----------------------------------------------
코리아패싱(Korea passing) 그 무서운 두얼굴~!
문재인은 입만열면 북한의 핵을 거의 인정하는 선에서
국제정치와 국내정치에 대응하고 있는게 현실이다.
미국도 이런 상황이 오면 선택의 폭은 두가지 밖에 없다.
대한민국 국민이 원하든 원치않든 미군을 철수하고 한국을 포기하는 것과
한국 내 정치에 깊숙히 간여하여 정권을 교체하는 반장기적 작전으로 가는 수 밖에 없는거다.
한국 국민이 선거로 뽑은 대통령이기에 그 외의 뾰죽한 방법이 없기 때문이다.
어쩌면 문재인은 이런 꽃놀이 패를 즐기고 있을지도 모른다.
문재인은 한국민의 안녕과 지속적인 경제발전 보다는
북한과의 통합에 의해 중국으로 연결되는
사회주의국가 연대를 더 중요한 책무로 여기기 때문이고
그의 지지자들에게의 보은으로 생각하고 있기 때문이다.
코리아패싱의 결과에 가장 영향을 미치는 함수는 시간에 있다.
북한이 필요한 약 6개월의 핵완료 시간을 문재인이 벌어줄 수 있느냐 없느냐.
반대로 미국이 이 6개원 이전에 북한 핵 제거에 성공을 하는냐 못하는냐의 문제이다.
문제인 이시간을 김정은에게 벌어주기 위하여 남북정상회담등의 수단방법을 가리지 않을 것이고
미국은 이런 모든 것을 억제해가며 북한핵 제거에 모든 역량을 쏟아 부을 것이다.
대한민국 국민은 빨갱이대통령을 뽑은 댓가로
그 결과가 어느 쪽으로 가든 엄청난 댓가를 치르게되는 것을 감수 할 수 밖에 없다.
대한민국은 정말 공포스러운 매일매일을 살고 있다.
숨통이 막힌다.
다행이도 태극기운동이 성조기를 함께하고
그 열기 또한 전혀 식을 줄 몰라 커다란 힘이되지만
우리는 잠시도 빨갱이정권의 감시에 소홀해서는 안된다.
[출처] 코리아패싱(Korea passing) 그 무서운 두얼굴~!/ 일베, 발췌
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[출처] 코리아패싱(Korea passing) 그 무서운 두얼굴~!/ 일베, 발췌
-----------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
대통령을 묻어버린 '거짓의 산' 59편 | "박근혜 대통령은 무죄다 그 증거는 기록 속에 있다" / 「거짓과 진실」 행동 지침 공개
------------------------------------------------------------------------
재화를 분배하는 몇 가지 방법이 있다. 그중에 사유재산의 교환만이, 사회의 생산력과 삶의 수준을 높이는 유일한 방법이다. 유한한 자원을 분배하는 방법에 따라, 사회 구성원의 행동 양식은 변하게 된다.
Why Camping Out To Buy Stuff Is a Rarity in a Market Economy
•Brian Balfour
For college basketball fans, the excitement of “March Madness” is just around the corner. March marks the beginning of the mesmerizing three-week tournament to crown a college hoops champion, an event packed with buzzer-beaters, upsets, and office bracket pools across the nation.
Duke University’s basketball program, one of the traditional favorites to win the tournament, is also home to a unique tradition that can teach us a valuable economic lesson.
Krzyzewskiville, or more easily called K-ville, is a tradition reportedly dating back to 1986, in which students live in tents outside the basketball arena in order to obtain prime student seating for major Duke home basketball games. It is named after long-time head basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski (pronounced ‘Shih-shef-ski’). Why would these students forsake the comfort of their dorm rooms or apartments, often for weeks?
Student seats at the games are allocated on a “first come, first served” basis, so those first to set up camp outside the arena get first choice of seats in the student section. Front row seating comes with ample TV exposure, not to mention prime real estate for heckling opposing players.
Like any economic good, seats at Cameron Indoor Stadium (Duke’s basketball arena) are scarce. Each seat can be used by only one student, even though many more fans would desire a seat at the game. This is where economics comes into play.
The method by which scarce goods are allocated will determine how people compete to obtain that good. In the case of K-ville, the first come, first served method of allocation incentivizes students to be first in line to obtain the most desirable seats.
Imagine, instead, if those seats were allocated, say, according to feats of strength. Instead of filling up tents in K-ville, students would fill up the campus weight room to out-lift each other to earn a spot at the front of the line. Or, what if coach K himself personally distributed the student tickets? Students wouldn’t waste time in tents, instead they would go to great lengths to curry favor with Coach K – perhaps by showering him with gifts – in hopes of being rewarded with prime seats.
Just like those front-row Duke basketball tickets, all economic goods face the same potential dilemma of multiple people desiring to lay claim to the same resource.
One of the key question society must answer, then, is: What system of allocating scarce resources most encourages greater production of needed goods and services, resulting in a higher standard of living?
Several methods are conceivable. They include:
First come, first served: whoever is first to claim or physically obtain the good gets to keep it. We see this method playing out in the tents of K-ville. Those willing to forego other uses of their time in order to wait longest in line will be rewarded. It may also involve a little luck as well, with those who happen to be closest to some valuable good having the greatest ease of getting to it first. Obviously, rewarding the first in line does not incentivize productive activity.
Winner take all: there is a contest in which the winner is awarded control of their desired goods. Depending on the contest – be it strength, intelligence, height – the winner may be selected by chance or through acquiring a skill arbitrarily chosen by an authority figure. Such a process is unlikely to encourage greater production, but rather incentivize people to train themselves to win the contest.
Lottery: there is a drawing to see who wins ownership of the goods in question. This rewards people by pure luck.
Someone decides: an authority figure decides who gets what. Concentrating so much power over scarce goods into the hands of a single person or committee invites corruption. As such, people are incentivized to bribe or threaten the decision-makers to obtain what they desire (i.e. sending coach K gifts in exchange for tickets). Lobbying becomes more rewarding than investments in productivity.
Need: an authority figure determines who is in most desperate “need” of the good, and awards it to him. Attempting to distribute by “need,” however, subjects distribution to the arbitrary definition of “need” by the authority figure. Productive activity could be discouraged by the risk of losing access to goods because one is not considered “needy” in the eyes of the decider.
None of those options seem like a particularly productive (or fair) means by which to allocate scarce resources. Which brings us to:
Exchange of private property: Private property implies that goods have an owner, and that owner is the one with just and legal authority to determine how that good is used. The owner can consume it, use it for productive purposes, stockpile it or trade it. One acquires rights over (already owned) property thru voluntary exchange, whether those exchanges involve goods for goods, goods for money, or money for labor.
Under such a system, in order to compete for desired goods, one must offer something of value in exchange. This incentivizes greater productivity – the key to improving the standard of living for a society.
The method society chooses for how scarce resources are allocated will generate very different types of behavior, and results.
Only a system based on private property rights and free exchange will provide the framework for a more prosperous society, as this system is the only one to truly incentivize productive activity.
When applied correctly, the economic way of thinking can equip us to observe economic laws in action all around us – even in the behavior of hoops-crazy college kids in tents. To ignore these lessons would be true madness.
Brian Balfour is Executive Vice President for the Civitas Institute, a free market advocacy organization in Raleigh, North Carolina
-----------------------------------------------------
가격 안정화 정책이란 정부가 여신 팽창을 통해 금리를 낮춰 경기 활동을 부양하려 했던 정책이 실패한 뒤에 나타나는 정책이다.
정부 개입이 없는 건전한 재정은 시민의 자유를 지켜내기 위한 장치로, 권리 장전이나 헌법과 같은 반열에 있다.
The Fateful Wish for Price Stability
•Thorsten Polleit
[Originally published February 2007.]
It is hard to think of a slogan that nurtures anti–free market sentiment as strongly as the term "stabilization policy." To Ludwig von Mises, stabilization policy was a direct consequence of the failure of government's interventionism in the field of monetary affairs:
Shortcomings in the governments' handling of monetary matters and the disastrous consequences of policies aimed at lowering the rate of interest and at encouraging business activities through credit expansion gave birth to the ideas which finally generated the slogan "stabilization."
