Talk:Moxibustion

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Moxibustion.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles

China

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Untitled

"Scientific research has shown that mugwort acts as an emmenagogue" - there should be references to support this claim.

Also there should be references to support everything in this article, and there should be more informational and authoratative external links at the very least.66.41.66.213 18:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a reference to a Chinese Medical journal, and removed some slightly sarcastic punctuation. More references needed still though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.14.143 (talk) 12:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnamese name

Is the Vietnamese name cứu? Badagnani (talk) 07:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment moved from article

Comment : Moxibustion is a Chinese heat treatment technique to treat different human physiological problems. For examples, using moxibustion technique to warm the big toes is to help to stop mentral bleeding after the 5th day of the menstral cycle. Warming the 5th toe of a pregnant woman 2 to 3 weeks before laboring is to avoid the unnecessary C-section due to the abnormal fetus position. Also warming the tip of elbow is to heal the digestive problem. Usually, all these treatments are needed to perform for 1 to 2 weeks. Hectorso (talk) 08:28, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Hector So - comment accidently placed on article page moved here. ascidian | talk-to-me 12:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

for cancer treatment....

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=moxibustion+therapy+cancer&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en

--222.67.201.183 (talk) 10:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+moxibustion+cancer&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--222.67.201.183 (talk) 10:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of attention on the use of hyperthermia -- applying heat by various means, typically 40-42 degress celcius -- in cancer treatment (see Google scholar [1]). Oncologists are describing hyperthermia as a promosing "new" (!!) treatment, so the way in which moxibustion is trashed in this article surprises me. Is it the name? Hyperthermia sounds cool and scientific. --Timtak (talk) 01:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19th century western use

A procedure called moxibustion seems to have been used in western practice. It is described in the 1844 novel The Wandering Jew, by Eugene Sue, himself a physician, at Part III, Book IX, Chapters 29 and 30. Jm546 (talk) 22:09, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Parallel Uses of Mugwort

Mugwort says that Mugwort is not native to North America south of Alaska, so how could the peoples of North or South America have used it in pre-colonial days?

Western Medicine vs Medicine

Why use the term "western medicine"? That sounds like there is some disagreement in the medical field? In China they do have hospitals and doctors too, acting like they are all using something else is not correct. What do you call alt-med that has been proven to work? Medicine. You don't see mentions of flat earth on the earth page.Sgerbic (talk) 21:47, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"China (including Tibet)"

The line "It plays an important role in the traditional medical systems of China (including Tibet), Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Mongolia" seems a touch unusual. Is there a reason that a specific region of China is explicitly listed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junkqwerty (talk • contribs) 04:41, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet is not a region of China historically so it may have been added for clarification. Tibet has a different system of traditional medicine with a different philosophy that also makes use of moxibustion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.186.70.156 (talk • contribs) 03:27, 25 August 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Remove unattributed sentence

In Moxibustion#Theory and practice First paragraph, second sentence: It is believed by some[by whom?] that mugwort acts as an emmenagogue, meaning that it stimulates blood-flow in the pelvic area and uterus. This appears to have no citation and has been flagged "by whom" since July 2012. I propose that it be removed. Jim1138 (talk) 17:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I removed it. bobrayner (talk) 13:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Moxibustion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714172611/http://www.tcmwellness.tk/2014/04/moxibustions-effect-on-blood-chemistry/ to http://www.tcmwellness.tk/2014/04/moxibustions-effect-on-blood-chemistry/#.U5O2Yjp_u9c

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

vitaldirections.com

@BHB95:, your opinion on whether the source is reliable or not is immaterial. Two editors have challenged your source. It is impermissible to keep forcing your changes into the article. The WP:ONUS is now on you to provide evidence that this isa reliable source according to the standards that this community operates under. You have broken the three-revert-rule now and I will report this to the administrators for appropriate action if you do it again. Please discuss this source here before restoring this text. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed source does not meet WP:RS and even less WP:MEDRS. —Paleo Neonate – 21:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editorializing in the See also section

I don't think the See also section is a place where to editorialize about something being pseudoscientific. The reader should read the article and find out from there what wikipedia says on the subject. -- 84.249.137.160 (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is your objection? Bon courage (talk) 19:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]