Medicine is a noble profession

December 31, 2004

Thousands of MDs throughout the world are leading practitioners of

TCM and other `natural' medical systems – many of the top researchers

in TCM in China, Japan, and other countries are trained in WM as well

as being the recognized authorities in TCM. I would have thought that

most knew this. I was raised in a family of traditional healers

almost all of the new generation of my family are trained in multiple

disciplines.

I am a classically trained (apprentice system) traditional

practitioner. I have studied various aspects of traditional systems

in India, China, Nepal (also Dharmasala India where I studied head

moxa as practiced by the Tibetan's), Thailand, Malaysia, etc. In none

of those cultures did I ever see one person defend uncivil behavior

as appropriate for medical practitioners. In most traditional

societies medical practice is seen as a noble profession (medicine is

a profession no matter what we may say about it) – and physicians are

respected leaders in society. For any physician to take a nonserious

attitude toward their profession would not be understood by the

medical community or the patients. The idea that `professional'

physicians are not healers is not only incorrect it is the opposite

of the fact. EVERY serious physician of accomplishment (those who

actually help their patients or who contribute to the advancement of

medicine as teachers or researchers) that I have ever known or

studied with - are highly professional people and are recognized as

such by their community. Many here have studied medicine in China,

Japan, or other countries I dare say few of their teachers do not see

them selves as `professional healers'. Why practicing with a serious

attitude is seen as `dehumanizing' is not clear as the facts of

traditional medical practice indicate the opposite.

I was invited to join this group and it never entered my mind that

this would be the `wrong spot' for me when I joined. I am 65 years

old and have been practicing medicine for longer than many on this

group have been alive. Perhaps this is the problem – experienced

people do not understand why the discourse of medicine should be

conducted in a slipshod, rude, and destructive manner. The new

generation of practitioners (mainly western practitioners as I have

never noticed this tendency in Asian cultures) somehow see

intellectual interchange as some sort of battlefield of contending

ideas. The young and or inexperienced do not understand that there is

nothing new in their perceptions – millions of people have already

worked through these issues long ago. Like the struggle between TCM

and WM. Most traditional physicians have already solved these

problems in their own minds and gone on to a more intelligent

experience based system. The concept that WM has nothing to offer

traditional systems is just as uninformed as the idea that TCM and

other traditional systems has nothing to offer to WM.

Japan has a system of modern medicine that solves many of these

problems by instituting a system that properly trains and certifies

practitioners so that they might legally integrate various medical

concepts into their practice. Most researchers in Kimpo as an example

have been trained in western research techniques as the government

demands this for the results to be broadly accepted by the many

interested parties. This is an essential step in truly establishing

traditional medicine as a valid and verifiable system of national

health care. The old guarded and self protective methods of the past

are no longer valid. New systems of modern medical certification are

being developed – an ideal system has not arisen as yet but it will –

it will have to. Just as many here are dealing with the issues of

medical insurance classifications and codings – this is an inevitable

part of the issue of integrating various schools of medical practice.

It is a simple fact that society needs a system that protects the

patient as well as the practitioner – the working out of such a

system might be a long and tedious process but a necessary one. I

prefer this system to the wide open system of say India and China –

in those countries regulation of medicines and medical practitioners

is very poor and there are many stories of patients being harmed by

bogus or poisonous medicines – there is much exploitation of the

patient by unscrupulous business people. This is the reason for the

many horror stories one hears concerning poor quality and or

contaminated medicines. It is very difficult for a consumer to know

what they are buying.

Mentioning the subject of poor medical practice – why is it necessary

for any person with a MDs certificate to have to defend the practices

of wrong minded or fraudulent practices of all MDs – there is no

defense for the well known excesses of the WM system. Serious WM

practitioners do not approve of the political or business practices

of their fellow chauvinistic, money hungry practitioners. This is of

course also true in the case of TCM practice which is also full of

bogus political and business practices. We must deal with the facts

of medical practice – good or bad – as we find them – and personally

try to rise above the low level of practice that exists. It seems to

me that to start this process from the perspective of good will

toward others working for the same goals would be a useful place to

proceed from.

In considering these problems – I feel that the issue of the health

of the practitioner must be addressed. Anger, hostility,

argumentativeness, incivility, etc. are disease states and the

practitioner who has these symptoms should look carefully into their

own body and mind and solve the problem (usually upward moving evil

liver wind – in Ayurveda upward moving apana vayu). A healthy person

is not reactionary – this type of reactivity is irrational and non-

productive therefore obviously unhealthy. No person of note in the

history of medicine has ever been known as angry. Anger is a disease

and should be treated TCM has many methods and substances for dealing

with this problem.

December 31, 2004

Vinod,

I am not certain of what you are considering to be rude or

unprofessional behavior. What specific examples are you thinking of?

I, for one, simply disagree with some of your conclusions about

modern vs. traditional medicine. And in your latest post, you give the

example of the regulation of Kampo medicine in Japan as a positive

development. Unfortunately, only M.D.'s can practice Kampo, which

means that practitioners of traditional medicine are completely cut off

in Japan from the use of herbal medicine in their practices. I don't

see how this could be a positive development.

On Dec 31, 2004, at 1:33 PM, vinod3x3 wrote:

>

> Thousands of MDs throughout the world are leading practitioners of

> TCM and other `natural' medical systems – many of the top researchers

> in TCM in China, Japan, and other countries are trained in WM as well

> as being the recognized authorities in TCM. I would have thought that

> most knew this. I was raised in a family of traditional healers

> almost all of the new generation of my family are trained in multiple

> disciplines.

I was invited to join this group and it never entered my mind that

this would be the `wrong spot' for me when I joined. I am 65 years

old and have been practicing medicine for longer than many on this

group have been alive. Perhaps this is the problem – experienced

people do not understand why the discourse of medicine should be

conducted in a slipshod, rude, and destructive manner.