However, stabilizing the purchasing power of money is exactly what today's central banks, the agencies of government-held money supply monopolies, are trying to deliver. Following Irving Fisher's index regime, monetary policies around the world have been assigned the mandate of preserving "price stability." The latter is usually defined as a (consumer) price index to be held constant over time, e.g., allowed to increase only at a small and pre-determined percentage over time.
To Mises, a monetary policy aiming at preserving price stability did not stem from attempts to improve economic calculation but to fight the concept of the free market:
The idea of rendering purchasing power stable did not originate from endeavors to make economic calculation more correct. Its source is the wish to create a sphere withdrawn from the ceaseless flux of human affairs, a realm which the historical process does not affect.
For economists of the Austrian school, the monetary policy objective of price stability is a recipe for bringing about disastrous results, namely recurrent economic crises, which in turn ultimately lead to a destruction of economic and political freedom. With price stability having become so widely favored, it is important to outline the Austrian School's thinking in some more detail.
Impossibility of Money Stability
The starting point for Austrian economists is the observation that human action in a free society is characterized by ongoing, perpetual change. In a market economy, people continually choose among alternatives, leading to ever-changing valuations of goods and services bought and sold. Searching for absolute stability of vendible items' exchange ratios would therefore be an erroneous and futile undertaking. This insight applies also to the exchange ratio of money.
Money is a means of exchange. As such it is subject to peoples' actions and valuations in the same way that all other economic goods and services are. As a result, money's subjective and objective exchange values continually fluctuate, and there is no such a thing as the stability of the exchange ratio of money vis-à-vis other goods and services; in a free-market economy there aren't fixed exchange ratios.
What about economic calculation, for which money is an indispensable tool? Before governments took full control of monetary affairs, agents in free markets had decided to use precious and relatively scarce commodities — such as gold and silver — as media of exchange. Their quantities in circulation tended to change relatively slowly and predictably over time. Changes in money's purchasing power could thus be largely disregarded. In this sense, money based on scarce commodities provided "accounting stability."
Indeed, when measured on the basis of consumer price indices, money prices in, for instance, the United States and United Kingdom, were de facto constant during the 1800s and early 1900s, the era of the commodity/gold standard (see graphs below). As a result, inflation, as represented by the annual change in the price indices, was zero on average, even though it tended to fluctuate widely in the short-term.
After the start of the First World War in 1914, which is widely seen as marking the transition to the era of government controlled paper money standards, price indices started drifting upwards. The trend of ever-higher money prices — and thus constantly positive inflation — was only temporarily interrupted from the early 1920s to the middle of the 1930s (including the period of the Great Depression).
Increasing Money Supply Leads to Inflation
From the Austrians' viewpoint, any change in money supply influences money's exchange ratio, irrespective of whether a commodity or fiat money standard is in place. Take, for instance, a gold standard regime, in which money supply increases due to, say, a rise in gold supply hitting the market. Additional money is spent on particular goods in specific sectors of the economy. The first users of the newly created money spend it on goods and services given prevailing market prices.
As more and more market agents get hold of additional money, the marginal utility of money in their personal valuation scales declines, while the marginal utility of non-monetary goods and services increases. In an attempt to restore their portfolio equilibrium, people offer more money against goods and services. Money prices rise as each money unit can buy fewer goods and services when compared with the situation before the stock of money increased.
From this viewpoint it is straightforward to define inflation, as Mises did, as an increase in money supply — and deflation as a decline in money. Mises's definition of inflation and deflation stands in stark contrast to today's interpretation of these terms: "What many people today call inflation or deflation is no longer the great increase or decrease in the supply of money, but its inexorable consequences, the general tendency towards a rise or a fall in commodity prices and wage rates."
Money Is Not Neutral
Mises made the point that any increase or decrease in money supply would produce uneven price effects through time. To him, money is not "neutral." For instance, an increase in money supply drives up, in a first step, certain money prices while leaving those of other goods and services unchanged. The injection of additional money leads to changes in relative prices. The latter, in turn, influence market agents' investment and consumption plans.
When governments took full control of monetary affairs, the commodity standard was replaced by fiat money. In contrast to free-market money, a government-run, fiat-money regime does not set any limits to increasing credit and money supply, and market interest rates can be artificially lowered — a measure that is widely believed to be economically necessary and beneficial. However, manipulating the interest rate invites trouble.
The government-made increase in credit and money supply seems to suspend, at least temporarily, the law of scarcity, encouraging market agents to pursue investment projects for which the economy simply does not have the required resources. Sooner or later, however, it becomes obvious that businesses, who happily borrowed at cheap lending rates, invested too heavily (or better: malinvested) in capital goods and underinvested in consumption goods.
The misallocation of scarce resources is brought into the open when consumers start returning to their previous consumption-investment preferences. Demand declines, the boom turns into bust and the crisis unfolds. To Austrians, the building up of the boom, which must collapse as it is fuelled by an inflationary credit and money expansion, would occur even if the central bank kept a price index stable: a stabilized price index does not prevent the building up of distortions in relative prices and the economy's production structure.
The Call for Free-market Money
Austrians advocate ending governments' money supply monopolies and returning to free-market money. They don't think the latter would be free of inflation, but they hold the view that inflation would be much better contained under free-market money when compared with a government-controlled, fiat money. Under a freely chosen commodity-based money regime, such as the gold standard, money supply would tend to increase relatively predictably and in relatively small quantities over time — compared with random, arbitrary, and usually dramatic increases in paper money supply.
The Austrians' great concern is that a government-dominated money-supply regime would ultimately lead to economic and therefore political disaster; the objective of price stability would not alter such a dismal prediction. Even if a central bank succeeds in stabilizing a targeted price index, it would — by an ideologically motivated increase in credit and money supply — generously increase credit and money supply. It thereby distorts the economy's price mechanism, promotes malinvestment and initiates subsequent economic downturns. And it is actually the latter with which the trouble really starts.
To Mises, government interventionism — the artificial lowering of the interest rate through expanding bank credit and money supply — causes cyclical swings of the economy, inflation, stock market crashes, and subsequent losses in output and employment. This in turn would provoke the public calling upon the government to solve the crisis. Additional government action, rather than market forces, is usually seen as the solution to economic hardship. What follows are more interventions, leading further and further away from the ideal of the free society.
Public Opinion and Anticapitalist Mentality
With an economic crisis unfolding, people become dispirited and lose their confidence in the concept of the free market. They look for a quick bail-out, and fail, or simply do not want, to identify government interventionism as the actual cause of the crisis. An anticapitalist mentality would be particularly receptive to diagnoses of market failure rather than to ascribing the causes of the crisis to government interventionism.
To escape the consequences of a self-made monetary crisis, brought about by an ideologically motivated increase in credit and money expansion, the society opts for the policy that has actually brought about the malaise. In the words of Mises: "In the opinion of the public, more inflation and more credit expansion are the only remedy against the evils which inflation and credit expansion have brought about."
If public opinion is looking for government action to end the crisis, hopefully reversing it into a boom, political quarters can be expected to capitalize on such a desire. Politicians usually rise to prominence by advocating government measures that are supposed to restore the economy back to health. An "easy monetary policy" is usually seen as the appropriate policy measure.
Central banks, even if politically independent, would hardly be in a position to stem the tide. As government-owned institutions, they cannot pursue a policy that is out of line with public opinion. In fact, if a central bank's monetary policy does not meet the electorate's preference, it wouldn't take long for people — instructed by the anti–free market propaganda — to favor ending the bank's political independence and bringing it back under direct parliamentary control — thereby speeding up the demise of the currency.
Return to the Sound Money Principle
Austrians voice great concern that any government-controlled money supply will necessarily be prone to crisis, whether or not central banks can keep a price index number stable. As a consequence, they propose a return to free-market money, which would be compatible with the "sound money principle," as Mises put it.
