consensus statement

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/23/01 2:14:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes:

 

 

 

I have decided to write a brief consensus statement. I will allow until January 7 for people to address their approval, objections and suggestions. Then I will send the final statement to the CCAOM.

 

Please include ACAOM as well.

 

Will

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/23/01 3:06:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes:

 

 

Are they the accreditation commision?

 

Yes

[Guest guest]

I have decided to write a brief consensus statement. I will allow

until January 7 for people to address their approval, objections and suggestions.

Then I will send the final statement to the CCAOM.

The 500 members of Chinese Herbal Medicine, representing traditions

of China, Europe, Japan, Taiwan and Korea, agree and declare:

1. The term oriental is considered pejorative and/or meaningless

by the vast majority of the asian american community and mainstream academia

and should not be used to identify our doctoral level training. It

is considered offensive by a large segment of our potential clientele and

may have adverse economic impact on our profession.

2. The term chinese medicine accurately describes the practice

of acupuncture and chinese herbology in any culture where it has taken

root outside of china and even outside of Asia. Chinese medicine

and TCM are also both terms that are familiar and reassuring to the public.

3. Koreans, vietnamese and japanese all refer to their traditional

systems of medicine using variations on the term chinese medicine thus

noting the common foundations of these diverse practices. For example,

the Japanese term kanpo means "medicine of the han (chinese) people"

4. Traditional East Asian medicine is a term that encompasses

the various asian countries that have developed forms of chinese medicine

and is also the term that has been adopted by mainstream academia to describe

these practices. However this term is unfamiliar to the public and

has never been used to describe the clinical practice of american licensed

acupuncturists. It also fails to identify that all such medicine

is derived from China.

5. We thus strongly oppose the proposed title of DAOM for the

doctoral degree and recommend instead consideration of titles such as DTCM

or DCM.

 

-- ,

 

 

FAX:

 

[Guest guest]

, WMorris116@A... wrote:

 

>

> Please include ACAOM as well.

>

> Will

 

Are they the accreditation commision?

[Guest guest]

 

This statement should be sent to all our big organizations with AOM

in their titles, e.g. NCCAOM et al. It is a very well composed statement.

I have nothing to add or change. Thank you, Z'ev, Jim,

and everyone who helped move this forward.

Frances

 

I have decided to write a brief consensus statement.

I will allow until January 7 for people to address their approval, objections

and suggestions. Then I will send the final statement to the

CCAOM.

The 500 members of Chinese Herbal Medicine, representing traditions

of China, Europe, Japan, Taiwan and Korea, agree and declare:

1. The term oriental is considered pejorative and/or meaningless

by the vast majority of the asian american community and mainstream academia

and should not be used to identify our doctoral level training. It

is considered offensive by a large segment of our potential clientele and

may have adverse economic impact on our profession.

2. The term chinese medicine accurately describes the practice

of acupuncture and chinese herbology in any culture where it has taken

root outside of china and even outside of Asia. Chinese medicine

and TCM are also both terms that are familiar and reassuring to the public.

3. Koreans, vietnamese and japanese all refer to their traditional

systems of medicine using variations on the term chinese medicine thus

noting the common foundations of these diverse practices. For example,

the Japanese term kanpo means "medicine of the han (chinese) people"

4. Traditional East Asian medicine is a term that encompasses

the various asian countries that have developed forms of chinese medicine

and is also the term that has been adopted by mainstream academia to describe

these practices. However this term is unfamiliar to the public and

has never been used to describe the clinical practice of american licensed

acupuncturists. It also fails to identify that all such medicine

is derived from China.

5. We thus strongly oppose the proposed title of DAOM for the

doctoral degree and recommend instead consideration of titles such as DTCM

or DCM.

 

-- ,

 

 

FAX:

 

 

Chinese 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.

 

 

[Guest guest]

At 2:12 PM -0800 12/23/01,

>4. Traditional East Asian medicine is a term that encompasses the

>various asian countries that have developed forms of chinese

>medicine and is also the term that has been adopted by mainstream

>academia to describe these practices. However this term is

>unfamiliar to the public and has never been used to describe the

>clinical practice of american licensed acupuncturists. It also

>fails to identify that all such medicine is derived from China.

>

>5. We thus strongly oppose the proposed title of DAOM for the

>doctoral degree and recommend instead consideration of titles such

>as DTCM or DCM.

--

 

does this mean we are about to become a force to be reckoned with?

 

I offer a couple of amendments to the statement:

 

4. last sentence: It also fails to identify that all such medicine is

derived from China, while at the same time failing to acknowledge

that some of the developments come for outside East Asia.

 

5. not DTCM; it would be controversial within the community, and

refers to only a part of the whole. We could use DrCM.

 

Rory

--

[Guest guest]

, Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...> wrote:

 

> --

>

> does this mean we are about to become a force to be reckoned with?

