A reply to Chinese medical education

[Guest guest]

, acuman1@a... wrote:

> This must be where we agree to disagree, for I feel this is a

>fallacy perpetrated by those who could never get anything down very

>well clinically, at least if one is to use the same reasoning and

>subjectivity mentioned above. We all feel pretty good about

>ourselves and our choices, don't we? It is others choices we have to

>let go of.

 

 

It's not simply a matter feeling good about our choices, but how we

are going to formally define the practice of Chinese medicine in the

coming decade, and how we present ourselves to the public. To be an

acupuncturist/herblaist, there is an extensive historical precedence

as to the scope of that practice. Incorporating new methods and

information should be done in that context. For example, I look

forward to incorporating some of the ideas from 20th century Western

sciences (complexity and information theory, for example) because

there is, I believe, important epistemological and theoretical

connections between Chinese medicine and these systems of thought

(especially through 5-Phases and Pulse Diagnosis). But those

connections will grow out of the Chinese models.

 

If someone wants to practice homeopathy along with acupuncture and

herbalism, I personally have no problem with their decision, if

they're sufficiently educated in that field. But they shouldn't think

that it is a part of the practice of Chinese medicine. They can wear

as many hats as they want to.

 

 

 

> You are making assumptions here, or showing how deeply you went

>into a subject before giving up on it. I find that many MD's give up

>on OM after their quickie course. Many don't, especially if they

>have decided to go for a cash practice.

> We are talking apples and oranges here. Is it lack of education in

>other modalities or the use of those modalities at all we are

>speaking about?

> David Molony

 

 

 

We're getting to that attitude that Western art came to in the last

half of the twentieth century. " Anything I do is art, because I'm an

artist. " That sort of narcissism didn't make for very much

interesting art; nor does using homeopathic remedies make you a

better practitioner of Chinese medicine.

 

Again, we're speaking about how to define the practice of Chinese

medicine, not what people like to do. I didn't give up on homeopathy

because I didn't go into homeopathy. I didn't think it was

sufficiently interesting, nor similar enough to Chinese medicine.

Although it was fun to sometimes follow the changes in the pulses

when someone took a homeopathic remedy or a Bach flower remedy, there

is quite enough in my own field to keep me occupied.

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/1/00 1:50:38 AM, OMJournal writes:

 

To be an

acupuncturist/herblaist, there is an extensive historical precedence

as to the scope of that practice.

 

<< If someone wants to practice homeopathy along with acupuncture and

herbalism, I personally have no problem with their decision, if

they're sufficiently educated in that field. But they shouldn't think

that it is a part of the practice of Chinese medicine. They can wear

as many hats as they want to. >>

 

If they look at the patient from an OM standpoint diagnostically and decide

on further treatment and prognosis from the same, even though they use other

modalities, it makes it non OM?

Oriental Medicine is a perspective of looking at medicine, at health or the

imbalances leading to disorders. I don't see where it is limited to any

particular view, especially regarding scope. It does indeed have more

historical evidence with what are today taught in our schools as OM

modalities, but to limit it is not necessary or useful.

 

We're getting to that attitude that Western art came to in the last

half of the twentieth century. " Anything I do is art, because I'm an

artist. " That sort of narcissism didn't make for very much

interesting art; nor does using homeopathic remedies make you a

better practitioner of Chinese medicine.

 

Again, we're speaking about how to define the practice of Chinese

medicine, not what people like to do. I didn't give up on homeopathy

because I didn't go into homeopathy. I didn't think it was

sufficiently interesting, nor similar enough to Chinese medicine.

Although it was fun to sometimes follow the changes in the pulses

when someone took a homeopathic remedy or a Bach flower remedy, there

is quite enough in my own field to keep me occupied.

 

Klee or Kooning looks like random brushstrokes to many who are unaware of the

perspective of the field, and may seem like they are saying " anythng I do is

art " , but if the results are there and appreciated by enough people on a

consistent basis, it is indeed art, or perhaps shared consiousness, however

high or low another may deem it. While I may or may not look at homeopathy

itself from an OM perspective, I do look at the results and the reasoning for

using it from an OM perspective, and adjust the other thngs I use

accordingly. For that reason, I consider what I am doing OM.