The sound money principle not only allows reaping the full benefits of property rights, the division of labor, and free trade, thereby improving the general standard of living; it also represents a conditio sine qua non for the free society:
It is impossible to grasp the meaning of the idea of sound money if one does not realize that it was devised as an instrument for the protection of civil liberties against despotic inroads on the part of governments. Ideologically it belongs in the same class with political constitutions and bills of right.
To Mises, the sound money principle has two aspects: "It is affirmative in approving the market's choice of a commonly used medium of exchange. It is negative in obstructing the government's propensity to meddle with the currency system."
Against this backdrop, today's government controlled paper money standards could not have moved further away from what the Austrians consider a money regime compatible with the ideal of a free society. Such a worrying assessment is supported by the fact that there is rather little, if any, public debate about the Austrian School of Economic thinking regarding the remoter consequences that the very objective of today's monetary policies might entail.
However, such a debate has become indispensable for preserving the concept of the free society. Central banks' monetary policies have opened the floodgates of credit and money supply. They have set the economies on a path where the options appear to be either increasing inflation further — in a futile attempt to temporarily escape the final collapse — or allowing deflation restoring the economies back to equilibrium.
Needless to say that both outcomes — which are the direct results from the fateful wish for money stability — would play into the hands of anti-free market forces. A return to free market money would prevent these developments.
--------------------------------------------
자연의 만물은 프랙탈이다. 이에 반해 현대 건축은 프래탈이 아니고, 탑-다운 방식의 결과이다.
-----------------------------------------------------
어느 분야에서나 아마추어가 최고이다. 창녀가 사랑과 무관하듯이, 전문가들 역시 지식과 무관하다.
--------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------
보호무역의 댓가
The cost of protectionism
-----------------------------------------------------
트림 후에도 위가 답답한 증상에, 선복대자석탕
NO161、伤寒发汗，若吐若下，解后，心下痞硬，噫气不除者，旋复代赭石汤主之。
（胡希恕论）我们可以这样理解，此人素日胃就不好，可没明显发作，由于外感，经服药，吐下等伤胃气，新得的病好，但素日胃的疾患明显发作，心下痞硬，就是人参证了，为胃虚，邪饮趁胃虚而往胃上来，故心下痞硬，邪气上逆，故嗳气不除，应用旋覆代赭石汤主之。此方半夏泻心汤、甘草泻心汤、生姜泻心汤大有相似之处，也有人参、生姜、甘草、半夏、大枣，为健胃治逆的，治呕逆，另外加旋覆花代赭石，旋覆花是下气去结气的。代赭石是收敛性健胃药，此药在治本病不要重用，多用反伤胃，后世说是镇重使逆气不往上来，其实是收敛性的健胃药，有点补益的性质，此药重用，对胃不好，所以用人参、生姜、甘草、大枣、半夏，就是健胃降逆，用旋覆下气去结气，代赭有点健胃镇逆作用。此方与前三泻心比，没有芩连去热，也不解烦，也不治下利，此药在临床上对胃的疾患，经常有嗳气不除，与生姜泻心汤嗳气食臭，不同的是，有下利，而这里没有，反倒治大便干，对便秘，此方有效。旋覆代赭往下性的力量相当大，此方治胃疾之嗳气与陈皮之嗳气不同（橘子姜汤，也治嗳气），后者之嗳气是，觉得闷打膈后舒服，希望打膈才好，为橘皮证，茯苓饮也有此证侯，一般胃不好，食欲不振，有逆气，但打膈较舒服，主要以痞闷为主，用茯苓饮就好，健胃行气利水，而旋覆代赭石不是的，它是苦于打膈，嗳气不除嘛，难受，故此方有治噎膈的机会，就是胃食道发炎，癌证等打噎相当凶，用此方好。另胃泛酸，胃痛、打膈、大便干，此方好使，如果酸太多，可加乌贼骨，注意大便稀不行，用茯苓饮比较好，这些都是常用的方（56：00）苦于嗳气所以说“嗳气不除”
总结：生姜泻心汤：干嗳食嗅，下利（有芩连）
胃酸：加乌贼骨
胃虚：心下痞硬
-----------------------------------------------
