문재인 정부는 국가인권위원회 북한인권팀에 팀장 1명만 두고 직원을 모두 없애고, 예산도 절반으로 깎아버렸습니다. 민주당이 10년 이상 가로막고 있던 북한인권법이, 박근혜 대통령 때 통과된 지 2년이 되지만, 북한인권재단 이사진 구성조차 하지 않고 있습니다. 문재인 대통령 비서실장 임종석을 비롯하여 주사파 출신들이 청와대를 장악하고 있습니다.
이들의 시계는 여전히 1945년 이전 일제 식민지시대에 멈춰 있습니다. “일제 식민지 청산과 미 제국주의자의 지배를 벗어나서, 우리 민족끼리 잘 살아 보자”는 것입니다.
'우리 민족끼리'에 신들려서, 김정은 3대 세습 공산독재도 보지 못합니다. 김정은의 핵미사일도 우리 민족의 것이니까 무엇이 문제냐?고 되묻습니다. 반면 우리 민족이 아닌 미군철수를 외치고, 사드배치를 반대합니다. 미국 소고기를 먹으면 광우병이 걸린다는 거짓선동조차 서슴지 않습니다.
그러나, 이제 젊은이들이 정신을 차리기 시작했습니다.
“누구를 위해 평창올림픽을 유치했는가?”
“평양올림픽이 웬 말인가?”
“현송월이 뭐길래, 인공기 태운다고 수사를 하지?”
“트럼프나 박근혜 태울 때는 가만히 있더니, 김정은 태우니까 수사해?”
“김정은 핵공갈에 넘어가서 그 밑에 사는 건, 노예생활 아냐?”
“김정은 비위 맞추려고, 언론자유를 제약해? 시위의 자유를 수사해? 우리 여자하키선수들의 피땀을 희생해?”
“김정은이 아무 때나 이유 없이 약속 취소하고 우리를 무시해도 무조건 굽신거리며, 돈 대주고, 과잉 경호하고, 기름 갖다 주고, 말도 제대로 못하고 살아야 돼?”
"악질 '민족'보다는 '자유'를 달라!"는 젊은이들의 외침에 먼동이 트고 있습니다.
김문수(前 경기도 지사)
벌레소년은 정신 차리는 젊은이들의 대표라 할만하다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
헌법 권위자의 뒤늦은 지적 "탄핵소추의결서는 부실했다"
證人(조갑제닷컴 회원)
그의 인터뷰 내용을 종합한 필자의 판단은 억지 탄핵소추에도 불구하고 언론이 이의 관철을 선동하고 국민들이 놀아났으며 무엇보다 냉정하고 엄격해야 할 헌법재판관들마저 이성을 잃고 감성에 휩쓸렸다는 결론이다. 이는 다 아는 사실이지만 탄핵 심판 당시 헌법재판소에서 근무하며 이를 직접 지켜본 헌법 권위자로부터의 인증(認證)인 셈이니 주목할 일이고, 후일을 기약할 실마리라도 찾은 듯한 심정이다.
이미 광풍(狂風)의 핵은 지나갔다. 이를 바로 잡는 일은 정권을 되찾는 길뿐이다. 만약 그런 기회가 온다면 김영삼 정권 이전으로 되돌려놔야 할 것이다. 대한민국 망조는 폭도들을 민주유공자로 둔갑시킨 데서부터 시작된 것이다. 국방부 장관이 국가보안법 위반 전과자에게서 '엄중한 주의'를 들어야 하는 이 상황을 타개하려면 다시 피를 보지 않고서는 불가능해 보인다. 그럴 만한 인물이 나올 수 있을지는 모르겠으나 대한민국이 다시 살아나려면 그 길밖에 없을 듯하다. (발췌)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 白丁 2018-01-30 오후 11:25 | ||
| 아직도 대한민국에는 일송정, 해란강가에서 말달리는 선구자 정신으로 광복운동하는 독립투사들 많습니다. 종군위안부 문제가 새삼 이슈가 된 것도 다 그런 까닭이겠고요. 대한민국에서 진보임을 내세우는 인물들 기자회견 말미에 꼭 끼는 메뉴 3종세트 - 존경하는 인물은 김구, 감명깊게 읽은 책은 백범일지, 애창곡은 선구자 - 아닌 놈 없습디다. 李承晩, 朴正熙 존경한다는 놈 한 놈 없습디다. 그 덕에 대한민국 여권 갖고 해외여행 다니고, 먹고 살고 있는 놈들이... | ||
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
황제 도시락 처먹는 좌파 거지 코스프레 떨거지들
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WP “백악관, 빅터 차 駐韓미국대사 지명 검토 철회”
이 신문은 차 석좌가 지난해 12월 트럼프 행정부의 한반도 정책과 관련해 이견을 보였다고 밝혔습니다. 차 석좌가 백악관 국가안보회의(NSC) 당국자들에게 이른바 ‘코피 전략’으로 알려진 제한적인 대북 공격에 대해 우려를 나타냈고 트럼프 행정부가 미-한 자유무역협정(FTA) 폐기를 위협하는 것에 대해서도 반대 의견을 표출했다는 설명입니다.
