美國認同中醫藥學為獨立科學體系是真新聞

密碼

雖然這個“首次”、“從‘補充和替代醫學(CAM)’中分離出來”顯然不確切；因為這第一像luye同學指出的那樣，不是什麼首次，NCCAM文件早就指出過；第二並沒有這個分離一說，因為根本不存在這樣的必要，中醫自成獨立科學體系，並不影響它仍然在補充和替代醫學範疇之內。然而，因為一些枝節的不正確而全盤否定，顯然不是科學的思維方法。

美國食品與藥物管理局（FDA）發布的指導性文件原文：

美國國家補充與替代醫學中心（NCCAM）把整體醫學體系描述為：“與對抗（常規）醫學獨立地或平行發展的完整的理論和實踐體系”。
NCCAM describes whole medical systems as involving "complete systems of theory and practice that have evolved independently from or parallel to allopathic (conventional) medicine."

http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/altmed.pdf

與《人民日報》新聞引用內容完全一致。獨立於西方醫學之外，並被美國權威機構承認為醫學、並與西方醫學並列的，不是被美國承認為獨立的科學體系，又是什麼體系？美國國家衛生總署也拿出真金白銀，支持無數包括中醫在內的整體醫學項目，德國甚至把針灸列入了全民保健系統報銷範圍，這支持的不是科學，難道還是偽科學不成？

科學是發展的，科學也從來承認人的認知的有限。西方科學界或者說西方醫學界，從來都沒有自大到認為只有西醫才算現代醫學、中醫不屬於現代醫學範疇。恰恰相反，他們正是把中醫包括在科學和現代醫學之內。方舟子本人也曾多次認同英文Wikipedia質量之完善，我們也不妨看看出典完備的英文 Wikipedia裡面的相關認定吧：

Sience（科學）條：

Science in the broadest sense refers to any system of knowledge attained by verifiable means.[1] In a more restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on empiricism, experimentation, and methodological naturalism, as well as to the organized body of knowledge humans have gained by such research. This article focuses on the meaning of science in the latter sense.

Medecine（醫學）條：

Medical care is shared between medical professions (physicians) and other professionals such as physician assistants, nurses and pharmacists, sometimes known as allied health professionals. Historically, only those with a medical doctorate have been considered to practice medicine. Clinicians (licensed professionals who deal with patients) can be physicians, nurses, therapists or others. The medical profession is the social and occupational structure of the group of people xxxxally trained and authorized to apply medical knowledge. Many countries and legal jurisdictions have legal limitations on who may practice medicine.

Medicine comprises various specialized sub-branches, such as cardiology, pulmonology, neurology, or other fields such as sports medicine, research or public health.

Human societies have had various different systems of health care practice since at least the beginning of recorded history. Medicine, in the modern period, is the mainstream scientific tradition which developed in the Western world since the early Renaissance (around 1450). Many other traditions of health care are still practiced throughout the world; most of these are separate from Western medicine, which is also called biomedicine, allopathic medicine or the Hippocratic tradition. The most highly developed of these are traditional Chinese medicine and the Ayurvedic traditions of India and Sri Lanka. Various non-mainstream traditions of health care have also developed in the Western world. These systems are sometimes considered companions to Hippocratic medicine, and sometimes are seen as competition to the Western tradition. Few of them have any scientific confirmation of their tenets, because if they did they would be brought into the fold of Western medicine.
Scientific method（科學方法）條：

Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena and acquiring new knowledge, as well as for correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical, measurable evidence, subject to the principles of reasoning[1].

“哪裡有‘科學’一詞”的問法，是荒唐可笑的。我們在討論西醫、物理、數學的時候，也無須特別做出它們屬於“科學”的認定。美國人和中國人一樣，當然不會特意去做“中醫是科學”這樣的認定，就像不會特意去做“西醫是科學”這樣的認定一樣，因為無論是對中、還是外，這本來就是題中應有之義。這樣的題中應有之義，當然也不是不可以別出心裁提出質疑，比如，通過研究，得出中醫不是科學、或者中醫是偽科學這樣的結論；但是，這是科學家們在醫學專業雜誌或者學術會議上才可能做的事；而無論如何，都不是一個從來沒有學過一天醫學的無業游民所可能指正的。

和英文Wiki一樣，FDA指導文件偏偏不用反科學寫手們所無比熱愛的“現代醫學”（modern medicine）這一概念來形容西方醫學（Western medicine），而偏偏只用對抗醫學 （allopathic medicine）或者常規醫學（conventional medicine）的概念，並將中醫等整體醫學（whole medical systems）或稱替代醫學（alternative medical systems）與之並列。這難道是偶然的麼？