소변을 본 후에 어지러워 쓰러지는 증세에, 백합활석자석탕
瘦型糖尿病 치료
仝小林，1956出生，主任医师，教授，博士生导师，博士后合作导师，973计划项目首席科学家。中国中医科学院首席研究员，国家中医药管理局内分泌重点学科带头人。享受国务院特殊津贴。
主要研究方向为中西医结合治疗糖尿病、肥胖、代谢综合征等内科杂病。承担国家科技部973计划项目、国家“十一五”攻关课题、国家自然科学基金课题、科技部863、卫生部等课题30余项。
组成：干姜6～9g，黄连15～45g，黄芩15～45g，太子参15～30g。
功效：清热降浊，益气养阴。
主治：瘦型糖尿病（消瘅）
煎服法：急性期：水煎服，日二次；缓解期：配水丸，3g/次，3次/日。
方解：太子参性平和，益气生津，或可用西洋参益气养阴，黄连、黄芩苦寒清热，干姜护胃。“苦酸制甜”，黄连最苦，最能降糖，临证治疗血糖控制欠佳的糖尿病患者，常重用苦味药黄连30～60g，降糖效果显著，未见明显不良反应，干姜6g反佐，制黄连、黄芩之苦寒，又与二黄构成“辛开苦降”手法，红参用于糖尿病气阴两伤期。本方出自《伤寒论》３５９条：“伤寒本自寒下，医复吐下之，寒格，更逆吐下；若食入口即吐，干姜黄芩黄连人参汤主之。”临床活用为瘦型糖尿病，临床降糖效果明显，同时可以改善症状。
加减：证病结合。针对病：伴高血脂，加红曲15g，五谷虫30g，生山楂30g，化橘红30g；高尿酸血症，加威灵仙15g，汉防己30g；高血压，加地龙30g，怀牛膝30g，葛根30g。针对证：伴血瘀，加三七6～15g，鸡血藤30g，水蛭粉3～6g（冲），酒军3g，伴阴虚，加花粉30g，生牡蛎30～120g，伴阳虚，淡附片6～30g，肉桂6～15g。
-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
시금온담탕
处方柴芩温胆汤：柴胡10克、黄芩12克、半夏10克、陈皮10克、竹叶15克、茯苓15克、枳壳10克、茵陈15克
二、主治：
-----------------------------------------------------------
杜光明 중의 학술사상
杜光明，男，1933年出生，成都军区昆明总医院北教场医院退休主任医师，军中名医，现任昆明圣爱中医馆主任医师。从事中医工作50余年，擅长治疗肺心病、脑血管疾病、急慢性支气管炎、胆囊炎、慢性腰腿痛及骨关节病等，尤其对胃肠道疾病、急慢性肾炎、妇科病、痤疮、儿科疾病等疗效确切。临床科研成果先后获全军科技进步三等奖6项、四等奖2项。在各级刊物上发表学术论文30余篇，出版专著3部。[1]
治疗水肿
温阳利水汤
温阳利水汤
组成：制附片60克(免煎颗粒兑服)，茯苓30克，白芍20克，白术30，干姜20克，砂仁10克，桂枝20克，葶苈子15克，回心草20克，太子参30克，麦冬10克，五味子10克，炙黄芪60克，大枣4枚，炙甘草10克。
功效：温阳利水，补肾健脾，益气宁心。
主治：心源性水肿、肺心病水肿等证属阳虚水泛，兼有气血不和者，症见全身浮肿，形寒肢冷，心悸气短，小便不利，四肢沉重等
用法：冷水浸泡15分钟，煮取药液200毫升，对入附片免煎颗粒约20克温服。日3服。
方解：本方所治之全身浮肿，乃由脾肾阳虚，水湿泛滥所致，且属重症。肾阳虚衰，膀胱气化失司，故小便不利；脾阳不足，水湿内停，水气凌心，则心下悸动。脾主肌肉，脾阳不运，水寒浸渍，故肢体浮肿沉重。肺为水之上源，肾为主水之脏，肺肾气虚则水道不通，津液输布失常，故可加重全身浮肿、心悸气短等症状。水湿泛滥是主要表现，阳气虚衰是根本原因。治以温阳利水为大法。本方以真武汤、桂枝汤为主体，融入生脉饮、炙黄芪、砂仁、葶苈子、回心草而成。
方中附片上助心阳而通血脉、中温脾阳以健运、下补肾阳以益火；干姜助附片温扶阳气而壮水之主、温暖脾阳以化气行水；茯苓、白术培土健脾而利水。真阳不足、真阴亦亏，用白芍顾护真阴，以求阴阳之平衡。伍以砂仁，功在化湿醒脾，并收五脏之阳归于肾气。附片配砂仁，一补一收，相得益彰。
用桂枝汤以调和气血阴阳之失衡。桂枝甘温，既温扶脾阳以运水，又可温肾阳、逐寒邪、助膀胱气化而行水湿之邪，为治疗水湿内停的常用药。但对阳虚阴盛，水湿泛滥之重症，则其温里扶阳之力显然不够。因此，桂枝汤与真武汤合用，既可调和气血之失衡，又共奏温阳化气行水之功。
出于阴阳互根的道理，为求阴平阳秘之效果，故将生脉饮融入方中，与白芍配合，体现了善补阳者，必于阴中求阳的原则。太子参(配以炙黄芪)以健脾补肺、益气止汗，麦冬可滋养心血，五味子可交通心肾，宁心安神。与真武汤、桂枝汤同用，相辅相成，既针对阳虚水泛，又可解决动则气喘、气短懒言、心动悸、脉结代、自汗多等问题。
回心草为云南特有草药，其味淡、微苦，性平，归心经。其功在养心宁神，对各种原因所致之心悸有很好的疗效。葶苈子泄肺气之壅闭而通调水道，利水消肿。二药相伍，心神得养，水道得通。再与桂枝、炙甘草配合，入心益阳，心阳得复则悸动可除，小便自利。此法验之于临床，对心源性水肿疗效肯定。
学术思想探讨
摘要
先师吴佩衡，是中国现代名医，著名中医学家，是20世纪以来我国具有第一流水平，在国际上也有较大影响的医学名人（1）。今天是先师诞辰120周年的纪念日，他毕生从事中医临证和医学教学六十余载，擅长中医内、妇、儿科，学术上对仲景《伤寒杂病论》有深入研究和造诣。临床上善用大辛大热之姜、桂、附，辨证精当，用药超常，屡起沉疴，享誉四方。笔者曾就读于云南中医学院“西学中”第一期研究班，课堂聆听，临床侍诊，耳濡目染，受益良多。现就先师之温阳扶正学术思想作一探讨，以兹承扬。
注重表证，变中求治
太阳病是《伤寒论》六经病名之一，太阳主人身之表，统摄皮肤营卫，有卫外御邪之功。太阳病脉证为“脉浮、头项强痛而恶寒。”先师对外感一证辨证极为重视，“若不认真，辨明在表之虚实寒热，极易误治，甚至导致疾病的传变”。十分强调“一定要把住太阳这一关。”抓住“脉浮、头项强痛而恶寒”为主要特征。发热亦是太阳病常见症状之一，又因感邪性质和人体虚实差异，分别表现表寒、表虚、表实、表热。若确认为表证则当急治、早治，以免病邪传变之患。严格按照风、寒、温三纲变法及三者辨证要点，抓住“恶寒”与“恶热”之分，“渴与不渴”或“渴喜热饮或冷饮”之别等临床要点，其治法上主张太阳表虚寒证用桂枝汤，伤寒表实无汗者用麻黄汤或相应方剂，两者之间一虚一实全在有汗和无汗，脉之浮缓与浮紧之别。如发热无汗头体疼痛，但欲寐，脉细微者，此乃太阳少阴两感证。《内经》里对两感证是没有办法治疗的，因表邪内陷直接威胁到心肾，心肾俱伤，病情危笃。先师用麻辛附子汤治疗，挽救了很多危重患者。盖少阴心肾两虚，寒邪在太阳，又因肾虚抵抗力弱，寒邪陷入少阴而成太阳、少阴两感合病证。方以麻黄开腠理，散表之寒，附子温里寒而暖肾水，再得细辛温散少阴经络之寒，使之由阴出阳，达于太阳，借麻黄之功达肌表得汗解，为温经解表扶正除邪之良剂。如遇发热无汗口渴喜冷饮，脉浮滑而数者，选用麻杏石甘汤以治，取其麻黄一辛温，石膏一辛寒，杏仁宣利肺气，往往一剂而热退，再剂而病愈。此间必须牢记先师教诲：“表证看似简单，若一误治，变化莫测。谚云用药如用兵，究其弊端；如药不胜病，犹兵不胜敌，误施滋补，犹闭门逐寇；选用寒凉，犹引贼深入；方药夹杂，犹奸细作祟，表散过甚，则汗流不止，到大汗亡阳……”恭读之余，启迪良多。