신문은 또 관계자를 인용해 차 석좌의 신원 검증 과정에서 문제가 발견됐으며 대사직을 수행하지 못한다는 판단이 내려졌다고 설명했습니다. 해당 관계자는 검증 과정에서 어떤 문제가 발생했는지는 밝히지 않았습니다. (미국의 소리, 발췌)
------------------------------------------------------------------
[출처] 여검사 사건이 일어난게 자그마치 8년전이다.
피해 입은 사람한테 이런말 하기 조심스럽지만 그 동안은 왜 참은 건지 잘 모르겠다. 더구나 이 사람 말에 따르면 그 성추행 덕분에 인사상 불이익을 2년뒤(?) 받았다고 하는데, 바로 당장도 아니고 2년뒤? 무언가 말이 잘 안 되는 거 같다. 지금 이 여자 사건이 커진 건 일종의 정치적 배경도 있다고 본다. 검찰을 길들이는 거와 공수처 설치에 대한 여론 몰이이다. 공수처란 것은 장차관 부터 검찰 사법부 국회의원 들 까지 부정부패 비리를 조사 기호 하는 기관으로 아는데, 일종의 기존 권력들에 대한 채찍 같은 거다. 좋은 의미로도 볼수 있지만 그 채찍을 만약 문재앙 같은 이가 잡는 다면 독재의 도구로 악용될 여지가 너무 많다는 것이 문제다. 국회의원 숫자가 아직도 여소야대의 상황이고 문재앙의 인기가 점점 떨어 질수록 이들 재앙이네의 재앙스런 입법들이 차질을 만나게 될 것이다. 그 부분에 대한 해결책 겸 권력을 공고히 하기 위한 공수처 설치를 위한 일종의 여론 몰이가 아닌지를 심각하게 고민하는 중이다.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
계속 늘어나는 5.18유공자 - 2017년 총정리/ 일베 발췌
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
벌레소년의 인터뷰가 올라왔는데, 웬만한 정치인이나 평론가보다 말을 잘 한다.
http://www.futurekorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=102396
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
빅터 차가 트럼프의 예방 선제 공격에 반대해 낙마했다고 쓰고 있다.
일부 정치 평론가들은 미국의 선제 공격 가능성을 낮게 보았지만, 이제부터 그 가능성은 매우 높다고 보아야 한다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NK defector raises his crutch to President
Mr Trump further drilled in the “ominous nature” of the North Korean regimen by highlighting the story of defector Ji Seong-ho, who was also in the crowd.
The President told the story of how Ji was run over by a train in North Korea after trying to steal coal to trade for food, leading to multiple amputations and stunted growth. He was later tortured by North Korean authorities after travelling to China, and has since defected to South Korea where he helps other defectors.
Mr Trump praised Ji, who waved his crutch in the air as the crowd applauded his story.
“Today he has a new leg, but Seong-ho, I understand you still keep those crutches as a reminder of how far you have come. Your great sacrifice is an inspiration to us all,” the President said. “Seong-ho’s story is a testament to the yearning of every human soul to live in freedom.”