 

Well if you can't have money, you might as well have power, right?

 

 

 

>

> I offer a couple of amendments to the statement:

>

 

I'll revise after taking more comments. thanks

 

 

[Guest guest]

I agree with this consensus statement 100%, and also agree with (Rory?)

that some elements may object to the dTcm logo, so perhaps we should

leave it at DCM.

 

 

On Sunday, December 23, 2001, at 02:12 PM,

 

> I have decided to write a brief consensus statement.  I will allow

> until January 7 for people to address their approval, objections and

> suggestions.  Then I will send the final statement  to the CCAOM.

>

> The 500 members of Chinese Herbal Medicine, representing traditions of

> China, Europe, Japan, Taiwan and Korea, agree and declare:

>

> 1.  The term oriental is considered pejorative and/or meaningless by

> the vast majority of the asian american community and mainstream

> academia and should not be used to identify our doctoral level

> training.  It is considered offensive by a large segment of our

> potential clientele and may have adverse economic impact on our

> profession.

>

> 2.  The term chinese medicine accurately describes the practice of

> acupuncture and chinese herbology in any culture where it has taken

> root outside of china and even outside of Asia.  Chinese medicine and

> TCM are also both terms that are familiar and reassuring to the public.

>

> 3.  Koreans, vietnamese and japanese all refer to their traditional

> systems of medicine using variations on the term chinese medicine thus

> noting the common foundations of these diverse practices.  For example,

> the Japanese term kanpo means " medicine of the han (chinese) people "

>

> 4.  Traditional East Asian medicine is a term that encompasses the

> various asian countries that have developed forms of chinese medicine

> and is also the term that has been adopted by mainstream academia to

> describe these practices.  However this term is unfamiliar to the

> public and has never been used to describe the clinical practice of

> american licensed acupuncturists.  It also fails to identify that all

> such medicine is derived from China.

>

> 5.  We thus strongly oppose the proposed title of DAOM for the doctoral

> degree and recommend instead consideration of titles such as DTCM or

> DCM.

>  

>

> --

> Chinese Herbs

>

> FAX: 

>

 

>

>

> Chinese 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.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Rory Kerr wrote:

 

> 5. not DTCM; it would be controversial within the community, and

> refers to only a part of the whole. We could use DrCM.

 

I don't think that the " T " is the controversial part, I think that we

all agree on the " traditional " part.

 

Z'ev added:

 

> I agree with this consensus statement 100%, and also agree with (Rory?) that

some elements may

object to the dTcm logo, so perhaps we should leave it at DCM.

 

I don't get it, what's the problem with the " T " ?

 

--

Al Stone L.Ac.

<AlStone

http://www.BeyondWellBeing.com

 

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

[Guest guest]

, Al Stone <alstone@b...> wrote:

 

> I don't get it, what's the problem with the " T " ?

 

It depends on whether your tea is pre-mao or post-mao....Fernando

[Guest guest]

On Monday, December 24, 2001, at 11:00 AM, Al Stone wrote:

>

>

> Z'ev added:

>

> > I agree with this consensus statement 100%, and also agree with

> (Rory?) that some elements may

> object to the dTcm logo, so perhaps we should leave it at DCM.

>

> I don't get it, what's the problem with the " T " ?

>

> --

 

Al,

Almost anyone who is trained as an herbalist has no problem with the

TCM logo. However, those trained primarily as acupuncturists, especially

those who practice Japanese and Worsley variants of Nan Jing 5 phase

traditions define TCM as the pattern differentiation style of medicine

that uses acupuncture according to herbal theory. I believe these

practitioners have no problem in seeing themselves as under the umbrella

of Chinese medical theory, but not practicing TCM as is standard in the

PRC today.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Well, I don't want what I do to be confused with chiropractic. I think

that removing the " T " (leaving it as DCM) confuses the issue between

what we do and what chiros do, especially in the mind of the uninitiated

i.e. consumers!

 

wrote:

>

> On Monday, December 24, 2001, at 11:00 AM, Al Stone wrote:

>

> Z'ev added:

>

> > I agree with this consensus statement 100%, and also agree with (Rory?)

that some elements may

> object to the dTcm logo, so perhaps we should leave it at DCM.

>

> I don't get it, what's the problem with the " T " ?

>

> --

> I believe these practitioners have no problem in seeing themselves as under

the umbrella of Chinese medical theory, but not practicing TCM as is standard in

the PRC today.

 

 

 

--

Al Stone L.Ac.

<AlStone

http://www.BeyondWellBeing.com

 

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

[Guest guest]

All,

 

In the lightning speed of CHA posts and the

evolution of consensus, this may appear somewhat

stale to some. My apologies. I've been on a

train from Chengdu to Beijing for the past

couple days and am just now catching up with

cyber realities.

 

I always worry about consensus, however, and

before Todd's Jan. 7 deadline expires, I'd

like to submit the following for your consideration.