真假寒热，睿智善辨
凡病有真寒与真热证之分，又有真热假寒与真寒假热之别，真者易识，假者难辨。“阴盛阳必衰，阳盛阴必弱。”临床上前者居多，后者亦不少。《内经》云：“阳复则生，阴盛则死。”先师十分重视真寒假热的辨证，善于在阴阳上探求至理。他说：“论病之要在于认证，论证之要在辨阴阳，唯辨证确凿方能得心应手。”从而总结出寒热辨证的基本纲领“十六字诀”，即热证为“身轻恶热，张目不眠，声音洪亮，口臭气粗”；寒证为“身重恶寒，目瞑嗜卧，声低息短，少气懒言。”真热证兼见烦渴喜冷饮，口气蒸手；真寒证口润不渴或渴喜热饮而不多，口气不蒸手。此为辨明证候的要领和鉴别真伪的关键。特别指出“阳虚阴寒”往往被忽视，致使误治而垂危，实为病者一难关，医者一难题。对“阳虚阴寒”一类证候，本着“治病必求其本”的原则，主张温扶真阳，扶正驱邪，“益火之源，以消阴翳，壮水之主，以制阳光”，以期达到“阴平阳秘，精神乃治”的目的。他在临床上常用四逆汤、通脉四逆汤、白通汤、麻辛附子汤治之，疗效可靠。对四逆汤的运用，先师曾论曰：“按四逆汤为少阴证主方，太阳少阴合病，重其发汗，则汗出不止而出现亡阳，此证可用之，以招纳欲散之阳。太阳证亦用以温经，与桂枝汤同用以救里；太阴证用之，以治寒湿；厥阴证用之，以回厥逆。临证中若遇邪热内盛，热邪内陷，造成真热假寒者，转变成阳明腑证者，遂以承气加白虎汤治之，以期达到方药对证而收功。”
阳虚阴盛的治疗要达到“邪尽正复”，宜“与其失治于寒凉断难生活，不若试之于温补尤可救疗”，先师遵郑钦安“周身腹中发热难安时”为疗效判断标准，“周身腹中发热”是真阳全面来复的必然反应并以此作为限用辛温药物的疗程依据。但何以要发热至“难安”方罢呢？须知阳虚阴盛者最突出的病机变化特点是阳易消而阴易长，阳旺方能消阴，“难安”强调矫往必须过正，此道最微，理实无穷，有很高的科学性和精确性。
阴盛格阳，审因施治
“阴盛格阳”是一种向阴阳离决发展的危证，是阴阳失调中特殊的一类病机，谓真寒假热证，又谓“阴证似阳”，究其本质就是很重的虚寒证。大凡阳虚之人，阴气自然必盛，阳气或有上浮。阳不制阴，偏胜之阴盘踞于内，逼迫衰极之真阳浮越于外，为阴阳不相维系，相互格拒的一种病理状态。阳虚病，其人面色、唇口青白无华，目瞑倦卧，声低息短，少气懒言，身重畏寒；口吐清水，即饮水亦喜热饮，二便自利，脉空浮，细微无力，自汗肢冷，爪甲青，腹痛倦缩，皆为阳虚真象，据此辨证不难。但当阴盛之极，阳格于外时，却现一派“阳热表象”。临床中“阳虚证有面赤如珠而似实火者，有脉大如实者，有身大热者，有满口齿缝流血者，有气喘、咳嗽痰涌者，有大小便不利者。”此火旺实为阴证似阳，不可不辨。先师辨真识假，从阴证论治，用温阳散寒，温通经脉法治厥阴缩睾证；引火归源法治虚火牙痛、牙龈出血；回阳救逆法治阳气厥脱证；温阳益气通腑，温阳安蛔法等等，皆抓住阳虚本质，以温中，收纳、回阳、救逆、潜阳、封固为要。如齿龈出血，自古多用凉血止血法，先师讲：“素秉阳虚之人，并无火邪之症，阴血全俱，忽见满口牙龈出血，此是肾中阳虚，不能统摄血液，阴血外溢，只有扶阳收纳一法为妥。”常用大剂炮姜、甘草以止血，再用四逆汤加补肾药治之，屡用屡效。上述看似火热病症，先师能力排众议，明辨阳虚阴盛，倡用大剂辛温药物，扶阳抑阴；而且强调指出，唯此方能起危救死。似此类病症，即便在今日医林之下，识得真蒂者也为数寥寥。
现实医疗实践中对“阴盛格阳”证认识不清而误用寒凉清热药者屡见不鲜，所见杂病及慢性病中，虚寒证约占半数以上，而选用温阳扶正者甚少，究其原因有三：“一是金元时期，河间力倡“火热论”学说以来，寒凉药物的运用由补金元前以伤寒概外感认识之偏，用辛温通治一切热病用药之弊，逐渐发展学不思《经》旨，不明辨证候，盲目过用甚至滥用寒凉的另一极端。二是曲解医训，谬种流传，明清以来，医林中流传着“热病误用热药，下咽立毙！”的避误训戒，原是明眼人的警世高论，要点全在“误用”二字上，可叹如此浅显明白的训示，却被世俗误解为：热药杀人，断不可用！三是中西医学理法的简单代换，以“火热邪毒”释“炎症”，以“清热解毒”抗“感染”，中药西用之风盛行。正是由于这些因素的复杂影响，因而使得虚寒疾病的治疗迷失了正确的方向。现实地看，这就为辛温药物的研究运用提出了迫切要求和提供了极其广阔的社会空间。长远地看，则是为中医学术发展和临床应用提出了一个拨乱反正的课题。”
笔者曾治一患者，李XX，男，68岁，昆明市人，因外感服用西药解热镇痛剂、银翘片、氨卞西林胶囊，服用四天，病势未减。首诊于1994年4月20日，应邀中医诊治，症见：发热不恶寒，体温39.8℃,身痛胸闷，重病容，面赤，咳嗽，端坐呼吸，痰色清稀，口渴喜热饮，大便干燥，小便黄赤，色质淡红，苔薄黄，脉细数，首剂以麻辛附子汤和二陈汤内服。川附片100g，炙麻黄12g，细辛10g，化红10g，京夏15g，茯苓20g，炙甘草10g，服用首剂后，身痛减轻，咳喘已减三分之一，守上方再进2剂后，身热不作，咳喘已减半，且能平卧而寐，宗上方加减出入调治半月而病愈。本法附片与麻黄同用，意在“寒邪散而阳不亡，精自藏而阴不伤”以期散寒平喘。取细辛以助其解表，温经散寒；配以二陈汤，燥湿化痰，理气和中而收功，本例患者随访一年康复如常。
《吴佩衡医案》中所述温阳扶正病例，有力地抨击了滥用寒凉药物的弊端，用辛温药物救治了无数病证错综复杂的精彩案例，辨假识真，显示出非常高超的水平和扶阳药物应用的广阔前景。
重先后天，扶阳治本
肾为先天之根，脾为后天之本。先天心肾阳气是人生阳气之根，人之奉生而不死，以其赖以饮食也。脾之运化水谷精微，故脾为后天之本。郑钦安阐述八卦学说认为，离为火，属阳，气也，而真阴寄焉；坎为水，阴也，血也，而真阳寄焉。人身一团血肉之躯，阴也，全赖一团真气运于其中而立命，人秉天地之正气而生，故离坎为人生命之根。治病要以顾护两本为第一要义，认为“万物皆损于阳气。”
虚证多从寒自内生，在上焦者多为心阳虚，中焦者多为脾阳虚，下焦者肾阳虚使然。《医学心悟》常治法曰：“纳凉饮冷，暴受寒侵者，宜温治之；体虚夹寒者，温而补之；寒客中焦者，理中汤治之，寒客下焦者，四逆汤治之”。先师在治脾肾阳虚证时，常遇久治不愈，食欲不振，精神倦怠，足面浮肿之证，评审病情依法治之，既有主方，亦有化裁。常用附子理中汤调治，先后天并固，脾肾两补，较理中汤疗效更佳。此论源于“后天无先天不立，先天无后天不继。”治脾肾两虚者，以四逆汤温运脾肾之阳。先师认为只重后天之调理，忘却先天心肾之关系，徒治其末，忽略其本，对于四逆汤和理中汤之差异，提出治疗深浅层次的差别，再用理中汤之白术、党参类补气之品会大大有碍于疾病的退却。选用四逆汤，亦为先后天并治之本源。故谓“理中不中也，当以四逆汤补火生土。”他数十年医疗实践见之甚多，所可奇者，姜附草三味，既能起死回生。实令人难尽信者，余亦始怪之，而终信之。信者何，信仲景“用姜附而有深义也。”
先师主张温扶真阳，运用要点，以及对所以然之理的阐释，确是不二妙法，至理名言。可惜当今世俗之医者，首先抱定火热成见，脱离辨证原则，迷失辨证方向，不识阳虚之本质，已成举世通病，先师之论，在今天仍有补偏救弊的现实意义。
崇尚经方，妙用峻药