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

December 31, 2004

Z'ev,

I think Vinod has a point about rudeness. In fact I left this forum

previously because I found the destructive behaviour just too gross and

since no one spoke up I assumed I was out of step with the group's norms,

and hence it was no longer a place/space that I wished to experience.

However, it is hard to gauge, as there are over 1,000 list members and only

a fraction of those speak.

One doesn't have to put out another's light in order to shine brighter.

I for one think it is good that in Japan you have to have both

pharmacological training as well as Kampo training for those that choose to

use an OM approach. I think this for two reasons, Kampo goes back to the

SHL which was not the case for TCM use of herbs, as I understand it.

Secondly having both the insight of the chemistry as well as the OM model,

can make for a power practitioner.

Also, by having an acupuncture only license, acupuncture has benefited. As

has massage only license, and moxa only license. There are practitioners

that treat all through blood letting or just cupping. This segregation has

meant that these practitioners have had to take their art/medicine to both

much greater depth and higher ground.

I see the prescription of dubious quality and potentially loaded with

herbicides herbs based on minimal education as a dis-service and dangerous.

I would never prescribe herbs based on my two semesters of herbal study. I

would never prescribe herbs if I had any doubt as to their quality, safety

and efficacy.

Best wishes,

[zrosenbe]

Saturday, 1 January 2005 7:52 AM

Chinese Medicine

Re: Medicine is a noble profession

Vinod,

I am not certain of what you are considering to be rude or

unprofessional behavior. What specific examples are you thinking of?

I, for one, simply disagree with some of your conclusions about

modern vs. traditional medicine. And in your latest post, you give the

example of the regulation of Kampo medicine in Japan as a positive

development. Unfortunately, only M.D.'s can practice Kampo, which

means that practitioners of traditional medicine are completely cut off

in Japan from the use of herbal medicine in their practices. I don't

see how this could be a positive development.

On Dec 31, 2004, at 1:33 PM, vinod3x3 wrote:

>

> Thousands of MDs throughout the world are leading practitioners of

> TCM and other `natural' medical systems – many of the top researchers

> in TCM in China, Japan, and other countries are trained in WM as well

> as being the recognized authorities in TCM. I would have thought that

> most knew this. I was raised in a family of traditional healers

> almost all of the new generation of my family are trained in multiple

> disciplines.

I was invited to join this group and it never entered my mind that

this would be the `wrong spot' for me when I joined. I am 65 years

old and have been practicing medicine for longer than many on this

group have been alive. Perhaps this is the problem – experienced

people do not understand why the discourse of medicine should be

conducted in a slipshod, rude, and destructive manner.

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

December 31, 2004

I have to strongly disagree with you here, Sharon. The basis of the CM

use of herbs is the Shang Han Lun, and you have to study the theory

carefully to practice effectively any form of Chinese herbal medicine.

I know this first hand as a professor of herbal medicine for seventeen

years. Students cannot understand how to prescribe Chinese herbs

without some training in the Shang Han Lun.

Being an MD is no advantage in prescribing Chinese herbs, as MD's do

not necessarily know pharmacology. Pharmacologists do. Certainly, the

more knowledge, the better, but this is not an excuse for forbidding

herbal medicine to professions other than MD's.

An acupuncture-only practitioner can benefit from focusing on one

modality, but any practitioner should have the choice of how they

focus, not a legislated one.

On Dec 31, 2004, at 2:39 PM, Sharon wrote:

>

> I for one think it is good that in Japan you have to have both

> pharmacological training as well as Kampo training for those that

> choose to

> use an OM approach. I think this for two reasons, Kampo goes back to

> the

> SHL which was not the case for TCM use of herbs, as I understand it.

> Secondly having both the insight of the chemistry as well as the OM

> model,

> can make for a power practitioner.

>

> Also, by having an acupuncture only license, acupuncture has

> benefited. As

> has massage only license, and moxa only license. There are

> practitioners

> that treat all through blood letting or just cupping. This

> segregation has

> meant that these practitioners have had to take their art/medicine to

> both

> much greater depth and higher ground.

>

December 31, 2004

Hi all,

I find it amazing that in our 'free' world, so many people are so ready to

silence others. I run this group with the sole aim to have a high level of

freedom of speech for TCM. This sometimes includes disagreements, arguments

which are a normal part of normal life. So long as members don't flame

others, and stay within the topics of discussion then that's all I want. I

don't want to silence others and don't want to create a fake, ultra-happy

little bubble forum where we all smile and never step outside our boundaries

and upset others. Sometimes its good to have an argument, its normal and not

a negative thing. I've tried to please others in the past and now realise

that I can't, so I just try and stick by my own morals, rules and beliefs.

If any members don't like the sometimes 'hot' messages then they can either

delete them or leave the group. In the meantime, I'll continue to run this

group the best way I see fit, which includes polls to see what members want,

so its not a dictatorship and others have suggested. And what's more, I'm

fed up with members taking pop-shots at the way I run this group. If you

think you can do any better then set up your own one. I tell you now, its

alot of hard work, especially if you want it to be the largest and most

active forum such as this group. You never get a break from reading

messages, never get a holiday, to be honest its a bloody nightmare.

On a separate note, I wish everyone a happy New Year and hope that all

members have taken the time to donate money to the earthquake relief in

Asia.

Kind regards

Attilio D'Alberto

Doctor of (Beijing, China)

BSc (Hons) TCM MATCM

07786198900

attiliodalberto

<http://www.attiliodalberto.com/> www.attiliodalberto.com

Sharon []

31 December 2004 22:40

Chinese Medicine

RE: Medicine is a noble profession

Z'ev,

I think Vinod has a point about rudeness. In fact I left this forum

previously because I found the destructive behaviour just too gross and

since no one spoke up I assumed I was out of step with the group's norms,

and hence it was no longer a place/space that I wished to experience.