트럼프의 연설에서 언급된 탈북자 지성호 씨. 북한에서 석탄을 훔치려다 기차에 치여 다리가 잘려나갔다.
------------------------------------------------------------------
부패한 정치권을 청소하기 힘든 이유는 기득권이 계속 유지되기를 바라는 사람들을 기용하기 때문이다.
Trump Shows Us Why Its So Hard to "Drain the Swamp"
Personnel Is Policy
One of the primary rules in politics is “personnel is policy.” What a politician says he’ll do is less important than who he hires to implement his policies. In many cases, the people he hires may not agree with his policies and may work to surreptitiously (or not so surreptitiously) undermine and co-opt him. We certainly see this on Capitol Hill all the time, where class after class of freshman Congressmen enters Congress pledging to fix the way Congress works. Yet time after time they get corrupted by the system in Washington. Why is that? It’s because of the people they hire.Coming into office often with no experience of how things operate in DC, they rely on their respective party apparatuses to staff their offices. They’ll hire Hill veterans as their chiefs of staff and legislative directors, staffers who are more concerned with the future of their careers and who consequently do everything they can not to upset party leadership so that they can maintain their ability to work on the Hill and work the government/lobbying revolving door. We’re seeing much the same thing happening in the White House today too, as Trump continues to hire establishment Republicans who wouldn’t be out of place in a Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, or John McCain White House. (발췌)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
폴 르로이볼리외: 다가올 사회주의 비극을 경고하다
르로이볼리외가 1885년 출판한 <집합주의>는 이미 1차 세계대전 이전에, 그리고 러시아에서 사회주의 실험이 시작되기 30년 전에, 사회주의와 계획경제의 파괴적인 면모를 구체적으로 파헤친 책이다.
그는 정부의 통제나 계획 없이도 파리와 런던의 모든 일상 용품들이 차질 없이 공급되고 있다는 사실을 지적했다.
Paul Leroy-Beaulieu: A Warning Voice About the Socialist Tragedy to Come
•Richard M. Ebeling
The Russian Revolution of November 1917, now being marked by its centenary, ushered in a hundred years of political tyranny and terror, economic suffering, exploitation and corruption, along with unimaginable mass murder, among the tens of millions of people who came under the control and command of Marxist inspired socialist regimes around the world. But before this tragic episode occurred in human history, indeed, decades before Vladimir Lenin and his cohort of communist revolutionaries seized power in Russia, there were clear and insightful critics of socialism who explained much of what was to be in store in any attempt to implement and impose a collectivist utopia on humanity.
One of the leading such anti-socialist voices in the second half of the nineteenth century was the French classical liberal and free market economist, Paul Leroy-Beaulieu (1843–1916). In 1870, Leroy-Beaulieu won several awards for his book on Colonialism and Modern Man. While not openly opposing the French government’s colonial occupation of countries such as Algeria in North Africa, he argued that any colonial power, including France, should follow a policy of free trade within the colonial territories and between those colonies and the rest of the world, since this was the economic policy most likely to benefit the people of France and all those under French colonial administration. He also stated the longer run goal of colonial policy should be eventual self-government by those initially under the control of those in power in faraway Paris.
In 1872, Leroy-Beaulieu was appointed professor of finance the Paris Institute of Political Studies, and in 1880 he was given a chair in political economy at the College of Paris, one of the oldest and most respected institutions of higher learning in France. True to the classical liberal ideals of the nineteenth century, Leroy-Beaulieu was a strong advocate of international peace, free trade and mutual prosperity among nations. In 1869, he published a study, Contemporary Wars, in which he dissected the financial and human cost of war in the middle decades of the nineteenth century.
The Myth of the State as a Thinking and Willing Entity
In 1889, Leroy-Beaulieu published, The Modern State in Relation to Society and the Individual. He argued against the Hegelian conception of the State as a higher and separate entity, more important that the individuals comprising it, and to which the individual was subservient. He emphasized that there is no such thing as “the State” in terms of actions demanded and undertaken. The State is a fiction that enables some to impose their control over others, and to bend the wills of the others to the wills of those in power.
