숙환이 아니라 울화병으로 별세했다.
아래는 일베 댓글
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
개 씹 꿀지역에서
불도 안나서 출동도 안하고 근무시간에 처자고, 게임하고
세금만축내는 씹새끼들이 8할인데
얼굴에 잿가루묻고 사람 구하는 소방관 사진
몇개 들고와서 최신장비달라.. 임금올려달라.. 근무시간 줄여달라
처우개선해달라고 존나 징징대기만하는직업임
지금 충분히 돈도 많이받고
지금 충분히 돈도 많이받고
근무환경,시간도 ㅆㅅㅌㅊ인데
만족할줄도 모르고 끝까지 감성팔이함 ㄹㅇ
취업 안되서
공무원 하고는싶은데 행정은 빡세고
그나마 할만한거 골라놓고
사명감 있는척 ㅋㅋ
무슨 '영웅' 인척 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 하는게 제일 역겨움
[출처] 희대의 씹 감성팔이 직업.jpg
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+2
모든 건물 출입 시에 신분증 검사, 금속 탐지기,
그리고 안면 인식 프로그램 통과해야 하는
조지 오웰의 1984년 Big Brother 시스템 가동중.
신장 지역 1천2백만명 무슬림중 10%에 해당하는 1백2십만명은 강제 수용소에 가둬놓고 외부 출입과 접촉 금지. 그냥 감옥 생활.
중공은 현재, 신장 지역에서 성공(?)을 거둔
국민 감시 시스템과 위험(?) 인물의 강제 수용소행을
전국적으로 실행하는 쪽으로 가닥을 잡았다고 함
[출처] 점점 잔혹해지는 중공
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
중앙선 넘어서 불법 좌회전 하던 오토바이가 마주오던
화물차와 사고가 났고 병원에서 치료받았는데
건강보험공단에서 중앙선 침범이라고 보험급여 환수시킴
[출처] 건강보험법 박살 낸 교통사고 사례
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
세줄요약
1. 기레기들이 마두로 곧 망명한다고 선동하는데 마두로는 망명하고 싶어도 받아줄 데가 없음. 죽기살기로 베네수엘라 국내에 남아서 싸울 것임.
2. 러시아가 마두로를 지원하고 있으며 군부는 마두로에게 충성을 맹세하고 있음.
3. 미국은 과이도를 보호하지만 지상군을 파견할 움직임은 없음. 따라서 마두로가 곧 몰락할 거라고 보는 것은 지나치게 낙관하는 것임.
[출처] 베네수엘라 낙관적으로만 볼 일이 아닌 이유들
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
균형 같은 건 없어...
---> 이데올로기에서 중립이라는 말은, 나는 "남자도 여자도 아니다"라는 말과 같다. 즉 나는 "병신"입니다라는 고백과 같은 것이다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
한국이 6월부터 유투브, 구글, 페이스북 등을 검열하려고 한다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
시진핑의 절대 권력은 혼란으로 끝날 가능성이 크다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
과학주의적 사고에 빠진 글이고, 좌파적인 글인 듯하다. 하지만 미국의 쇠락은 부정할 수 없다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
바로 "자유한국당 = 토착왜구"로 표현하는 전략이다.
더불어민주당이 종북정당으로 몰리면서,
좌파에서 종북행위를 유지하면서도 지지율을 잃지 않기위해서 "민주당 vs 자한당 = 북한 vs 일본"의 프레임을 만들어낸것같다.
이러한 프레임이 정착이 된다면,
한국사회에서 이뤄진 전통적인 반일역사교육 때문에 "친일본보다는 종북이 낫지" 또는 "종북이나 친일이나 거기서거기"라고 생각하는 사람들도 나타날 수 밖에 없다.
즉 "종북"과 종북행위에 대한 사람들의 거부감이 희석되어 버릴수밖에 없다.
좌파들의 이러한 "종북 vs 친일" 프레임에 말려들지 않으려면 보수세력에서 새로운 프레임을 만들어야한다.
그 대안이 바로 "반미 vs 친미" 프레임이다.
