3. The Superiority of Integrating Chinese and Western Medicine

From Traditional Chinese Medicine Theory and Clinical Case Discussion · Read time 1 min · Updated March 22, 2026

Keywords：专著资料, 全文在线浏览, 3. 整體觀和局部觀的結合

Section Index

3. The Superiority of Integrating Chinese and Western Medicine
2. Western medicine emphasizes localized understanding, while Traditional Chinese Medicine emphasizes holistic understanding
3. Western medicine emphasizes the pathogen-centric view, while Traditional Chinese Medicine emphasizes the body’s response-oriented view
2. Western medicine emphasizes localized understanding, while Traditional Chinese medicine emphasizes holistic understanding
3. Western medicine focuses on pathogenetic causation, while Traditional Chinese medicine focuses on the body’s response
The Connotation and Models of TCM–Western Medicine Integration in Internal Medicine

Traditional Chinese Medicine approaches disease from a macroscopic perspective, while Western Medicine does so from a microscopic one, inevitably leading to the following tendency: Chinese medicine emphasizes the whole and neglects the part, whereas Western medicine emphasizes the part and neglects the whole. Over the past century, both medical systems have felt that this tendency is detrimental to their own development, prompting a wave of "systematization of modern medicine" within Western medicine. This movement was initially spearheaded by Pavlov's theory of reflexes and subsequently followed by Selye's theory of stress response. In the past 20 years, the rapid development of immunology, control theory, information theory, and other disciplines has further deepened this trend.

Pei Zhengxue's Traditional Chinese Medicine—Discussion on TCM Theory and Clinical Cases

12 Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

The purpose of systematizing modern medicine is to shift Western medicine's disease perception from the local to the whole, from cells and organs to the entire organism, ecosystem, climate, and society. In contrast, the trend in modern TCM development is precisely the opposite of Western medicine: it moves from a systemic and holistic view of the seven emotions, six exogenous evils, qi, blood, phlegm, dampness, meridians, and organ manifestations toward a gradual exploration of the local and concrete. The Warm Disease School's view that diseases enter through the mouth and nose and emphasize clearing heat and detoxifying, Wang Qingren's anatomical practices and promoting blood circulation and removing blood stasis, as well as modern research on the essence of the spleen and kidneys—all these are components of this process.

In summary, the Western medical drive toward systematization and wholeness, coupled with the TCM drive toward localization and concreteness, are inevitable outcomes of medical development and reflect the inherent laws of historical evolution. If we take TCM's systemic and holistic perspectives as a reference for Western medical systematization, and Western medicine's localized and concrete understanding as a reference for TCM's deepening into the local, this will undoubtedly accelerate the pace of medical development. This mutual borrowing is, in essence, what is commonly referred to as the integration of Chinese and Western medicine.

Since the integration of Chinese and Western medicine began, numerous facts have proven that using this integrated approach to study Chinese medicine can elevate traditional TCM theory to new heights. Chest oppression is a traditional disease name in Chinese medicine, similar to coronary heart disease in modern medicine. According to the "Jin Gui·Chest Oppression, Heart Pain, and Shortness of Breath" chapter, this condition arises when yin occupies yang's position and chest yang fails to diffuse, requiring methods to unblock chest yang for treatment. The nine prescriptions listed, including Gualou Xiebai Baijiu Decoction, all focus on the qi level; although these formulas do have some therapeutic effect in treating chest oppression, they never achieve a complete cure.

Since the integration of Chinese and Western medicine began, given that this disease is caused by narrowing of the coronary arteries due to atherosclerosis, resulting in insufficient blood supply, it should be classified as "blood stasis" in TCM. By combining Chinese and Western medicine to try treatments that promote blood circulation and remove blood stasis, the therapeutic effect has significantly improved, opening up new avenues for understanding and treating this disease. The Beijing collaborative team, based on this new understanding, formulated Coronary Heart No. 2, which is used in conjunction with Gualou Xiebai-type prescriptions in clinical practice, achieving an overall effectiveness rate of over 90%. This has added the concept of blood stasis to the understanding of chest oppression, thereby deepening TCM's comprehension of this condition.

Regarding the treatment of edema, Traditional Chinese Medicine has traditionally relied on warming yang to eliminate water, strengthening the spleen to drain dampness, and dispersing lung qi to promote diuresis—methods that all focus on the qi level. Since the integration of Chinese and Western medicine began, given that patients with edema most commonly suffer from nephritis, and the pathological changes in nephritis are based on the proliferation of the glomerular basement membrane, this "proliferation" can still be categorized as "blood stasis" in TCM. The Shanxi Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, based on this view, formulated Yishen Decoction, primarily focused on promoting blood circulation and removing blood stasis, to treat various types of nephritis, achieving an effectiveness rate of over 70%. This fact demonstrates that the integration of Chinese and Western medicine has deepened Chinese medicine's understanding of edema and revolutionized its treatment methods, breaking away from the traditional approach of simply warming yang, strengthening the spleen to drain dampness, and dispersing lung qi to promote diuresis.

In recent years, those integrating Chinese and Western medicine have conducted extensive experimental research on the essence of the spleen, discovering that the spleen is closely related to the autonomic nervous system, metabolic system, immune system, and endocrine system. Using methods that strengthen the spleen and boost qi, one can carry out syndrome differentiation and treatment for diseases affecting these systems, providing a substantive basis for "treating different diseases with the same approach." This has significant implications for strengthening traditional TCM theory. After the Chinese Civil War, Chinese researchers integrating Chinese and Western medicine also conducted a series of experiments on the kidney, discovering that, in addition to its role in the urinary system, the kidney primarily represents the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal cortex system and the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal system. This provides experimental evidence for the traditional TCM view of the kidney as the "root of life" and the "foundation of existence." Elevating a conclusion formed through logical reasoning in clinical practice to a theory backed by scientific experimentation is undoubtedly a powerful impetus for the development of Chinese medicine. In summary, using the integrated approach of Chinese and Western medicine to study Chinese medicine can enrich and enhance its content, driving its development forward.

Part One: Academic Thought

Pei Zhengxue's Traditional Chinese Medicine—Discussion on TCM Theory and Clinical Cases

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

Throughout history, physicians have accumulated many vivid methods of reasoning through rich clinical practice, such as analogy and seeking commonality among similar conditions, striving to form accurate mental images of the essence of disease. Although these mental images lack a solid experimental research foundation, they are derived from clinical application and rooted in practical experience, making them universally guiding for TCM clinical practice.