Perhaps I am not compartmentalizing what OM is as much as I should, but I

just don't look at it as what it isn't, but as what it is and can be.

David Molony

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/1/00 10:14:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

yulong writes:

 

<< If students today were simply taught everthing they must

know in order to grasp the fundamentals of Chinese medicine

they would have no time to even think about other subjects.

>>

Hi,

I think that the word you are looking for is " blinders " . Yes, blinders

will guarantee the purest. Isn't that Communistic? Perfection,....I think

Hitler thought he had the best idea. Perhaps you will find some ideas to

support your movement from our history books.

Blessings,

Joan

[Guest guest]

A few thoughts about Chinese medical education...

 

I lived in China for several years and spent most of

that time studying Chinese medicine there. Although

I'd gone to hone my clinical skills, as I got to know

more I began to understand and appreciate the importance

of other issues that impinge upon the effort to acquire

competence in this field.

 

If you look at the table of contents of our book, you

will find an outline of these issues. In short, I came to

see that in order to study Chinese medicine, one must

build a foundation of understanding a number of interrealted

subjects. For those who do not understand the Chinese

language, this foundation must include some degree of

familiarity with the language, paying particular attention to

the ways in which the nature of the language and of the

medical terminology shapes and reflects the thinking

of medical theorists and practitioners.

 

I submit that before anyone can or should consider themselves

competent in Chinese medicine they must have such understanding.

If the root is in disorder, there will be no branches, no flowering

only decline and death.

 

Shall we include homeopathy? Shall we make this or that

refinement to our clinical practice? to our curricula? to our

licensing exams? to our professional conduct?

 

What meaning do such questions have in the absence of an

understanding of the most fundamental issues?

 

For those who do not possess such understanding, the first

prerequisite to achieve substantial progress is to recognize

the deficiency and take effective steps to build it up.

 

I believe that a lot of the peculiarities and alloying of other

subjects and practices comes as a response to and an

effort to fill the vacuum left in the education of the bulk of

American trained stuents and practitioners when Chinese

language and Chinese medical literature were omitted from

the early formalizations of the subject here.

 

As a field, we should recognize this mistake and take

effective steps to correct it at once. Continuing business

as usual with such a glaring error fully exposed to view

can only lead to more complicated problems in the

future.

 

If students today were simply taught everthing they must

know in order to grasp the fundamentals of Chinese medicine

they would have no time to even think about other subjects.

 

I agree with Jim's statement that it doesn't just matter

that we feel good about our choices in such matters.

We have to make the right choices, and we have to act

effectively.

 

Ken

 

____________________

" Our most fundamental liberties depend upon the freedom of thought and the

freedom of expression; and you cannot limit either one in any way without

destroying both. "

Thomas Jefferson

-

James Ramholz <OMJournal

 

Wednesday, May 31, 2000 10:48 PM

A reply to Chinese medical education

 

 

> , acuman1@a... wrote:

> > This must be where we agree to disagree, for I feel this is a

> >fallacy perpetrated by those who could never get anything down very

> >well clinically, at least if one is to use the same reasoning and

> >subjectivity mentioned above. We all feel pretty good about

> >ourselves and our choices, don't we? It is others choices we have to

> >let go of.

>

>

> It's not simply a matter feeling good about our choices, but how we

> are going to formally define the practice of Chinese medicine in the

> coming decade, and how we present ourselves to the public. To be an

> acupuncturist/herblaist, there is an extensive historical precedence

> as to the scope of that practice. Incorporating new methods and

> information should be done in that context. For example, I look

> forward to incorporating some of the ideas from 20th century Western

> sciences (complexity and information theory, for example) because

> there is, I believe, important epistemological and theoretical

> connections between Chinese medicine and these systems of thought

> (especially through 5-Phases and Pulse Diagnosis). But those

> connections will grow out of the Chinese models.

