Chinese pregnancy beliefs

[gougou]

And in reference to an earlier thing about acupuncture... I find these two are very unrelated.

Of course they are unrelated. My point was that not everything in TCM can be explained by scientific methods (yet?). Heck, they can't even explain some parts of Western medicine. Some things just work...

I still see placebo effect. I see it in western medicine as well.

Even if women only feel better because they think that not plucking their eye brows will make them feel better, as opposed to it having any inherent benefits, does it matter? The point is that they feel better. It's not like you could come up with an alternative for a thousand-year old belief over night.

(hopefully as well ruling out placebo affects)

So how would you do that? Have a control group where people are only pretending they're not combing their hair?

[muyongshi]

Then may I ask why 凉菜 are so commonly eaten if they are so hard to digest? It doesn't follow logic. Okay if we want to take this line of reasoning then we shouldn't eat green veggies either because the high amount of cloriphil is too difficult to digest and so it helps keep your system clean. It can't be broken down meaning it is difficult to digest. So our body instead passes it through our system. So anything that is difficult to digest a woman shouldn't eat right?

So how would you do that? Have a control group where people are only pretending they're not combing their hair?

No I was thinking more of not letting half the people (woman of course) who participated in this discussion not take a shower for a month and then have the other half not brush their hair or teeth for a month

In your words, your logic seems to tell “I don’t have this problem, so others don’t.” I'm sorry but if you don’t take others’ shoes, you might hardly understand what their life can be.

Worded badly yes. But the thing is I have not heard one person uphold this position and have done searches in various medical websites (and also post birth care websites) and none of them have this type of thing included. I have never heard anyone say they get indigestion from eating cold food.

[gougou]

have done searches in various medical websites (and also post birth care websites) and none of them have this type of thing included.

Did you just father a child? You're putting more effort into this than most parents would...

[jonaspony]

a control group where people are only pretending they're not combing their hair?

he hehe. Nice one gougou:D

[studentyoung]

Then may I ask why 凉菜 are so commonly eaten if they are so hard to digest?

When you get tired and lost too much sweat, your body and digest system need something hot and nutritious food to replenish energy. On one hand cold food itself is some kind of irritation to digestive tract(消化道), i.e. it might cause the spasms （痉挛） in digestive organs , especially intestinal(肠道). The effect might be very serious even in a normal person, less say a lying-in woman. On the other hand, cold food asks for extra energy to digest, because your body has to warm it up first.

I have never heard anyone say they get indigestion from eating cold food.

I have never seen anyone who suffers from milk hypersensitivity, but I believe that they do exist.

Thanks!

[Lu]

You and your friend don’t have this problem don’t mean others don’t have this problem, especially when their immunity is declined temporarily. I wonder if your friend is an oculist or if you are an oculist working in eye hospital. I also wonder if your words should be considered as scientific or proven in a scientific way.

I am not an eye doctor, and neither is any of my friends, and no, what I said is not scientific. It just happens to be so that I know a lot of women who pluck their eyebrows, and although me and my friends would discuss such things, I never heard about anyone getting infections from it. Which leads me to believe that although possible, it's not a common thing.

Also, one can see tons of women on the street every day, and I don't know about China but where I come from many of those women pluck their eyebrows. If people got infections from that, you would see women with a swollen eye once in a while. Unless of course they stayed home because of that. But again, having lived for most of my life in a society where many women pluck their eyebrows, I believe I would have heard about such a thing.

What if I tell you most of them will like to use soap and bath lotions to wash their vagina in order to keep so-call “clean”.

Well, next time you hear about that, tell them not to, it's not clean, it's bad for the vagina. Just like you said. And not only after childbirth, but always.

[studentyoung]

Which leads me to believe that although possible, it's not a common thing.

You and your friend don’t have this problem don’t mean others don’t have this problem, especially when their immunity is declined temporarily.

Well, next time you hear about that, tell them not to, it's not clean, it's bad for the vagina. Just like you said. And not only after childbirth, but always.