However, it is hard to gauge, as there are over 1,000 list members and only

a fraction of those speak.

December 31, 2004

If one is to improve, one must first accept that there is a problem. This

has not come easily for the frustrated western TCM profession, who often

have experienced or seen the many inequalities and outright lies perpetuated

as truths. I agree with you that there will be an integrated system of some

kind but do not think it will be with the current limited western medical

views. The US GAO (govt accounting office) had issued a report in the 80's

in which it stated that only about 10-15% of the currently used western

medical treatments had any scientific validity. True science does not

support western medicine, western medicine supports western medicine. It

has become a sort of cultish quasi-scientific religion with financial and

powerful interests. As more and more people fail to get insurance coverage

for healthcare we will see less and less money going into the coffers of the

medical insurance industry. This is a failing economic system. Surgeries

and pharmaceuticals are very expensive and many people cannot afford them.

Economics will change things and the medicine that does not work will be

gone. There is an reason why varous traditional medicines have lasted this

long in our modern sophisticated world without the blessing of big business

or financial lobbyists, it works for many things. Newer ideas will need to

keep low cost, global economy and renewability in mind. Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>vinod3x3

>Chinese Medicine

> Medicine is a noble profession

>Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:33:11 -0000

>

>Thousands of MDs throughout the world are leading practitioners of

>TCM and other `natural' medical systems – many of the top researchers

>in TCM in China, Japan, and other countries are trained in WM as well

>as being the recognized authorities in TCM. I would have thought that

>most knew this. I was raised in a family of traditional healers

>almost all of the new generation of my family are trained in multiple

>disciplines.

>

>I am a classically trained (apprentice system) traditional

>practitioner. I have studied various aspects of traditional systems

>in India, China, Nepal (also Dharmasala India where I studied head

>moxa as practiced by the Tibetan's), Thailand, Malaysia, etc. In none

>of those cultures did I ever see one person defend uncivil behavior

>as appropriate for medical practitioners. In most traditional

>societies medical practice is seen as a noble profession (medicine is

>a profession no matter what we may say about it) – and physicians are

>respected leaders in society. For any physician to take a nonserious

>attitude toward their profession would not be understood by the

>medical community or the patients. The idea that `professional'

>physicians are not healers is not only incorrect it is the opposite

>of the fact. EVERY serious physician of accomplishment (those who

>actually help their patients or who contribute to the advancement of

>medicine as teachers or researchers) that I have ever known or

>studied with - are highly professional people and are recognized as

>such by their community. Many here have studied medicine in China,

>Japan, or other countries I dare say few of their teachers do not see

>them selves as `professional healers'. Why practicing with a serious

>attitude is seen as `dehumanizing' is not clear as the facts of

>traditional medical practice indicate the opposite.

>

>I was invited to join this group and it never entered my mind that

>this would be the `wrong spot' for me when I joined. I am 65 years

>old and have been practicing medicine for longer than many on this

>group have been alive. Perhaps this is the problem – experienced

>people do not understand why the discourse of medicine should be

>conducted in a slipshod, rude, and destructive manner. The new

>generation of practitioners (mainly western practitioners as I have

>never noticed this tendency in Asian cultures) somehow see

>intellectual interchange as some sort of battlefield of contending

>ideas. The young and or inexperienced do not understand that there is

>nothing new in their perceptions – millions of people have already

>worked through these issues long ago. Like the struggle between TCM

>and WM. Most traditional physicians have already solved these

>problems in their own minds and gone on to a more intelligent

>experience based system. The concept that WM has nothing to offer

>traditional systems is just as uninformed as the idea that TCM and

>other traditional systems has nothing to offer to WM.

>

>Japan has a system of modern medicine that solves many of these

>problems by instituting a system that properly trains and certifies

>practitioners so that they might legally integrate various medical

>concepts into their practice. Most researchers in Kimpo as an example

>have been trained in western research techniques as the government

>demands this for the results to be broadly accepted by the many

>interested parties. This is an essential step in truly establishing

>traditional medicine as a valid and verifiable system of national

>health care. The old guarded and self protective methods of the past

>are no longer valid. New systems of modern medical certification are

>being developed – an ideal system has not arisen as yet but it will –

>it will have to. Just as many here are dealing with the issues of

>medical insurance classifications and codings – this is an inevitable

>part of the issue of integrating various schools of medical practice.

>It is a simple fact that society needs a system that protects the

>patient as well as the practitioner – the working out of such a

>system might be a long and tedious process but a necessary one. I

>prefer this system to the wide open system of say India and China –

>in those countries regulation of medicines and medical practitioners

>is very poor and there are many stories of patients being harmed by

>bogus or poisonous medicines – there is much exploitation of the

>patient by unscrupulous business people. This is the reason for the

>many horror stories one hears concerning poor quality and or

>contaminated medicines. It is very difficult for a consumer to know

>what they are buying.

>

>Mentioning the subject of poor medical practice – why is it necessary

>for any person with a MDs certificate to have to defend the practices

>of wrong minded or fraudulent practices of all MDs – there is no

>defense for the well known excesses of the WM system. Serious WM

>practitioners do not approve of the political or business practices

>of their fellow chauvinistic, money hungry practitioners. This is of

>course also true in the case of TCM practice which is also full of

>bogus political and business practices. We must deal with the facts

>of medical practice – good or bad – as we find them – and personally

>try to rise above the low level of practice that exists. It seems to

>me that to start this process from the perspective of good will

>toward others working for the same goals would be a useful place to

>proceed from.