Modern medicine provides a microscopic basis

In modern times, the development of modern industry and natural sciences complement and promote each other. With the help of new theories provided by natural sciences and advanced tools produced by modern industry, humanity's understanding of disease has gradually become more microscopic. At the end of the 17th century, following the Industrial Revolution in Britain, Western medicine emerged under these circumstances. Experimental research replaced traditional logical preaching, and microscopic understanding supplemented medieval macroscopic reasoning—these were the hallmarks of this initial stage. Thus, Western medicine presented itself in a brand-new light, forming a microscopic system based on physiological and pathological changes in organs, tissues, cells, body fluids, and nerves. Every link in this system, as well as the corresponding clinical treatments and prescriptions, is closely tied to advances in modern natural sciences. This transformation within Western medicine has made it an important component of the modern technological network, interacting and advancing in tandem with other branches of modern natural sciences, such as physics, chemistry, microbiology, meteorology, geology, and so on.

Examinations such as liver function tests, protein electrophoresis, fetal protein, and three-system tests for liver diseases; gastroscopy and tissue biopsies for stomach diseases; electrocardiograms, vectorcardiograms, and echocardiograms for heart diseases—all these examination methods and microscopic data are products of experimental research and results of mutual exchange across various fields of modern natural sciences.

Part One: Academic Thought

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

For chronic nephritis, macroscopic syndrome differentiation often reflects yang deficiency with water overflowing, spleen and stomach qi deficiency, lung failing to descend properly, liver and gallbladder real fire, bladder damp-heat, and so on; microscopic syndrome differentiation, on the other hand, should pay attention to casts, red blood cells, white blood cells, urinary protein, non-protein nitrogen, carbon dioxide binding capacity, and other indicators in routine urine tests. When treating this disease, I first determine a basic formula based on macroscopic syndrome differentiation, such as Zhenwu, Jisheng, Liu Jun, Longdan Xiegan, and then prescribe tonifying and consolidating agents for proteinuria; hemostatic agents for hematuria; heat-clearing and detoxifying agents for white blood cells in urine; and if non-protein nitrogen rises or carbon dioxide binding capacity declines, I recommend methods to lift the clear and sink the turbid.

For gastric pain, macroscopic syndrome differentiation identifies spleen and kidney qi deficiency, liver-kidney disharmony, excessive stomach fire, damp-heat in the stomach and spleen, and lung-stomach yin deficiency; microscopic differentiation involves gastroscopy, pathological tissue sections, and gastric juice analysis. I usually determine a basic formula based on macroscopic syndrome differentiation, such as Liu Jun, Xiaoyao, Qingwei, Xiexin, Yiguan Jian, and so on. If microscopic examination reveals superficial gastritis, I add Coptis and Scutellaria; for atrophic gastritis, I add Salvia miltiorrhiza, Corydalis yanhusuo, Coptis, and Scutellaria; for gastric and duodenal ulcers, I add White Peony, Raw Dragon Shell, and Cuttlefish Bone; for gastric prolapse, I add Astragalus, Citrus Aurantium, and Atractylodes; for gastric mucosal prolapse, I add Agarwood, Sandalwood, Amomum villosum, and Cardamom.

The Necessity and Inevitability of Integrating Chinese and Western Medicine—Pei Zhengxue

"The integration of Chinese and Western medicine"—this relationship, which determines the success or failure of Chinese medicine, has attracted increasing attention from medical professionals and all sectors of society both domestically and internationally.

Task output rules: Translate this markdown block from Chinese to English. Preserve markdown markers, links, and formatting. Keep headings and list structure unchanged. Return only the translated block.

Input: Due to their origins and development on entirely different social foundations, Western and Traditional Chinese medicine have evolved into completely distinct academic systems in both form and content. These two systems exhibit clear complementary characteristics, and contemporary medical professionals deeply recognize the necessity of integrating them. This aspiration has now transcended national borders, becoming a shared goal among scholars in both Eastern and Western medical communities, and represents an inevitable trend toward elevating global medical science to new heights.

Pei Zhengxue’s Study of Traditional Chinese Medicine—Discussion on TCM Theory and Clinical Case Records

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

Another figure known as the “Sage of Medicine,” Zhang Zhongjing (150–219 CE), emerged. The former inherited the ideas of the Hippocratic Corpus and further integrated them with clinical practice, thereby establishing a monumental milestone in the development of Western medicine; the latter inherited the scholarly thought of the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon and combined it with clinical application, thus creating a unique model for the development of Eastern medicine.

From the Hippocratic Corpus to Galen, and from the Inner Canon to Zhang Zhongjing, the social foundations upon which Western and Chinese medicine arose and developed were evidently quite similar—both lacked the economic base characteristic of modern industrial society. However, because the ancient Greeks and Romans lived for generations along the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts, their turbulent seafaring lifestyle fostered a spirit of innovation and enterprise; in contrast, the Chinese have long resided in the inland Yellow River basin, where a relatively stable agricultural mode of production cultivated a mindset of tranquility, conservatism, and a lack of ambition. Moreover, since the Western Han Dynasty, the doctrine of “suppressing all schools of thought and exclusively venerating Confucianism” greatly constrained the Chinese people’s willingness to innovate. In the realm of medicine, this manifested as follows: while the works of Hippocrates and Galen, in addition to the extensive “logical reasoning” teachings common to both the Inner Canon and the Treatise on Cold Damage and Miscellaneous Diseases, also introduced some rather novel experimental research on anatomy, physiology, pathology, and other areas—this laid the groundwork for modern medicine to quickly emerge from the framework of ancient Roman medicine when modern industry later took off, creating the necessary preconditions. Although ancient Roman medicine, through the innovations of figures like Galen, initially bore the imprint of “experimental research,” such activities remained largely artisanal in nature. Without the economic foundation provided by the modern industrial revolution, these practices ultimately could not escape being confined to the patchwork and concatenation of “logical reasoning” methods, because at that time medicine was, at best, merely a superstructure dependent on the economic base.

As history demonstrates, over the more than 1,500 years following Galen, since the Western world did not experience any major social transformations that broke through old production relations and unleashed new productive forces, Western medicine continued to develop and preserve itself on the same social foundation lacking modern industry. The experimental research portions of the works of Hippocrates and Galen were never vigorously developed or made the main theme of Western medicine; instead, certain maxims and doctrines outside of their experimental research were elevated to the status of inviolable dogma, becoming the rigid ideological barriers of the “Scholastic” school of ancient Roman medicine that stifled innovative thinking. It was only after the 16th century that this situation began to change. At that time, capitalism began to sprout in the West, and the development of mining and mechanical industries—especially the invention of telescopes and microscopes—opened up unprecedented opportunities for humanity to unlock the mysteries of nature. Consequently, natural science began to break free from the confines of “Scholastic philosophy” and stride boldly onto the path of modern experimental research.