“The State neither thinks nor wills of itself,” Leroy-Beaulieu said, “it thinks and wills only in and by the thought and will of the men who control” political power as agents of “the State.” Furthermore, those in political authority, “who control the State, who speak in its name, act in its name, and issue commands in its name, are not of an different physical or mental structure from that of other men. They do not rejoice in any natural superiority, either inborn or inoculated by the very profession they follow.”
The State, he insisted, was not the same as “society.” Society is the cumulative associations and networks of mutual relationships and actions undertaken by various individuals to further the common purposes and goals they have in mind. Said Leroy-Beaulieu:
Society and the State are two different things. ... Side by side with the political organization of collective force, proceeding by way of injunction and restraint, that is, the State, there arise on all sides other spontaneous forms of collective force, each created with a view to a precise and definite end, and acting with various degrees of energy, sometimes, very intense, but altogether without coercion. These are the various associations that answer to some sentiment or interest, some requirement or some illusion, the religious and philanthropic societies, civil, commercial, and financial companies. They simply swarm: the crop is inexhaustible.
Man is a being with a natural taste for association, not association of the fixed, immovable, rigid sort imposed from without [by the State] ... We shall then begin to realize how the life of each one of us is intertwined in this enormous network of combinations formed for various purposes which touch upon our profession, our fortune, our opinions, our tastes, our relaxations, our general conceptions of the world, and our particular conceptions of the arts, literature, the sciences, education, politics, the work of helping others, and so on. ... It is evident, therefore, that all kinds of collective requirements are not within the domain of the State. Let us hear no more from our philosophers of any such abstraction as the isolated individual.
Leroy-Beaulieu, however, warned that precisely due to the number and continuing growth of such intermediary institutions that separate the State from the individual, and through which individuals are able to better serve their ends and achieve their common goals and purposes through peaceful and voluntary association, “the State is at last beginning to feel jealous and to take alarm.” The continuing development and solving of social problems through these free associations raises the danger that people will come less and less to see any reason to rely on government for much of anything other than the securing of life and liberty. This is reinforced by the important moral consideration that all such institutions and associations of civil society have only one means of influencing people, “the force of persuasion,” while “what characterizes the State is its coercive power.”
Socialists Fail to Understand the Spontaneous Market Order
The great counter-revolution against individual freedom, the voluntary associations of civil society, and the growing prosperity resulting form free enterprise and free trade is found in the modern demand for centralized control and command of all of social life under the banner of socialism. Analyzing and criticism this threat to human liberty was the theme of Paul Leroy-Beaulieu’s most important and profound work, Collectivism. Originally published in French in 1885, and translated into English in a slightly abridged edition in 1908, it is one of the most detailed and devastating studies of socialism and central planning before the First World War, and all explained more than thirty years before the great socialist “experiment” began in Russia.
A leading error in the socialist argument, insisted Leroy-Beaulieu, is the inability to appreciate the workings of the spontaneous order that emerges from the voluntary interactions of a multitude of people following their respective individual interests.
“A force is not necessarily unregulated because it acts automatically, on the contrary,” he pointed out, “it is most probably more regular, more uniform and more purposeful in its action, than a force which is entirely directed by volition — a fundamental truth which is quite disregarded by collectivists.” He reminded his readers that without State regulation or directed planning, great cities like Paris and London are daily provisioned with all the necessities and conveniences of everyday life.
“Persons who are absolutely ignorant of the general welfare, are nevertheless completely successful in supplying these great cities with the required quantities of all the innumerable commodities demanded by the inhabitants ... This wonderful automatic adjustment of supply and demand is far from being incoherent and anarchic, as asserted by the collectivists,” he explained.
Market prices are what integrate and coordinate all of the goings-on of the multitude of market participants. “‘Price’ is the sure guarantee of an adequate supply, and is thus the guardian of the subsistence of humanity ... ‘Price’ is the guide, and in response to its unerring directions, enterprise, spurred on by personal interest, acts with extreme rapidity and certainty” to assure adaptation to constantly changing circumstances.
Socialist Planning vs. the Market Price System
But all this would come to an end with the abolition of private property in the means of production, and central determination and direction of all economic activity in the hands of the State. How will those in charge of centrally planning the economy know what to do? The government planners will have to rely upon the collection of statistics about supply and demand conditions prepared by “committees of inquiry” for that purpose, he suggested.