>

>In considering these problems – I feel that the issue of the health

>of the practitioner must be addressed. Anger, hostility,

>argumentativeness, incivility, etc. are disease states and the

>practitioner who has these symptoms should look carefully into their

>own body and mind and solve the problem (usually upward moving evil

>liver wind – in Ayurveda upward moving apana vayu). A healthy person

>is not reactionary – this type of reactivity is irrational and non-

>productive therefore obviously unhealthy. No person of note in the

>history of medicine has ever been known as angry. Anger is a disease

>and should be treated TCM has many methods and substances for dealing

>with this problem.

January 1, 2005

----

mike Bowser

01/01/05 07:45:09

Chinese Medicine

RE: Medicine is a noble profession

The US GAO (govt accounting office) had issued a report in the 80's

in which it stated that only about 10-15% of the currently used western

medical treatments had any scientific validity. True science does not

support western medicine, western medicine supports western medicine.

(Tom) Mike, do you have that report? Or any more recent ones? I would like to

read them; this is pretty intriguing.

January 1, 2005

mike Bowser wrote:

<snip>

> The US GAO (govt accounting office) had issued a report in the 80's

> in which it stated that only about 10-15% of the currently used

> western medical treatments had any scientific validity.

Hi Mike!

Have you a web address for that report?

Regards,

Pete

January 1, 2005

Dear Z'ev,

What you don't know about herbs, perhaps is not worth knowing.

There are many varied understandings of history, the one to which I was

referring is Stephen Birch's in Understanding Acupuncture, p20,21

" ....The Nan Jing is not the only accomplishment of the later Han, .... is

also the period of the first attempt to incorporate herbal pharmacotherapy

into the medicine of systematic correspondence. In 198 Zhang Zhong-jing

wrote the Shang Han Lun (A Discourse on Cold-induced disorders), today

recognized as central to Chinese medical thought on natural drug therapy.

Ironically, Zang Zhong-jing, who is now called 'the greatest physician China

has produced' or 'the Chinese Hippocrates,' would have relatively little

influence on China's traditional medicine for nearly a thousand years.

Although the Shang Han Lun and Zhang Zhong-jing' second seminal work, Jin

Gui Yu Han Yao Lue (Survey of the Most Important Elements from the Golden

Chest and Jade Container) would remain intact for centuries between the Hand

and Song, they would inspire less than 10 Chinese authors to follow their

lead. Indeed, the works seem to have more powerfully influenced Japanese

medicine. This theoretical and and therapeutic approach would have such a

profound effect on Japanese medicine that it still retains a significant

place in modern Japan, particularly in Japanese traditional pharmaceutics.

Only later in the Song-Jin-Yuan period would virtually all the important

Chinese authors adopt the principles expressed in these texts. "

So my comment was merely that Kampo is directly based on SHL and that was

not the case from the beginning of Chinese herbal medicine. If you know a

different history please share it. Those practitioners I know that dispense

herbs tell me they use the Kampo tradition which is different to the TCM

model taught.

Now not being big on herbs, I don't comprehend the difference to which they

are referring, however, they clearly perceive they are using a model in

Kampo that is different.

As far as being an MD and dispensing herbs, I suspect that comes down to

individuals, and to their basic training of which I am unaware. I suspect

that total quality control of herbs is better in Japan than China, given the

separate licensing laws and the fact it is a product of pharmacies, but this

is just a guess and has no foundation on evidence.

Best wishes

[zrosenbe]

Saturday, 1 January 2005 9:05 AM

Chinese Medicine

Re: Medicine is a noble profession

I have to strongly disagree with you here, Sharon. The basis of the CM

use of herbs is the Shang Han Lun, and you have to study the theory

carefully to practice effectively any form of Chinese herbal medicine.

I know this first hand as a professor of herbal medicine for seventeen

years. Students cannot understand how to prescribe Chinese herbs

without some training in the Shang Han Lun.

Being an MD is no advantage in prescribing Chinese herbs, as MD's do

not necessarily know pharmacology. Pharmacologists do. Certainly, the

more knowledge, the better, but this is not an excuse for forbidding

herbal medicine to professions other than MD's.

An acupuncture-only practitioner can benefit from focusing on one

modality, but any practitioner should have the choice of how they

focus, not a legislated one.

On Dec 31, 2004, at 2:39 PM, Sharon wrote:

>

> I for one think it is good that in Japan you have to have both

> pharmacological training as well as Kampo training for those that

> choose to

> use an OM approach. I think this for two reasons, Kampo goes back to

> the

> SHL which was not the case for TCM use of herbs, as I understand it.

> Secondly having both the insight of the chemistry as well as the OM

> model,

> can make for a power practitioner.

>

> Also, by having an acupuncture only license, acupuncture has

> benefited. As

> has massage only license, and moxa only license. There are

> practitioners

> that treat all through blood letting or just cupping. This

> segregation has

> meant that these practitioners have had to take their art/medicine to

> both

> much greater depth and higher ground.

>

January 1, 2005

Chinese Medicine ,

wrote:

>

> > So my comment was merely that Kampo is directly based on SHL and that was

> not the case from the beginning of Chinese herbal medicine. If you know a

> different history please share it. Those practitioners I know that dispense

> herbs tell me they use the Kampo tradition which is different to the TCM

> model taught.

>

The style of Kampo that derives primarily from SHL is actually the newer style,

though it is

called the Old style (Koho-ha). The older style (which is conversely called the

Later style

or Gosei-ha) is based on Song-Jin-Yuan medicine. The Koho style is clearly the

current

majority of practice in Japan, but that has not always been so. TCM is not

without its

adherents in Japan, also.

> Now not being big on herbs, I don't comprehend the difference to which they

> are referring, however, they clearly perceive they are using a model in

> Kampo that is different.