In the field of medicine, the use of microscopes enabled researchers to delve into the microscopic world; the discovery of cells and the renewed understanding of blood circulation both arose on this very foundation.

In the mid-16th century, the advent of the modern industrial revolution driven by steam engines had a groundbreaking impact on the development of medicine. The precision instruments produced by modern industry accelerated the rapid advancement of basic medical research, leading to a series of breakthrough theoretical achievements that allowed Western medicine to quickly emerge with a brand-new appearance.

Modern Western medicine is composed of disciplines closely related to clinical practice, such as physiology, anatomy, pathology, and biochemistry, forming a scientific system based on experimental research. Every link in this system is intimately connected with the progress of modern natural science and technology, making it naturally part of the broader body of modern natural science. Modern natural science is an intricate, interwoven network of various disciplines, in which each component mutually promotes and constrains the others; the advancement of one element inevitably drives the advancement of related elements.

Consider how every technological innovation in modern science invariably triggers corresponding breakthroughs in medical technology: the development of glass and metallurgy facilitated the creation of microscopes; the invention of electricity and electric lighting enabled the use of various endoscopes; advances in atomic physics gave rise to the clinical application of X-rays; radar technology provided ultrasound for medical use; line integrals led to the development of CT scans; and isotopic techniques produced gamma cameras and SPECT scanners. In short, virtually every major breakthrough in contemporary science can be directly adopted and utilized by modern medicine. Yet Traditional Chinese Medicine has consistently been excluded from modern technology, with none of its achievements ever being absorbed or put to use.

The primary reason for this lies in the fact that, from Bian Que in the 4th century BCE to contemporary masters such as Xiao Longyou and Pu Fuzhou, Traditional Chinese Medicine has always developed on the economic foundation of individual agriculture and fragmented handicrafts. The entire theoretical system is the product of “logical reasoning” rather than experimental research. X-rays cannot reveal “pathological fire arising abnormally,” and CT scans or ultrasounds cannot detect “liver wood overcoming earth.” Since the Chinese Civil War, especially over the past decade, China has established a massive modern industrial system, fundamentally transforming its socio-economic foundation. Traditional Chinese Medicine must therefore undergo corresponding reforms; otherwise, it will forever remain disconnected from modern technology and unable to keep pace with its advancements.

Pei Zhengxue’s Study of Traditional Chinese Medicine—Discussion on TCM Theory and Clinical Case Records

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

A new milestone in the journey of medical research. He believed that living organisms are societies composed of cells, and that the body is a federation of cells. He stated: “Every animal is the sum of many units of life, and each unit of life exhibits all the characteristics of life.” Disease, he argued, is the result of changes occurring within a group of cells inside the body—a composite of microscopic alterations. This perspective opened up new horizons for Western medicine’s emphasis on microscopic understanding.

The renowned German bacteriologist Ehrlich once fairly remarked: “Since Weil’s brilliant research pioneered new avenues, people’s attention has focused on the localization and etiology of disease, and it is abundantly clear that this insight holds decisive significance in our therapeutic work.”⑧ Weil’s theory dominated the entire trajectory of Western medical development from the 19th to the 20th centuries. Western medicine’s microscopic understanding of disease has always been the mainstream of modern Western medical epistemology, permeating all branches of Western medical foundational theory—such as anatomy, physiology, histology, biochemistry, and pathology—and profoundly influencing clinical practice across all specialties.

Traditional Chinese Medicine, however, has never benefited from the support of modern industry and can only advance slowly along the traditional path of logical reasoning. A survey of historical and contemporary TCM texts reveals that no single viewpoint fails to stem from logical reasoning. The “Six Exogenous Pathogenic Factors” and “Seven Internal Emotions” proposed in the Inner Canon, as well as Chen Wuzhe’s “Three Causes Theory”—since they are not products of experimental research, they can only offer macroscopic insights into etiology. The “Nineteen Pathological Principles” in the Suwen’s “Great Discussion on Supreme Truth” represent a seminal text in TCM pathology, but because they are all macroscopic descriptions, they lack precise localization, qualitative analysis, and quantitative assessment. While these principles can guide TCM practice overall, as diseases become increasingly complex and variable, practitioners often draw on their own experience to arrive at different interpretations. For example, Liu Hejian viewed the “Nineteen Pathological Principles” as focusing specifically on “fire,” and from this he derived numerous new perspectives on “fire” syndromes; Zhang Zihé, on the other hand, found in them new grounds for attacking pathogenic factors. Thus, some argue that such theories can only provide vague directions for exploration. In recent years, scholars have reorganized the “Nineteen Pathological Principles” of the Inner Canon into a more systematic classification, yet even this remains a macroscopic exposition, offering no insight into the microscopic changes underlying disease onset and progression. In essence, the etiology, pathology, and treatment principles of the entire field of Traditional Chinese Medicine fall within the macroscopic domain, with conclusions largely derived from logical reasoning.

2. Western medicine emphasizes localized understanding, while Traditional Chinese Medicine emphasizes holistic understanding

As early as the 4th century BCE, the great Greek anatomist Aristotle (384–322 BCE) began to focus on the local structures of the human body and the localized morphological changes associated with disease. In the 2nd century CE, Galen established a series of physiological and anatomical experimental methods, shifting Western medicine’s focus from the whole to the parts. However, over the subsequent long period, with no modern industrialization to support it, Western medicine, like all other superstructures, remained firmly bound by religious ideology, and its understanding of localized disease stagnated. Meanwhile, a large volume of speculative doctrines gradually came to dominate the landscape of Western medicine. Starting in the 16th century, as the Western world underwent economic transformation driven by modern industry, advanced production tools significantly enhanced Western medicine’s microscopic insight, while simultaneously strengthening its localized understanding. After more than ten centuries of being shackled by religious dogma, Western medicine, through experimental research, rapidly made unprecedented progress along both the microscopic and localized paths, so that today its localized understanding has almost become the core of diagnosis and treatment in Western medicine.