Yet, statistics, Leroy-Beaulieu said, can never serve as an effective substitute for the fluctuations in prices that always are “more rapid and certain indication of the required amount of production than statistical abstractions.” Imbalances and mismatching between supplies and demands would constantly be open to occurring under socialism, “which would cause terrible disorder and confusion, with effects infinitely more serious than mistakes made by private enterprise, which, as a whole . . . shows a marvelous quickness of adoption; mistakes committed by the State would not only be more serious, but far more difficult to remedy.”
The introduction of socialist central planning, therefore, would threaten serious and dire consequences in any society following the collectivist path:
We see then, that the momentous problem of the adjustment of supply and demand under a collectivist regime, in all localities and in all industries, remains unsolved. The play of prices would vanish with the disappearance of private trade, as would that variation of profit that, although apparently unjust, is in reality the instrument by means of which harmonious interaction between production and [consumer] requirements is maintained.
In place of these potent and benign forces, the only safeguard against disaster would be infallibility on the part of the economic administration of the socialist state; but history and experience show that state administration, so far from being infallible, is, on the contrary, far inferior to private administration in respect of certainty and promptitude of conception and execution.
On the one side is private interest, always alert and active; on the other, officials hampered by rigid regulations imposed by a bureaucracy, slaves of red tape, capable of dealing with normal conditions only, and impotent when confronted with the exceptional difficulties and unexpected vicissitudes to which the economic world is always liable. Again, on the one side, we have the energies of millions of men freely and actively engaged in work which they understand, on which their living depends, and which, therefore, they perform with the greatest keenness; and on the other, the cool indifference of administrators, who would be quite as much benumbed as stimulated by the responsibilities thrown upon them.
The very distortions and failures of socialist central planning, Leroy-Beaulieu warned, would soon generate systemic corruption and black marketeering, as people throughout such a socialist system would try to find ways to better fulfill their needs and wants in the face of shortages of desired goods and superfluous amounts of unwanted commodities. “However severe the regulations might be, it would be impossible to suppress this [illegal] private commerce,” he anticipated.
Paul Leroy-Beaulieu, it can be seen, anticipated essential elements of the later “Austrian” critique of central planning developed by Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich A. Hayek. Collecting and collating statistical data about the types, quantities and qualities of the available means of production, and an attempt to survey the vast array of forms and varieties of consumer demands could not and would not in any way serve as an effective substitute for the market-based price system.
There was and is no alternative to a functioning price system that indicates easily and adaptively all and every change in market supplies and demands, which serves as the information and incentives for individuals to use their abilities and resources to orient their activities for the satisfaction of consumers’ demands, based upon the profit margin differentials offered by shifting production from one direction into another.
The Tyranny and Slavery of Socialism
Paul Leroy-Beaulieu also understood that with government centralization and control over the means of production would come the greatest threat to human liberty ever experienced in modern history. He expressed astonishment that so many socialists insisted that their collectivist system would provide a greater degree of individual freedom and dignity than under the market system.
How could liberty exist in a society in which everyone would be an employee of the state brigaded into squadrons from which there would be no escape, dependent upon a system of official classification for promotion, and for the amenities of life. ... The employee (and all would be employees) would be the slave not of the state, which is merely an abstraction, but of the politicians who possessed themselves of power.
A heavy yoke would be imposed upon all, and since no free printing presses would exist, it would be impossible to obtain publicity for criticism or for grievances without the consent of the government. The press censure exercised in [Czarist] Russia would be liberty itself compared to that which would be the inevitable accompaniment of collectivism. However numerous the dissentients, they would be condemned to silence and subjected to injustice under the [socialist] regime, and a tyranny such has never been hitherto experienced would close all mouths and bend all necks ...
Intellectual liberty would suffer equally. ... The human mind would thus be subjected to a yoke more terrible than it has ever known — the practices of Torquemada and the Inquisition would be mild in comparison. ... Again, what would become of art when the work of the artists would be subject to the dictation of the directors of production and the state would be the only purchaser?