>

TCM praxis is a complex subject and there are certainly a good number of SHL

specialists

in China. It is worth noting that in Japan many MDs who prescribe Kampo learn

it from

books and seminars and few practice it excusively. I think it is fair to say

the standard of

herbalism in China is higher than that in Japan.

robert hayden

January 1, 2005

Chinese Medicine , " "

<zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

>

> Being an MD is no advantage in prescribing Chinese herbs, as MD's do

> not necessarily know pharmacology. Pharmacologists do. Certainly, the

> more knowledge, the better, but this is not an excuse for forbidding

> herbal medicine to professions other than MD's.

>

> An acupuncture-only practitioner can benefit from focusing on one

> modality, but any practitioner should have the choice of how they

> focus, not a legislated one.

>

Pharmacists can also dispense Kampo formulas though they cannot " diagnose " or

" prescribe " -- the legal niceties of which have always escaped me. However,

there are

Japanese non-MD acupuncturists I have met who do practice Kampo by dint of their

pharm

training. Ikeda sensei is probaby the best-known. Also one of Shudo sensei's

senior

students, Nogami sensei. I got to talk a little bit about Kampo with him at a

seminar a few

years back, but not nearly as much as I'd have liked.

rh

January 1, 2005

Attilio:

First of all I would like to thank you for all your hard work in keeping

this forum going. It takes quite a bit of time in my day just to stay

up on it. I do it because some of the messages are extremely helpful to

me. And again, I appreciate your time. I also agree that differing

opinons make for good intellectual examination from which new ideas are

born. I do think that the manner in which people speak to one another

could be a lot more respectful. I opened an email today, started

reading it and I felt like a dart went through my heart, and it wasn't

even directed at me. So just in perusing the email to see if we want to

get involved or delete, I would appreciate more respect in addressing

one another. I am a member of an alumni email group from my school. It

is an unwritten rule that each member is treated with respect. There

are different ideas, and sometimes disagreement. And it is all done with

respect. This is what I am suggesting to make the group better.

Beleive me it is not a critizism of how you are running it. I think

with more respect for one another, the comments you are getting would be

better received.

Anne

Attilio D'Alberto wrote:

> Hi all,

>

> I find it amazing that in our 'free' world, so many people are so ready to

> silence others. I run this group with the sole aim to have a high level of

> freedom of speech for TCM. This sometimes includes disagreements,

> arguments

> which are a normal part of normal life. So long as members don't flame

> others, and stay within the topics of discussion then that's all I want.

And what's more, I'mfed up with members taking pop-shots at the way

I run this group.

>

January 1, 2005

True, but never underestimate the power of the US

lawmakers. They can outlaw any AltMed with the stroke

of a pen. In India, the British basically outlawed the

native medicine via the Indian parliament.

Our stuff IS better, but don't underestimate the

power of the med. establishment. JG HNY

--- mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

>

> If one is to improve, one must first accept that

> there is a problem. This

> has not come easily for the frustrated western TCM

> profession, who often

> have experienced or seen the many inequalities and

> outright lies perpetuated

> as truths. I agree with you that there will be an

> integrated system of some

> kind but do not think it will be with the current

> limited western medical

> views. The US GAO (govt accounting office) had

> issued a report in the 80's

> in which it stated that only about 10-15% of the

> currently used western

> medical treatments had any scientific validity.

> True science does not

> support western medicine, western medicine supports

> western medicine. It

> has become a sort of cultish quasi-scientific

> religion with financial and

> powerful interests. As more and more people fail to

> get insurance coverage

> for healthcare we will see less and less money going

> into the coffers of the

> medical insurance industry. This is a failing

> economic system. Surgeries

> and pharmaceuticals are very expensive and many

> people cannot afford them.

> Economics will change things and the medicine that

> does not work will be

> gone. There is an reason why varous traditional

> medicines have lasted this

> long in our modern sophisticated world without the

> blessing of big business

> or financial lobbyists, it works for many things.

> Newer ideas will need to

> keep low cost, global economy and renewability in

> mind. Later

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

> >vinod3x3

> >

> Chinese Medicine

> >Chinese Medicine

> > Medicine is a noble profession

> >Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:33:11 -0000

> >

> >Thousands of MDs throughout the world are leading

> practitioners of

> >TCM and other `natural' medical systems – many of

> the top researchers

> >in TCM in China, Japan, and other countries are

> trained in WM as well

> >as being the recognized authorities in TCM. I would

> have thought that

> >most knew this. I was raised in a family of

> traditional healers

> >almost all of the new generation of my family are

> trained in multiple

> >disciplines.

> >

> >I am a classically trained (apprentice system)

> traditional

> >practitioner. I have studied various aspects of

> traditional systems

> >in India, China, Nepal (also Dharmasala India where

> I studied head

> >moxa as practiced by the Tibetan's), Thailand,

> Malaysia, etc. In none

> >of those cultures did I ever see one person defend

> uncivil behavior

> >as appropriate for medical practitioners. In most

> traditional

> >societies medical practice is seen as a noble

> profession (medicine is

> >a profession no matter what we may say about it) –

> and physicians are

> >respected leaders in society. For any physician to

> take a nonserious

> >attitude toward their profession would not be

> understood by the

> >medical community or the patients. The idea that

> `professional'

> >physicians are not healers is not only incorrect it

> is the opposite

> >of the fact. EVERY serious physician of

> accomplishment (those who

> >actually help their patients or who contribute to

> the advancement of

> >medicine as teachers or researchers) that I have

> ever known or

> >studied with - are highly professional people and

> are recognized as

> >such by their community. Many here have studied

> medicine in China,

> >Japan, or other countries I dare say few of their

> teachers do not see

> >them selves as `professional healers'. Why

> practicing with a serious

> >attitude is seen as `dehumanizing' is not clear as

> the facts of

> >traditional medical practice indicate the opposite.