很多女性按习惯或受误导在日常生活中经常采取用“冲洗液”的方式来维系阴道卫生，特别是在不洁性交以后，大都选用“冲洗液”来冲洗阴道，一是防止受孕；二是怕传染上性病。然而妇科专家指出，女性勤于冲洗阴道未必有益，过度频繁的冲洗可能增加某些妇科病、性病的罹患几率，甚至还是导致“宫外孕”、“盆腔炎”、“不孕症”、“宫颈癌”的元凶。

八成女性误认为“洗洗更健康”

中国名医协会妇科专家喻早说，她在近一年来对自己所接诊的5000多名妇科炎症患者进行了询问统计，其中竟然有高达80%的女性误认为经常清洗阴道会减少妇科疾病的发生几率。甚至还有很多女性都养成了每天或性生活后用香皂或用洗液清洗外阴的习惯。

http://www.ik51.com/dzyx/jtys/2007920/3636.Html

Thanks!

[shanghaikai]

Yes, it is never been proven. But can you guarantee there is no such radiation and no harmful effect on human being, especially a lying-in woman and her new born baby? Can’t she take precautions just because she's not so sure on something which might hurt her?

Pascal's Wager. Do you believe in the Christian God? Since you cannot guarantee that the Christian God does NOT exist, shouldn't you become Christian as a precaution against going to Hell?

Even if women only feel better because they think that not plucking their eye brows will make them feel better, as opposed to it having any inherent benefits, does it matter? The point is that they feel better. It's not like you could come up with an alternative for a thousand-year old belief over night.

These practices are adhered to because they supposedly are beneficial for the new mother. Many people do not understand how some of these practices are beneficial and are being intellectually honest about wanting and waiting to hear convincing arguments for them. Defenders of these practices have failed to provide convincing arguments that do not suffer from alternative, logical, and proven explanations or placebo effect.

We cannot take something as true simply because it cannot be proven to be untrue.

These practices stipulate that a new mother should not bathe for a week because doing so would be harmful to her or put her at increased risk. Fine. But how true is this or how logical is this advice or how applicable is it to today's society?

This is what muyongshi is asking.

studentyoung seems content to defend this practice by calling upon the infalliable supremacy of Chinese culture and history. This is not scientifically rigorous. When people say this, studentyoung then falls back on the rhetorically dubious position of: "We're different/Chinese are different/中国有中国的特点." That is the argumentative equivalent of saying "I don't care what is logical, you have your logic, I have mine, and I will continue to insist that I am right, you are wrong, and no one should question me." A major problem with this debate is that both sides have not agreed upon certain premises for which to build this debate upon. studentyoung immediately thwarted this the moment she made the implication that Chinese women are "scientifically" different than Western women and hence Chinese rules apply and Western rules do not. How do you have a reasonable and intellectually honest debate in this situation?

muyongshi has repeatedly said he has no problem with people holding onto and adhering to these practices as long as they admit that it is cultural, traditional, or otherwise just makes them feel good about themselves. That's fine. However, if someone like studentyoung wants to come out and start saying that these practices ought to be followed because they are scientifically practical and proven to be beneficial to a new mother, then the burden of proof is upon them to provide adequate rationale in defense of these practices. muyongshi is perfectly within his rights as a skeptic to proffer challenging explanations for why a practice may have been recommended given specific circumstances that may no longer be true today and thus renders such a practice obsolete. It is incumbent upon studentyoung to demonstrate that the practice continues to be applicable even when taking into account current circumstances.

I'm glad that people are bringing up things like "placebo effect" because it is entirely relevant to this debate. For many years, humans held that they were at the center of the universe, that the sun revolved around the earth, and that the planet was flat. For many years, Jewish parents circumsized their children out of a religious pact with their Lord, only to have aspiring Christians adopt the practice and attempt to justify it for years as a defense against sinful masturbation. Later, doctors tried to argue that circumcision was healthier for the child. Nowadays, most doctors agree that circumcision has no clear or intrinsic benefit to a male, and may even be slightly harmful. For many years, the Chinese society was organized under an imperial autocracy, only to have Mao Ze Dong and the Communist come in and wipe it all away, elevating the Chinese woman as equal to Chinese men contrary to thousands of years of Confuscian ideology. For many years, Chinese people sacrificed and sacrificed in pursuit of a worker's paradise, struggling against wealthy landowners, only to have Deng Xiao Ping say: "to get rich is glorious!"

History and tradition are important, but at what point does a practice become more a relic of cultural history and tradition rather than sound, practical advice? No one is forbidding anyone from continuing to do what they want to do, but in an intellectually honest debate, one must be willing to concede and abide to the basic rhetorical rule that every claim must be supported by reasonable premises. There are arguments and opinions. I see a lot of opinions and unsubstantiated arguments supported by easily defeated premises.