Part One: Academic Thought

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

Traditional Chinese Medicine, beginning with the Inner Canon, established a relatively complete holistic perspective. Through the theories of Yin-Yang and the Five Elements’ mutual generation and control, it emphasized the unity, interconnectedness, and integrity of the human body. It held that the various tissues and organs constituting the body are structurally inseparable, functionally coordinated and mutually supportive, pathologically influential on one another, and therapeutically require holistic regulation and treatment. The Inner Canon also particularly stressed the concept of “human beings corresponding to heaven and earth”: the Ling Shu’s “Yearly Dew” states, “Humans correspond to heaven and earth and to the sun and moon”; the Suwen’s “Great Discussion on the Five Constants” says, “One must first consider the seasonal qi and avoid disturbing the harmony of heaven.” All these passages underscore that in both recognizing and treating disease, one should not only emphasize the unity of all parts of the body but also the unity between humans and their surrounding environment. Of course, while emphasizing the holistic view and the correspondence between humans and heaven and earth, the Inner Canon also included some discussions on localized anatomy—for example, the Ling Shu’s “Chapter on Meridians and Water” states: “For a person eight chi tall, the skin and flesh are externally measurable and palpable, and upon death can be dissected and examined. The hardness or softness of the internal organs, the size of the hollow organs, the amount of food consumed, the length of the meridians, the clarity or turbidity of the blood, the quantity of qi… all have specific numerical values.”

However, after the Han Dynasty, China entered a long feudal era, during which Confucian and Mencian doctrines held that “the body, hair, and skin are gifts from parents and must not be damaged,” and that “exposing the chest or abdomen is unseemly.” This view severely hindered people’s exploration of localized aspects of disease. Although there were indeed pioneering physicians like Wang Qingren who dared to innovate and seek out localized lesions, due to the fact that the development of Traditional Chinese Medicine never had access to advanced industrial conditions, this spirit of localized exploration ultimately failed to gain further traction. What did flourish, instead, was the holistic perspective and the theory of human-heaven correspondence, both of which relied primarily on logical reasoning as their main method of inquiry. Indeed, the “holistic view” advocated by the Inner Canon has been continuously enriched and developed by successive generations of physicians, becoming not only more thorough in its reasoning but also more comprehensive in its system. Any trace of localized thinking that once existed in the history of Chinese medicine has long since been submerged in the vast ocean of holistic teachings.

3. Western medicine emphasizes the pathogen-centric view, while Traditional Chinese Medicine emphasizes the body’s response-oriented view

Before the 18th century, there was no qualitative difference between Western and Traditional Chinese medicine in terms of etiology; both employed speculative reasoning to establish causal relationships. Ancient Greek medicine posited four fundamental elements—air, fire, water, and earth—as the causes of disease, a concept broadly analogous to the Five Elements theory in Traditional Chinese Medicine. Western medicine attributed puerperal fever to “changes in the universe, the earth, and the atmosphere,” a view largely consistent with the TCM notion of “correspondence between humans and heaven and earth.” But once the West benefitted from the baptism of technological industry, this situation began to change.

In 1847, Austrian physician Semmelweis first observed that postpartum fever was caused by infection with decaying matter. Although his views were suppressed by the religious authorities of the time—Semmelweis himself was even expelled from the hospital and soon died of mental illness—around the same period, the famous French scientist Pasteur discovered that souring milk and wine was caused by microorganisms. Subsequently, British surgeon Lister proposed that wound inflammation resulted from bacterial invasion and infection. He was the first to use carbolic acid (phenol) to disinfect operating rooms and to sterilize surgical instruments by boiling, thereby laying the initial groundwork for disinfection, sterilization, and preservation.

Among the milestones in the history of pathogen recognition, special mention must be made of the German physician Koch (1843–1910), whose contributions to the development of pathogenology were truly epoch-making. He is regarded as the founder of modern microbiology. He first created solid culture media, developed staining techniques for bacteria, and established animal models of infection, thus creating the essential preconditions for the development of modern microbiology. Thanks to Koch’s pioneering work, Western medicine in the second half of the 19th century established a firm understanding of pathogenic microorganisms, and with the support of modern industrial technology, this understanding deepened over the subsequent century alongside the rise of immunology. Eventually, Western medicine formed a complete academic system—from practice to theory—that serves as the fundamental standard for understanding the etiology and pathology of disease.

Pei Zhengxue’s Study of Traditional Chinese Medicine—Discussion on TCM Theory and Clinical Case Records

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

In Traditional Chinese Medicine, the understanding of etiology has always been based on the principles in the Inner Canon—“when righteous qi resides within, evil cannot invade” and “where evil gathers, qi must be deficient”—and proceeds through logical reasoning. It holds that the causes of disease boil down to two extremes: “deficiency of righteous qi” and “excess of evil qi,” with the former being the crucial factor and the latter merely serving as a condition for disease onset. Therefore, TCM consistently advocates the “theory of deficiency causing disease,” and in treatment adopts the principle of “strengthening righteous qi and consolidating the root” as the overarching approach for addressing numerous ailments. The Suwen’s “Great Discussion on the Correspondence Between Yin and Yang” states: “Yin and Yang are the way of heaven and earth, the guiding principles of all things, the parents of change, the origin of life and death, the abode of the divine, and in treating disease one must seek the root.” Here, “root” refers to regulating yin and yang, which means adjusting the body’s responsiveness. After the Inner Canon, Zhang Zhongjing, Chao Yuanfang, Chen Wuzhe, and others offered numerous discussions on etiology, proposing concepts such as “six exogenous pathogenic factors,” “seven internal emotions,” “damage from diet,” and “excessive labor and rest.” Notably, Chen Wuzhe’s “three causes” theory of disease, though innovative, still remained firmly within the framework of the Inner Canon’s logical reasoning. In essence, TCM’s understanding of etiology has remained unchanged, focusing solely on the body’s response while neglecting a deeper investigation into the true pathogens.

Although there were instances in the history of TCM development, such as the first use of the smallpox vaccine and Wu Youke’s theory of “noxious qi” as the cause of disease, without the backing of modern industrial infrastructure, these highly promising innovations and ideas, unable to be promptly incorporated into experimental research, ultimately faded away into the vast sea of logical speculation. Records of brewing and drinking alcohol can be traced back to ancient classics such as the Rites of Zhou and the Inner Canon, spanning over two thousand years; yet no one ever imagined using alcohol for surgical disinfection. Instead, people simply reasoned based on alcohol’s flammability and fluidity: “Alcohol burns, so its nature is like fire; alcohol flows, so its form is like water.” This clearly reveals the one-sidedness of reasoning that lacks experimental research. The Warm Disease School that emerged during the Ming and Qing dynasties made significant corrections and supplements to the concept of etiology for external febrile diseases in the Treatise on Cold Damage, but since it still relied on the old method of logical reasoning and lacked the conditions for experimental research, its results were limited to merely changing “wind-cold” to “wind-heat” and substituting ma huang and gui zhi with sang yin and yin gan. Modern medical scholars such as Wang Qingren, Tang Zonghai, and Zhang Xichun strove to innovate within the framework of traditional TCM theory, but still lacked adequate conditions for experimental research, resulting in negligible contributions to the understanding of pathogenic causality.