先师推崇仲景学说，除习用经方外，还倡用峻猛方药。学术上“尊古不泥古，发扬不离宗。”他在《医药简述》一书中，对附子、干姜、桂枝、肉桂、麻黄、细辛、石膏、大黄、芒硝、黄连十味药品的性味、功效及临床应用详细阐述，认为：“此十味药品，余当以十大主帅名之，是形容作用之大也，”“据余数十年经验，如能掌握其性能，与其它药物配伍得当……不但治一般常见病效若桴鼓，并且治大多数疑难重症及顽固沉疴，无不应手奏效。”“十大主帅”集寒热两类药物中之攻坚祛邪峻品，为四逆汤、白虎汤、大承气汤主药，是阴阳二证之猛剂。先师运用灵活奇妙。在吴佩衡医案中总计89例，使用附子者56例，石膏11例，大黄8例，黄连6例，芒硝3例。（5）广用附子，且善用大剂量，曾治一伤寒重症，昼夜连进附子800g，惊世骇俗，然终力挽厥脱，令人叹服！故有“吴附子”之雅称，用药风格足显大家风范。并非哗众取宠，实在是救治重症垂危患者的所需。对阳热之证亦颇多见识和独到经验，《案》中治瘟疫3例，投用达原饮，内加用石膏、大黄两味苦寒峻药，一剂热退，数剂治愈。临证做到“有是证，用是药，选是方。”对“药对方，方对法，法对证”领悟极为深刻，决不拘泥，他从不“以扶阳为时尚，以附子论英雄”，始终坚持经典是共同的基础，谨守辨证论治是永恒的法宝。世医以为先师只知温扶阳气用姜附草，显然是执意以偏概全，只知皮毛，未晓精髓。只有深刻领悟他在治学上倡导的“尤重自悟，少有盲从，多有独创”的学术思想，才能深刻理解先师渊博的学术之理。
遵照先师善用峻药的学术思想，笔者曾用峻药救治一名特大面积烧伤患者，取得可喜成绩，现报导如下：赵某，男，19岁，救火英雄，1970年3月因扑灭山火致全身特大面积烧伤（Ⅲº，95%），并中毒性黄疸型肝炎。病情危笃，急邀会诊。症见巩膜深度黄染，恶心呕吐，小便深黄，舌苔黄腻，舌质红少津，因烧伤无法切脉。证属湿热互结，治以清热利湿，方选茵陈蒿汤加味：茵陈30g、栀子20g、大黄15g、黄连10g、薏仁30g、波蔻10g，连服四剂，巩膜黄染明显消退，遵上方加减调治二月后肝功能正常，《人民日报》、《解放军报》都在头版头条刊载了英雄事迹及中西医结合成功救治英雄事绩的经过，赴广交会参展后受到广泛赞誉，谌称奇迹。
（胡希恕论）我们可以这样理解，此人素日胃就不好，可没明显发作，由于外感，经服药，吐下等伤胃气，新得的病好，但素日胃的疾患明显发作，心下痞硬，就是人参证了，为胃虚，邪饮趁胃虚而往胃上来，故心下痞硬，邪气上逆，故嗳气不除，应用旋覆代赭石汤主之。此方半夏泻心汤、甘草泻心汤、生姜泻心汤大有相似之处，也有人参、生姜、甘草、半夏、大枣，为健胃治逆的，治呕逆，另外加旋覆花代赭石，旋覆花是下气去结气的。代赭石是收敛性健胃药，此药在治本病不要重用，多用反伤胃，后世说是镇重使逆气不往上来，其实是收敛性的健胃药，有点补益的性质，此药重用，对胃不好，所以用人参、生姜、甘草、大枣、半夏，就是健胃降逆，用旋覆下气去结气，代赭有点健胃镇逆作用。此方与前三泻心比，没有芩连去热，也不解烦，也不治下利，此药在临床上对胃的疾患，经常有嗳气不除，与生姜泻心汤嗳气食臭，不同的是，有下利，而这里没有，反倒治大便干，对便秘，此方有效。旋覆代赭往下性的力量相当大，此方治胃疾之嗳气与陈皮之嗳气不同（橘子姜汤，也治嗳气），后者之嗳气是，觉得闷打膈后舒服，希望打膈才好，为橘皮证，茯苓饮也有此证侯，一般胃不好，食欲不振，有逆气，但打膈较舒服，主要以痞闷为主，用茯苓饮就好，健胃行气利水，而旋覆代赭石不是的，它是苦于打膈，嗳气不除嘛，难受，故此方有治噎膈的机会，就是胃食道发炎，癌证等打噎相当凶，用此方好。另胃泛酸，胃痛、打膈、大便干，此方好使，如果酸太多，可加乌贼骨，注意大便稀不行，用茯苓饮比较好，这些都是常用的方（56：00）苦于嗳气所以说“嗳气不除”
总结：生姜泻心汤：干嗳食嗅，下利（有芩连）
胃酸：加乌贼骨
胃虚：心下痞硬
-----------------------------------------------
소변을 본 후에 어지러워 쓰러지는 증세에, 백합활석자석탕
刘宝玲叙述，有一解放军团长，年四旬以上，有一病况，小便后眩厥，用补法、提升法均未获效。听罢，魏老兴奋非常，言：我也治疗过这样的病证，用药即愈，并让大家到家翻看自己的医案，以及患者治愈后的感谢信。同时让刘宝玲翻阅《金匮要略》查“百合病篇”条文，引经据典念之：其人头痛，小便后淅然，头眩者，用百合滑石代赭石汤。魏老言，其记载与今人所患之症，丝毫没有二样，故，用百合汤投之，无不中的。
【滑石代赭汤组方：百合七枚
此话令在座的同仁、晚辈惊讶不已，深感学习经典较魏老大欠火候，学问深深，须更加努力。
从这里我思索：学习经典，必须联系实际，结合前辈总结的医案，会有事半功倍的效果。
-----------------------------------------------------------------------瘦型糖尿病 치료
仝小林，1956出生，主任医师，教授，博士生导师，博士后合作导师，973计划项目首席科学家。中国中医科学院首席研究员，国家中医药管理局内分泌重点学科带头人。享受国务院特殊津贴。
主要研究方向为中西医结合治疗糖尿病、肥胖、代谢综合征等内科杂病。承担国家科技部973计划项目、国家“十一五”攻关课题、国家自然科学基金课题、科技部863、卫生部等课题30余项。
组成：干姜6～9g，黄连15～45g，黄芩15～45g，太子参15～30g。
功效：清热降浊，益气养阴。
主治：瘦型糖尿病（消瘅）
煎服法：急性期：水煎服，日二次；缓解期：配水丸，3g/次，3次/日。
方解：太子参性平和，益气生津，或可用西洋参益气养阴，黄连、黄芩苦寒清热，干姜护胃。“苦酸制甜”，黄连最苦，最能降糖，临证治疗血糖控制欠佳的糖尿病患者，常重用苦味药黄连30～60g，降糖效果显著，未见明显不良反应，干姜6g反佐，制黄连、黄芩之苦寒，又与二黄构成“辛开苦降”手法，红参用于糖尿病气阴两伤期。本方出自《伤寒论》３５９条：“伤寒本自寒下，医复吐下之，寒格，更逆吐下；若食入口即吐，干姜黄芩黄连人参汤主之。”临床活用为瘦型糖尿病，临床降糖效果明显，同时可以改善症状。
加减：证病结合。针对病：伴高血脂，加红曲15g，五谷虫30g，生山楂30g，化橘红30g；高尿酸血症，加威灵仙15g，汉防己30g；高血压，加地龙30g，怀牛膝30g，葛根30g。针对证：伴血瘀，加三七6～15g，鸡血藤30g，水蛭粉3～6g（冲），酒军3g，伴阴虚，加花粉30g，生牡蛎30～120g，伴阳虚，淡附片6～30g，肉桂6～15g。
-----------------------------------------------------------
중풍 치료의 약방들
小续命汤、振废汤、补阳还五汤、傅青主治半身不遂方
-------------------------------------------
시금온담탕
处方柴芩温胆汤：柴胡10克、黄芩12克、半夏10克、陈皮10克、竹叶15克、茯苓15克、枳壳10克、茵陈15克
二、主治：
-----------------------------------------------------------
杜光明 중의 학술사상