This thread can easily spin out of control and become a debate about how culture affects rhetoric...but that's definitely opening Pandora's Box.

[Myriam]

she made the implication that Chinese women are "scientifically" different than Western women and hence Chinese rules apply and Western rules do not.

No, shanghaikai, I think you have misunderstood her :

It is because Chinese women’s constitution and the clinical experience gained in Chinese people’s life for thousands of years.

I could choose to PM you this but I prefer posting it here. And I can't elaborate simply because I don't know enough to be able to do so, but think about it.

[gougou]

Good points, shanghaikai. So, is there a doctor in the house? It would be interesting to hear the point of view of somebody who has a broader sample than him-/herself and a bunch of friends.

Judging from previous threads, there should be a couple of westerners studying TCM around these forums. It's a pity none of them chimed in yet.

[muyongshi]

Ummm...wow

That's all I can say...wow

Impressively long post....wow

[shanghaikai]

Myriam: I'm willing to go as far as conceding that given our differing levels of English language skill, I could have misunderstood her...

...but I don't really think so.

Moreover, I'm not sure what you're asking me to think about...nor why you specifically bolded those two portions of our respective posts. I do feel she implied that Chinese women are somehow scientifically different than Western women. This was quickly caught by everyone else who pointed out that, yes, our environment certainly shapes our physiologies, immunities, etc. but to categorically say "Chinese women" versus "Western women" is a very big and largely unnecessary generalization. Perhaps the generalization itself could be excused but (and maybe this lies in her ability to communicate in English) the way she threw that out just reeked of "well, we're just different and that's all you need to know."

Furthermore, you're missing the real point of that specific issue: Has what she said demonstrated that these practices continue to warrant being so broadly applied to "Chinese women" in general, regardless of their particular circumstances?

The "clinical experience" of "thousands of years" may lead one to believe that something should or should not be done, but that is an appeal to tradition and not to reason. For thousands of years, it was acceptable for men to beat their women when they misbehaved. Why should men violate thousands of years of "clinical experience" now? I mean, beating your woman till she behaved as you would have her certainly worked before, right?

[Myriam]

I'm not sure what you're asking me to think about...

Not to worry, I'm out of this discussion, I said what I wanted to say and that's enough for me, no wait, I found this interesting :

Pascal's Wager. Do you believe in the Christian God? Since you cannot guarantee that the Christian God does NOT exist, shouldn't you become Christian as a precaution against going to Hell?

I've got some links I can forward you by PM if you are interested.

[shanghaikai]

Myriam: I'm not sure why you're being so ambiguous in whatever you're trying to say. I wholly welcome you to post on the thread whatever you wish to say to me via PM but if you prefer to PM me, please feel free to do so. I'm not sure what links you want to send to me, but I'm wondering if you've missed the point I was making with identifying studentyoung's use of Pascal's Wager. I certainly hope you're not going to PM me links to pages refuting/challenging/faulting Pascal's Wager...since that is pretty much my point anyway.

[jonaspony]

Shanghaikai... What's going on? I have never before heard the Chinese People's Revolution, Deng Xiao Ping theory or Copernicus referred to as a placebo effect. Pascal's Wager? That's a bit heavy handed isn't it? And as for discounting anything at all because men beat up on their wives... disproving one thing (or prohibiting one thing) doesn't disprove/prohibit another.

Citing the great minds, Copernicus for example, as a justification for undisciplined skepticism is like citing the Wright Bros as a justification for throwing a cat off a bridge. I say it is undisciplined because the bounds of the question have changed from "Any views would be appreciated..." to "something a little more scientific.... (i.e. proof)". And that was just in the first few posts.

I don't really think of this question as skeptical, more as provocatively combative. And pretty well done too. The line "merely cultural and not at all necessary" was pure genius. I think we need to have that frank and open dicussion about the cultural nature of knowledge. Please, please, please.

[shanghaikai]

Confucius, not Copernicus.

That said, I'm sure everyone is free to share their views as this is a discussion forum. However, at the same time, since it is a discussion forum, I see no oddity in people migrating from "i'd appreciate to hear your view" to "i'd appreciate to hear you explain, substantiate, and justify your view." The respondent, of course, is under no legal obligation to do so, but in the forum of public ideas, their idea would be accorded that much less validity.