 

from Chapter 44 of the Dao De Jing:

 

Your name or your self,

which is more valuable?

 

-----------------------

 

The importance of language is nowhere more evident

than in the naming of things. The recent spate of

posts prompted by concerns over what we are going to

call our new degree, and more fundamentally what

we should call the subject that we study and purvey

in the clinic, in books, and in courses, suggests

that we consider a number of aspects of this important

subject.

 

With respect to whether or not Oriental is pejorative.

Yes. The pejorative use of a word is adequate to confer

the label. Such pejorative usage tends to depend upon

and therefore to reflect various kinds of prejudices

on the part of those who use them. As prejudices change

the status of words changes. Nor is the status of a word

necessarily the same for all who use it. Words can become

so charged with such changing values that from time

to time they become forbidden for some yet mandatory

for others. Such distinctions tend to be based upon

underlying social, political, and economic realities and

associations of those who ultimately decide the fate

of words, i.e. the users of the language.

 

As in all successful use of language, the key is understanding.

A not-understood status or a misunderstood status can

be as devastating to understanding as a not understood

or misunderstood definition or meaning.

 

As a writer, I'm always concerned and tend to pick

up my ears when I get whiff of a term that someone

considers or asserts to be politically incorrect

or forbidden as I see it as a step towards a kind

of censorship that is particularly pernicious. I'm

grateful for this thread as it brings back into focus

the issue of what we call ourselves and our subject

as well as degress and other documents that certify

individuals as qualified practitioners of it. It

also shines another light on the question of language

comprehension in general. Certainly it is as important

that we grasp the full meanings of our nomenclature

as that we understand the implications of what we

call those who study and use those words in practice.

 

In fact I think a strong case can be made to support

the assertion that what's in the package, in this case,

is far more important than the lettering on the label.

And speaking once again to the question of pejoratives

and offensive use of language, which is more offensive:

 

the use of a word on pieces of paper with which graduates

and successful exam candidates will cover small portions

of their office walls; or

 

the message sent to all Oriental people by a community

of students, practitioners, and educators who collectively

refuse to include the study of not just the word Oriental

but the whole language and literary tradition that virtually

all Orientals recognize as the mother tongue of their

various traditional approaches to medicine?

 

Again, your name or your substantive self, which is

it going to be?

 

Why do we care about whether or not we offend

Orientals...whoever they may be? Are we concerned

about their delicate sensibilities or our own?

 

The more I think about it, the more it seems that

this may be one of the most important threads we've

talked about in this forum. And if it serves to give

us all an opportunity to inspect some previously

uninspected assumptions and presumptions concerning

various importances and functions of words, it might

be the most productive as well.

 

Anywhere you go throughout the Orient, East Asia,

or whatever you call it, people practicing the

medicine of acupuncture, herbs, massage, qi4 gong1

(of all sorts) along with related modalities including

regulation of diet, lifestyle and even sexual habits,

you will encounter a broad and deep resepct for the

Chinese language and culture that has produced a

traditional transmission on which these subjects

are all based.

 

No, not every doctor of this medicine is a scholar

of these subjects.

 

Yes, one can attain certain competencies without

understanding a word of Chinese.

 

But those who conform to these two conditions are

the exception and not the rule. They are certainly

not the standard makers and bearers...except in

the United States of America, as well as other

Western regions where the subject is relatively

young and undeveloped.

 

Perhaps we are to be forgiven for our youth and

our presumptions. But we should recognize what

we are doing. What we are doing is redefining

what it means to be a doctor of this medicine,

whatever we call it and whatever form or style

we study or practice.

 

Why? What does it matter?

 

If we don't embrace the contents of the subject,

why should we care at all what we call it?

Are we trying to make it look like " the real thing? "

 

Are we striving for accuracy? Do we long

to be sensitive, politically correct folk?

 

Or are we just struggling to figure out

what we can get away with?

 

I don't believe that this is a matter to be left

to school owners, administrators, regulators,

policy makers or any other group that survives

by the assignment of letters and names and that

is principally motivated by political and/or

economic considerations.

 

I think this is a matter of the utmost personal

integrity. Each and every individual who considers

that they represent these various traditions to

their patients, students, or the public at large

should be able to answer Lao Zi's question.

 

Which is more dear: name or body?

 

In considering, debating, and particularly

in coming to consensus, I suggest we keep

the underlying importances in mind.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

The consensus statment is fine by me.

I've been wondering about this issue for a while now, knowing that

Oriental is a pejorative term, yet we've been using it in our

profession. I think it's important for us to find some kind of

consensus and speak up as a group. Being a first generation American

of Armenian descent, I can relate to the vagueness of the term

Oriental. I don't really know what traditional Armenian medicine was,

but interestingly enough, I do know that my grandfather used to do

cupping treatments in the orphanage he ran.

 

Nan