杜光明，男，1933年出生，成都军区昆明总医院北教场医院退休主任医师，军中名医，现任昆明圣爱中医馆主任医师。从事中医工作50余年，擅长治疗肺心病、脑血管疾病、急慢性支气管炎、胆囊炎、慢性腰腿痛及骨关节病等，尤其对胃肠道疾病、急慢性肾炎、妇科病、痤疮、儿科疾病等疗效确切。临床科研成果先后获全军科技进步三等奖6项、四等奖2项。在各级刊物上发表学术论文30余篇，出版专著3部。[1]
治疗水肿
温阳利水汤
温阳利水汤
组成：制附片60克(免煎颗粒兑服)，茯苓30克，白芍20克，白术30，干姜20克，砂仁10克，桂枝20克，葶苈子15克，回心草20克，太子参30克，麦冬10克，五味子10克，炙黄芪60克，大枣4枚，炙甘草10克。
功效：温阳利水，补肾健脾，益气宁心。
主治：心源性水肿、肺心病水肿等证属阳虚水泛，兼有气血不和者，症见全身浮肿，形寒肢冷，心悸气短，小便不利，四肢沉重等
用法：冷水浸泡15分钟，煮取药液200毫升，对入附片免煎颗粒约20克温服。日3服。
方解：本方所治之全身浮肿，乃由脾肾阳虚，水湿泛滥所致，且属重症。肾阳虚衰，膀胱气化失司，故小便不利；脾阳不足，水湿内停，水气凌心，则心下悸动。脾主肌肉，脾阳不运，水寒浸渍，故肢体浮肿沉重。肺为水之上源，肾为主水之脏，肺肾气虚则水道不通，津液输布失常，故可加重全身浮肿、心悸气短等症状。水湿泛滥是主要表现，阳气虚衰是根本原因。治以温阳利水为大法。本方以真武汤、桂枝汤为主体，融入生脉饮、炙黄芪、砂仁、葶苈子、回心草而成。
方中附片上助心阳而通血脉、中温脾阳以健运、下补肾阳以益火；干姜助附片温扶阳气而壮水之主、温暖脾阳以化气行水；茯苓、白术培土健脾而利水。真阳不足、真阴亦亏，用白芍顾护真阴，以求阴阳之平衡。伍以砂仁，功在化湿醒脾，并收五脏之阳归于肾气。附片配砂仁，一补一收，相得益彰。
用桂枝汤以调和气血阴阳之失衡。桂枝甘温，既温扶脾阳以运水，又可温肾阳、逐寒邪、助膀胱气化而行水湿之邪，为治疗水湿内停的常用药。但对阳虚阴盛，水湿泛滥之重症，则其温里扶阳之力显然不够。因此，桂枝汤与真武汤合用，既可调和气血之失衡，又共奏温阳化气行水之功。
出于阴阳互根的道理，为求阴平阳秘之效果，故将生脉饮融入方中，与白芍配合，体现了善补阳者，必于阴中求阳的原则。太子参(配以炙黄芪)以健脾补肺、益气止汗，麦冬可滋养心血，五味子可交通心肾，宁心安神。与真武汤、桂枝汤同用，相辅相成，既针对阳虚水泛，又可解决动则气喘、气短懒言、心动悸、脉结代、自汗多等问题。
回心草为云南特有草药，其味淡、微苦，性平，归心经。其功在养心宁神，对各种原因所致之心悸有很好的疗效。葶苈子泄肺气之壅闭而通调水道，利水消肿。二药相伍，心神得养，水道得通。再与桂枝、炙甘草配合，入心益阳，心阳得复则悸动可除，小便自利。此法验之于临床，对心源性水肿疗效肯定。
学术思想探讨
摘要
先师吴佩衡，是中国现代名医，著名中医学家，是20世纪以来我国具有第一流水平，在国际上也有较大影响的医学名人（1）。今天是先师诞辰120周年的纪念日，他毕生从事中医临证和医学教学六十余载，擅长中医内、妇、儿科，学术上对仲景《伤寒杂病论》有深入研究和造诣。临床上善用大辛大热之姜、桂、附，辨证精当，用药超常，屡起沉疴，享誉四方。笔者曾就读于云南中医学院“西学中”第一期研究班，课堂聆听，临床侍诊，耳濡目染，受益良多。现就先师之温阳扶正学术思想作一探讨，以兹承扬。
注重表证，变中求治
太阳病是《伤寒论》六经病名之一，太阳主人身之表，统摄皮肤营卫，有卫外御邪之功。太阳病脉证为“脉浮、头项强痛而恶寒。”先师对外感一证辨证极为重视，“若不认真，辨明在表之虚实寒热，极易误治，甚至导致疾病的传变”。十分强调“一定要把住太阳这一关。”抓住“脉浮、头项强痛而恶寒”为主要特征。发热亦是太阳病常见症状之一，又因感邪性质和人体虚实差异，分别表现表寒、表虚、表实、表热。若确认为表证则当急治、早治，以免病邪传变之患。严格按照风、寒、温三纲变法及三者辨证要点，抓住“恶寒”与“恶热”之分，“渴与不渴”或“渴喜热饮或冷饮”之别等临床要点，其治法上主张太阳表虚寒证用桂枝汤，伤寒表实无汗者用麻黄汤或相应方剂，两者之间一虚一实全在有汗和无汗，脉之浮缓与浮紧之别。如发热无汗头体疼痛，但欲寐，脉细微者，此乃太阳少阴两感证。《内经》里对两感证是没有办法治疗的，因表邪内陷直接威胁到心肾，心肾俱伤，病情危笃。先师用麻辛附子汤治疗，挽救了很多危重患者。盖少阴心肾两虚，寒邪在太阳，又因肾虚抵抗力弱，寒邪陷入少阴而成太阳、少阴两感合病证。方以麻黄开腠理，散表之寒，附子温里寒而暖肾水，再得细辛温散少阴经络之寒，使之由阴出阳，达于太阳，借麻黄之功达肌表得汗解，为温经解表扶正除邪之良剂。如遇发热无汗口渴喜冷饮，脉浮滑而数者，选用麻杏石甘汤以治，取其麻黄一辛温，石膏一辛寒，杏仁宣利肺气，往往一剂而热退，再剂而病愈。此间必须牢记先师教诲：“表证看似简单，若一误治，变化莫测。谚云用药如用兵，究其弊端；如药不胜病，犹兵不胜敌，误施滋补，犹闭门逐寇；选用寒凉，犹引贼深入；方药夹杂，犹奸细作祟，表散过甚，则汗流不止，到大汗亡阳……”恭读之余，启迪良多。
真假寒热，睿智善辨
凡病有真寒与真热证之分，又有真热假寒与真寒假热之别，真者易识，假者难辨。“阴盛阳必衰，阳盛阴必弱。”临床上前者居多，后者亦不少。《内经》云：“阳复则生，阴盛则死。”先师十分重视真寒假热的辨证，善于在阴阳上探求至理。他说：“论病之要在于认证，论证之要在辨阴阳，唯辨证确凿方能得心应手。”从而总结出寒热辨证的基本纲领“十六字诀”，即热证为“身轻恶热，张目不眠，声音洪亮，口臭气粗”；寒证为“身重恶寒，目瞑嗜卧，声低息短，少气懒言。”真热证兼见烦渴喜冷饮，口气蒸手；真寒证口润不渴或渴喜热饮而不多，口气不蒸手。此为辨明证候的要领和鉴别真伪的关键。特别指出“阳虚阴寒”往往被忽视，致使误治而垂危，实为病者一难关，医者一难题。对“阳虚阴寒”一类证候，本着“治病必求其本”的原则，主张温扶真阳，扶正驱邪，“益火之源，以消阴翳，壮水之主，以制阳光”，以期达到“阴平阳秘，精神乃治”的目的。他在临床上常用四逆汤、通脉四逆汤、白通汤、麻辛附子汤治之，疗效可靠。对四逆汤的运用，先师曾论曰：“按四逆汤为少阴证主方，太阳少阴合病，重其发汗，则汗出不止而出现亡阳，此证可用之，以招纳欲散之阳。太阳证亦用以温经，与桂枝汤同用以救里；太阴证用之，以治寒湿；厥阴证用之，以回厥逆。临证中若遇邪热内盛，热邪内陷，造成真热假寒者，转变成阳明腑证者，遂以承气加白虎汤治之，以期达到方药对证而收功。”
阳虚阴盛的治疗要达到“邪尽正复”，宜“与其失治于寒凉断难生活，不若试之于温补尤可救疗”，先师遵郑钦安“周身腹中发热难安时”为疗效判断标准，“周身腹中发热”是真阳全面来复的必然反应并以此作为限用辛温药物的疗程依据。但何以要发热至“难安”方罢呢？须知阳虚阴盛者最突出的病机变化特点是阳易消而阴易长，阳旺方能消阴，“难安”强调矫往必须过正，此道最微，理实无穷，有很高的科学性和精确性。
阴盛格阳，审因施治