한국전쟁때 미군의 파병사실과, 전세계적으로 미국을 따르는 국가가 훨씬 많으므로 친미를 해야 수출국가인 한국에 유리하다는점 등, 친미를 해야할 이유는 많지만 반미를 해야하는 근거는 찾기 힘들다.
따라서 반미를 해야한다는 주장은 힘을 얻기 힘들고, "반미 vs 친미"의 프레임 속에서는 대부분의 사람들이 자연스럽게 친미를 선택할수밖에 없다.
1줄요약
최근 좌파들의 "종북 vs 친일" 프레임에서 벗어나기 위해서는 보수세력들이 "반미 vs 친미"프레임을 만들어서 대응해야한다
[출처] [방구석 여의도연구소] 최근 생겨난 좌파의 여론선동 전략
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
양적 완화네 경기 부양이네 하면서 천문학적인 돈을 풀었다. 시중에 돈이 너무 많이 풀려서 돈의 가치가 떨어졌고, 서민들은 점점 가난해지고 있다. 화폐 개혁이 아니라, 윤전기로 돈을 찍어내서 시장에 푸는 미친 짓을 그만 두어야 한다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
검찰, 靑에 열받았다! 김은경, 靑비서관 동시구속? 임종석 문재인 벌벌! (진성호의 융단폭격)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
유머가 있는 전단지
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
미국은 영국이 했던 것과 같은 균형자 역할을 할 수 있을까?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30년 전에 2,000년까지 온난화 추세를 멈추지 못하면 큰 재앙이 닥칠 거라고 경고했던 유엔 관리.
온난화 사기는 꽤 오래 되었지만 아직도 속는 사람들이 너무 많다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
전형적인 백인 여성 "베키"에 관한 연구들
스타벅스와 어그부츠에 집착하고 큰 엉덩이를 가지려 노력하는 여자
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social media has proved to me beyond all doubt that educated people are just as vulnerable to bullshit and deception as less educated - maybe even more so.
소셜 미디어는 유식자도 무식자만큼 헛소리와 사기에 현혹되기 쉽다는 것을 알려준다.
---> 지난 탄핵 사태는 유식자들이 무식자들보다 더 어리석고 멍청하다는 것을 증명했다.
-------------------------------------------------------
등불 아래 책을 펴놓고 알지도 못했던 과거의 인물들과 친구가 되는 일이 가장 즐거운 여흥이다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This collection of essays, along with Rosen's other book _Life Itself_, are mandatory reading for any scientist or any astute layperson interested in biology, physics or philosophy of science.
Rosen was a very insightful and technically capable theoretical biologist. His work - first as a student of physicist and theoretical biologist Nicholas Rashevsky, and later as professor emeritus at Dalhousie - is unquestionably of the level of importance of Einstein's Special/General Theory of Relativity, or Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. This is a grand claim to make, but once you read Rosen's work, you will see for yourself.
These are not the easiest books to read, despite Rosen's excellent writing skills. The difficulty is two-fold. First and foremost, the new concepts and paradigms presented are of such breadth and profundity that it can take several readings to begin to fully grasp them adequately. Secondly, Rosen is mathematically (and otherwise) quite astute. The reader will encounter to some degree: category theory, topology, catastrophe theory (Rosen dedicates a chapter on genericity in _Essays_ to Rene Thom), differential equations, dynamical systems, Godel, Church-Turing, as well as philosophical topics of epistemology, ontology, and foundations of biology, mathematics and physics.
This should not, however, deter even the non-professional. Particularly in _Life Itself_, Rosen progresses carefully and patiently, even including a short intro to Category Theory. One can gloss over some of the math and still garner most of the insights from the text alone. _Essays_ utilizes a wider range of math skills, since that book covers a broader range of topics, but it is still quite accessible to the careful and astute reader.
In _Life Itself_, Rosen was investigating the question posed by Erwin Shrodinger originally in his 1943 lecture "What is Life?". Rosen's search led him to peel back in careful detail the foundations of Newtonian mechanics and reveal the underlying tacit assumptions of a state/phase-based physics and the repercussions for science in general, and biology in particular.