Part One: Academic Thought

This inevitably led to the fatal flaw of treating symptoms rather than addressing the root cause. Consequently, within the stronghold of Western medicine, Pavlov’s theory of neural reflexes, Selye’s theory of stress, and Harris’s 1937 discovery of the hypothalamus-pituitary gland’s role in systemic regulation all emerged one after another. Their research and viewpoints aimed to shift Western medicine from a localized focus back to a holistic one, and from a microscopic perspective to a macroscopic one. Over the past three decades, this approach has been further strengthened by the remarkable progress in immunology.

Turning to the modern development history of Traditional Chinese Medicine, although not as obvious as in Western medicine, we can still faintly discern attempts by enlightened individuals to shift the focus from macroscopic to microscopic understanding. Wu Youke’s “noxious qi” theory, Wang Qingren’s “anatomical studies,” and Tang Zonghai and Zhang Xichun’s “integration of Chinese and Western medicine” are all concrete manifestations of this endeavor. Looking at the dynamic developments in both Western and Traditional Chinese medicine over the past century, each side has begun to address its own shortcomings. All things, in their development, proceed on the premise of gradual correction and refinement—this is an inherent law of development. As a component of modern science, Western medicine, in the context of the rapid advancement of modern technology, seeks to absorb everything that can provide nourishment for its own improvement, thereby achieving greater strength. In recent years, the Western world has witnessed a surge of interest in Traditional Chinese Medicine; while clinical treatment needs are certainly a contributing factor, the deeper implication is that the West has begun to draw inspiration from TCM, eager to extract its essence and apply it. It can be confidently asserted that the holistic and human-heaven correspondence perspectives embedded in the treasure trove of TCM are precisely the contents that Western medicine should first excavate, then subject to experimental research, and ultimately incorporate into its own practices in the short term, striving to recreate the academic legacy of Western medicine.

The descendants of Yan and Huang—the inheritors of the contemporary TCM legacy—have clearly recognized that, today, the urgent task is to shift the TCM academic system from a macroscopic to a microscopic perspective. This is the only viable path forward for the current development of TCM; there is no other way. Modern science and technology have formed an interconnected, interdependent network system, yet TCM remains excluded from this network, continuing to adhere to ancient teachings and advancing slowly along the traditional path of logical reasoning. As previously mentioned, this situation stems from the long feudal era, during which individual agriculture and handicrafts did not provide TCM with opportunities to move toward microscopic understanding. We cannot hold the ancients accountable for this. However, by the 1990s, China’s modern industry had already joined the ranks of the world, and the conditions for TCM to advance toward the microscopic level were fully in place.

Pei Zhengxue’s Discussion on Traditional Chinese Medicine: Theory and Clinical Case Studies

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

Another figure known as the “Sage of Medicine,” Zhang Zhongjing (150–219 CE), emerged. The former inherited the ideas of the Hippocratic Corpus and further integrated them with clinical practice, thereby establishing a monumental milestone in the development of Western medicine; the latter, on the other hand, inherited the scholarly thought of the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon and combined it with clinical application, thus creating a unique model for the development of Eastern medicine.

From the Hippocratic Corpus to Galen, and from the Inner Canon to Zhang Zhongjing, the social foundations upon which Western and Chinese medicine arose and developed were evidently quite similar—both lacked the economic base characteristic of modern industrial society. However, because the ancient Greeks and Romans had long resided and lived around the Aegean and Mediterranean seas, their turbulent seafaring lifestyle fostered a spirit of innovation and enterprise; in contrast, the Chinese had traditionally settled in the inland Yellow River basin, where a relatively stable agricultural mode of production cultivated a mindset of tranquility, conservatism, and a lack of ambition. Furthermore, since the Western Han Dynasty, the doctrine of “suppressing all schools of thought and exclusively honoring Confucianism” greatly constrained the Chinese people’s willingness to innovate. In terms of medicine, this was reflected in the fact that, apart from the extensive “logical reasoning” teachings common to both the Hippocratic Corpus and the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon as well as the Treatise on Cold Damage and Miscellaneous Diseases, the works of Hippocrates and Galen also introduced some rather novel experimental research on anatomy, physiology, pathology, and other areas. This laid the groundwork for modern medicine to quickly emerge from the framework of ancient Roman medicine when modern industry later rose, creating the necessary preconditions. Although ancient Roman medicine, through the innovations of figures like Galen, initially bore the imprint of “experimental research,” such activities remained largely artisanal in nature. Without the economic foundation provided by the modern industrial revolution, these practices ultimately could not escape the constraints of “logical reasoning” methods, as at the time medicine could at best be regarded as a superstructure dependent on the economic base.

As history demonstrates, over the more than 1,500 years following Galen, since the Western world did not experience any major social transformations that broke through old relations of production and unleashed new productive forces, Western medicine continued to develop and preserve itself within the same social framework lacking modern industry. Consequently, the experimental research portions of the works of Hippocrates and Galen were never vigorously developed or made the main theme of Western medicine; instead, certain maxims and doctrines outside of their experimental research were elevated to the status of inviolable dogma, becoming the rigid ideological barriers of the “Scholastic” school of ancient Roman medicine that stifled innovative thinking. It was only after the 16th century that this situation began to change. At that time, the seeds of capitalism emerged in the West, and with the development of mining and mechanical industries—especially the invention of telescopes and microscopes—humans gained unprecedented access to the mysteries of nature, enabling natural science to break free from the confines of “Scholastic philosophy” and stride boldly onto the path of modern experimental research.

In the field of medicine, the use of microscopes allowed researchers to delve into the microscopic world, leading to discoveries such as cells and a renewed understanding of blood circulation.

In the mid-16th century, the advent of the modern industrial revolution powered by steam engines had a groundbreaking impact on the development of medicine. The precision instruments produced by modern industry accelerated the rapid advancement of basic medical research, resulting in a series of breakthrough theoretical achievements that enabled Western medicine to quickly emerge with a brand-new appearance.

