First of all, TCM is BS. It may have been useful thousands of years ago when nothing was known about science but nowadays we know better. Besides, "modern TCM" was pretty much invented by Chairman Mao in the 50's: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/10/traditional_chinese_medicine_origins_mao_invented_it_but_didn_t_believe.html … (2/16)
-
-
Show this thread
-
Look at this terrifying aim of the review! "WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR TCM TO SPREAD TO WESTERN SOCIETIES". Ideological bias, much? (3/16)pic.twitter.com/0QEfs5JURY
Show this thread -
Review has two chapters describing atherosclerosis by 1) "Western" and 2) TCM views. Already this is a false dichotomy - there's only one science that can describe atherosclerosis and it's not dependent on your compass. (4/16)
Show this thread -
The "Western perspective" is mostly accurate. However, the eastern is a huge load of motivated reasoning attempting to make it sound like some ancient hypotheses are actually describing real things (5/16)pic.twitter.com/WmO6aAbCrg
Show this thread -
But to be fair, the authors acknowledge that these are nonspecific, ill-defined subjective features and "Western" diagnostics is (luckily!) opted even by TCM practitioners. Unfortunately they've drank the "integrative" Kool Aid instead of stating we should pick the best (6/16)pic.twitter.com/eQscINA9Gs
Show this thread -
If many TCM hospitals are equipped with modern equipment and the authors state that traditional methods are inferior, why not just state that they shouldn't be used? What additional value do traditional methods provide? Nothing. That's what. (7/16)
Show this thread -
The authors searched pubmed and a Chinese database for trials on traditional herbal treatments for athero. They summarise 10 human trials of which apparently only one had outcome data: https://www.ajconline.org/article/S0002-9149(08)00353-6/fulltext … (8/16)
Show this thread -
That was as study on red yeast extract, which is known to contain Monacolin K which is exactly the same molecule as lovastatin. In other words, that study was essentially a statin trial with some issues related to red yeast products: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28601545 (9/16)
Show this thread -
On a positive note, the authors also acknowledge that unfortunately many features of modern biomedical sciences are new to China and therefore many trials are still of very low quality (10/16)pic.twitter.com/1W3kGeL0RD
Show this thread -
Then there's a few pages of discussion on potential mechs of traditional herbs and surrogate outcomes (blood pressure, etc). Many of these studies are also subject to critical evaluation due to poor methodological quality. (11/16)
Show this thread -
Then we get to the chilling yet simultaneously hilarious concluding chapter. First, "WE MUST SPREAD TCM TO WEST".... (12/16)pic.twitter.com/s2km0HRmSE
Show this thread -
...followed by "but we have some problems". Yes, you certainly do and I'm glad you bring them up. Namely, THE problem is that TCM is BS. With these, why would you want to spread this to West? (13/16)pic.twitter.com/UdJmqQ3pcY
Show this thread -
Luckily there's a positive note at the end demanding for a COI disclosure also for Chinese researchers. (14/16)pic.twitter.com/X5t4hefY6v
Show this thread -
Overall, this is a very strange review indeed. It's as if the authors are determined that we really MUST spread TCM to the west but we can't because in "western medicine" people want that pesky rigorous evidence. (15/16)
Show this thread -
But instead of this demand for evidence leading to discarding the spreading agenda, the authors just conclude that more studies are needed. This is a bit scary as to me it sounds almost like "we're going to get that positive evidence one way or another" (16/16)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.