“阴盛格阳”是一种向阴阳离决发展的危证，是阴阳失调中特殊的一类病机，谓真寒假热证，又谓“阴证似阳”，究其本质就是很重的虚寒证。大凡阳虚之人，阴气自然必盛，阳气或有上浮。阳不制阴，偏胜之阴盘踞于内，逼迫衰极之真阳浮越于外，为阴阳不相维系，相互格拒的一种病理状态。阳虚病，其人面色、唇口青白无华，目瞑倦卧，声低息短，少气懒言，身重畏寒；口吐清水，即饮水亦喜热饮，二便自利，脉空浮，细微无力，自汗肢冷，爪甲青，腹痛倦缩，皆为阳虚真象，据此辨证不难。但当阴盛之极，阳格于外时，却现一派“阳热表象”。临床中“阳虚证有面赤如珠而似实火者，有脉大如实者，有身大热者，有满口齿缝流血者，有气喘、咳嗽痰涌者，有大小便不利者。”此火旺实为阴证似阳，不可不辨。先师辨真识假，从阴证论治，用温阳散寒，温通经脉法治厥阴缩睾证；引火归源法治虚火牙痛、牙龈出血；回阳救逆法治阳气厥脱证；温阳益气通腑，温阳安蛔法等等，皆抓住阳虚本质，以温中，收纳、回阳、救逆、潜阳、封固为要。如齿龈出血，自古多用凉血止血法，先师讲：“素秉阳虚之人，并无火邪之症，阴血全俱，忽见满口牙龈出血，此是肾中阳虚，不能统摄血液，阴血外溢，只有扶阳收纳一法为妥。”常用大剂炮姜、甘草以止血，再用四逆汤加补肾药治之，屡用屡效。上述看似火热病症，先师能力排众议，明辨阳虚阴盛，倡用大剂辛温药物，扶阳抑阴；而且强调指出，唯此方能起危救死。似此类病症，即便在今日医林之下，识得真蒂者也为数寥寥。
现实医疗实践中对“阴盛格阳”证认识不清而误用寒凉清热药者屡见不鲜，所见杂病及慢性病中，虚寒证约占半数以上，而选用温阳扶正者甚少，究其原因有三：“一是金元时期，河间力倡“火热论”学说以来，寒凉药物的运用由补金元前以伤寒概外感认识之偏，用辛温通治一切热病用药之弊，逐渐发展学不思《经》旨，不明辨证候，盲目过用甚至滥用寒凉的另一极端。二是曲解医训，谬种流传，明清以来，医林中流传着“热病误用热药，下咽立毙！”的避误训戒，原是明眼人的警世高论，要点全在“误用”二字上，可叹如此浅显明白的训示，却被世俗误解为：热药杀人，断不可用！三是中西医学理法的简单代换，以“火热邪毒”释“炎症”，以“清热解毒”抗“感染”，中药西用之风盛行。正是由于这些因素的复杂影响，因而使得虚寒疾病的治疗迷失了正确的方向。现实地看，这就为辛温药物的研究运用提出了迫切要求和提供了极其广阔的社会空间。长远地看，则是为中医学术发展和临床应用提出了一个拨乱反正的课题。”
笔者曾治一患者，李XX，男，68岁，昆明市人，因外感服用西药解热镇痛剂、银翘片、氨卞西林胶囊，服用四天，病势未减。首诊于1994年4月20日，应邀中医诊治，症见：发热不恶寒，体温39.8℃,身痛胸闷，重病容，面赤，咳嗽，端坐呼吸，痰色清稀，口渴喜热饮，大便干燥，小便黄赤，色质淡红，苔薄黄，脉细数，首剂以麻辛附子汤和二陈汤内服。川附片100g，炙麻黄12g，细辛10g，化红10g，京夏15g，茯苓20g，炙甘草10g，服用首剂后，身痛减轻，咳喘已减三分之一，守上方再进2剂后，身热不作，咳喘已减半，且能平卧而寐，宗上方加减出入调治半月而病愈。本法附片与麻黄同用，意在“寒邪散而阳不亡，精自藏而阴不伤”以期散寒平喘。取细辛以助其解表，温经散寒；配以二陈汤，燥湿化痰，理气和中而收功，本例患者随访一年康复如常。
《吴佩衡医案》中所述温阳扶正病例，有力地抨击了滥用寒凉药物的弊端，用辛温药物救治了无数病证错综复杂的精彩案例，辨假识真，显示出非常高超的水平和扶阳药物应用的广阔前景。
重先后天，扶阳治本
肾为先天之根，脾为后天之本。先天心肾阳气是人生阳气之根，人之奉生而不死，以其赖以饮食也。脾之运化水谷精微，故脾为后天之本。郑钦安阐述八卦学说认为，离为火，属阳，气也，而真阴寄焉；坎为水，阴也，血也，而真阳寄焉。人身一团血肉之躯，阴也，全赖一团真气运于其中而立命，人秉天地之正气而生，故离坎为人生命之根。治病要以顾护两本为第一要义，认为“万物皆损于阳气。”
虚证多从寒自内生，在上焦者多为心阳虚，中焦者多为脾阳虚，下焦者肾阳虚使然。《医学心悟》常治法曰：“纳凉饮冷，暴受寒侵者，宜温治之；体虚夹寒者，温而补之；寒客中焦者，理中汤治之，寒客下焦者，四逆汤治之”。先师在治脾肾阳虚证时，常遇久治不愈，食欲不振，精神倦怠，足面浮肿之证，评审病情依法治之，既有主方，亦有化裁。常用附子理中汤调治，先后天并固，脾肾两补，较理中汤疗效更佳。此论源于“后天无先天不立，先天无后天不继。”治脾肾两虚者，以四逆汤温运脾肾之阳。先师认为只重后天之调理，忘却先天心肾之关系，徒治其末，忽略其本，对于四逆汤和理中汤之差异，提出治疗深浅层次的差别，再用理中汤之白术、党参类补气之品会大大有碍于疾病的退却。选用四逆汤，亦为先后天并治之本源。故谓“理中不中也，当以四逆汤补火生土。”他数十年医疗实践见之甚多，所可奇者，姜附草三味，既能起死回生。实令人难尽信者，余亦始怪之，而终信之。信者何，信仲景“用姜附而有深义也。”
先师主张温扶真阳，运用要点，以及对所以然之理的阐释，确是不二妙法，至理名言。可惜当今世俗之医者，首先抱定火热成见，脱离辨证原则，迷失辨证方向，不识阳虚之本质，已成举世通病，先师之论，在今天仍有补偏救弊的现实意义。
崇尚经方，妙用峻药
先师推崇仲景学说，除习用经方外，还倡用峻猛方药。学术上“尊古不泥古，发扬不离宗。”他在《医药简述》一书中，对附子、干姜、桂枝、肉桂、麻黄、细辛、石膏、大黄、芒硝、黄连十味药品的性味、功效及临床应用详细阐述，认为：“此十味药品，余当以十大主帅名之，是形容作用之大也，”“据余数十年经验，如能掌握其性能，与其它药物配伍得当……不但治一般常见病效若桴鼓，并且治大多数疑难重症及顽固沉疴，无不应手奏效。”“十大主帅”集寒热两类药物中之攻坚祛邪峻品，为四逆汤、白虎汤、大承气汤主药，是阴阳二证之猛剂。先师运用灵活奇妙。在吴佩衡医案中总计89例，使用附子者56例，石膏11例，大黄8例，黄连6例，芒硝3例。（5）广用附子，且善用大剂量，曾治一伤寒重症，昼夜连进附子800g，惊世骇俗，然终力挽厥脱，令人叹服！故有“吴附子”之雅称，用药风格足显大家风范。并非哗众取宠，实在是救治重症垂危患者的所需。对阳热之证亦颇多见识和独到经验，《案》中治瘟疫3例，投用达原饮，内加用石膏、大黄两味苦寒峻药，一剂热退，数剂治愈。临证做到“有是证，用是药，选是方。”对“药对方，方对法，法对证”领悟极为深刻，决不拘泥，他从不“以扶阳为时尚，以附子论英雄”，始终坚持经典是共同的基础，谨守辨证论治是永恒的法宝。世医以为先师只知温扶阳气用姜附草，显然是执意以偏概全，只知皮毛，未晓精髓。只有深刻领悟他在治学上倡导的“尤重自悟，少有盲从，多有独创”的学术思想，才能深刻理解先师渊博的学术之理。
遵照先师善用峻药的学术思想，笔者曾用峻药救治一名特大面积烧伤患者，取得可喜成绩，现报导如下：赵某，男，19岁，救火英雄，1970年3月因扑灭山火致全身特大面积烧伤（Ⅲº，95%），并中毒性黄疸型肝炎。病情危笃，急邀会诊。症见巩膜深度黄染，恶心呕吐，小便深黄，舌苔黄腻，舌质红少津，因烧伤无法切脉。证属湿热互结，治以清热利湿，方选茵陈蒿汤加味：茵陈30g、栀子20g、大黄15g、黄连10g、薏仁30g、波蔻10g，连服四剂，巩膜黄染明显消退，遵上方加减调治二月后肝功能正常，《人民日报》、《解放军报》都在头版头条刊载了英雄事迹及中西医结合成功救治英雄事绩的经过，赴广交会参展后受到广泛赞誉，谌称奇迹。
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기