ABSTRACT
Research on the molecular mechanisms controlling circadian rhythm in Western medicine is comparable to the study of a day-night rhythm in Chinese medicine (CM), as also focus on the same life phenomenon. By comparing the two, this paper elaborates on the differences between them in their respective issues of consciousness, ways of thinking, research methods and research results. Relatively speaking, Nobel Prize research has a stronger sense of the problems and concerns about the essence of "what", while CM focuses on "how a thing functions". The former mainly adopts experimental and mathematical methods, while the latter primarily depends on observation and understanding. The natural philosophy and natural science eventually lead to the results and the inevitable, quantitative and qualitative differences. Research on the life rhythm in CM should be proposed, scientific problems should be fully grasped, and research should be carried out with the aid of multidisciplinary new knowledge and new achievements through cross-disciplinary studies. On the basis of clinical epidemiological research and experimental research, a systematic review should be made of the human physiology of CM and the pathological rhythm model to explore the regulatory mechanism of time rhythm and create a new theory of time medicine.