Modern Chinese Medicine Multi-Target Regulatory Treatment Approach for Chronic LD

To deal with the dilemma of conventional medicine in the care of LD, we developed our MCM multi-target regulatory “Fuzheng Quxie (strengthening the body resistance to eliminate pathogenic factors)” protocol for chronic LD, which consists of

1. Anti-infection,

2. Immune regulation,

3. Global health support,

4. Treatments of the complications such as Hashimoto, vasculitis, myocarditis, central and peripheral neuropathy, autoimmune arthritis, fibromyalgia, and autoimmune encephalitis…etc. and

5. Symptomatic treatment.

This is a comprehensive protocol to address all aspects of the pathology of the chronic LD. In my practice I found that it is a more effective way to treat LD especially chronic LD. Only when the immune function normalized, the body becomes healthier, then under the help of anti-infection substances we can eradicate the infection much more effectively. I will explain every sections of this protocol in following posts.

Lack of Sensitive and Accurate Tests to Diagnose, Monitor, and Determine the End-Point of Treatment for LD

In the real world practice the treatment of chronic LD has one more difficulty that is lack of accurate and sensitive tests that can correctly diagnose and monitor the Lyme infections. There is no test that is reliable enough to show the real infectious status of the patient. It is difficult to evaluate the treatment responds and to determine the endpoint of the treatment. What we can do is only rely on symptomatic evaluation, but it is subjective.

Nowadays the commonly used diagnostic tests are testing the serum antibodies level of the patient that can only tell whether the patient had contracted the pathogens before; it can’t tell whether the pathogens are still there in the body or the amount of the pathogens are there. There are some methods such as PCR test to detect and measure the DNA of pathogens or to culture the pathogens in a culture dish, those tests not only very expensive and takes long time to have results but also have very low sensitivity that can make a lot of fouls negative results. They are not reliable too. Thus to evaluate the efficacy of treatment is almost impossible. The only way we can use is to record the symptom changes, but it does not produce quantitative figures and the data collected is not subjective and convincing. We are badly needing accurate and sensitive tests to be developed to enable an accurate diagnose and evaluation of the Lyme disease during treatment course and to be able to determine the endpoint of the treatment objectively.

Dilemma of Conventional Medicine in the Care of Chronic LD

In the care of chronic LD, conventional medicine which mainly relies on antibiotics (ABXs) has some difficulties:

a. LD needs long term treatment, but ABXs are not designed for long term use. To use for a few weeks is fine, not for months or years. Long term use ABXs makes more harm than good. Long term use ABX causes flora disturbance in the gut which can badly affect general health of the patient.

b. LD is multiple-pathogen co-infections, but most ABXs are useful for bacterial infections; it cannot treat none-bacterial co-infections, such as protozoa, virus, etc.

c. ABXs are made from fungus long term use can cause yeast overgrowing, which created new complications, such as candidiasis.

d. LD involved the central nerve system ABXs cannot easily go through the blood brain barrier, even by intravenous infusion.

e. ABXs suppress bacteria mainly by destroying the cellular wall, once the bacteria shed off the cellular wall become cyst form ABXs will not work well.

f. ABXs have been very much abused, and germs developing resistance to them is common, such as MRSA and MARCoNS.

g. ABXs only address the etiology, the infection, of the LD; it does not address pathogenesis caused complications, immune dysfunctions and deteriorated health status. After the disease has been there for long time the pathogenesis affects often have much deeper influence on the responds to the treatment and prognosis of the disease than the etiological factors.

Therefore, only rely on ABXs is not a solution of chronic LD and it is a dilemma of conventional medicine.

Chronic LD is a Complex Condition that cannot be Resolved in Simple Way

Chronic LD is a very complicated condition: multiple pathogen co-infections, multiple body systems affected, and multiple pathophysiological mechanisms involved, LD caused multiple complications and wild spectrum of symptoms. It is a complexity condition that cannot be resolved by a simple method – sole anti-infection by using antibiotics alone.

