yang, five elements, and mutual promotion and restraint. The Materia Medica by Li Shizhen, recognized as an epitome of Chinese medicine, is full of recipes purportedly handed down by celestial beings. In one absurd example, a cup of the first Spring rain miraculously cures impotence. This is obviously not based on experience, rather these passages are likely aimed at coloring the symbiotic relationships between all living things. Chinese medicine believes that tiger bones, tiger penis, rhinoceros horns, bear gall bladder are effective medicines is simply because these animals have fearsome, strong associations, and Chinese medicine is attempting to impart their traits.
   
Chinese medicine also states that eating sun-dried leeches will invigorate blood circulation (for urinary tract problems, try eating some sun-dried earthworms). Clearly these and other “cures” are not based on experience; they are superstition in disguise.
    
Another argument for Chinese medicine is that it is effective. But efficacy does not necessarily mean it is scientific. Chinese people discovered during the Ming dynasty that they could prevent smallpox through vaccination. Even then, Chinese medicine recognized smallpox as a symptom of a latent congenital illness, where the appearance of the pock marks signifies the drawing out of that illness. When better vaccinations swept through China in the 19th century, Chinese medicine hailed the combination of eastern and western medicine.
    
Besides, the claims of efficacy are also dubious. Many believe in Chinese medicine because they feel that at one point they have been cured by it, and because Chinese medicinal experts relish every opportunity to cite medical cases where Chinese medicine succeeded. But modern medicine cannot take these kinds of patient and doctor testimonies as evidence. Many diseases cure themselves over time, especially with the aid of the placebo effect. Thus, Chinese dugs and treatment plans must undergo strictly designed clinical tests before one can safely say that they are effective.
    
It wasn’t until the 1940’s that such rigorous medical standards were adopted in the West. But even in this modern age, there are many doctors who still refuse modern scientific standards for clinical testing. They lavish themselves with praise when they feel that they’ve cured a disease while simultaneously ignoring any case where the illness was not cured. Even when their own relatives die, they don’t engage in any soul-searching. What’s the difference between this kind of person and a quack?