By setting aside state/phase-based physics, Rosen then proceeded to layout the groundwork for an atemporal relational biology based on functional organization and to methodically investigate the theoretical limits of mechanistic systems, including along the way: simulation, Turing machines, and the epistemology and ontology of such systems. The distinction eventually becomes clear that any such algorithmic mechanisms cannot embody the kinds of impredicative complexity that are characteristic of an organism. Because the syntax of Newtonian physics can express no such closed loops of entailment, "life" cannot even be described in that model of physics, much less modeled in any complete way. Thus it is that biological organisms are not a mere subset of current physics, but are representative of complexities that require physics to be enlarged.
In _Essays on Life Itself_, Rosen uses his considerable abilities across a broad spectrum of topics to continue the ideas from _Life Itself_. It is difficult to describe how topics as diverse as the assumptions of Pythagoras, the Turing test, universal unfoldings, morphogenesis, mind-brain problem, and more can be in the same book. Mostly, they all in one way or another accomplish one task: to look beyond the limits of how a problem is currently being viewed, and to see it from a larger perspective. Often, these perspectives take Rosen into terrain others would avoid, since they sometimes lead into the non-algorithmic / noncomputable, or the breakdown of the presumed subject-object division, or other kinds of "messy" scenarios.
Often they lead into "complex systems", where Rosen uses the word "complex" to define a certain class of systems - those systems have symptoms of being: impredicative, non-algorithmic, context-dependent, semantic, nonformalizable. This classification is not a desire for obfuscation or ineffability, but is as rigorous as the nonformalizability of Number Theory or the unsolvability in closed form of the n-body problem. It is a complexity akin to the size of a transfinite number: it is not simply a matter of merely being hugely complicated, it is rather an entirely different order of system structure.
However, guided by Rosen, one does not feel uneasy following his path. Rather one feels enriched both in knowledge and in paradigm. Distinguishing the broader generic case from the degenerate or special is a characteristic theme in Rosen. The unfamiliar terrain he argues to is thus not some void, but a grander scale that subsumes the orthodox view.
In that grander view, it may become more clear that some problems are based on incorrect assumptions, while some are more difficult or complex than in the more limited original view. However, it is apparent that Rosen is uninterested in making problems appear simpler by ignoring those difficulties - he is interested in where the science leads. It is an immensely richer, complex view of the physical world that one comes away with. As such, it presents some difficult challanges, but it also opens up vast opportunities - opportunities not visible in the neat and tidy fantasy model of science that generally prevails where it is assumed that with enough effort everything can be reduced or calculated.
Rosen writes deliberately and with precision, and is both a critical and a profound thinker. I hope that he one day receives the recognition and admiration he rightfully deserves. 필자 T. Gwinn / 아마존
This book is a powerfil critique of reductionist and/or simulation (modeling) approach to mind/body problem, and "what is life" question. Rosen builds his case against Church Thesis, arguing that contemporary mathematical and, more generally, scientific rigor, which bans impredicative loops from scientific discource, would not allow us to build what he calls "new science", which is needed to account for life and consciousness.
More than once he mentiones Goedel Theorem, as well as various paradoxes, encountered by science over the centuries, emphasizing the fact, that they all are directly related to the impossibility to draw definite border between an observer and her object (not just in quantum physics).
Although the book was very interesting for me, i felt that some essays essentially repeated the material, already covered in other parts of the same book. Also, this "new science", which Rosen thought is needed to deal with open systems, is never really described in any way, so we are left with critique only.
I am not sure i fully agree with Rosen's view of the Turing Test, which he only sees as a simulation approach to the mind (intelligence) problem. My understanding is that Turing Test should be rather understood in the "observer/object" context, meaning that the participant makes a judgement, being, at the same time, fully incorporated into the system.
In one of the essays Rosen says: "If somebody wants to call this 'vitalism' - then ... so be it." With no constructive theory in site it's a bit like this, to my understanding. 필자
아직 번역이 안 된 듯한데, 복잡계 연구에 매우 중요한 책인듯.