As I said, there are opinions and arguments. I've merely opted to take studentyoung to task for the construction of her arguments, most of which I find to be atrocious when combined with what I may have misinterpreted as a sort of cultural arrogance masquerading as scientific fact.

[studentyoung]

@ shanghaikai

Originally Posted by studentyoung

Yes, it is never been proven. But can you guarantee there is no such radiation and no harmful effect on human being, especially a lying-in woman and her new born baby? Can’t she take precautions just because she's not so sure on something which might hurt her?

Pascal's Wager. Do you believe in the Christian God? Since you cannot guarantee that the Christian God does NOT exist, shouldn't you become Christian as a precaution against going to Hell?

Your words shocked me, and especially they came out from a westerner. If they like, I don’t think there is anything wrong. It is their right and their choice. Don’t you think so? In China mainland, if you got bite by a dog which you were not sure whether it might have rabies（狂犬病）, the best way to protect your life was to take the rabies vaccine, right? I wonder if it should be considered as a non-scientific way.

@ gougou

Judging from previous threads, there should be a couple of westerners studying TCM around these forums.It's a pity none of them chimed in yet.

You can say that again, gougou!

After reading more relative information and consulting a doctor, I have something else as supplement.

“No cutting of nails”. I was told that most Chinese women suffer from arm or leg cramps(手脚抽筋) during pregnancy and lying-in days, due to calcium-deficiency And cramps are something you can’t predict. In clinical records, it is not rare to find those new mothers got hurt by nail clippers or scissors, while the cramps appeared at the time they were cutting their nails. Usually, the wound is a piece of cake in common days, but it is not the case when a woman in her lying days. Especially it might be rather complicated to handle if the infection appeared. Even the smallest amount of medicine might affect the new born baby who is breasted by his / or her mother.

“No pulling of eyebrows.” A woman in her lying-in days usually sweats more than normal days. As I have said before, the skin around eyes is usually thinner and more sensitive than in other area. Pulling eyebrows might cause little and almost undetectable wounds. When you sweat, your eyebrow will keep your sweat out of your eyes to protect them. But at the same time, the sweat containing metabolites(代谢物) and even germs creep in those little wounds. In common days, it can be considered as nothing, and the immune system in a healthy adult can protect the body very well, so that he / she won’t feel anything wrong. But if it happens on a lying-in woman whose immune system is declined for a short while, the chance of developing an infection will increase.

"Eating only of freshly cooked food." Why? Isn’t it just the right food (i.e. good for health) for a woman after having a baby? Can anyone tell me why it is considered as non-scientific?

Why just freshly cooked food? It is an important precaution to prevent nitrite intoxication（亚硝酸盐中毒）. Nitrite salt is more likely to appear in those non-freshly cooked food and preserved food. This nitrite salt is bad for human being’s health, especially fetus, lying-in mothers and new born babies. I once read an article about it in a medical medicine. A new mother cooked some vegetable juice for her baby. But the baby couldn’t drink all of it at a time, so she kept the remained juice in a refrigerator. A few hours later, she took it out, warmed it up with a microwave-oven and fed it to her baby. Just after a while, she felt something wrong, for her baby kept crying. The sound was loud at first, and weaker and weaker later. And she also noticed that her baby’s face didn’t look well and a lot of saliva came out of her baby’s mouth. Luckily, she sent her baby to hospital in time. The doctor told her that it was nitrite intoxication caused by the remained vegetable juice.

"No cold food." Besides it is hard for a lying woman to digest, cold food is also an irritation to womb. That’s why doctor advise women who suffer from dysmenorrheal (痛经) not to drink cold water or eat cold food.

Thanks!

[shanghaikai]

Your words shocked me, and especially they came out from a westerner. If they like, I don’t think there is anything wrong. It is their right and their choice. Don’t you think so? In China mainland, if you got bite by a dog which you were not sure whether it might have rabies（狂犬病）, the best way to protect your life was to take the rabies vaccine, right? I wonder if it should be considered as a non-scientific way.

Why do my words shock you? Did you actually understand the point I was making?

You are saying that the maxim of "Do not use cell phone or watch TV after childbirth" should still be followed because of the danger of radiation, even though you admit that there is no proof that the radiation is actually harmful. You feel this is a logical precaution. The point I was making with mentioning Pascal's Wager (which you should probably first do some research on) is that it is not logical to simply adhere to something for fear of consequences that are not proven.