> >

> >I was invited to join this group and it never

> entered my mind that

> >this would be the `wrong spot' for me when I

> joined. I am 65 years

> >old and have been practicing medicine for longer

> than many on this

> >group have been alive. Perhaps this is the problem

> – experienced

> >people do not understand why the discourse of

> medicine should be

> >conducted in a slipshod, rude, and destructive

> manner. The new

> >generation of practitioners (mainly western

> practitioners as I have

> >never noticed this tendency in Asian cultures)

> somehow see

> >intellectual interchange as some sort of

> battlefield of contending

> >ideas. The young and or inexperienced do not

> understand that there is

> >nothing new in their perceptions – millions of

> people have already

> >worked through these issues long ago. Like the

> struggle between TCM

> >and WM. Most traditional physicians have already

> solved these

> >problems in their own minds and gone on to a more

> intelligent

> >experience based system. The concept that WM has

> nothing to offer

> >traditional systems is just as uninformed as the

> idea that TCM and

> >other traditional systems has nothing to offer to

> WM.

> >

> >Japan has a system of modern medicine that solves

> many of these

> >problems by instituting a system that properly

> trains and certifies

> >practitioners so that they might legally integrate

> various medical

> >concepts into their practice. Most researchers in

> Kimpo as an example

> >have been trained in western research techniques as

> the government

> >demands this for the results to be broadly accepted

> by the many

> >interested parties. This is an essential step in

> truly establishing

> >traditional medicine as a valid and verifiable

> system of national

> >health care. The old guarded and self protective

> methods of the past

> >are no longer valid. New systems of modern medical

> certification are

> >being developed – an ideal system has not arisen as

> yet but it will –

> >it will have to. Just as many here are dealing with

> the issues of

> >medical insurance classifications and codings –

> this is an inevitable

> >part of the issue of integrating various schools of

> medical practice.

> >It is a simple fact that society needs a system

> that protects the

> >patient as well as the practitioner – the working

> out of such a

> >system might be a long and tedious process but a

> necessary one. I

> >prefer this system to the wide open system of say

> India and China –

> >in those countries regulation of medicines and

> medical practitioners

> >is very poor and there are many stories of patients

> being harmed by

> >bogus or poisonous medicines – there is much

> exploitation of the

> >patient by unscrupulous business people. This is

> the reason for the

> >many horror stories one hears concerning poor

> quality and or

> >contaminated medicines. It is very difficult for a

> consumer to know

> >what they are buying.

> >

> >Mentioning the subject of poor medical practice –

> why is it necessary

> >for any person with a MDs certificate to have to

> defend the practices

> >of wrong minded or fraudulent practices of all MDs

> – there is no

> >defense for the well known excesses of the WM

> system. Serious WM

> >practitioners do not approve of the political or

> business practices

>

=== message truncated ===

The all-new My - Get yours free!

January 1, 2005

Well thanks for clearing that up Robert,

When you say the standard is higher in China, can you explain?

I had been thinking the quality of the herbs might be more uniform in Japan,

is this what you mean?

Best wishes,

kampo36 [kampo36]

Sunday, 2 January 2005 12:59 AM

Chinese Medicine

Re: Medicine is a noble profession

Chinese Medicine ,

wrote:

>

> > So my comment was merely that Kampo is directly based on SHL and that

was

> not the case from the beginning of Chinese herbal medicine. If you know

a

> different history please share it. Those practitioners I know that

dispense

> herbs tell me they use the Kampo tradition which is different to the TCM

> model taught.

>

The style of Kampo that derives primarily from SHL is actually the newer

style, though it is

called the Old style (Koho-ha). The older style (which is conversely

called the Later style

or Gosei-ha) is based on Song-Jin-Yuan medicine. The Koho style is

clearly the current

majority of practice in Japan, but that has not always been so. TCM is

not without its

adherents in Japan, also.

> Now not being big on herbs, I don't comprehend the difference to which

they

> are referring, however, they clearly perceive they are using a model in

> Kampo that is different.

>

TCM praxis is a complex subject and there are certainly a good number of

SHL specialists

in China. It is worth noting that in Japan many MDs who prescribe Kampo

learn it from

books and seminars and few practice it excusively. I think it is fair to

say the standard of

herbalism in China is higher than that in Japan.

robert hayden

http://babel.altavista.com/

and adjust

accordingly.

Please support the running of this group. Make a donation by clicking

here, http://tinyurl.com/4xm7g

----------

--

January 2, 2005

Sharon,

I've read this passage from Paul (Unschuld) and discussed it with him

personally, however Jin-Yuan medicine was eight hundred years ago, and

that's a lot of time for the SHL to be the major influence on Chinese

medicine. Bensky's Formulas and Strategies is over 25% SHL/JGYL

formulas, and many of the others are based on original formulas from

this text. Every TCM college in China and Taiwan has required courses

in the Shang Han Lun as well, and there are hundreds if not thousands

of commentaries and texts based on this work in Chinese.

Kanpo is clearly based on the Shang Han Lun, but also Jin-Yuan

medicine as well. However, the Japanese changed the system somewhat by

adding abdominal patterns, and a uniquely Japanese approach to the

subject.

The point I felt you were making was that the separation of the

herbal medicine and acupuncture professions was somehow a good thing,

but the political restrictions of only allowing M.D.'s to practice

herbal medicine sets a dangerous precedent for practitioners who

specialize in Eastern medicines as opposed to Western medicine.

Western medicine is a very complex, long-term study and practice, and

therefore many of the M.D.'s who practice Kampo take 'short courses'

with symptomatic application of the formulas.

I agree that quality control in Japan is excellent, in fact, a model

for the world. However, they only use extracts, not raw herbs, so the

flexibility of prescriptions may be somewhat limited.

