Traditional Chinese Medicine

"The logic underlying Chinese medical theory - a logic that assumes that a part can be understood only in its relation to the whole -- can also be called synthetic or dialectical.

The character for Yin originally meant the shady side of a slope.  It is associated with such qualities as cold, rest, responsiveness, passivity, darkness, interior, downward, inward, decrease, satiation, tranquility, and quiescence.  It is the end, completion, and realized fruition.

The original meaning of Yang was the sunny side of a slope.  The term implies brightness, heat, stimulation, movement, activity, excitement, vigor, exterior, upward, outward, and increase.  It is arousal, beginning, and dynamic potential.  

All things have Yin and Yang aspects....and any Yin or Yang aspect can be further divided into Yin and Yang.  

Yin and Yang mutually create, control, and transform one another.  Although Yin and Yang can be distinguished, they cannot be separated.   Yin and Yang are always subtly supporting, repairing, and transforming into one another.  This constant transformation is the source of all change.  Organic transformation can occur harmoniously in the normal course of events or sudden ruptures can occur. If Yin and Yang are unbalanced for prolonged periods of time or in an extreme manner, the resulting transformation can be drastic.  

Lao Tzu says:  

In order to expand, it is necessary to first contract.  In order to stregthen, it is necessary to first weaken.  In order to create, it is necessary to first destroy.  In order to give, it is necessary to first take.

In Chinese thought, events and phenomena unfold through a kind of spontaneous cooperation, an inner dynamic in the nature of things.  The key word is Pattern - people and things behave in particular ways not necessarily because of prior actions or impulses, but because their position in the cyclical universe and their endowment with intrinsic natures. 

The Chinese assume that the universe is continuously changing.  The cosmos itself is an integral whole, a web of interrelated things and events.  The desire for knowledge is the desire to understand the interrelationships or patterns within that web, and to become attuned to the unfolding dynamic.

A traditional Chinese landscape painting captures the essence of nature in balance and in flux.  The paiting is like the Taoist symbol, containing Yin and Yang in their proper proportions but constantly interacting and transforming into each other.  

The scene depicts a vast range of elements, from the towering mountain to the little trickling stream.  Nature is shown as a balance of the yielding Yin (foliage, water) and the unyielding Yang (rock, trees).  There are the dynamic (water, people) and the quiescent (mountains, houses); the slow (trees) and the fast (mist); the dark and the light; the solid and the liquid.  All things contain both Yin and Yang.  The water, for instance, is both yielding (Yin) and dynamic (Yang).

The picture is a totality, and each detail takes on meaning only as it participates in the whole.  The mountain is immense by virtue of its smaller foothills; the people are small by virtue of the vastness of nature.  All things are imbued with interactive qualities and dynamics in their relationships to the things around them.

The painting depicts a time and place that through their correspondence with the cosmos become timeless and placeless.  It rediscovers the elemental and continuous course of the cosmic pulsation through the figurative representation of a landscape...The tension created by the correlation between the lines and the washes, the visible and the invisible, fullness and emptiness, endows the landscape with a power to suggest more than the merely visible and open it to the life of the spirit. " 

(from p. 7-17 The Web That Has No Weaver by Ted Kaptchuk)

A Disturbing History of Nutrition Science

What is the biggest mistake scientists have ever made?  Nina Teicholz's The Big Fat Surprise, a wonderful history of the awful state of nutrition science, suggests that science's worst mistake may well be the idea that saturated fat is unhealthy.  She makes a convincing case that nutritional guidelines over the last half century, by focusing on fats rather than sugars, have resulted in the premature deaths of millions of Americans and others around the world.

Even more interesting than turning conventional wisdom on its head, this book is an eye-opening journey into how an entire field of science can be hijacked by special interests and strong personalities. Moreover, this book holds important lessons about how the process of science is still susceptible to the same biases and group-think as the rest of society.

Nina Teicholz sums up the story of how nutrition science went wrong:

"Well-intentioned experts, hastening to address growing epidemics of chronic disease, simply overinterpreted the data. Scientists hypothesized that dietary fat was to blame...  This hypothesis became accepted as truth before it was properly tested.  Public health bureaucracies adopted and enshrined this unproven dogma.  The hypothesis became immortalized in the mammoth institutions of public health.  And the normally self-corrected mechanism of science, which involves constantly challenging one's own beliefs, was disabled.  While good science should be ruled by skepticism and self-doubt, the field of nutrition has instead been shaped by passions verging on zealotry. ...Once ideas about fat and cholesterol became adopted by official institutions, even prominent experts in the field found it nearly impossible to challenge them."  

