五疸中惟劳疸、女劳疸多相混，故或去劳疸，入黑疸，以足五疸之数。但劳疸之名旧矣
，《
病源》名劳疸为劳黄，与十种黄并列。其女劳疸则次黄胆、谷疸、酒疸、黑疸之中，是劳疸
属黄，女劳疸属疸，所属不同。《外台》引《集验》、《删繁》皆有疗劳疸之方，用苦参、
龙胆草、栀子三味，以牛胆或猪胆和丸，而与谷疸并列，是劳疸疗与谷疸同，而《近效》云
女劳疸疗与黑疸同，是治法亦不同。二疸为证相似，所异者，劳疸微汗出，手足间热，小便
利，而女劳疸无之；女劳疸发热恶寒，足下热，而劳疸无之。且诊其少腹，但急不满者劳疸
，急而满者女劳疸，此其要诀。自《金匮》劳疸条衍“女”字，而后世遂不知此义矣。详余
所撰《金匮方论注》中。
古今诸家言消渴者不一，要当以《金匮》为正。《金匮》首列厥阴病一条，是渴而不消
；次
列脾约症一条，是消而不渴；次列肾气症一条，是消渴并作。其旨以饮、溲相较，而分为三
，最为简当，犹霍乱之分但吐、但泻、吐泻并作为三也。其言饮一溲一者，乃较其出入之多
寡以出诊法也。推详其意，似有可以饮多溲少、饮少溲多、饮溲相当为三者，亦即就前三者
而引申之也。其兼及能食、便难者，乃旁参他症以为出治地也，并非三消必定如是。后人误
会其旨，所以说歧而义转未备。泉尝即《金匮》以推诸家之言知所谓能饮不能饮，及溲如麸
片、如油，及溲数不数者，皆当作诊法观，不必致辨。总之，但渴者，
有燥、湿两种，五苓、白虎是也；但消者，有虚、实两种，脾约、
肾沥是也。消渴并作者，有寒、热两种，黄连、肾气是也。其方备见唐人书中，但不以兼证
测之，不确也，故诸家云云。
Among the five types of jaundice (Huangdan), only Lao Dan (Jaundice due to overwork) and Nü Lao Dan (Female Jaundice due to sexual excess) are often confused. Therefore, sometimes Lao Dan is omitted and Hei Dan (Black Jaundice) is added to complete the count of five. However, the name "Lao Dan" is ancient. *Zhubing Yuanhou Lun* (Treatise on the Pathogenesis and Symptoms of All Diseases) refers to Lao Dan as "Lao Huang" (Yellow due to overwork), listing it alongside ten types of yellow diseases. In contrast, Nü Lao Dan appears after Huang Dan (Jaundice due to damp-heat), Gu Dan (Grain Jaundice), Jiu Dan (Wine Jaundice), and Hei Dan, indicating that Lao Dan belongs to the category of "Huang" (Yellow), while Nü Lao Dan belongs to the category of "Dan" (Jaundice); their classifications differ. *Waitai Miyao* (Essential Prescriptions Worth a Thousand Gold for Emergencies) cites *Jiyan Fang* and *Shanfan Fang*, both containing prescriptions for treating Lao Dan using Sanmen (Radix Sophorae Flavescentis), Longdancao (Radix Gentianae), and Zhizi (Fructus Gardeniae), formed into pills with ox or pig bile. These are listed alongside Gu Dan, implying that the treatment for Lao Dan is the same as for Gu Dan. Conversely, *Jin Xiao Fang* states that the treatment for Nü Lao Dan is the same as for Hei Dan, implying that their therapeutic methods differ. The presentations of these two conditions are similar; the distinction lies in the fact that Lao Dan presents with slight sweating, heat in the hands and feet, and free urination, which Nü Lao Dan lacks. Nü Lao Dan presents with fever, aversion to cold, and heat in the soles of the feet, which Lao Dan lacks. Furthermore, upon palpating the lower abdomen, if there is tension without fullness, it is Lao Dan; if there is tension with fullness, it is Nü Lao Dan. This is the key diagnostic point. Since the character "Nü" (Female) was appended to the Lao Dan clause in *Jinkui Yaolue* (Essential Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet), later generations have failed to understand this meaning. For details, please refer to my commentary *Jinkui Fanglun Zhu*.
Various scholars throughout history have offered different explanations for Xiaoke (Wasting-Thirst). However, *Jinkui Yaolue* should be regarded as the standard. *Jinkui Yaolue* first lists a clause on Jueyin Disease, characterized by thirst without wasting; next, it lists a clause on Pi Yue (Splee Confinement), characterized by wasting without thirst; and then, it lists a clause on Shen Qi (Kidney Qi) deficiency, characterized by both thirst and wasting. Its main principle is to divide the condition into three categories based on the comparison between fluid intake and urine output, which is concise and appropriate, similar to how Huoluan (Cholera-like disorder) is divided into vomiting only, diarrhea only, and simultaneous vomiting and diarrhea. The statement "one dou of water intake results in one dou of urine output" compares the volume of input and output as a diagnostic method. Inferring its deeper meaning, it seems possible to categorize cases into those with high intake and low output, low intake and high output, and equal intake and output, which is an extension of the previous three categories. The mention of ability to eat and difficulty in defecation serves to reference other symptoms to guide treatment, rather than being definitive characteristics of all three types of Xiaoke. Later generations misunderstood this principle, leading to divergent interpretations and incomplete theories. I once analyzed the statements of various schools based on *Jinkui Yaolue* and concluded that descriptions such as the ability or inability to drink, urine resembling bran or oil, and frequency of urination should all be viewed as diagnostic indicators, not subjects of excessive debate. In summary, cases presenting only with thirst fall into dryness and dampness types, treated with Wuling San (Poria Pill) and Baihu Tang (White Tiger Decoction), respectively. Cases presenting only with wasting fall into deficiency and excess types, treated with Pi Yue Wan (Splee Confinement Pill) and Shen Li Tang (Kidney Drip Decoction), respectively. Cases presenting with both thirst and wasting fall into cold and heat types, treated with Huanglian Ejiao Tang (Coptis and Donkey-Hide Gelatin Decoction) and Shenqi Wan (Kidney Qi Pill), respectively. These formulas are detailed in Tang dynasty texts. Without considering accompanying symptoms, the analysis is inaccurate, hence the plethora of differing opinions among scholars.