Life is a machine. Such reductionism, however, is not something Rosen can leave unchallenged: “…the machine metaphor is not just a little bit wrong; it is entirely wrong and must be discarded.” (23
Life is a machine. Such reductionism, however, is not something Rosen can leave unchallenged: “…the machine metaphor is not just a little bit wrong; it is entirely wrong and must be discarded.” (23
Says Rosen:
… just as formalization in mathematics [initially] believed that everything could be formalized without loss, so that all truth could be captured in terms of syntax alone, so particle mechanisms came to believe that every material behavior could be, and should be, and indeed must be, reduced to purely syntactical sequences of configurations in an underlying system of particles. Hence the power of belief in reductionism, the scientific equivalent of the formalist faith in syntax. (68)
In the proverbial nutshell, Rosen claims that the whole notion of mechanism follows from the assumption of equivalence between these two kinds of modeling relationships. Eliminating this assumption leads to a new, more holistic realm, one he labels “complex.” The assumption of equivalence is common to reductionistic Newtonian insights; the opposing belief, that analytic and synthetic models are not equivalent, is typical of what he calls relational biology. In reading these chapters, you may not understand all the intricacies of this distinction, but you will be left with no doubt as to which, in Rosen’s mind, is preferable. “In a sense, it is the thrust of this entire work that this hypothesis of analysis equals synthesis must be dropped.” (154)
출처: Book Review: Robert Rosen’s “Life Itself”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
생각을 정지시키는 관용구들
대부분의 지출 프로그램과 규제 법안은 이런 관용구를 이용해 대중의 감시를 벗어난다.
“세금은 문명을 누리는 댓가이다”라는 관용구로, 대중을 선동해 세금을 갈취하고 국가 권력을 비대하게 키운다.
이런 관용구를 멈추게 하려면, 시민들은 반드시 “이 사람이 실질적으로 나의 질문에 답을 해주었던가?”라고 물어야 한다.
"National Security" and other Thought-Stopping Clichés
Justin Murray
I was browsing the news recently and came across an interesting headline. It read “ U.S. Orders Chinese Company to Sell Grindr App ”. My first through was that the Federal Government was, once again, narrowly defining a monopoly to a ridiculous degree and decided this Chinese company was somehow monopolizing the swipe left/right mobile phone dating scene for gay men, similar to how long ago the FTC came to the conclusion that Blockbuster Video was monopolizing the narrow market of strip mall DVD and VHS rental locations that sport a blue logo when combating their attempted merger with Hollywood Video . But when I started reading the piece, I came across something even more bizarre. I kid you not, the entire justification for this forced sale was “national security”.
The term “national security” has unambiguously become a parody on the order of Helen Lovejoy screaming “ won’t somebody please think of the children? ” every time something doesn’t go her way.
These phrases are part of a broad category of concepts called the Thought-Stopping Cliché . This is a technique used when the individual, who knows the concept lacks merit or struggles to justify a course of action, to attempt to dissuade the listener from brooking further inquiry. It’s a fairly common technique used from the insidious, like cults, to the innocuous, like a high school cheer squad or annual shareholder meeting. Why should I support my high school football team? They can’t even come up with a fight song without ripping off “On Wisconsin”. “You’re either with us, or against us.” There, now shut up, put on this orange face paint and buy $15 nachos. “It’s a business decision”. There, shareholder, shut up and accept this merger that makes no sense.
The true problem with this is that, by and large, thought-stopping clichés work. Take the Green New Deal for example. When people begin to question the details , the general response is how we’ll die in exactly 12 years from now , like all eight billion of us, if this isn’t passed immediately. On the surface, it’s absurd to say the entire human species will go extinct on March 27th, 2031 at 6pm Mountain Standard Time (the exact moment in time I wrote this sentence), but that’s enough to convince 46% of the population to like it (along with the NYT engaging in its own thought-stopping clichés by saying only rich people will pay for it to goose the numbers). GND supporters get upset when you bring up details, like how everyone will get a tax hike, how anyone who refuses to work is guaranteed a high quality of life, how all cars will be banned or how the rest of the world will snort and ignore this and continue emitting on. That means you, GND supporter who may be reading this, you’re the “other people” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez means when other people will be taxed to pay for it. When given that bit of information, supporters turn into detractors, so it’s best to give them the “you’ll die a horrible death from whatever natural disaster is prevalent in your area in exactly 12 years from today” line to keep them from asking any more questions. Don’t ask me how CO2 sets of volcanoes and earthquakes , the science is settled and you’ll die if you don’t let people sit at home, not working.