On Dec 31, 2004, at 8:55 PM, Sharon wrote:

>

> Although the Shang Han Lun and Zhang Zhong-jing' second seminal work,

> Jin

> Gui Yu Han Yao Lue (Survey of the Most Important Elements from the

> Golden

> Chest and Jade Container) would remain intact for centuries between

> the Hand

> and Song, they would inspire less than 10 Chinese authors to follow

> their

> lead. Indeed, the works seem to have more powerfully influenced

> Japanese

> medicine. This theoretical and and therapeutic approach would have

> such a

> profound effect on Japanese medicine that it still retains a

> significant

> place in modern Japan, particularly in Japanese traditional

> pharmaceutics.

> Only later in the Song-Jin-Yuan period would virtually all the

> important

> Chinese authors adopt the principles expressed in these texts. "

>

> So my comment was merely that Kampo is directly based on SHL and that

> was

> not the case from the beginning of Chinese herbal medicine. If you

> know a

> different history please share it. Those practitioners I know that

> dispense

> herbs tell me they use the Kampo tradition which is different to the

> TCM

> model taught.

>

January 2, 2005

Robert,

I am very interested in Ikeda sensei's work, one of his students

gave a seminar in San Diego a few years ago I sat in on for a little

while. I know he's organized SHL formulas in a unique style. Do you

know where I can get some of his writings?

Thanks,

On Jan 1, 2005, at 7:09 AM, kampo36 wrote:

>

> Pharmacists can also dispense Kampo formulas though they cannot

> " diagnose " or

> " prescribe " -- the legal niceties of which have always escaped me.

> However, there are

> Japanese non-MD acupuncturists I have met who do practice Kampo by

> dint of their pharm

> training. Ikeda sensei is probaby the best-known. Also one of Shudo

> sensei's senior

> students, Nogami sensei. I got to talk a little bit about Kampo with

> him at a seminar a few

> years back, but not nearly as much as I'd have liked.

>

> rh

>

January 2, 2005

Hi Z'ev,

Z'ev said... The point I felt you were making was that the separation

of the

herbal medicine and acupuncture professions was somehow a good thing,

but the political restrictions of only allowing M.D.'s to practice

herbal medicine sets a dangerous precedent for practitioners who

specialize in Eastern medicines as opposed to Western medicine.

Western medicine is a very complex, long-term study and practice, and

therefore many of the M.D.'s who practice Kampo take 'short courses'

with symptomatic application of the formulas.

Sharon answered... I think this whole area is complex, and will

touch on a few points.

Historically, it was the American General Macarthur who brought the

separate licenses in, in Japan. And that was in the face of great

opposition from the Japanese wm doctors who wanted all acupuncture and herbs

to be given by wm doctors only. So that for one, is a blessing that we

didn't have all branches of OM taken from us.

MD's and Vets historically, treated with herbs and some allopathic Vets I

know still do.

So herbs have been the province of western and eastern healers- a turf

war.

Whoever prescribes herbs should know the following (IMO):

1. The effect on the body

2. The side effects of over dosing

3. The quality of the herbs (including being free from pollutants)

4. An adequate system of diagnosis

I find the lines between allopathic western drug treatment and herbal

treatment blurred. Now bear in mind my limited education on the topic,

which may be were I come unstuck. Such training was based on Bensky and

using selected formulae to treat Zang fu pathologies. Possibly no more

adequate than the short courses of which you speak. Most of the time was

about rote learning traditional details of herbs and western indications and

some general contraindications for pregnant women. Also bear in mind there

are graduates of my course and similar degree courses who are prescribing

herbs to their patients based on this standard of education. (Given that

these subjects were taught by a Chinese practitioner and the school has a

sister school in China).

It would appear that herbalists are prescribing herbs for the person long

term, is this much like allopathic medicine, ie treat the symptoms? If the

cause was being treated wouldn't one stop prescribing the same herbs?

If I am hitting on raw nerves here, perhaps those that are herbalists and

educators could address such issues for the efficacy of the practitioner and

the safety of the patient. Whether the prescriber be wm or om.

Best wishes,

Sharon

--

Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release 30/12/2004

January 2, 2005

Chinese Medicine , " "

<zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> Robert,

> I am very interested in Ikeda sensei's work, one of his students

> gave a seminar in San Diego a few years ago I sat in on for a little

> while. I know he's organized SHL formulas in a unique style. Do you

> know where I can get some of his writings?

>

> Thanks,

>

As it happens, Eastland Press is soon going to offer a translation of Ikeda

sensei's Dento

Shinkyu Chiryo Ho (Traditional Acumoxa Treatment). Dr Bensky graciously let me

have a

look at some of it earlier last year. He's kind of reconciled Meridian Therapy

and the four-

Zang-deficiency-pattern with the SHL, so there's some integration of Kampo with

the

acumoxa. I'm thinking it will be out sometime this year.

In the meantime, Ikeda sensei has been and continues to be a frequent

contributor to

NAJOM, so that is also a good source of his writings in English.

robert

January 2, 2005

Chinese Medicine ,

wrote:

> Well thanks for clearing that up Robert,

> When you say the standard is higher in China, can you explain?

>

> I had been thinking the quality of the herbs might be more uniform in Japan,

> is this what you mean?

> Best wishes,

>

Well, I've heard it posited that the PRC actually exports much of its prime

quality herb yield

to Japan, and that accounts for the apparent discrepancy in Kampo dosing vs TCM

dosing,

which is at a ratio typically somewhere of 1:3 (ie TCM doses of crude herbs

would be some

three or more times higher than the standard Kampo dose). I don't know how true

that is

and I suspect the truth of the dosage issue is a little more complex, but i'm no

expert.

But when i say that the standard of herbalism is higher in China, I mean the

Chinese have

a dedicated profession of herbalists using probably the most sophisticated form

of

diagnosis and treatment of any botanical medicine practice in the history of the

world.

Kampo really just uses a piece of that tradition in a unique -- and very

effective -- way.

