Epistemological issues in the theory of Chinese medicine

Dissertation, London School of Economics and Political Science (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Traditional Chinese Medicine has been criticized for being unscientific because the theory on which it is based involves entities like qi and ’meridians’ that appear ambiguous and because the internal ‘organs’ like the kidney and the spleen are very different from those of modern anatomy and physiology. Even more so, TCM methods of therapy based on the yin-yang principle, the model of the five elements, and the classification of illnesses according to standard constellations of symptoms are largely unproven by the protocols of modern evidence-based medicine. This dissertation attempts to reconstruct TCM theory by: providing explanations of TCM entities as abstractions and constructs that relate to observable body functions and illness symptoms and interpreting TCM theory as comprising heuristic models that were constructed from clinical experience to fit empirical observations of illnesses and their treatments with herbal medications and acupuncture. It suggests that scientists should be less concerned with the ontological status of TCM entities and the epistemic credentials of TCM models than with the ability of these concepts and models to guide physicians in therapy. More importantly, it makes the argument that these models are testable using the methods of evidence-based medicine. There are methodological difficulties associated with randomized controlled trials partly because TCM treatments tend to be individualized and syndromes are dynamic in nature; observational trials may be more appropriate in some situations. It is also possible that, for patients who are more culturally attuned to TCM, the placebo effect is strongly at play and may render the real effects of TCM treatments harder to tease out in clinical trials. The dissertation concludes that the main postulates of TCM should be put to rigorous test. The result may be a leaner but more robust theory, with parts that do not stand up to the test being rejected or modified, and a possible acceptance of its more modest therapeutic claims for a limited range of pathological conditions like pain and chronic illnesses.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Evidence: philosophy of science meets medicine.John Worrall - 2010 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (2):356-362.
Does evidence-based medicine apply to psychiatry?Mona Gupta - 2007 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (2):103.
Assigning Functions to Medical Technologies.Alexander Mebius - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (3):321-338.
Current epistemological problems in evidence based medicine.R. E. Ashcroft - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (2):131-135.
Corroborating evidence‐based medicine.Alexander Mebius - 2014 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 20 (6):915-920.
The philosophy of evidence-based medicine.Jeremy H. Howick - 2011 - Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, BMJ Books.
Hierarchies of evidence in evidence-based medicine.Christopher Blunt - 2015 - Dissertation, London School of Economics

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-10-16

Downloads
7 (#1,360,984)

6 months
4 (#800,606)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Otto Neurath.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Ian Hacking.
Philosophical Investigations.Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1953 - New York, NY, USA: Wiley-Blackwell. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe.
Models in Science (2nd edition).Roman Frigg & Stephan Hartmann - 2021 - The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 29 references / Add more references