its a competent summary introduction with decent coverage

but kaptchuk falls short in terms of his lazy attempts at "translation", his ideological dualism, and his misunderstanding of chinese intellectual history; taken together these errors border on factual misrepresentation and orientalism

his attempts to render chinese medical notions more "comprehensible" (tho imo its debatable whether such a translation is rly necessary) are uncreative and reductive. he fails to take the channel theory seriously for what it is, instead employing an inconsistent instrumentalism to get away w his positivist worldview intact and unchallenged

he insists on a separation bw religious belief and scientific knowledge, when such a separation has never held in chinese medicine or chinese culture broadly

and he constantly confuses confucian values for broadly/generally chinese values. confucianism has ofc been the hegemonic philosophy in china for 2 millenia, but this does not excuse such an error, especially when non-confucian taoists were instrumental pioneers in developing many of the core theoretical components of chinese medicine

im honestly not sure who this book is intended for ( )

Such a well reasoned and researched read that challenged many assumptions I had in my scientific training and perspectives on TCM. Valuable information for all. ( )

For the first time, an American fully trained in the practice of Chinse medicine explains this non-"scientific" but often astoundingly effective system of healing.

Kaptchuk writes a fascinating introduction to Chinese medicine. More than just a clinical analysis of acupuncture and herbal treatment, Kaptchuk describes the entirely different, more holistic, worldview of a Chinese physician.

As a patient who has received some relief for chronic migraine through herbal and acupuncture treatment, this book was totally intriguing. ( )

An introduction to what is obviously an extremely complex system of thought developed through centuries of observation and practice. Makes the important point that Chinese and Western categories of illness are based on almost entirely different assumptions about how the body functions. Does note some similarities to the system of humors that prevailed in the West from Greek times to the Enlightenment. It is important to note that this is an introduction to a system of though, not a guide to self-diagnosis or self-medication. It would have been interesting if the author had noted whether there are lay guides to Chinese medicine in the way of precepts for maintaining health, simple treatments for common ailments or injuries, etc.