For the complex condition of chronic LD, we need Chinese medicine’s multiple-target regulatory treatment strategy. It should consist of anti-infection, immune regulation, general health support, and treatments of complications and symptoms. In Chinese medicine this anti-infection principle is called “Fuzheng Quxie (扶正祛邪),” that can be literally translated as “Support the right and eradicate the evil.” It means “strengthening the vitality and eliminating the pathogenic factors.” MCM believes that fighting off infections mainly rely on the body’s own defense, the immunity, but chronic LD caused the very system dysfunctional, such as immune deficiency, autoimmunity, over-sensitivity, and prolonged extensive inflammation, which not only causes complications but also creates symptoms that make patients sick, at the same time it weakens patient’s defense power.  Long term chronic LD made patients in a sub-health status. If the body is weak, no matter how strong the external interventions (such as the multiple antibiotics used together or even long-term intravenous antibiotics infusion) are the infectious agents cannot be totally eradicated; only the body becomes healthy and immune system function normalized then under the help of the anti-infection treatments we can eradicate the pathogens effectively. This is the believe of MCM that it is the body heals itself not the external intervention. It is internal cause determinism. In comparison, conventional medicine is mainly relied on suppression of the infection by antibiotics, i.e. external intervention.

MCM believes that the job of eradicating the pathogens can only be done by the patients; while conventional medicine tries to do the job for the patients.  Philosophically, these two medicines’ viewpoint on dealing with chronic LD is quite different which leads to different clinical therapeutic methodologies and clinical outcome.

It is chronic LD not post treatment Lyme syndrome

First, I must emphasize that we are dealing with “chronic Lyme disease” not “post treatment Lyme disease syndrome.” The later term tries to say that LD can be resolved within a few weeks with antibiotics treatment and the lingering problem is “post LD” disorder. In the reality the antibiotics alone cannot totally eradicate the multiple pathogens infections of LD within a few weeks. Therefore, the term of “PTLDS” is inaccurate and misleading. 

Lyme disease was nominated due to the first place the disease was discovered, Lyme, Connecticut USA. It does not define the nature of the disease. A more accurate name of this disease is Borreliosis which means it is a bacteria Borrelia burgdorferi infection. But even this name is not exactly representing the real nature of this disease. Because besides the bacteria there are many other pathogens involved in this disease, some are not bacteria, such protozoa and viruses the disease victor the ticks carry and transmit. Therefore, to use a name such as tick-borne disease will be more accurately reflect its nature. It is a multiple pathogen co-infection not a single bacteria infection.

Lyme Disease is a Controversial Topic

I am Dr. Qingcai Zhang, an alternative medicine – modern Chinese medicine, practitioner in New York. I have been using MCM to treat Lyme disease for more than twenty years and treated more than two thousand patients. Now 90% of my patients are LD patients. I published a book “Lyme Disease and Modern Chinese Medicine” in 2006, which was a summary of my research and clinical experiences with LD. Since then, thirteen years have passed and I have treated more LD patients. This blog will share with readers my more recent thoughts and understanding of LD, especially chronic LD.

LD, especially chronic LD, is a controversial topic. The largest infectious disease association of the US does not acknowledge the existence of chronic LD. They think Lyme infections can be eradicated with a few weeks of antibiotic treatment. They deny the existence of chronic LD , and instead call the lingering problem of chronic LD patients “post treatment LD syndrome.” Another group of LD literate doctors recognize the existence of chronic LD, but they want to use long term antibiotics. The previous group said that long term use of antibiotics causes more harm than good. Those arguments make patients wonder what the right choice is.

I do not belong to either of these groups, and hope to explain why MCM is possibly a better approach for treating complex LD, especially chronic LD. There is also some disagreement as to what LD actually is, and I will share my thoughts about it in the next post.


These posts of this blog is for information only. It is not intended for diagnose or treatment of any diseases. If you have health concern, please consult with a qualified professional.

