Guest guest Posted November 26, 2004 Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 Hi all, I'm afraid its my duty to report a abuse of a member of this group. The member Manu Hamlin has been recently reporting the unification articles on this group. Unfortunately, to generate interest in this topic, he impersonated a number of other people, Stephen and Kenneth in order to fabricate interest. I caught him, confronted him and asked him to report himself to the group, he chose not to. He was acting on behalf of the publishers of Dr Lee's new book Lee Chongwi Press, who reluctantly allowed him to initiate his actions. After reading some of the posts sent by Manu, the publishers were upset with the level of academic argument and level of pose. The publishers have now asked me to set in and stop Manu's degeneration of their authors work. I have removed Manu from the group. In order to save some academic understanding of Dr Lee's work, the publisher has sought a short Q & A list from Dr Lee himself on his work, see below. If anyone wishes to discuss this, please contact me off list. Thank you. Attilio. Dr Lee's Q & A statement: Q: The main purpose of the book. A: The main purpose of the book is to breakthrough the impasse of unifying modern Western Medicine (W.M.) and Traditional (T.C.M.). The combination of W.M. and T.C.M. has been set up as a principal task for Chinese medical people since the beginning of the People's Republic of China. It has been a hot topic both in China and abroad for last a few decades, however there is a little substantial achievements have been made except for some technical development such as T.C.M. with modern technology. The unification of W.M. and T.C.M. in regards to technology is only one of the three parts of the unification, the other two are theoretical unification and thinking mode (logic). Without the last two there will be no unification, only T.C.M. can be used by W.M., eventually T.C.M. will be eliminated by W.M. To save T.C.M. and rescue the W.M. from too many 'side-effects', it is important to unify W.M. and T.C.M. from all these three areas. This book is step to step (c! hapter to chapter) to analyse their common features and differences, at last concluding with three basic laws that make W.M. and T.C.M. naturally unified without incompatibility. One person can only contribute an idea of initiating the breakthrough of medicine by a book, but to achieve the medical revolution cannot happen without the collective effort of the people from country to country. One of the most important purposes of this book is to unite all the people who are interested either in saving T.C.M. from modern societies or in unification of W.M. and T.C.M. together, to achieve a better medicine for mankind. The non-profitable academic organization - Register of Synergetic Medicine International Inc. (RSMI) was established for this purpose. Q: Will T.C.M. & W.M. be equal? A: W.M. and T.C.M. in all the western counties are not equal now, this is the fact. Even in China before 1949, National Government, at one stage, tried to stop T.C.M. practice in China due to it contradicted to W.M. and modern science, this was a fact too. According to the way of the so called combination of the two medicines is going now, T.C.M. will be sacrificed to W.M. i.e. partially contribute to W.M. but actually being faded out from medical history, this will be the fact of near future if we do not do something immediately. Q: Will this then become a singular medicine? (They are worried this will destroy T.C.M.) A: Yes, Synergetic Medicine is a singular medicine, it is neither W.M. nor T.C.M. it is the unification of the two medicines. Details see the book Chapter V., 5.1, The criteria for the unification of modern Western Medicine and Traditional . 'The new medicine, which is the product of the unification of W.M. and T.C.M., has to meet all the above criteria. Neither W.M. nor T.C.M. can have any fundamental change in thinking modes or theories, because any change of this kind might disadvantage one of the medicines. Leaving out the merits of a current medicine to form a new medicine is entirely against the purpose of unification of W.M. and T.C.M. But this does not mean that once the new medicine is formed, it will be perfect and cannot be improved. A science or technology can always be improved. The improvements will be made in the future through developments in medical science and technology. But this is not the present purpose of the unification of W.M. and T.C! .M. " the book, P. 279 " '. Q: How is Dr Lee's approach different to the current approach to unification? A: The current approach is from technical aspects, this is the least confusing area due to both treating objects are the same, i.e. human health