Modern Western medicine is composed of disciplines closely related to clinical practice, such as physiology, anatomy, pathology, and biochemistry, forming a scientific system based on experimental research. Every link in this system is intimately connected with advances in modern natural science and technology, making it naturally part of the broader framework of modern natural science. Modern natural science is an intricate, interwoven network of various disciplines, where each component mutually promotes and constrains the others, and progress in one area inevitably spurs advancement in related fields.

Consider how every technological innovation in modern science invariably triggers corresponding breakthroughs in medical technology: the development of glass and metallurgy facilitated the creation of microscopes; the invention of electricity and electric lighting enabled the use of various endoscopes; advances in atomic physics led to the clinical application of X-rays; radar technology provided ultrasound for medical use; line integrals gave rise to CT scans; and isotope technology produced gamma cameras and SPECT scanners. In short, virtually every major discovery across contemporary scientific disciplines can be directly adopted and utilized by modern medicine. Yet Traditional Chinese medicine has consistently been excluded from modern technology, with none of its achievements being absorbed or put to use.

The primary reason for this lies in the fact that, from Bian Que in the 4th century BCE to contemporary masters such as Xiao Longyou and Pu Fuzhou, Traditional Chinese medicine has always developed within the economic framework of individual agriculture and decentralized handicrafts. The entire theoretical system is the product of “logical reasoning” rather than experimental research. X-rays cannot reveal “pathological fire disturbances,” and CT scans or ultrasounds cannot detect “liver wood overcoming earth.” Since the Chinese Civil War, especially over the past decade, China has established a massive modern industrial system, fundamentally transforming its socio-economic foundation. Traditional Chinese medicine must therefore undergo corresponding reforms; otherwise, it will forever remain disconnected from modern technology and unable to keep pace with its advancements.

Pei Zhengxue’s Discussion on Traditional Chinese Medicine: Theory and Clinical Case Studies

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

A new milestone in medical research. He believed that living organisms are societies composed of cells, and that the body is a federation of cells. He stated: “Every animal is the sum of many units of life, and each unit of life exhibits all the characteristics of life.” Disease, he argued, is the result of changes occurring within a group of cells inside the body—a composite of microscopic alterations. This perspective opened up new horizons for Western medicine’s emphasis on microscopic understanding.

The renowned German bacteriologist Paul Ehrlich once fairly remarked: “Since Weil’s brilliant research pioneered new avenues, people’s attention has focused on locating diseases and identifying their causes, and it is abundantly clear that this insight holds decisive significance in our therapeutic work.”⑧ Weil’s theory dominated the overall trend of Western medical development from the 19th to the 20th centuries. Western medicine’s microscopic understanding of disease has always been the mainstream of modern Western medical epistemology, permeating all branches of Western medical foundational theory—including anatomy, physiology, histology, biochemistry, and pathology—and profoundly influencing clinical practice across all specialties.

Traditional Chinese medicine, however, has never benefited from the support of modern industry and can only advance slowly along traditional lines of logical reasoning. A review of historical and contemporary TCM texts reveals that no single viewpoint fails to stem from logical reasoning. The “Six Exogenous Pathogenic Factors” and “Seven Internal Emotions” proposed in the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon, as well as Chen Wuzhe’s “Three Causes Theory”—since they are not products of experimental research, they can only offer macroscopic insights into disease etiology. The “Nineteen Pathological Principles” in the Plain Questions—the classic text that has become the cornerstone of TCM pathology discussions—are likewise based on macroscopic observations, lacking precise localization, characterization, and quantification. While these principles can guide TCM practice overall, as conditions become increasingly complex and variable, practitioners often draw on their own experience to arrive at different interpretations. For example, Liu Hejian viewed the “Nineteen Pathological Principles” as focusing specifically on “fire,” and from this he derived numerous new perspectives on “fire-related syndromes”; Zhang Zihé, on the other hand, found in them new grounds for expelling pathogenic factors. Thus, some argue that such theories can only provide vague directions for exploration. In recent years, scholars have reorganized the “Nineteen Pathological Principles” of the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon into a more systematic classification, but even this remains a macroscopic analysis, offering no insight into the microscopic changes underlying disease onset and progression. Overall, the etiology, pathology, and treatment principles of Traditional Chinese medicine all fall within the macroscopic realm, with conclusions largely derived from logical reasoning.

2. Western medicine emphasizes localized understanding, while Traditional Chinese medicine emphasizes holistic understanding

As early as the 4th century BCE, the great Greek anatomist Aristotle (384–322 BCE) began to focus on the local structures of the human body and the localized morphological changes associated with disease. By the 2nd century CE, Galen had established a series of experimental methods in physiology and anatomy, shifting Western medicine’s focus from the whole to the parts. However, over the subsequent long period, with no modern industrialization to support it, Western medicine, like all other superstructures, remained firmly bound by religious ideology, causing localized understanding of disease to stagnate. Meanwhile, vast amounts of speculative preaching gradually came to dominate the landscape of Western medicine. Starting in the 16th century, as the Western world underwent economic transformation driven by modern industry, advanced tools of production significantly enhanced Western medicine’s microscopic insight, while simultaneously strengthening localized understanding. After more than ten centuries of being shackled by religious dogma, Western medicine, through experimental research, rapidly made unprecedented progress along both the microscopic and localized paths, so that today localized understanding has almost become the core of Western diagnostic and therapeutic practices.

Part One: Academic Thought

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

Traditional Chinese medicine, beginning with the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon, established a relatively comprehensive holistic perspective. Through the theories of yin-yang and the five elements’ mutual generation and control, it emphasized the unity, interconnectedness, and integrity of the human body. It held that the various tissues and organs constituting the body are structurally inseparable, functionally coordinated and mutually supportive, pathologically influential on one another, and therapeutically requiring holistic regulation and treatment. The Inner Canon also particularly stressed the concept of “human beings corresponding to heaven and earth”: the Spirit Pivot states, “Humans correspond to heaven and earth and to the sun and moon,” while the Plain Questions says, “One must first consider the seasonal qi and avoid disturbing the harmony of heaven.” Both passages underscore that in understanding and treating disease, emphasis should be placed not only on the unity of all parts of the body but also on the unity between humans and their surrounding environment. Of course, while emphasizing the holistic view and the correspondence between humans and nature, the Inner Canon also included some discussions on localized anatomy—for example, the Spirit Pivot’s chapter on meridians and water states: “For a person eight chi tall, the skin and flesh are externally measurable and palpable, and upon death can be dissected and examined. The hardness or softness of the internal organs, the size of the hollow organs, the amount of food consumed, the length of the pulse, the clarity or turbidity of the blood, the quantity of qi… all have specific numerical values.”