Using Modern Chinese Medicine’s Multiple-Target Regulatory Treatment for Chronic Lyme Disease

About Dr. Zhang
Upon graduation from Shanghai Second Medical University in 1962, Dr. Qingcai Zhang worked as a physician in a teaching hospital, The Reijing Hospital of the Shanghai Second Medical University in Shanghai, China, and doing clinical and research work to integrate Chinese and Western medicine. He was an associate professor of medicine at the medical university.
In 1980, he was awarded a World Health Organization scholarship, which supported his two-year fellowship in Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital. In 1984 he worked as a research fellow at the Wakai Clinic in Nagoya, Japan. A year later, he received a one-year appointment from the University of California at Davis as a visiting professor.
Since 1986, Dr. Zhang has been the primary researcher at the Oriental Healing Arts Institute in Long Beach, Calif., where he conducted research on treating AIDS with Chinese medicine, designed herbal formulas for AIDS patients, and published two books on AIDS and Chinese medicine.
He started his private practice in 1990, first in Cypress, California, and then moved to New York City in 1992. He is the founder of Zhang’s Clinic in New York City and White Plains, New York. Since 1987, he has been focusing on treating chronic viral diseases with modern Chinese herbal medicine, such as viral hepatitis and AIDS, infectious diseases, such as Lyme Disease and autoimmune diseases, such as inflammatory bowel diseases, psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis. 

Books published: <AIDS and Chinese Medicine: Applications of the Oldest Medicine to the Newest Disease>, <Compound Q – Trichosanthin And Its Clinical Applications>, <Healing Hepatitis C with Modern Chinese Medicine>, and <Lyme Disease and Modern Chinese Medcine>.

— Oscar Wilde.

This is the first post on my new blog. I’m just getting this new blog going, so stay tuned for more. Subscribe below to get notified when I post new updates.

The Role of Chinese Medicine in the Prevention and Control of New Coronary (Covid 19) Pneumonia

A news report of 4/24/2020

Official media for the first time revealed: Western medicine group mortality rate is 10 times the Chinese medicine group! On April 24th, Ren Min reported that “The Seminar on the Role and Heritage Innovation and Development of Chinese Medicine in the Prevention and Control of Covid 19 Pneumonia” was held in Shanghai. The high-spec academic seminar, which opened the first shot to defend the Chinese medicine’s right to explain the prevention and treatment of new Covid 19 pneumonia, revealed for the first time that the mortality rate of the Western medical treated group was 10 times that of the Chinese medicine treated group.

Many of the guests were well-known experts in the Chinese medicine. The meeting in the form of the main venue and the venue video link, invited those who participated first-line anti-epidemic clinical work academician, medical experts Zhang Boli, Huang luqi, Tong Xiaolin, Jiang Hualiang made a keynote speech. President Xu Jianguang of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, President Hu Gang of Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, President Chen Zhong of Zhejiang University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, scientific research institutes of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and experts and scholars of Chinese and Western medicine in universities of Shanghai and other places participated in the seminar. Secretary Huang of the Shanghai Municipal Health and Health Commission delivered a speech, and Yu Wenming, Director of the State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, attended and spoke. At the meeting, academician Zhang Boli said, don’t forget Chinese medicine, when the pandemic is over.

At the meeting, academician Tong Xiaolin introduced a set of comparative data. There were 1476 patients hospitalized in Wuhan Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine Hospital, of which 662 were in serious and critical illness status. Among them 484 cases treated with Chinese medicine decoctions and 178 cases in the non-Chinese medicine treatment group. There were 15 deaths in the Chinese medicine group and 56 deaths in the non-Chinese medicine group. He said that the risk of death decreased by 87.7% in the Chinese herbal soup group, which showed clear statistical significance.

Some hospitals now have consciously applied Chinese medicine in treating the Covid 19 infections. Beijing Xiaotangshan Hospital treatment it mainly based on Chinese medicine. Shanghai City issued Chinese medicine for all the confirmed patients who enter to the city. Suifenhe City treats all mild, serious and critical patients of Covid 19 puemonia with traditional Chinese medicine. Wuhan’s rehabilitation hospitals are using traditional Chinese medicine to promote recovery of Covid 19 infected patients. It is lamentable that if Wuhan did the same at the beginning, how good it would be!

The experience of treating the plague has been verified for thousands of years of Chinese medicine, why do we have to verify again to go to the main battlefield? The data revealed at this seminar and the living reality of the past few months once again fully illustrate: “It is urgent to increase the proportion of Chinese medicine in the national medical resources.” This is the right choice to be more responsible for the lives of patients and to deal with the medical problems of the 21st century.

Author Ren Ming,  

Article Source: Instinctive System Medicine

Translated and edited by  QC Zhang