Let's examine your comparison of rabies with one of your 坐月子 maxims:

First, the rabies:

PREMISE: Rabies is a dangerous and communicable disease where a common symptom is increased aggression.

PREMISE: There is an unknown, strange, possibly stray dog.

PREMISE: This dog has bitten me.

CONCLUSION: This dog may have rabies.

This is a good inductive argument. If the premises are true, the conclusion is likely to be true.

PREMISE: A dog I am not familiar with has bitten me.

PREMISE: I suspect this dog has rabies.

PREMISE: Rabies can be vaccinated.

CONCLUSION: I should go see a doctor to possibly get a rabies vaccination as a precaution.

This is a good and valid deductive argument. If the premises are all true, then the conclusion must be true.

Next, your 坐月子 argument:

PREMISE: Cell phones and televisions emit radiation.

PREMISE: New mothers and babies are more susceptible to harm.

PREMISE: Radiation is bad.

CONCLUSION: New mothers and babies should avoid cell phones and televisions.

This is a bad argument, deductive or inductive, because you cannot prove all your premises to be true. If you cannot prove your premises to be true, then your conclusion is not valid or likely to be valid. The necessary premise that proves that the specific radiation from cell phones and televisions are unduly dangerous specifically to new mothers and babies, is either missing or has not been proven to be true.

...

Anyway, no offense, but I doubt you understand what I'm saying here. This has a lot to do with rhetoric and what makes a "sound" argument. I reckon your English is not at the level where you can understand what I'm writing above and I reckon my Chinese is not good enough to communicate the same principles to you. All I can hope for is that you somehow do understand that your conclusions in support of 坐月子 are not logically supported, despite you thinking they are. In reality, you are making unwarranted leaps in logic to substantiate your conclusions.

This is not rhetorically rigorous or acceptable.

I've written a lot in an effort to show you why your arguments are weak, but given that you have not responded to them, I can only conclude that you either cannot understand what I'm saying or you cannot respond to my objections/arguments adequately.

That is too bad.

[adrianlondon]

PREMISE: Cell phones and televisions emit radiation.

PREMISE: New mothers and babies are more susceptible to harm.

PREMISE: Radiation is bad.

CONCLUSION: New mothers and babies should avoid cell phones and televisions.

This is a bad argument, deductive or inductive, because you cannot prove all your premises to be true.

Although I'm of the camp that believes mobiles and TVs don't emit enough radiation to be harmful, on a real-life level your analogy fails.

If the premises are false then fine. If the premises simply can't be proven then one has to take a gamble. How difficult is it to ensure that new mothers and babies are not sat too close to mobile phones and TVs? If it's easy, then one makes a risk assessment and decides whether to do this (pending the proof or dis-proof of your premises).

It took a while for conclusive, scientific proof to link passive smoking to cancer; however many people assumed it would be proved at some point and hence decided to limit their risk by avoiding excessive exposure to cigarette smoke.

One doesn't need every premise to be scientifically proven or disproven to make an assessment of the situation. Life is very rarely black and white.

Discussion about semantics and logic is black and white, but the downside of this fascinating subject is that it can't actually be applied to anything in real life.

[shanghaikai]

“No cutting of nails”. I was told that most Chinese women suffer from arm or leg cramps(手脚抽筋) during pregnancy and lying-in days, due to calcium-deficiency And cramps are something you can’t predict. In clinical records, it is not rare to find those new mothers got hurt by nail clippers or scissors, while the cramps appeared at the time they were cutting their nails. Usually, the wound is a piece of cake in common days, but it is not the case when a woman in her lying days. Especially it might be rather complicated to handle if the infection appeared. Even the smallest amount of medicine might affect the new born baby who is breasted by his / or her mother.

Wait...WHAT? So the advice against cutting your nails is because they're afraid women will get a cramp and suddenly hurt themselves? This is ridiculous. Cramps can be caused by any number of reasons, including simple inactivity or lack of hydration. Regardless, I'd love to see the clinical records that show that there is a statistically meaningful amount of pregnant women who have increased incidences of severe self-inflicted nail-clipper or scissor injuries. Then, I'd like for you to explain that these women's cramp-induced nail-clipper and scissor injuries are scientifically more prone to infection. Then, I'd like for you to show me how simple medications used to treat minor injuries (caused by nail-clippers no less) might harmfully affect the baby that is being breast-fed.

A new mother cooked some vegetable juice for her baby.

Are you supposed to feed your newborn baby vegetable juice?