problems. However, this book believes to unify the two medicines cannot just look within the two medicines, it has to look from both medical historical and a philosophical view as well. Q; Will T.C.M. be Watered Down? A: No. It will not be allowed, otherwise it will violet the criteria of the unification being set up in the book. Q: What is the main point of changing the terminology, and what will change and why? A: Although changing the terminology is not the major task of the book, but it is a long overdue task for T.C.M. to collect. At the beginning of translation of W.M. and T.C.M., people did not realize a convenient translation would cause so much confusion later on. For example, a T.C.M. doctor diagnoses a patient having kidney deficiency, but a W.M. doctor after all the tests might say the same patient has no kidney problem at all. This clinical contradiction can cause a fatal problem. Any new science, if it cannot find an existing word suitable for describing it has to make a new one, e.g. in computer science. To avoid confusion, a different system often has to have its own vocabulary. What T.C.M. calls kidney is not the exact kidney of anatomical body parts. If it is not, why call it kidney. It is confusing to name two different objects with a single name. The purpose of changing terminology either is for avoiding confusion (e.g. the lung related hair and skin) or for easy comprehension (e.g. tai yin, shao yang) by a person who has grown up with western culture and education. If it is not necessary, a traditional terminology will not be changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2004 Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 Fascinating turn of events; it all seems so obvious now. I am just sorry I wasted so much time on Manu and his ramblings despite my suspicions of there being more (or less) to his postings that met the eye. Good catch Attilio and a thankyou to Dr. Lee for setting some things straight. Best Wishes, Steve On 27/11/2004, at 4:49 AM, Attilio D'Alberto wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm afraid its my duty to report a abuse of a member of this group. > > The member Manu Hamlin has been recently reporting the unification > articles > on this group. Unfortunately, to generate interest in this topic, he > impersonated a number of other people, Stephen and Kenneth in order to > fabricate interest. I caught him, confronted him and asked him to > report > himself to the group, he chose not to. > > He was acting on behalf of the publishers of Dr Lee's new book Lee > Chongwi > Press, who reluctantly allowed him to initiate his actions. After > reading > some of the posts sent by Manu, the publishers were upset with the > level of > academic argument and level of pose. The publishers have now asked me > to set > in and stop Manu's degeneration of their authors work. I have removed > Manu > from the group. > > In order to save some academic understanding of Dr Lee's work, the > publisher > has sought a short Q & A list from Dr Lee himself on his work, see below. > > If anyone wishes to discuss this, please contact me off list. Thank > you. > Attilio. > > Dr Lee's Q & A statement: > > Q: The main purpose of the book. > > A: The main purpose of the book is to breakthrough the impasse of > unifying > modern Western Medicine (W.M.) and Traditional > (T.C.M.). > The combination of W.M. and T.C.M. has been set up as a principal task > for > Chinese medical people since the beginning of the People's Republic of > China. It has been a hot topic both in China and abroad for last a few > decades, however there is a little substantial achievements have been > made > except for some technical development such as T.C.M. with modern > technology. > The unification of W.M. and T.C.M. in regards to technology is only > one of > the three parts of the unification, the other two are theoretical > unification and thinking mode (logic). Without the last two there will > be no > unification, only T.C.M. can be used by W.M., eventually T.C.M. will be > eliminated by W.M. To save T.C.M. and rescue the W.M. from too many > 'side-effects', it is important to unify W.M. and T.C.M. from all these > three areas. This book is step to step (c! hapter to chapter) to > analyse > their common features and differences, at last concluding with three > basic > laws that make W.M. and T.C.M. naturally unified without > incompatibility. > > One person can only contribute an idea of initiating the breakthrough > of > medicine by a book, but to achieve the medical revolution cannot happen > without the collective effort of the people from country to country. > One of > the most important purposes of this book is to unite all the people > who are > interested either in saving T.C.M. from modern