The destruction of individuality would be the inevitable result of such a system, and the position of the laborer under it would be worse than that of a serf in the middle ages. ... Again, what dignity could exist in a society when state obligations would be substituted for all moral duties? Parents would not longer direct the bringing up of their children ...
How can human progress continue in a society subject to universal constraint and authority? ... An immense bureaucracy would be established, and individuals who are exceptional in any way would be shouldered on one side and crushed by its complicated machinery.
Paul Leroy-Beaulieu’s Warnings About Socialism
How amazingly prescient was Paul Leroy-Beaulieu about the reality of socialism-in-practice as experienced in Soviet Russia and anywhere else where it was more or less fully implemented. The Soviet state determined your education and indoctrinated your mind through monopolization of all means of communication and information; determined your occupation and employment and therefore your life opportunities; commanded where you would work and live, down to an assigned apartment in government housing (and there was no other) from which you could not move without permission.
The socialist regime viewed all dissent as threats to the system, and therefore brought down the wrath of the State on anyone through those in the hierarchy of power having virtually total control over your fate — including sending you to a labor camp or simply killing you. Corrupt officials and bureaucrats abounded all through the socialist planned economy, with whom “connections” were needed, and to whom loyalties and bribes of many sorts had to be paid to survive in the society.
The creative men of the mind — writers, artists, musicians, scientists — all were commanded and coerced into applying their abilities and talents only in those ways useful and demanded by the State to further the aims and goals of the socialist leadership — all in the name, of course, of building the utopia of the future. To resist meant losing your government job, and being classified as an unemployed “social parasite,” which made you subject to arrest, imprisonment and removal to a forced labor camp in the frozen wastelands of Siberia or burning deserts of Soviet Central Asia.
And all the while, Soviet socialist reality, due to the unworkability of the central planning system, left the mass of the society waiting on long lines for poor, shoddy and highly limited quantities of everyday goods in the “people’s” retail stores, which were the only legal outlets to get any of the necessities of life.