However, after the Han Dynasty, China entered a long feudal era during which Confucian and Mencian doctrines held that “the body, hair, and skin are gifts from parents and must not be damaged” and that “exposing the chest or abdomen is unseemly.” This view severely hindered people’s exploration of localized aspects of disease. Although there were pioneering physicians like Wang Qingren who dared to innovate and seek out localized lesions, due to the lack of advanced industrial conditions supporting TCM development, this spirit of localized exploration ultimately failed to gain further traction. What did flourish, instead, was the holistic perspective and the theory of human-nature correspondence, both of which relied primarily on logical reasoning. Indeed, the “holistic view” advocated by the Inner Canon has been continuously enriched and developed by generations of physicians, becoming not only more thorough in its reasoning but also more complete in its system. Any trace of localized thinking that once existed in the history of Chinese medicine has long since been submerged in the vast ocean of holistic teachings.

3. Western medicine focuses on pathogenetic causation, while Traditional Chinese medicine focuses on the body’s response

Before the 18th century, there was no qualitative difference between Western and Traditional Chinese medicine in terms of etiology; both employed speculative reasoning to establish causal relationships. Ancient Greek medicine posited four fundamental elements—air, fire, water, and earth—as the causes of disease, a concept broadly analogous to the Five Elements theory in TCM. Western medicine attributed puerperal fever to “changes in the universe, the earth, and the atmosphere,” a view largely consistent with TCM’s principle of “correspondence between humans and nature.” But once the West benefitted from the blessings of technological and industrial advancement, this situation began to shift.

In 1847, Austrian physician Semmelweis first observed that postpartum fever was caused by infection with decaying matter. Although his findings were suppressed by the prevailing religious and theological orthodoxy at the time—Semmelweis himself was even expelled from the hospital and soon died of mental illness—around the same period, the renowned French scientist Pasteur discovered that souring milk and wine was due to microorganisms. Subsequently, British surgeon Lister proposed that wound infections were caused by bacterial invasion. He was the first to disinfect operating rooms with carbolic acid (phenol) and sterilize surgical instruments by boiling, thereby laying the initial groundwork for disinfection, sterilization, and preservation.

Of particular note in the history of pathogen recognition is the German physician Koch (1843–1910), whose contributions to the development of pathogenetics were truly epoch-making. He is regarded as the founder of modern microbiology. He first created solid culture media, developed staining techniques for bacteria, and established animal models of infection, thus creating the essential preconditions for the development of modern microbiology. Thanks to Koch’s pioneering work, Western medicine in the second half of the 19th century established a firm understanding of pathogenic microorganisms, and with the support of modern industrial technology, this understanding deepened over the subsequent century alongside the rise of immunology. As a result, Western medicine developed a comprehensive academic system linking practice to theory, which became the fundamental standard for understanding disease etiology and pathology.

Pei Zhengxue’s Discussion on Traditional Chinese Medicine: Theory and Clinical Case Studies

Published by Hefei Book Publishing House

In Traditional Chinese medicine, the understanding of etiology has always been based on the principles in the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon—that “righteous qi resides within, and evil qi cannot invade” and that “where evil qi gathers, righteous qi must be deficient”—and proceeds through logical reasoning. It holds that the causes of disease are essentially limited to two extremes: “deficiency of righteous qi” and “excess of evil qi,” with the former being the crucial factor and the latter merely serving as a condition for disease onset. Therefore, TCM consistently advocates the “theory of deficiency leading to disease,” and in treatment adopts the approach of “strengthening righteous qi and consolidating the root” as the overarching principle for addressing numerous ailments. The Plain Questions states: “Yin and yang are the way of heaven and earth, the guiding principle of all things, the parents of change, the origin of life and death, the abode of the divine, and the basis for curing disease—always seek the root.” Here, “root” refers to regulating yin and yang, which means adjusting the body’s responsiveness. After the Inner Canon, Zhang Zhongjing, Chao Yuanfang, Chen Wuzhe, and others offered numerous discussions on etiology, proposing concepts such as “six exogenous pathogenic factors,” “seven internal emotions,” “damage from diet,” and “excessive labor or rest.” Notably, Chen Wuzhe’s “three causes” theory of disease, though innovative, still remained firmly within the framework of reasoning based on the Inner Canon. In essence, TCM’s understanding of etiology has remained unchanged, focusing solely on the body’s response while neglecting a deeper exploration of the true pathogens.

Although there were instances in the history of TCM development, such as the first use of the smallpox vaccine and Wu Youke’s theory of “noxious qi” as a cause of disease, without the backing of modern industrial infrastructure, these highly promising innovations and ideas, unable to be promptly incorporated into experimental research, ultimately faded away into the vast sea of logical speculation. Records of brewing and drinking alcohol can be traced back to ancient classics such as the Rites of Zhou and the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon, spanning over two thousand years; yet no one ever imagined using alcohol for surgical disinfection. Instead, people simply reasoned based on alcohol’s flammability and fluidity: “Alcohol burns, so its nature is like fire; alcohol flows, so its form is like water.” This clearly illustrates the one-sidedness of reasoning that lacks experimental validation. The Warm Disease School that emerged during the Ming and Qing dynasties made significant corrections and additions to the concept of etiology for external febrile illnesses in the Treatise on Cold Damage, but since it still relied on traditional logical reasoning without any conditions for experimental research, its results were limited to merely changing “wind-cold” to “wind-heat” and substituting ma huang and gui zhi with sang yin and yin wei. Modern medical scholars such as Wang Qingren, Tang Zonghai, and Zhang Xichun sought to innovate within the framework of traditional TCM theory, but still lacked adequate conditions for experimental research, resulting in negligible contributions to the understanding of pathogenetic causation.

Part One: Academic Thought

This inevitably led to the fatal flaw of treating symptoms rather than addressing the root cause. Consequently, within the stronghold of Western medicine, Pavlov’s theory of neural reflexes, Selye’s theory of stress, and Harris’s 1937 discovery of the hypothalamus-pituitary gland’s role in systemic regulation began to emerge one after another. Their research and viewpoints aimed to shift Western medicine from a localized focus back to a holistic perspective, from microscopic scrutiny to macroscopic consideration. Over the past three decades, this approach has been further reinforced by the remarkable advances in immunology.