societies or in > unification > of W.M. and T.C.M. together, to achieve a better medicine for mankind. > The > non-profitable academic organization - Register of Synergetic Medicine > International Inc. (RSMI) was established for this purpose. > > Q: Will T.C.M. & W.M. be equal? > > A: W.M. and T.C.M. in all the western counties are not equal now, this > is > the fact. Even in China before 1949, National Government, at one stage, > tried to stop T.C.M. practice in China due to it contradicted to W.M. > and > modern science, this was a fact too. According to the way of the so > called > combination of the two medicines is going now, T.C.M. will be > sacrificed to > W.M. i.e. partially contribute to W.M. but actually being faded out > from > medical history, this will be the fact of near future if we do not do > something immediately. > > Q: Will this then become a singular medicine? (They are worried this > will > destroy T.C.M.) > > A: Yes, Synergetic Medicine is a singular medicine, it is neither W.M. > nor > T.C.M. it is the unification of the two medicines. Details see the book > Chapter V., 5.1, The criteria for the unification of modern Western > Medicine > and Traditional . 'The new medicine, which is the > product of > the unification of W.M. and T.C.M., has to meet all the above criteria. > Neither W.M. nor T.C.M. can have any fundamental change in thinking > modes or > theories, because any change of this kind might disadvantage one of the > medicines. Leaving out the merits of a current medicine to form a new > medicine is entirely against the purpose of unification of W.M. and > T.C.M. > But this does not mean that once the new medicine is formed, it will be > perfect and cannot be improved. A science or technology can always be > improved. The improvements will be made in the future through > developments > in medical science and technology. But this is not the present purpose > of > the unification of W.M. and T.C! .M. " the book, P. 279 " '. > > Q: How is Dr Lee's approach different to the current approach to > unification? > > A: The current approach is from technical aspects, this is the least > confusing area due to both treating objects are the same, i.e. human > health > problems. However, this book believes to unify the two medicines > cannot just > look within the two medicines, it has to look from both medical > historical > and a philosophical view as well. > > Q; Will T.C.M. be Watered Down? > > A: No. It will not be allowed, otherwise it will violet the criteria > of the > unification being set up in the book. > > Q: What is the main point of changing the terminology, and what will > change > and why? > > A: Although changing the terminology is not the major task of the > book, but > it is a long overdue task for T.C.M. to collect. At the beginning of > translation of W.M. and T.C.M., people did not realize a convenient > translation would cause so much confusion later on. For example, a > T.C.M. > doctor diagnoses a patient having kidney deficiency, but a W.M. doctor > after > all the tests might say the same patient has no kidney problem at all. > This > clinical contradiction can cause a fatal problem. Any new science, if > it > cannot find an existing word suitable for describing it has to make a > new > one, e.g. in computer science. To avoid confusion, a different system > often > has to have its own vocabulary. What T.C.M. calls kidney is not the > exact > kidney of anatomical body parts. If it is not, why call it kidney. It > is > confusing to name two different objects with a single name. > > The purpose of changing terminology either is for avoiding confusion > (e.g. > the lung related hair and skin) or for easy comprehension (e.g. tai > yin, > shao yang) by a person who has grown up with western culture and > education. > If it is not necessary, a traditional terminology will not be changed. > chinese_medicine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 > A: Yes, Synergetic Medicine is a singular medicine, it is neither W.M. nor T.C.M. it is the unification of the two medicines. … As Dr. Lee notes, this impetus to arrive at a single system is a characteristic of modern Chinese thought, applied to medicine since the earliest days of modern TCM. In contrast, as Dr. Unschuld portrays in great historical detail (in " Was ist Medizin? " ), a plurality of medical systems, which each have their own effectiveness, is a hallmark of Western tradition. This is not unlike the spirit of the European Union. That's not to say that Western-rooted international big pharma isn't aiming to create a global monopoly on medicine. But, although, absolutistic empires in the West are not unknown, they have always had a limited life-span. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.