>

> If someone wants to practice homeopathy along with acupuncture and

> herbalism, I personally have no problem with their decision, if

> they're sufficiently educated in that field. But they shouldn't think

> that it is a part of the practice of Chinese medicine. They can wear

> as many hats as they want to.

>

>

>

> > You are making assumptions here, or showing how deeply you went

> >into a subject before giving up on it. I find that many MD's give up

> >on OM after their quickie course. Many don't, especially if they

> >have decided to go for a cash practice.

> > We are talking apples and oranges here. Is it lack of education in

> >other modalities or the use of those modalities at all we are

> >speaking about?

> > David Molony

>

>

>

> We're getting to that attitude that Western art came to in the last

> half of the twentieth century. " Anything I do is art, because I'm an

> artist. " That sort of narcissism didn't make for very much

> interesting art; nor does using homeopathic remedies make you a

> better practitioner of Chinese medicine.

>

> Again, we're speaking about how to define the practice of Chinese

> medicine, not what people like to do. I didn't give up on homeopathy

> because I didn't go into homeopathy. I didn't think it was

> sufficiently interesting, nor similar enough to Chinese medicine.

> Although it was fun to sometimes follow the changes in the pulses

> when someone took a homeopathic remedy or a Bach flower remedy, there

> is quite enough in my own field to keep me occupied.

>

> Jim Ramholz

------

> Scrap your search engine.

> Inforocket.com is the fast way to the right answer - guaranteed.

> http://click./1/4517/9/_/542111/_/959838537/

> ------

>

> Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

>

[Guest guest]

Jim,

 

>For example, I look

> forward to incorporating some of the ideas from 20th century Western

> sciences (complexity and information theory, for example) because

> there is, I believe, important epistemological and theoretical

> connections between Chinese medicine and these systems of thought

> (especially through 5-Phases and Pulse Diagnosis). But those

> connections will grow out of the Chinese models.

 

I share your interest in these ideas. Can you expand upon your

remarks here? What are the important connections you see?

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/1/00 1:37:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

zrosenberg writes:

 

<< As a Jew, I resent your use of the Hitler metaphor to compare with the

study of this medicine. Can you be a little more subtle, perhaps? >>

Hello Zev,

And I am German, I hope you will excuse me.

Blessings,

Joan

[Guest guest]

Joan,

Chinese medicine as Ken is talking about has nothing to do with

communism. . .it has to do with classical Chinese literature, not only

medical, but philosophical as well. There is a vast amount of material

that needs to be studied, translated and applied to truly say that we have

access to the full scope of this medical system and healing art. It has

nothing to do with 'blinders'. It has to do with professional competancy,

the responsibility to take care of human life with the utmost care and

compassion.

As a Jew, I resent your use of the Hitler metaphor to compare with the

study of this medicine. Can you be a little more subtle, perhaps?

Especially when your comments completely miss the mark?

 

 

 

 

>In a message dated 6/1/00 10:14:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

>yulong writes:

>

><< If students today were simply taught everthing they must

> know in order to grasp the fundamentals of Chinese medicine

> they would have no time to even think about other subjects.

> >>

>Hi,

> I think that the word you are looking for is " blinders " . Yes, blinders

>will guarantee the purest. Isn't that Communistic? Perfection,....I think

>Hitler thought he had the best idea. Perhaps you will find some ideas to

>support your movement from our history books.

>Blessings,

>Joan

[Guest guest]

Joan,

 

You can call me a Nazi. You can call me a Communist.

You can call me a multi-personality case. But please

don't tell me what word I'm looking for. If there is one

thing that me and my multiple selves can do for ourselves

it's pick the words we wish to use.

 

The point I was making was not that students should be

blindered. I don't believe that students should be blindered.

I was commenting on the sheer bulk of the material that constitutes

the subject of traditional Chinese medicine.

 

It's a lot. A whole lot.

 

It's so much that if it were to be adequately studied most

students would find little time left for other pursuits.

It's not an expression of any idea other than an idea about

the mass of material that has accumulated over 2,000 years

on Chinese medicine.

