Guest guest Posted September 12, 2001 Report Share Posted September 12, 2001 Alon, , " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote: > The fundamental ingredients of yin1 yang2 > theory, which is the fundamental methodology > employed to fashion virtually al of the > other ingredients of Chinese medicine, > are unknown to most courts of law. > >>>They are not musch more than servo systems and can be explained as such > Alon OK. Please explain. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2001 Report Share Posted September 12, 2001 Stephen, > I believe you are confusing a scientific issue for a legal issue. > Substantiation of yin1 yang2 theory would not likely concern a court of law. Why? I can imagine in a case of pneumothorax, for example, of a hostile attorney or prosecutor wanting a practitioner who had made this mistake to explain just exactly what they thought they were doing by sticking a needle into their client's (or their next of kin) lung. Or, more to the point of herbs, such an attorney could quite conceivably inquire as to what the purported function of a particular ingredient was supposed to be by the practitioner who prescribed it for his or her client. " What were you trying to do, Dr. Morissey, by including this toxic substance in my client's formula? " Anyhow, it's all just a hypothetical discussion, but I don't get what I'm confused about or confusing here. And the point really isn't whether or not anyone ever gets asked for such an explanation. But can one be developed? Some have said yin1 yang2 theory can be easily explained this way or that way. But we're still waiting for those details. > However a licensed practitioner providing a medicinal substance known to > contain unlisted ingredients would very definitely raise liability and > professional judgment issues that comfortably fall within the parameters of > the legal system. > > That said, however, I and others on this list would most likely be more > interested in hearing defenses of yin1 yang2 theory from any unique > perspective. > Not sure what you mean here. Can you explain? Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2001 Report Share Posted September 12, 2001 Servo system are system that are under negative and positive control basically to maintain balance - yulong Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:28 PM Re: Yunnan Pay Yao Restrictions Alon,, "Alon Marcus" <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:> The fundamental ingredients of yin1 yang2> theory, which is the fundamental methodology> employed to fashion virtually al of the> other ingredients of Chinese medicine,> are unknown to most courts of law. > >>>They are not musch more than servo systems and can be explained as such> AlonOK. Please explain.KenChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2001 Report Share Posted September 12, 2001 Why? I can imagine in a case of pneumothorax, forexample, of a hostile attorney or prosecutor wantinga practitioner who had made this mistake to explainjust exactly what they thought they were doing bysticking a needle into their client's (or their nextof kin) lung.>>>>>>I do not think that a pneumo is necessary a mal practice but can be a normal risk of deep acupuncture procedures. A lot will depend on how we frame our techniques and of course the particular jury. Remember MD give pneumos daily and are not subject to malpractice from them. Its a matter of concent and normal (standard of care) risks Alon - yulong Wednesday, September 12, 2001 5:05 PM Re: Yunnan Pay Yao Restrictions Stephen,> I believe you are confusing a scientific issue for a legal issue.> Substantiation of yin1 yang2 theory would not likely concern a court of law.Why? I can imagine in a case of pneumothorax, forexample, of a hostile attorney or prosecutor wantinga practitioner who had made this mistake to explainjust exactly what they thought they were doing bysticking a needle into their client's (or their nextof kin) lung.Or, more to the point of herbs, such an attorney could quite conceivably inquire as to what thepurported function of a particular ingredientwas supposed to be by the practitioner whoprescribed it for his or her client."What were you trying to do, Dr. Morissey,by including this toxic substance in myclient's formula?"Anyhow, it's all just a hypothetical discussion,but I don't get what I'm confused about orconfusing here. And the point really isn'twhether or not anyone ever gets asked forsuch an explanation. But can one be developed?Some have said yin1 yang2 theory can beeasily explained this way or that way.But we're still waiting for those details.> However a licensed practitioner providing a medicinal substance known to> contain unlisted ingredients would very definitely raise liability and> professional judgment issues that comfortably fall within the parameters of> the legal system.> > That said, however, I and others on this list would most likely be more> interested in hearing defenses of yin1 yang2 theory from any unique> perspective.> Not sure what you mean here.Can you explain?KenChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. 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.