Large-scale damage the State does with broad public support isn’t even hypothetical. The entire invasion of Iraq was built around the laughably thin national security cliché. The silly premise that a tin-pot Middle East dictator who couldn’t even reliably project force a mile outside of his own political borders was a grave threat to the United States turned into a conflict that ended up killing in the neighborhood of a half million people and simultaneously spent years with overwhelming public support . This is all with nothing more than waving the “national security” line – something even more egregious than using that line to waste hundreds of billions a year on poorly functional military hardware . $1.5 trillion and counting to a well-connected contractor to build a plane that the engineers discovered, 27 years later, uses fuel that, gasp, combusts. Don’t question this, though, it’s for national security.
Just about every major spending program and regulatory action relies on these clichés to pass public scrutiny. 80% of humanity would be curled up, dead, in roadways if we don’t give everything the State asks for. Taxes are the price of civilization, after all. Politicians use this beautifully to manipulate the public to agree to concessions for an ever-expanding State and it works on both ends of the classic left-right political spectrum.
The sad part is that a thought-stopping cliché is remarkably easy to identify. All you have to do is ask, “Did this person actually address my question?” If the answer is no, they’re admitting that whatever it is they’re peddling is a stupid idea but they don’t want you thinking about it. Otherwise, you may come to the conclusion that calling Grindr a national security risk is silly since any person can perform deep espionage by simply signing up for the service, setting the ZIP code to 20810 and then skimming photos to look for a government employee. If they’re laying the B.S. thick on this claim of national security, what else are bureaucrats trying to hide every other time it is used?
