Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Z'ev, This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining the authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind as well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry needling " . 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths do, but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all the while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is extremely powerful. So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and empirical prevention and treatment. K Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe wrote: John, What do you mean by integrated health care? On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence how > the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we need > to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and 80's and > 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated > medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > > K Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 John, I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > Z'ev, > This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining the > authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind as > well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > needling " . > 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths do, > but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all the > while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > extremely powerful. > > So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > empirical prevention and treatment. > > K > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe wrote: > > > > John, > What do you mean by integrated health care? > > > On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > >> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence how >> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we need >> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and 80's > and >> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated >> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. >> >> K > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Zev, I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in opposition? We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use Oswestery neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Chinese Medicine zrosenbe Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? John, I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > Z'ev, > This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining the > authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind as > well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > needling " . > 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths do, > but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all the > while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > extremely powerful. > > So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > empirical prevention and treatment. > > K > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe wrote: > > > > John, > What do you mean by integrated health care? > > > On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > >> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence how >> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we need >> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and 80's > and >> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated >> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. >> >> K > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Mike, In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are practicing Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of pulse, questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, I just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a more advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure out what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > Zev, > > I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in opposition? We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use Oswestery neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? > > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > > > > Chinese Medicine > zrosenbe > Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John, > > I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . > > > > > > On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > > > >> Z'ev, > >> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > >> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining the > >> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind as > >> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > >> needling " . > >> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > >> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths do, > >> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all the > >> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > >> extremely powerful. > >> > >> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > >> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > >> empirical prevention and treatment. > >> > >> K > >> > >> > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> John, > >> What do you mean by integrated health care? > >> > >> > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > >> > >>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence how > >>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we need > >>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and 80's > >> and > >>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated > >>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > >>> > >>> K > >> > >> > >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Agreed. Is your program emphasizing any abdominal palpation (appendix, hernia), listening to bowel, lung and heart sounds? Curious, as these are part of internal medicine as is taking blood pressure. I would rather see us as having enough info to act as go between (having enough medical knowledge to refer and communicate as well as track progress) for said referral then say having the MD's giving advice on acupuncture. I see integration as a necessity for our survival and do not expect many positive acupuncture referrals or recommendations from the uneducated medical establishment. I hope you understand my concerns. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Chinese Medicine zrosenbe Thu, 29 Apr 2010 08:03:04 -0700 Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? Mike, In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are practicing Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of pulse, questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, I just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a more advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure out what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > Zev, > > I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in opposition? We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use Oswestery neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? > > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > > > > Chinese Medicine > zrosenbe > Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John, > > I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . > > > > > > On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > > > >> Z'ev, > >> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > >> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining the > >> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind as > >> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > >> needling " . > >> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > >> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths do, > >> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all the > >> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > >> extremely powerful. > >> > >> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > >> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > >> empirical prevention and treatment. > >> > >> K > >> > >> > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> John, > >> What do you mean by integrated health care? > >> > >> > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > >> > >>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence how > >>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we need > >>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and 80's > >> and > >>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated > >>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > >>> > >>> K > >> > >> > >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Hmmm... this