"What I found, incredibly, was not only that it was a mistake to restrict fat but also that our fear of the saturated fats...has never been based in solid science.  A bias against these foods developed early on and became entrenched, but the evidence mustered in its support never amounted to a convincing case and has since crumbled away."

Let the sorry story of nutrition science be a lesson for the scientists and promoters of scientists in other fields.  We like to think that science is independently and objectively building a tower of knowledge for the ages, one rock at a time, but the reality is that our science is a product of our society, our beliefs, our biases, and our assumptions.

An Ecologist Ponders the Microbiome

Fluctuating nutrient concentrations and the timing of peristalsis may affect microbiome growth and composition, which is hypothesized to affect health. Certainly digestive upset is no fun for anyone, and it makes sense to look at inputs (diet) as the primary drivers.

Ecosystem arguments are used to claim that some forms of digestive upset are due to over- or under-growth of bacteria in the intestines.  For example, Small Intestine Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) is treated with what is called the GAPS diet, an effort to restrict all foods that bacteria can digest.

In response, Jeff Leach, of the American Gut Project, made this comparison between diets disturbing the microbiome and ecological disturbances:

"If you think about it from an ecosystem perspective or from an ecosystem restoration perspective, if you take any ecosystem like the gut, the microbiome, and if you starve it... If you starve your backyard and all the diversity of plants, if you just starve it of nutrients, all ships go down with lowering water. And that perturbation, if you will, it wouldn’t be on the same level as an antibiotic, but it is a perturbation; it is an insult. And when you insult an ecosystem, insults like fire, drought, nutrient overload or nutrient deprivation, any of these perturbations typically result in a flourishing of weedy species, in this case, opportunistic pathogens. I know the GAPS diet...from an ecosystem restoration standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to starve your gut microbiome at any level. "

This idea that "a healthy garden needs a healthy soil" is an ecological idea.  Jeff Leach goes on to claim that specific nutrients, like "resistant starch, non-starch polysaccharides like inulin and fructooligosaccharides and galactooligosaccharides, can provide food for the beneficial bacteria in your gut and can increase their levels by orders of magnitude."

Turns out it may be a false analogy, or if the analogy is valid, the hoped-for predictive power of diet on microbiome function may not hold up. While broad temperature-precipitation drivers do determine biome (e.g. tundra versus desert) it is almost impossible to predict the exact species in an ecosystem based on the nutrient inputs to that ecosystem.  And if microbiome bacteria exert their effects in a species-dependent fashion, it may not be possible to predict that eating x will cause bacteria xyz to grow.

Ecologists look (with envy, and skepticism) at nutrition research and commentary because we know how complicated ecosystems can mess with simplistic notions of cause-and-effect.

Grazing Optimization

McNaughton SJ. Grazing as an Optimization Process: Grass-Ungulate Relationships in the Serengeti. The American Naturalist. 1979 May 1;113(5):691–703.

McNaughton lists 9 possible mechanisms by which productivity of herbivore affected plant tissues may be compensated or stimulated:
1. Increased photosynthetic rates in residual tissue;
2. Reallocation of substrates from elsewhere in the plant;
3. Mechanical removal of older tissues functioning at less than a maximum
photosynthetic level;
4. Consequent increased light intensities upon potentially more active underlying
tissues;
5. Reduction of the rate of leaf senescence, thus prolonging the active photosynthetic period of residual tissue;
6. Hormonal redistributions promoting cell division and elongation and activation of remaining meristems, thus resulting in more rapid leaf growth and promotion
of tillering;
7. Enhanced conservation of soil moisture by reduction of the transpiration
surface and reduction of mesophyll resistance relative to stomatal resistance;
8. Nutrient recycling from dung and urine;
9. Direct effects from growth promoting substrates in ruminant saliva

Theoretical work by Claire Mazancourt (1998 and 1999):




But how much difference can herbivory make when ecosystem ecologists so routinely ignore it when calculating NPP?


Relationship between average aboveground annual NPP and average annual precipitation for 100 ecological regions within the central grassland region of the USA . Sala,O. E., Parton, W. J., Joyce, L. A. and Lauenroth, W. K. (1988b) Primary production of the central grassland region of the United States. Ecology 69, 40-45. More info, including soil carbon relationships.

One possibility is that there isn't much wiggle-room, and even that is dependent on nutrient concentrations:

Cebrian J, Williams M, McClelland J, Valiela I. The dependence of heterotrophic consumption and C accumulation on autotrophic nutrient content in ecosystems. Ecology Letters. 1998;1(3):165–170.