Justin Murray received his MBA in 2014 from the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
산후 복통에 지실작약산
불면증에 지실작약산 응용
枳实芍药散治不寐证经验举隅 (转载)
枳实芍药散出自《金匮要略?妇人产后》篇，由枳实、芍药各等分为散，以麦粥调服。原文曰：“产后腹痛，烦满不得卧，枳实芍药散主之”。即指产后气滞血郁，气机不通，郁而生热，则腹痛烦满不得卧。方中枳实（烧黑勿太过）行血中之气，烧黑破气力缓，合芍药和血缓急止痛，则气结散而血亦行，既解郁又清热。故临床运用不必囿于“产后腹痛”，凡气血郁滞、气机不畅而生热者均能以此方为主化裁使用。十多年前，笔者偶用枳实芍药散治疗不寐有效，即留心运用观察，略有心得，简述如下。
1、肝气郁结加佛手郁金
杜某，女，36岁，因情志变化而致不寐，入睡困难，甚则彻夜难眠已3年余 ，时轻时重，1998年5月11日初诊。刻下情绪低落，胸闷不舒，时有呕恶，善太息，不喜多言，不思饮食，舌淡红，苔薄白，脉弦。治以疏肝解郁，调气宁神。方用枳实15g，白芍30g，郁金12g，佛手10g，黄芩10g，每日1剂，水煎服。5剂后，每晚可睡3～4小时，纳食增加，胸闷减轻，后随症稍有加减，续服月余，病愈。1年后追访未见复发。
按：不寐一证，病因繁多，但以情志不舒、七情致病者多见。情志为病，肝郁气滞，扰乱神明，魂不内守，即《血证论?卧寐》所说：“肝藏魂……魂不入肝，则不寐”。治疗以调气开郁为主，气调则血畅，魂魄可安藏。故以枳实芍药散调郁开滞，加佛手、郁金助之，黄芩清已有之郁热，故能标本兼治而病愈。
2、心火炽盛加栀子黄连
李某，男，29岁，业务员，反复失眠近4年，工作紧张时明显，于1996年10月16日初诊。刻下心烦不寐，焦躁不安，口干舌燥，口舌生疮，小便短赤，有烧灼感，每晚仅睡2～3小时，且多梦，舌尖红，苔薄黄，脉细数。治宜清心泻火，开郁除烦。处方：枳实12g，白芍30g，栀子9g，黄连6g，生地15g，滑石20g，每日1剂水煎服。7剂后心烦不安已减，小便转清，每晚可睡3～4小时，少梦，口疮有好转，仍有口干。以上方稍有出入续服近2个月，诸症消失，不寐痊愈。随访1年未发。
按：该患者为业务员，因烦劳伤心，扰动心神，心火亢盛，神不安则不寐。心热下移小肠，故小便短赤有烧灼感，心火有余，阴血受损，心主血脉，则血行不畅，郁热更甚。以枳实芍药散加栀子、黄连苦寒泻火、清热除烦，全方既散已郁之血热，又制浮游之心火，则阴血上承，心火下达，心肾交通，不寐可愈。
3、肝郁化火加龙胆草黄芩珍珠母
谢某，女，44岁，教师，2001年9月20日诊。不寐6年，反复发作，近年加重，适逢新学期开学，因事不遂，失眠频作。刻下难以入睡，多梦易惊，甚至彻底不眠，性情急躁易怒，口干而苦，耳鸣目赤，胸闷头胀，不思饮食，便秘尿赤，舌红苔黄，脉弦数。治宜清肝泻火，开郁散结。处方：枳实15g，生白芍30g，黄芩15g，珍珠母30g，龙胆草12g，生地15g，每日1剂水煎服。5剂后诸症减轻，每晚可睡3～4小时，惟耳鸣头晕明显，上方加钩藤20g、石决明30g，再服10剂，每晚可安睡5～6小时。以 上方稍有出入继续服药1个月巩固，告愈，2年后追访未见复发。
按：患者适逢开学，因事不遂，肝失条达气郁不舒，郁而化火；复因工作烦劳，使阳气亢奋。“阳气者，烦劳则张”，肝阳首当其冲，扰及心神，神明失藏，魂游于目，而成不寐。患者失眠为旧疾，故易复发与加重。以枳实芍药散解气血之热结，加龙胆草苦寒，能清泻肝胆实火，黄芩泻火助胆草清肝之力，珍珠母、石决明平肝潜阳、镇惊安志，生地助芍药养血柔肝，全方解郁泻肝火，安神镇凉清头目而守神，故能切中病机取效。
4、阴虚火旺加知母生地阿胶