But it is difficult to really consider the two as being equal, especially

nowadays when the

Japanese government regulates herbs to the extent that only about 150 unmodified

formulas are used and most prescribers of Kampo in Japan really only use Kampo

as part

of their practice (ie they are part-time herbalists though they are full time

MDs). AFAIK

there is not the same level of training as TCM herbalists get -- long

residencies writing

individualized scripts for hundreds of patients a day at the larger hospitals vs

learning to

prescribe pre-packaged extract formulas through seminars, books and study

groups.

Of course there are brilliant Kampo sensei who practice their art full time and

there are

third-rate hacks in TCM practice but overall I think it's pretty clear that as

far as herbal

medicine goes TCM practice standards are higher than those in Japan. Perhaps if

the

Japanese government didn't regulate the profession so tightly there might be

less of a gap.

Acumoxa therapy is a different matter, of course. I've seen a lot of

acupuncturists with a

lot of training from a lot of different places and as a whole I think that in

terms of just

sheer technical ability the Japanese are by and large the best in the world.

Ikeda sensei for

example is stunning in his technical virtuosity, everything from the most subtle

contact

needling to using thick PRC style needles painlessly on even the most sensitive

points.

Add to that the wide range of moxibustion techniques, the shiraku and other

modalities,

and I think most anyone would be hard-pressed to disagree that the Japanese have

really

raised the level of acupuncture practice in the world.

I however do not hold to such hard and fast opinions on TCM acupuncture as I

used to

since reading for example the work of the late Dr Ni Yitian or selections from

Jason

Robertson's conversations with his teacher Dr Wang Juyi in Beijing. There's

just so much

we in the West don't know about East Asian medicine no matter what the country

of origin.

robert hayden

January 2, 2005

On Jan 1, 2005, at 7:04 PM, Sharon wrote:

>

> Hi Z'ev,

>

> MD's and Vets historically, treated with herbs and some allopathic

> Vets I

> know still do.

>

> So herbs have been the province of western and eastern healers- a

> turf

> war.

The Chinese (and also Ayurvedic and Tibetan) use of herbal medicine is

based on a very complex system of diagnosis and polypharmacy, and

require in-depth training to use. It is different than the more

empirically-oriented approaches to herbal medicine in present use by

many 'western' professionals.

>

> Whoever prescribes herbs should know the following (IMO):

> 1. The effect on the body

> 2. The side effects of over dosing

> 3. The quality of the herbs (including being free from pollutants)

> 4. An adequate system of diagnosis

>

> I find the lines between allopathic western drug treatment and

> herbal

> treatment blurred. Now bear in mind my limited education on the

> topic,

> which may be were I come unstuck. Such training was based on Bensky

> and

> using selected formulae to treat Zang fu pathologies. Possibly no

> more

> adequate than the short courses of which you speak. Most of the time

> was

> about rote learning traditional details of herbs and western

> indications and

> some general contraindications for pregnant women. Also bear in mind

> there

> are graduates of my course and similar degree courses who are

> prescribing

> herbs to their patients based on this standard of education. (Given

> that

> these subjects were taught by a Chinese practitioner and the school

> has a

> sister school in China).

The main different from a physiological point of view between

allopathic and herbal medicine is the use of single medicines for a

single condition as opposed to polypharmacy, the combination of several

crude/natural medicinals in complex, synergistic prescriptions to treat

patterns.

>

> It would appear that herbalists are prescribing herbs for the

> person long

> term, is this much like allopathic medicine, ie treat the symptoms?

> If the

> cause was being treated wouldn't one stop prescribing the same herbs?

It will depend on the condition. One needs to understand time and

timing in these situations. Long-term, entrenched diseases tend to be

more complex and enduring, so longer-term treatment of complex

prescriptions is necessary. Acute, externally-contracted or traumatic

disorders may only need short term treatment.

Some acupuncturists, including the Worsley school, treat patients for

months or years as well. Would you also say this is 'allopathic'

dosing? Of course not. Sometimes it takes time to modify a person's

condition or even constitution through treatment.

January 3, 2005

All I can say is, take a look about what MDs are saying about chiropractic

physicians regarding the new chiropractic college at Florida State

University, and then we can talk about professional behavior. MDs have

clearly stated that they would rather quit than have to rub shoulders with

the likes of me -- while claiming that I and my peers practice some bizarre

form of voodoo witchcraft. That's the behavior of a " noble profession " ?

Vinod, I realize that you are not in the U.S., but the attitude of medical

doctors to chiropractic physicians is international. And what we have dealt

with for the past 105 years is the same bigotry facing acupuncturists in

this country for the past 20 years.

Attilio, please do not interpret this note as WM bashing. It's not intended

to be. But if vinod3x3 claims that medical doctors do not stoop to

name-calling, discrimination and bigotry toward other disciplines, I must

beg to differ.

Avery L. Jenkins, DC, DACBN, FIAMA

Chiropractic Physician

Diplomate, American Clinical Board of Nutrition

Fellow, International Academy of Medical Acupuncture

Kent, CT

www.docaltmed.com

" Life expands and contracts in proportion to one's courage. " -- Anais Nin

-

<vinod3x3

Friday, December 31, 2004 4:33 PM

Medicine is a noble profession

Thousands of MDs throughout the world are leading practitioners of

TCM and other `natural' medical systems - many of the top researchers

in TCM in China, Japan, and other countries are trained in WM as well

as being the recognized authorities in TCM. I would have thought that

most knew this. I was raised in a family of traditional healers

almost all of the new generation of my family are trained in multiple

disciplines.

I am a classically trained (apprentice system) traditional

practitioner. I have studied various aspects of traditional systems

in India, China, Nepal (also Dharmasala India where I studied head

moxa as practiced by the Tibetan's), Thailand, Malaysia, etc. In none

of those cultures did I ever see one person defend uncivil behavior

as appropriate for medical practitioners. In most traditional

societies medical practice is seen as a noble profession (medicine is

a profession no matter what we may say about it) - and physicians are