 

If someone wants to call themselves a practitioner of

Chinese medicine, he or she should be familiar with

this material, no?

 

I frankly do not know if Chinese medicine is the best

idea. I know far too little about absolutely everything

to be able to even contemplate such value judgments.

 

I do know that Chinese medicine is a vast subject and

that if we ever hope to have a sound foundation for

this subject to develop properly in this country we're

going to have to pitch in and work to put various

critical elements into place.

 

The list of these critical elements begins with the

medical literature. If you are currently using someone else's

(i.e. not your own) interpretation of this literature you are

at risk of operating on an extremely limited and probably

faulty understanding.

 

That is the rationale for group intelligence. It surpasses in

some respects what individuals can attain. In fact, it seems

to me that the one best way to safeguard ourselves against

the kinds of tyrannies you evoke is to devote ourselves to

the understanding of the subject.

 

My whole and only point is that it is a big job.

 

Ken

 

 

" Our most fundamental liberties depend upon the freedom of thought and the

freedom of expression; and you cannot limit either one in any way without

destroying both. "

Thomas Jefferson

 

-

<jplane1

 

Thursday, June 01, 2000 10:01 AM

Re: A reply to Chinese medical education

 

 

> In a message dated 6/1/00 10:14:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> yulong writes:

>

> << If students today were simply taught everthing they must

> know in order to grasp the fundamentals of Chinese medicine

> they would have no time to even think about other subjects.

> >>

> Hi,

> I think that the word you are looking for is " blinders " . Yes,

blinders

> will guarantee the purest. Isn't that Communistic? Perfection,....I

think

> Hitler thought he had the best idea. Perhaps you will find some ideas to

> support your movement from our history books.

> Blessings,

> Joan

>

> ------

> fnCentral.com lets you manage your money the easy way - online!

> Control your finances, pay your bills, track your investments...

> fnCentral.com - the Web's first fully integrated personal finance

> manager. Open your FREE account today!

> http://click./1/4648/9/_/542111/_/959878917/

> ------

>

> Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

>

[Guest guest]

Hello,

 

could you please tell me what book you are referring to? Thanks

 

 

Cosmic Dragon LLC wrote:

 

> A few thoughts about Chinese medical education...

>

> I lived in China for several years and spent most of

> that time studying Chinese medicine there. Although

> I'd gone to hone my clinical skills, as I got to know

> more I began to understand and appreciate the importance

> of other issues that impinge upon the effort to acquire

> competence in this field.

>

> If you look at the table of contents of our book, you

> will find an outline of these issues. In short, I came to

> see that in order to study Chinese medicine, one must

> build a foundation of understanding a number of interrealted

> subjects. For those who do not understand the Chinese

> language, this foundation must include some degree of

> familiarity with the language, paying particular attention to

> the ways in which the nature of the language and of the

> medical terminology shapes and reflects the thinking

> of medical theorists and practitioners.

>

> I submit that before anyone can or should consider themselves

> competent in Chinese medicine they must have such understanding.

> If the root is in disorder, there will be no branches, no flowering

> only decline and death.

>

> Shall we include homeopathy? Shall we make this or that

> refinement to our clinical practice? to our curricula? to our

> licensing exams? to our professional conduct?

>

> What meaning do such questions have in the absence of an

> understanding of the most fundamental issues?

>

> For those who do not possess such understanding, the first

> prerequisite to achieve substantial progress is to recognize

> the deficiency and take effective steps to build it up.

>

> I believe that a lot of the peculiarities and alloying of other

> subjects and practices comes as a response to and an

> effort to fill the vacuum left in the education of the bulk of

> American trained stuents and practitioners when Chinese

> language and Chinese medical literature were omitted from

> the early formalizations of the subject here.

>

> As a field, we should recognize this mistake and take

> effective steps to correct it at once. Continuing business

> as usual with such a glaring error fully exposed to view

> can only lead to more complicated problems in the

> future.

>

> If students today were simply taught everthing they must

> know in order to grasp the fundamentals of Chinese medicine

> they would have no time to even think about other subjects.