徐某，女，28岁，反复失眠7个月，于1999年9月6日就诊。症见虚烦少眠，心悸不安，甚至彻底难眠，头晕耳鸣，腰膝酸软，健忘，五心烦热，口干少津，盗汗，时有胸胁胀满，舌红少苔，脉细数。证属阴虚火旺不寐，治宜滋阴降火，清心安神。处方：枳实12g，生白芍30g，知母9g，生地30g，阿胶10g（烊化），女贞子20g，每日1剂水煎服。7剂后每晚睡眠较前好转，时有头痛，加白蒺藜15g、蔓荆子12g，继服12剂，每晚可安睡4～6小时，以上方随症稍有出入继续服药20天巩固，告愈。于2000年11月不期而遇，告知失眠未再复发。
按：因劳倦过度，肾阴暗耗，久则阴虚阳旺，阳不入阴，虚热上扰心神，致虚烦不寐，即《景岳全书?不寐》所谓“真阴精血之不足，阴阳不交，而神有不安其室”，脑髓失充，神明不主，发为不寐。以枳实芍药散行气血、解郁结，加知母、生地、阿胶、女贞子补真阴而柔肝，使肾阴上济心阴而心火不亢，即能养脑安神，泻火除烦。
5、心脾两虚加黄芪党参陈皮茯神
张某，男，公务员，37岁，反复发作失眠1年余，于2000年9月23日就诊。多梦易醒，醒后再难入睡，饮食少进，神疲乏力，易感冒，心悸头晕，健忘多汗，大便溏秘不均，面色萎黄，舌淡苔薄白，脉沉弱。治宜补益心脾，调血安神。处方：白芍30g，枳实15g，党参15g，黄芪20g，陈皮9g，茯神30g，远志8g，当归15g，每日1剂水煎服。6剂后诸症略减，已能安睡3～4小时，仍有乏力、纳差，上方加莱菔子8g、五味子15g，服15剂，已能安睡5～6小时。仍以枳实芍药散加党参、陈皮、茯神为方，服药1个月巩固之。于2001年4月来告，愈后未再复发。
按：劳心过度，心血先伤，日久则气血不足，无以奉养心神，脑失滋养，神明不守，而致不寐，即《景岳全书?不寐》所云：“无邪而不寐者，必营血不足也，营主血，血虚则无以养心，心虚则神不守舍”。因饮食、劳倦等损伤脾胃，脾胃失和，升降异常，食少纳呆，气血生化之源不足，无以奉养心脑，致使神志不宁而不寐发生。治当补益心脾，行气血以舒脾，用枳实芍药散加黄芪、党参补气健脾，茯神安神定志，陈皮助枳实行气血之郁滞而舒脾，使补而不滞，诸药相伍，健脾养血，宁心安神，神安则睡眠正常。
6、痰热内扰加胆星竹茹黄芩
阮某，男，33岁，酒店职员，因反复失眠4个月，于2000年3月11日就诊。刻下胸闷心烦，不易入睡，多梦易醒，嗳气呕恶，头重目眩，口苦痰多，大便不爽，平素喜食肥甘厚味，舌红，苔黄腻，脉弦滑。此因痰生热，扰动心神；治宜化痰清热，理气和中。处方：枳实15g，赤芍30g，胆星10g，竹茹12g，黄芩15g，莱菔子9g，每日1剂水煎服。服5剂后诸症略减，入睡较前容易，可安睡4小时左右，仍头昏胸闷，上方加生龙齿30g，服12剂，能安睡4～6小时。继以上方服用月余，诸症消失，能安睡6小时以上。嘱其慎饮食、远肥甘，1年后追访未见复发。
按：平素嗜酒厚味，积湿生痰，因痰生热，互结难化，痰火交蒸，上扰神明，神不守舍，导致不寐。《景岳全书?不寐》云：“痰火扰乱，心神不宁，思虑过伤，火炽痰郁而致不眠者多矣”。若夹肝胆火盛，引动痰火者，可见烦躁易怒。配胆星、竹茹、黄芩可加强清化痰热的作用，以醒脑通窍、清心除烦；再用龙齿镇心除浮阳，全方标本兼顾，即能取效。
7、瘀血内阻加川芎红花当归
秦某，男，47岁，经商，因长期失眠（自诉超过6年）时轻时重，于2001年4月9日初诊。不寐日久，入睡困难，有时彻夜不寐，多梦易惊，甚则数日无倦意且精神不减。刻下面色晦暗，眼周黑晕，形体消瘦，舌质紫暗，苔薄微黄，脉沉细而涩。证属久病多瘀，痰瘀交阻；治宜活血化瘀，理气调肝，补益肝肾。处方：枳实15g，赤白芍各30g，当归15g，川芎15g，红花9g，寄生30g，女贞子20g，制首乌15g，每日1剂水煎服。10剂后入睡已较前顺利，每晚睡3小时左右，继服上方20剂，已能安睡5个小时左右，眼周发黑消失，面色转润。仍以上方为主随证略有加减服药2个月，诸症消失，每晚安睡6～7小时，嘱以逍遥丸合六味地黄丸口服以巩固疗效。2年后追访未见复发。
按：长期失眠，面色晦暗，舌暗脉涩，多因久病多瘀、久病入络，此时瘀血内阻既是病理产物，又是致病之因。瘀阻血脉，运行涩滞，阴阳失衡，故失眠反复难愈。《医林改错》曾于血府逐瘀汤证下描述曰：“夜不安者，将卧则起，坐未稳又欲睡，一夜无宁刻，此血府血瘀”。故用枳实芍药散行气散血中瘀滞，且赤白芍同用，通养结合，一散一收；再配活血化瘀之当归、川芎、红花，通窍醒脑，以安脑神；又因久病入肾，患者眼周发黑，劳累辛苦，加寄生、首乌等补肾以助安心神，全方共图理气化瘀、养肝益肾、安神定志之功。
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기