Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
May be slightly imbalanced

Article summary:

1. This article examines the history of standardization in the English translation of traditional Chinese medicine terminology.

2. It applies methods of historiography, philology and descriptive study to divide the history of TCM into three phases, based on representative experts and social events.

3. The authors are optimistic that a more comprehensive and recognized standard will come out soon.

Article analysis:

The article is generally reliable and trustworthy, as it provides an overview of the history of standardization in the English translation of traditional Chinese medicine terminology. The authors use methods such as historiography, philology and descriptive study to divide the history into three phases, based on representative experts and social events. They also provide references to support their claims, which adds to its credibility.

However, there are some potential biases in the article that should be noted. For example, it does not explore any counterarguments or present both sides equally; instead it focuses solely on the positive aspects of TCM terminology standardization without considering any potential risks or drawbacks associated with it. Additionally, some claims made in the article are unsupported by evidence or missing points of consideration; for instance, when discussing international standards for TCM terminology they do not mention any specific organizations or initiatives that have been involved in this process.

In conclusion, while this article is generally reliable and trustworthy due to its use of historiography and other methods to discuss TCM terminology standardization, there are some potential biases that should be taken into account when evaluating its trustworthiness and reliability.