>

> I agree with Jim's statement that it doesn't just matter

> that we feel good about our choices in such matters.

> We have to make the right choices, and we have to act

> effectively.

>

> Ken

>

> ____________________

> " Our most fundamental liberties depend upon the freedom of thought and the

> freedom of expression; and you cannot limit either one in any way without

> destroying both. "

> Thomas Jefferson

> -

> James Ramholz <OMJournal

>

> Wednesday, May 31, 2000 10:48 PM

> A reply to Chinese medical education

>

> > , acuman1@a... wrote:

> > > This must be where we agree to disagree, for I feel this is a

> > >fallacy perpetrated by those who could never get anything down very

> > >well clinically, at least if one is to use the same reasoning and

> > >subjectivity mentioned above. We all feel pretty good about

> > >ourselves and our choices, don't we? It is others choices we have to

> > >let go of.

> >

> >

> > It's not simply a matter feeling good about our choices, but how we

> > are going to formally define the practice of Chinese medicine in the

> > coming decade, and how we present ourselves to the public. To be an

> > acupuncturist/herblaist, there is an extensive historical precedence

> > as to the scope of that practice. Incorporating new methods and

> > information should be done in that context. For example, I look

> > forward to incorporating some of the ideas from 20th century Western

> > sciences (complexity and information theory, for example) because

> > there is, I believe, important epistemological and theoretical

> > connections between Chinese medicine and these systems of thought

> > (especially through 5-Phases and Pulse Diagnosis). But those

> > connections will grow out of the Chinese models.

> >

> > If someone wants to practice homeopathy along with acupuncture and

> > herbalism, I personally have no problem with their decision, if

> > they're sufficiently educated in that field. But they shouldn't think

> > that it is a part of the practice of Chinese medicine. They can wear

> > as many hats as they want to.

> >

> >

> >

> > > You are making assumptions here, or showing how deeply you went

> > >into a subject before giving up on it. I find that many MD's give up

> > >on OM after their quickie course. Many don't, especially if they

> > >have decided to go for a cash practice.

> > > We are talking apples and oranges here. Is it lack of education in

> > >other modalities or the use of those modalities at all we are

> > >speaking about?

> > > David Molony

> >

> >

> >

> > We're getting to that attitude that Western art came to in the last

> > half of the twentieth century. " Anything I do is art, because I'm an

> > artist. " That sort of narcissism didn't make for very much

> > interesting art; nor does using homeopathic remedies make you a

> > better practitioner of Chinese medicine.

> >

> > Again, we're speaking about how to define the practice of Chinese

> > medicine, not what people like to do. I didn't give up on homeopathy

> > because I didn't go into homeopathy. I didn't think it was

> > sufficiently interesting, nor similar enough to Chinese medicine.

> > Although it was fun to sometimes follow the changes in the pulses

> > when someone took a homeopathic remedy or a Bach flower remedy, there

> > is quite enough in my own field to keep me occupied.

> >

> > Jim Ramholz

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ------

> > Scrap your search engine.

> > Inforocket.com is the fast way to the right answer - guaranteed.

> > http://click./1/4517/9/_/542111/_/959838537/

> > ------

> >

> > Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

> >

>

> ------

> Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.

> http://click./1/4634/9/_/542111/_/959868750/

> ------

>

> Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

 

--

Cecilia Lee

cecilia

[Guest guest]

By Zhang Yu Huan and Ken Rose

 

" Our most fundamental liberties depend upon the freedom of thought and the

freedom of expression; and you cannot limit either one in any way without

destroying both. "

Thomas Jefferson

-

<herb-t

 

Friday, June 02, 2000 9:47 AM

Re: A reply to Chinese medical education

 

 

> , Cecilia Lee <cecilia@n...>

> wrote:

> > Hello,

> >

> > could you please tell me what book you are referring to? Thanks

> >

> >

> >Who Can Ride the Dragon by Ken Rose

>

>

>

> ------

> Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.

> http://click./1/4634/9/_/542111/_/959964469/

> ------

>

> Chronic Diseases Heal - Chinese Herbs Can Help

>