Turning to the modern development history of Traditional Chinese medicine, although not as obvious as in Western medicine, we can still faintly discern attempts by enlightened individuals to shift the focus from macroscopic to microscopic understanding. Wu Youke’s “noxious qi” theory, Wang Qingren’s “anatomical” approach, and Tang Zonghai and Zhang Xichun’s efforts to integrate Chinese and Western medicine—all represent concrete manifestations of this endeavor. Looking at the dynamic interactions between Chinese and Western medicine over the past century, both sides have begun to address their respective shortcomings. All developments, by their very nature, proceed through gradual correction and refinement—this is an inherent law of evolution. As a component of modern technology, Western medicine, in the context of its own advanced development, seeks to absorb everything that can provide nourishment for its own growth and improvement. In recent years, the Western world has witnessed a surge of interest in Traditional Chinese medicine; while clinical treatment needs certainly play a role, the deeper implication is that the West has begun to draw inspiration from TCM, eager to extract its essence and apply it. It can be confidently asserted that the holistic and human-nature-correspondence perspectives embedded in the treasure trove of TCM are precisely the aspects that Western medicine should first explore, then subject to experimental research, and ultimately incorporate into its own practices in the short term, striving to recreate the brilliance of Western medical scholarship.

The descendants of Yan and Huang—the inheritors of contemporary Traditional Chinese medicine—have clearly recognized that, today, the urgent task is to shift the TCM academic system from a macroscopic to a microscopic perspective. This is the only viable path forward for the current development of TCM; there is no other way. Modern science and technology have formed an interconnected, interdependent network system, yet Traditional Chinese medicine remains excluded from this network, continuing to adhere to ancient teachings and advancing slowly through traditional methods of reasoning and speculation. As previously mentioned, this situation stems from the long feudal era, during which individual agriculture and handicrafts did not provide TCM with opportunities to move toward microscopic understanding. We cannot hold the ancients accountable for this. However, by the 1990s, China’s modern industry had already joined the ranks of the world, and the conditions for TCM to advance toward the microscopic level were fully in place.

Contemporary TCM practitioners should follow the natural laws of development, boldly extend their thinking to the microscopic level, adopt Western medical experimental methods for their own use, and thereby develop TCM; they should apply ancient knowledge to contemporary practice and foreign knowledge to Chinese practice, with the aim of preserving the unique characteristics of TCM while opening up new horizons for modern TCM. The integration of TCM’s holistic perspective with Western medicine’s focus on the local is essential; the combination of TCM’s macroscopic view with Western medicine’s microscopic approach; and the fusion of TCM’s concept of bodily response with Western medicine’s pathogenic theory—these are all intrinsic needs for the two medical systems to learn from each other’s strengths and compensate for their weaknesses. Whoever takes the initiative to harness the strengths of the other will make rapid progress in the short term. Contemporary TCM practitioners must clearly recognize this reality: under current conditions, the most effective way to develop TCM is to first emulate Western medicine, because what Western medicine excels at is precisely what TCM lacks. The integration of TCM and Western medicine is the primary model for emulating Western medicine (and, of course, for mutual emulation between the two), but within this model, TCM practitioners must always adhere to the principles of “applying ancient knowledge to contemporary practice” and “applying foreign knowledge to Chinese practice.” Only in this way can the goal of developing TCM be achieved. With the development of China’s modern industry, unprecedented opportunities have arisen, placing the glorious yet arduous task of developing modern TCM squarely on the shoulders of our generation of TCM practitioners.

(“Research on the Integration of TCM and Western Medicine,” March 1996)

Pei Zhengxue’s TCM Studies—Discussions on TCM Theory and Clinical Cases

Published by Heji Book Publishing House

① Engels: “Dialectics of Nature,” People’s Edition, p. 30, 1971

② Virchow: “Cellular Pathology,” People’s Health Edition, p. 11, 1963

③ Lindholm: “History of Scientific Thought,” Social Sciences Edition, p. 298, 1961

The Connotation and Models of TCM–Western Medicine Integration in Internal Medicine

Pei Zhengxue

Within the field of internal medicine, the connotation of TCM–Western medicine integration should reflect the characteristic of mutually learning from each other’s strengths. Specifically, it should emphasize the combination of TCM’s holistic view with Western medicine’s localized perspective, TCM’s macroscopic approach with Western medicine’s microscopic analysis, and TCM’s concept of bodily response with Western medicine’s pathogenic theory. To achieve these goals, certain working models must be designed for clinical practice in internal medicine; such disease-specific TCM–Western medicine integration models can also be referred to as clinical integration models. While taking into account specific clinical needs, these models must also facilitate further in-depth theoretical and clinical research on the overall integration of TCM and Western medicine, thereby contributing to the development of contemporary TCM.

Pei Zhengxue’s TCM Studies—Discussions on TCM Theory and Clinical Cases

Published by Heji Book Publishing House

If, on the basis of the aforementioned macroscopic differentiation, we incorporate modern medical microscopic data—such as changes in liver function, plasma proteins, and fetal proteins—and comprehensively consider them through the lens of TCM differentiation, then TCM’s comprehensive understanding of liver diseases will undoubtedly be greatly enhanced, leading to improved therapeutic outcomes. Through long-term clinical application, the author has initially identified several patterns that readers may find useful as references. For example, to reduce elevated GPT levels, one can, based on traditional macroscopic differentiation, select heat-clearing and detoxifying herbs such as honeysuckle, forsythia, dandelion, houttuynia, prunella, indigofera, gentian, and sedum; whereas to improve turbidity, one can reapply tonifying and consolidating herbs like codonopsis, astragalus, salvia, polygonum multiflorum, and angelica. By using medication to confirm the diagnosis, the former case corresponds to a pattern of excess, caused by heat-toxin; the latter corresponds to a pattern of deficiency, often due to dual qi and blood deficiency. An increase in GPT indicates a rise in serum transaminase levels, which represents “excess”; an increase in turbidity, however, reflects a decrease in serum albumin, indicating “deficiency.” As stated in the “Inner Canon”: “replenish what is deficient, eliminate what is excessive” is the correct treatment approach. Therefore, for elevated GPT, one should employ heat-clearing and detoxifying methods; for turbidity, tonifying and consolidating methods are more appropriate. In regulating the three systems of hepatitis B, the author tends to use heat-clearing and detoxifying methods to lower the surface antigen index, while employing tonifying and consolidating methods to achieve negative conversion of the e antigen. Modern immunology holds that the relationship between antigens and antibodies is mutually complementary; thus, TCM differentiation for the three systems of hepatitis B should take both deficiency and excess into account, and treatment should balance tonifying and consolidating therapies with heat-clearing and detoxifying measures in order to effectively cure the disease.

This chapter is prepared for online research and reading; for external materials, please align with original publications and the review process.