反科學鬥士們的卑劣伎倆之一，就是搶奪話語權。把打真或者造假說成打假；把“對抗醫學” （allopathic medicine）或者“西方醫學”（Western medicine）說成是現代醫學的唯一代表；把世界衛生組織（WHO）認定的官方翻譯“替代醫學”（alternative medicine）強譯成“另類醫學”，就是例子。

2007.8.3

-
附：方舟子：舉報假新聞“美國首次認同中醫藥學為獨立科學體系”
2007-08-03　04:28:48
大中小
標籤： 健康/保健
國內現在正在打擊假新聞，我現在舉報，《人民日報》2007年8月3日刊登的“美國首次認同中醫藥學為獨立科學體系”就是一條欺騙國人的假新聞。FDA發布的指導性文件原文見：

http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/altmed.pdf

文件中只有兩處提到中醫，都是和印度草醫放一塊的，翻譯如下：
“‘補充與另類醫學’一詞涵蓋許多種醫療實踐、產品和療法，它們與‘常規’或‘對抗療法’醫學的實踐、產品和療法有顯著的差異。有些形式的補充與另類醫學，例如中醫和印度草醫，已被實踐了數百年，而其他的，例如電療法，則是更晚近才出現的。”（The term "complementary and alternative medicine" (CAM) encompasses a wide array of health care practices, products, and therapies that are distinct from practices, products, and therapies used in "conventional" or "allopathic" medicine. Some xxxxs of CAM, such as traditional Chinese medicine and Ayurvedic medicine, have been practiced for centuries, whereas others, such as electrotherapy, are more recent in origin.）
“NCCAM（國家補充與另類醫學中心）把完整醫藥體系描述為涉及‘與對抗療法（常規）醫學獨立地或平行地演變的完整的理論和實踐體系’。這些可能反映了獨特的文化體系，例如中醫和印度草醫。”（NCCAM describes whole medical systems as involving "complete systems of theory and practice that have evolved independently from or parallel to allopathic (conventional) medicine." These may reflect individual cultural systems, such as traditional Chinese medicine and Ayurvedic medicine.）
這不過指出了眾所周知的事實，即中醫和印度草醫類似，與“常規醫學”（現代醫學）存在顯著差異，有數百年的歷史，是一個獨特的文化體系。哪裡認同中醫是個 “科學體系”？哪裡有“科學”一詞？哪裡表明FDA接受了中醫藥理念和治療功能？難道中國中醫科學院認為FDA像中國藥監局那樣是可以用陰陽五行胡扯就糊弄過去的？
FDA的這份文件還特地指出，不可因為文件中提到某種療法、實踐或產品就認為FDA在支持它（any mention of a particular CAM therapy, practice, or product should not be construed as expressing FDA's support for or endorsement of that particular CAM therapy, practice,or product or, unless specified otherwise, as an agency determination that a particular product is safe and effective for its intended uses or is safe for use.），大概就是料到了可能會有騙子要拿這份文件騙人。中國中醫科學院陳可冀院士是因為英文水平太差看不懂這份文件，還是有意造謠欺騙國人？這是不是再次證明了中醫的“國際地位”是靠謊言打造的？

附：美國首次認同中醫藥學為獨立科學體系

http://www.sina.com.cn 2007年08月03日01:32 人民網-人民日報
本報北京8月2日電 (記者王淑軍) 記者今天從中國中醫科學院獲悉：美國食品藥品管理局(FDA)新近發布了一份指導性文件《補充和替代醫學產品及FDA管理指南(初稿)》，將包括中醫藥在內的傳統醫學從“補充和替代醫學(CAM)”中分離出來，首次認同中醫藥學與西方主流醫學一樣，是一門有着完整理論和實踐體系的獨立科學體系，而不僅僅是對西方主流醫學的補充。
據中國中醫科學院陳可冀院士介紹，美國FDA這一繼2004年發布《植物藥產品指南》之後的新文件，契合了以患者為中心的醫療模式，順應了美國國內補充和替代醫學快速發展的現狀，表明了FDA對中醫藥理念和治療功能的接受程度有所提高，在新藥開發問題上有了較積極、務實的態度。
美國國家補充和替代醫學中心(NCCAM)和FDA認為，傳統醫學體系是“有完整理論和實踐體系、與對抗療法(西方主流醫學傳統療法)獨立或平行發展而來”的，有着獨特的文化傳承背景。它們具有一些共同的元素，如相信機體有自愈能力，治療方法也有獨到之處。