How naïve and blind were so many people as to what was waiting in store from the great experiment in building socialism, when it began a hundred years ago in Soviet Russia. But it is not as if people had no warnings as to what socialist reality might look like if implemented. Paul Leroy-Beaulieu had anticipated and explained most of its worrisome and dangerous features and characteristics three decades before the Russian Revolution began. He also reminded any readers that might have picked up his great book on Collectivism in the years before 1917 that if freedom and prosperity were, indeed, desired, there was no institutional alternative to individual liberty, private property, free markets, and the competitive price system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
（五）郁体方
1柴龙牡（一身尽重，不可转侧---柴胡证）（抓原文）
2四逆散（舒缓神经，放松身心）（抓柴胡证+芍药证）
3小柴胡汤（往来、寒热，胸胁苦满，默默不欲，脉搏弦细）
（抓柴胡证+黄芩证+半夏
4枳实芍药散（中药阿托品，解痉止痛方）（抓枳实证+芍药证）
5栀子厚朴汤（除烦、顺气、抗焦虑。八味除烦汤的缩减版，用于气-火病）（抓栀子证+厚朴、枳实证）
6八味解郁汤（柴胡、半夏复合体）（抓柴胡人+半夏人）
7退热汤（少阳热型）（抓核心配伍柴胡+甘草）
（六）瘀体方
1大黄蛰虫丸（干血：干瘦人+瘀血证）（抓羸瘦人的地黄证+诸活血药证）。
2桂枝茯苓丸
（1）桂枝、茯苓：气上冲，见头昏、头胀、头晕、头痛、面赤、心悸、失眠、烦躁、健忘；
（2）丹皮、赤芍、桃仁：盆腔瘀血的腹证、下肢瘀血的腿证。
（抓脑症、面症、腹症、腿症、皮肤症）
3八味活血汤（血府逐瘀汤的精简版，柴胡人+瘀血证）（抓柴胡人+瘀血证）
4四味健步汤（下肢血管保护剂、修复剂）（抓病）
5桂枝茯苓丸加大黄牛膝方（药物刮宫方）（参考桂枝茯苓丸方证+抓病）
（七）痰体方
1半夏厚朴汤（疑病的半夏人）（抓疑病的半夏人）
2温胆汤（恐惧的半夏人）（抓恐惧的半夏人）
（八）水体方
1当归芍药散（当归、川芎、芍药证+白术、茯苓、泽泻证的组合）（抓白芍证之大便干结如栗和白术证之面黄虚浮，腹肌柔软）
2苓桂枣甘汤（整体羸瘦----大枣、甘草；水气上冲致动悸、急迫、冲击----桂枝、茯苓）
（抓大枣、甘草证的人羸瘦；桂枝证的气上冲症候群；茯苓证的水舌）
3苓桂味甘汤（整体羸瘦----甘草；虚劳人
（抓整体羸瘦----甘草证；
虚喘、虚冒----五味子证；
气上冲症候群的动悸、急迫、冲击----桂枝证；
水舌---茯苓证）
4苓桂术甘汤（水饮上冲，气上冲胸，起则头眩，身为振振摇）
（抓气上冲的桂枝证、水舌的白术茯苓证、人羸瘦的甘草证）
5防己黄芪汤（黄芪人+下肢水肿+膝关节疼痛）（抓黄芪人+下肢水肿+膝关节疼痛）
6甘姜苓术汤（肌肉、关节冷痛、重痛+干姜舌+肥胖女人）（抓肌肉
7五苓散（水体调体方，注意苍白术）（抓白术证）
8小青龙汤（呼吸道寒饮方，呼吸道有大量水样分泌物。本方与治疗消化道寒饮的吴茱萸汤，相互对偶）（抓咳喘+水舌、水涕、水痰）
9猪苓汤（1阴虚+水饮证；2尿路感染专方）（抓病！）
10真武汤（眩、悸、颤+水肿+附子证）（抓眩、悸、颤+白术、茯苓证+附子证）
11八味通阳汤（痰湿水体的调体专方）（抓舌苔白厚，胃腹胀满+浮肿
（九）错杂方
1半夏泻心汤运用的三种思路：
（1）HP感染的慢性浅表性胃炎专方；
（2）对人：人参、大枣、甘草；
（3）消化道上段湿热：口腔溃疡、结膜充血、舌苔黄腻、心烦失眠、体格壮实、青壮年人、嗜烟嗜酒、烟客酒客、口臭喷人、HP感染；
中段虚寒：胃脘喜暖、喜按，得冷食或服用清胃药后胃中不适，胃脘怕冷；
下段湿热：肛门灼热、大便粘臭、排便不尽、痔疮肛裂、肛周湿疹。
2柴胡桂枝干姜汤方证：
（1）抑郁、疲劳、怕冷：柴胡证；
（2）焦虑、心烦、口苦：黄芩证；
（3）头汗、失眠、心中悸动、脐腹悸动：桂枝、甘草、牡蛎证（平冲气）；
（4）口中干、大便干：天花粉证；
（5）肠鸣下利，舌面水润：干姜证。
3大黄附子细辛汤（大黄证+附子证+细辛证的组合）（抓大黄证+附子证+细辛证）
4大青龙汤（外麻黄+里石膏）（强人、急病）（抓麻黄证+石膏证）
5附子泻心汤（三黄证+附子人）（抓三黄证+附子证）
6桂枝芍药知母汤（以治疗关节疼痛
7葛根黄连黄芩汤（葛根背+芩连证）（抓葛根证+芩连证）
8甘草泻心汤（粘膜修复剂）（抓病！）
9桔梗汤（咽部干热者：合玄麦地，成玄麦甘桔汤；痰气者：合半夏厚朴汤；肿痛者，加连翘）（略）
10荆芥连翘汤（皮肤风药+四逆散+黄连解毒汤）（抓黄连解毒汤人的皮肤病）
11麻杏石甘汤（麻黄人+肺热证）（抓喘+汗出、体壮、头发浓密、营养状况好、活泼好动、面色红润的石膏证）
12排脓散（排痰散，中药沐舒坦）（对病）
13止痉散（中药的卡马西平）（对病，定颤、定痛方）。
整理自黄煌老师著作《黄煌经方使用手册》
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기