brings up an interesting discussion about specializations and since we really don't have specializations " board licensed " in Chinese medicine here in the US, where should we go with this? ABORM is a certification for gynecology, Fred Lerner and others do orthopedic certifications. These are steeped in bio-medicine. Should we have " board licensed " specializations available? Since most people come to us for pain, it seems that orthopedic tests should be taught in more depth in TCM colleges. Most schools have a class in this available as an elective and then people take Richard Tan's or Tung's points CEUs when they get out to deal with the treatment of pain. Pulse taking practice is also neglected and there are a few CEU courses for this as well, but pulse taking and physical exam for pain management both seem essential for our practices. Thoughts? K On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:03 AM, <zrosenbewrote: > > > Mike, > In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as > orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are practicing > Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of pulse, > questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, I > just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the > emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a more > advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure out > what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. > > > > On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > > > > Zev, > > > > I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your > influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in opposition? > We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of > biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for > more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better > communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use Oswestery > neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show > this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? > > > > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > > > > > > > > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > > zrosenbe <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com> > > Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 > > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John, > > > > I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of > 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to > medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine > and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with > biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese > medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > >> Z'ev, > > > >> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > > > >> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining > the > > > >> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind > as > > > >> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > > > >> needling " . > > > >> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > > > >> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths > do, > > > >> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all > the > > > >> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > > > >> extremely powerful. > > > >> > > > >> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > > > >> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > > > >> empirical prevention and treatment. > > > >> > > > >> K > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Sent from my iPhone > > > >> > > > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe<zrosenbe%40san.rr.com>> > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> John, > > > >> What do you mean by integrated health care? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence > how > > > >>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we > need > > > >>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and > 80's > > > >> and > > > >>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated > > > >>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > > > >>> > > > >>> K > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > > > >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > > > >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Of course I understand these concerns. I am not 'against' biomedical specialties as part of our training, it really depends on the emphasis of one's practice. But my concern is that the in-depth knowledge based that can only be gained by study of the classical CM curriculum is being bypassed, and that it will become a minority practice or disappear. As John pointed out, many of the speciality trainings are largely biomedically based. True 'integration' will only come when Chinese medicine is respected equally by other medical professionals, especially biomedical, and for that to happen, M.D.'s and nurses will need to study Chinese medicine. The basis of integration at this point remains biomedicine and modern science. Everything is being judged by these criteria. On Apr 29, 2010, at 8:20 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > Agreed. Is your program emphasizing any abdominal palpation (appendix, hernia), listening to bowel, lung and heart sounds? Curious, as these are part of internal medicine as is taking blood pressure. I would rather see us as having enough info to act as go between (having enough medical knowledge to refer and communicate as well as track progress) for said referral then say having the MD's giving advice on acupuncture. I see integration as a necessity for our survival and do not expect many positive acupuncture referrals or recommendations from the uneducated medical establishment. I hope you understand my concerns. > > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > > > > Chinese Medicine > zrosenbe > Thu, 29 Apr 2010 08:03:04 -0700 > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are practicing Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of pulse, questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, I just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a more advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure out what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. > > > > > > On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > > >> > >> Zev, > >> > >> I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in opposition? We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use Oswestery neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? > >> > >> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > >> > >> > >> > >> Chinese Medicine > >> zrosenbe > >> Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 > >> Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> John, > >> > >> I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Z'ev, > >> > >>> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > >> > >>> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining the > >> > >>> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind as > >> > >>> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > >> > >>> needling " . > >> > >>> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > >> > >>> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths do, > >> > >>> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all the > >> > >>> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > >> > >>> extremely powerful. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > >> > >>> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > >> > >>> empirical prevention and treatment. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> K > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >>> > >> > >>> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe wrote: > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> John, > >> > >>> What do you mean by integrated health care? > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > >> > >>> > >> > >>>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence how > >> > >>>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we need > >> > >>>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and 80's > >> > >>> and > >> > >>>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated > >> > >>>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> K > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > >> > >>> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > >> > >>> San Diego, Ca. 92122 > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Basic information, to participate as a primary care physician, is not a specialty and should not be looked at in that way. I think that all LAc's should have this basic knowledge, otherwise it is hard to see us as physicians or doctors if you like that name better. Legislators want to see a certain level as well. That is the world we live in. On the other hand, I also think we can learn a lot more about our history and the classical texts. As for specializations, I like the idea of learning but find our interpretation of them skewed and do not support them. I find it another chaotic event in an already overly confused profession. I agree that we do need to have more focus on pain and musculo-skeletal problems, as this is what most patients see us for and our profession does not deal with well. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Medicine > johnkokko > Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:22:58 -0500 > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > Hmmm... this brings up an interesting discussion about specializations and > since we really don't have specializations " board licensed " in Chinese > medicine here in the US, where should we go with this? > > ABORM is a certification for gynecology, Fred Lerner and others do > orthopedic certifications. These are steeped in bio-medicine. Should we > have " board licensed " specializations available? > > Since most people come to us for pain, it seems that orthopedic tests should > be taught in more depth in TCM colleges. Most schools have a class in this > available as an elective and then people take Richard Tan's or Tung's points > CEUs when they get out to deal with the treatment of pain. > > Pulse taking practice is also neglected and there are a few CEU courses for > this as well, but pulse taking and physical exam for pain management both > seem essential for our practices. > > Thoughts? > > K > > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:03 AM, <zrosenbewrote: > > > > > > > Mike, > > In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as > > orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are practicing > > Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of pulse, > > questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, I > > just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the > > emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a more > > advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure out > > what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. > > > > > > > > On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > > > > > > > Zev, > > > > > > I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your > > influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in opposition? > > We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of > > biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for > > more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better > > communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use Oswestery > > neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show > > this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? > > > > > > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > > > zrosenbe <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com> > > > Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 > > > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John, > > > > > > I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of > > 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to > > medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine > > and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with > > biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying Chinese > > medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Z'ev, > > > > > >> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > > > > > >> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining > > the > > > > > >> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we mind > > as > > > > > >> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > > > > > >> needling " . > > > > > >> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners with > > > > > >> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths > > do, > > > > > >> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, all > > the > > > > > >> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > > > > > >> extremely powerful. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > > > > > >> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > > > > > >> empirical prevention and treatment. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> K > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Sent from my iPhone > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, <zrosenbe<zrosenbe%40san.rr.com>> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> John, > > > > > >> What do you mean by integrated health care? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also influence > > how > > > > > >>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we > > need > > > > > >>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and > > 80's > > > > > >> and > > > > > >>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of integrated > > > > > >>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> K > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > > > > > >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > > > > > >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 Physical examination is taught in Western Physical Assessment. Is there a specific TCM type of physical examination? As for pulses, that just takes years of practice, feeling peoples' pulses in the clinic. There's no substitute for that. - " " <johnkokko <Chinese Medicine > Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:22 AM Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > Hmmm... this brings up an interesting discussion about specializations and > since we really don't have specializations " board licensed " in Chinese > medicine here in the US, where should we go with this? > > ABORM is a certification for gynecology, Fred Lerner and others do > orthopedic certifications. These are steeped in bio-medicine. Should we > have " board licensed " specializations available? > > Since most people come to us for pain, it seems that orthopedic tests > should > be taught in more depth in TCM colleges. Most schools have a class in > this > available as an elective and then people take Richard Tan's or Tung's > points > CEUs when they get out to deal with the treatment of pain. > > Pulse taking practice is also neglected and there are a few CEU courses > for > this as well, but pulse taking and physical exam for pain management both > seem essential for our practices. > > Thoughts? > > K > > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:03 AM, > <zrosenbewrote: > >> >> >> Mike, >> In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as >> orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are >> practicing >> Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of pulse, >> questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, >> I >> just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the >> emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a more >> advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure >> out >> what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. >> >> >> >> On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: >> >> > >> > Zev, >> > >> > I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your >> influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in >> opposition? >> We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of >> biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need for >> more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better >> communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use >> Oswestery >> neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show >> this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? >> > >> > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc >> > >> > >> > >> > To: >> > Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> >> > zrosenbe <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com> >> > Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 >> > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > John, >> > >> > I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of >> 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to >> medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern biomedicine >> and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with >> biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying >> Chinese >> medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >> Z'ev, >> > >> >> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, >> > >> >> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining >> the >> > >> >> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we >> >> mind >> as >> > >> >> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry >> > >> >> needling " . >> > >> >> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners >> >> with >> > >> >> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as allopaths >> do, >> > >> >> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, >> >> all >> the >> > >> >> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is >> > >> >> extremely powerful. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science >> > >> >> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and >> > >> >> empirical prevention and treatment. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> K >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> > >> >> >> > >> >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, >> >> <zrosenbe<zrosenbe%40san.rr.com>> >> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> John, >> > >> >> What do you mean by integrated health care? >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also >> >>> influence >> how >> > >> >>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we >> need >> > >> >>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and >> 80's >> > >> >> and >> > >> >>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of >> >>> integrated >> > >> >>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> K >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine >> > >> >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine >> > >> >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2010 Report Share Posted April 29, 2010 There are ways to assess and treat movement and postural issues using sinew meridian info and treating via sinew meridians. I have to take issue, though, with the idea that most people come to acupuncture for orthopedic issues and treatment of pain. I have a small practice at this point, but that certainly isn't the case for me. And I'm not saying that we should downplay the importance of treating pain, but by our education in CM or TCM, I think we've all been taught that treating pain is just treating the symptom and we want to do more whenever possible - treat the root, in other words. RA On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Mercurius Trismegistus < magisterium_magnum wrote: > > > Physical examination is taught in Western Physical Assessment. Is there a > specific TCM type of physical examination? As for pulses, that just takes > years of practice, feeling peoples' pulses in the clinic. There's no > substitute for that. > > > - > " " <johnkokko <johnkokko%40gmail.com>> > To: <Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yah\ oogroups.com> > > > Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:22 AM > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > > > Hmmm... this brings up an interesting discussion about specializations > and > > since we really don't have specializations " board licensed " in Chinese > > medicine here in the US, where should we go with this? > > > > ABORM is a certification for gynecology, Fred Lerner and others do > > orthopedic certifications. These are steeped in bio-medicine. Should we > > have " board licensed " specializations available? > > > > Since most people come to us for pain, it seems that orthopedic tests > > should > > be taught in more depth in TCM colleges. Most schools have a class in > > this > > available as an elective and then people take Richard Tan's or Tung's > > points > > CEUs when they get out to deal with the treatment of pain. > > > > Pulse taking practice is also neglected and there are a few CEU courses > > for > > this as well, but pulse taking and physical exam for pain management both > > seem essential for our practices. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > K > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:03 AM, > > <zrosenbe <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com>>wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Mike, > >> In my opinion, you are getting into the area of specialties, such as > >> orthopedic exam. Of course this stuff is valuable, but if you are > >> practicing > >> Chinese internal medicine, who has time to do such tests on top of > pulse, > >> questioning, tongue, palpation, etc.? If I need this kind of stuff done, > > >> I > >> just refer out. I have no problem with biomedical courses, it is the > >> emphasis on same over the depth of knowledge necessary to practice a > more > >> advanced form of Chinese medicine. As you point out, we need to figure > >> out > >> what is appropriate biomedical courses and level of understanding. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:47 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > Zev, > >> > > >> > I do not mean to put you on the spot but how do you perceive your > >> influence in this arena when the school appears to be pushing in > >> opposition? > >> We have not had much discussion as to what is an acceptable amount of > >> biomedical understanding. I think we need both and I see a large need > for > >> more medical understanding, for objectivity of results and better > >> communication/understanding with others as well as billing. We use > >> Oswestery > >> neck and lower back questionnaires as well as ortho-neuro exams to show > >> this. Are you saying our profession should not do this? > >> > > >> > Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > To: > >> > Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > <Chinese Medicine%40> > >> > zrosenbe <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com> <zrosenbe% > 40san.rr.com> > >> > Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:05 -0700 > >> > Re: Re: Degrees : What is integrated? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > John, > >> > > >> > I agree with you on all points. But the present understanding of > >> 'integrative' seems to be politically motivated, i.e. an approach to > >> medicine dominated by and approved (or disapproved) by modern > biomedicine > >> and scientific studies. It will be hard to stand on equal ground with > >> biomedical professionals until there is sincere interest in studying > >> Chinese > >> medicine with the dedication, rigor and respect it deserves. . > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:03 PM, wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> Z'ev, > >> > > >> >> This is a long discussion, but to mention a couple of points, > >> > > >> >> 1. I think that our foundation should be from the classics, retaining > >> the > >> > > >> >> authenticity and integrity of the medicine. If we give this up, we > >> >> mind > >> as > >> > > >> >> well be MDs practicing " medical acupuncture " or PTs practicing " dry > >> > > >> >> needling " . > >> > > >> >> 2. We need to integrate more fully with other medical practitioners > >> >> with > >> > > >> >> the patient's benefit in mind, not diagnosing or treating as > allopaths > >> do, > >> > > >> >> but able to communicate with them and understand what they're doing, > >> >> all > >> the > >> > > >> >> while, still using our own tools, which Nguyen Van Nghi reminds us is > >> > > >> >> extremely powerful. > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> So that integrated means ancient with contemporary, art-science > >> > > >> >> intuitive and intellectual, practical and theoretical, ethical and > >> > > >> >> empirical prevention and treatment. > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> K > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 10:52 AM, > >> >> <zrosenbe <zrosenbe%40san.rr.com><zrosenbe%40san.rr.com>> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> John, > >> > > >> >> What do you mean by integrated health care? > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:16 AM, wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >>> Does it matter what people think? Certainly.. This will also > >> >>> influence > >> how > >> > > >> >>> the medical establishment perceives us. Like I've written before, we > >> need > >> > > >> >>> to evolve away from the 70's acupuncturist of rebellious mystic and > >> 80's > >> > > >> >> and > >> > > >> >>> 90's spa-type treatments model to the 21st century model of > >> >>> integrated > >> > > >> >>> medical health care. The FPD is the right direction for that. > >> > > >> >>> > >> > > >> >>> K > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > >> > > >> >> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > >> > > >> >> San Diego, Ca. 92122 > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> 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.