Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 When considering where to side on the issue of the importance of chinese language skills to the practice of CM, it strikes me that the standard of judgment being requested is incorrect. It has been asked to present proof that this is truly important. That it will improve one's abilities in the clinic. The proof being begged seems to be quantitative. How many cases has the method been applied to with success. In other words, a quasi scientific analysis. However, debates of this sort might better be settled using the standards of a court of law. What would an impartial third party think of the various arguments. Well, experts need to prove their credibility and give their opinions and then it is evaluated in the context of other evidence or logic. So is it relevant that everyone who has studied chinese finds it of immense, incomparable benefit and the only people who do not think it is important are people who have not studied it? Would a judge put much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any of this. It is a judgment call. -- , FAX: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 Well put. I would only add that there is an enormous amount of quantative evidence in the 2,000 plus years of the survival and transmission of Chinese medicine. We know what works. What we don't know is whether or not what is being done in the States and elsewhere that the language and medical literature are being neglected will work. Again, it's too soon to tell. But certainly anyone who wants to play it safe and do the thing that has been proven, not in a court of law but in the court of history, to succeed can, as Karla so clearly put it the other day, take some relatively painless initial steps to get the process going that eventually leads to understanding Chinese medical Chinese. And if the folks who argue so bitterly against it and shake their fingers at us and tell us to be quiet would spend that time learning one Chinese character each day, well, at the end of a year they'd know 365. Ken , wrote: > When considering where to side on the issue of the importance of chinese > language skills to the practice of CM, it strikes me that the standard > of judgment being requested is incorrect. It has been asked to present > proof that this is truly important. That it will improve one's > abilities in the clinic. The proof being begged seems to be > quantitative. How many cases has the method been applied to with > success. In other words, a quasi scientific analysis. However, debates > of this sort might better be settled using the standards of a court of > law. What would an impartial third party think of the various > arguments. Well, experts need to prove their credibility and give their > opinions and then it is evaluated in the context of other evidence or > logic. So is it relevant that everyone who has studied chinese finds > it of immense, incomparable benefit and the only people who do not think > it is important are people who have not studied it? Would a judge put > much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the > field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit > would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is > of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good > health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to > rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up > to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and > make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any > of this. It is a judgment call. > > -- > Chinese Herbs > > FAX: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 -Would a judge put much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any of this. It is a judgment call >>>>>Todd I dont think anybody thinks it not of benifit Alon cha Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:19 AM judgement When considering where to side on the issue of the importance of chinese language skills to the practice of CM, it strikes me that the standard of judgment being requested is incorrect. It has been asked to present proof that this is truly important. That it will improve one's abilities in the clinic. The proof being begged seems to be quantitative. How many cases has the method been applied to with success. In other words, a quasi scientific analysis. However, debates of this sort might better be settled using the standards of a court of law. What would an impartial third party think of the various arguments. Well, experts need to prove their credibility and give their opinions and then it is evaluated in the context of other evidence or logic. So is it relevant that everyone who has studied chinese finds it of immense, incomparable benefit and the only people who do not think it is important are people who have not studied it? Would a judge put much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any of this. It is a judgment call. -- 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 , " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote: > > -Would a judge put much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any of this. It is a judgment call > >>>>>Todd I dont think anybody thinks it not of benifit > Alon I know you have said you think it may be valuable, but you do not think it is worth the time investment. Analogously, it is the same issue as the one of whether spending the time to learn biomedicine is valuable to one's practice. This is an area where you and I agree and one where the dissenters argue against its importance despite not having any advanced training in the area. So in either case, the only ones who can really make aneducated statement are those who have the knowledge and can thus make an accurate comparison. You have pointed out how vital you think orthopedics is to your practice. Others probably feel they do fine without it. But you know how much it has enhanced your practice and those who dismiss it have no real basis for their opinions. Just as those who do not use lab tests have no basis to dismiss that, either. So everyone may be doing fine with what they know. but how much better could one do? Only those who have taken the time to learn one of these things can ever know their true value. As an example, consider Heiner Fruehauf's explorations into gu syndrome, a concept never mentioned in the english language literature before Fruehauf's JCM article several years back. Now many people find this a useful, even vital framework in their practices, allowing them to get longterm relief from many complaints that never yielded to other therapies. If Heiner did not do this work, we would all have skipped along in ignorance, believing some things were just beyong the scope of TCM. It was chance that led him to this. And we still only have his one article and some supplementary work by Flaws in this area. But if one really wants to pursue this topic, one must learn to read Chinese. Sure, you can wait till someone else writes something more of interest on this topic, but that is leaving it to chance. By reading chinese, one can access the material they actually need for any given case at any time. You don't have to wait and hope that one of the few translators in the field will coincidentally serve your needs. It would be like me saying, too bad I don't know how to read a lab report. Maybe someone will explain it to me someday. till then, I'll just practice what I already know and hope for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 - I would only add that there is an enormousamount of quantative evidence in the 2,000plus years of the survival and transmissionof Chinese medicine. We know what works. >>>>>> To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to predict outcome. Alon dragon90405 Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:30 AM Re: judgement Well put.I would only add that there is an enormousamount of quantative evidence in the 2,000plus years of the survival and transmissionof Chinese medicine. We know what works.What we don't know is whether or not whatis being done in the States and elsewherethat the language and medical literatureare being neglected will work. Again, it's too soon to tell.But certainly anyone who wants to play itsafe and do the thing that has been proven,not in a court of law but in the court ofhistory, to succeed can, as Karla so clearlyput it the other day, take some relativelypainless initial steps to get the processgoing that eventually leads to understandingChinese medical Chinese.And if the folks who argue so bitterly againstit and shake their fingers at us and tellus to be quiet would spend that time learningone Chinese character each day, well, at theend of a year they'd know 365.Ken, wrote:> When considering where to side on the issue of the importance of chinese> language skills to the practice of CM, it strikes me that the standard> of judgment being requested is incorrect. It has been asked to present> proof that this is truly important. That it will improve one's> abilities in the clinic. The proof being begged seems to be> quantitative. How many cases has the method been applied to with> success. In other words, a quasi scientific analysis. However, debates> of this sort might better be settled using the standards of a court of> law. What would an impartial third party think of the various> arguments. Well, experts need to prove their credibility and give their> opinions and then it is evaluated in the context of other evidence or> logic. So is it relevant that everyone who has studied chinese finds> it of immense, incomparable benefit and the only people who do not think> it is important are people who have not studied it? Would a judge put> much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the> field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit> would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is> of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good> health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to> rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up> to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and> make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any> of this. It is a judgment call.> > -- > Chinese Herbs> http://www..org> 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 Alon, While I cannot compare clinical experiences with yours in the sense that I haven't worked in Chinese hospitals, is it possible that the level of training and practice were lacking in some way in your fellow doctors, or that the language barrier made it difficult for them to communicate prognosis? Or that their skills were being stretched in the hospital setting? My experience is different than yours when it comes to prognosis and Chinese medicine. On Thursday, January 17, 2002, at 01:11 PM, Alon Marcus wrote: > > > - I would only add that there is an enormous > amount of quantative evidence in the 2,000 > plus years of the survival and transmission > of Chinese medicine. We know what works. > > >>>>>> > To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody > that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical > mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to > predict outcome. > Alon > > > dragon90405 > > Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:30 AM > Re: judgement > > > > Well put. > > I would only add that there is an enormous > amount of quantative evidence in the 2,000 > plus years of the survival and transmission > of Chinese medicine. We know what works. > > What we don't know is whether or not what > is being done in the States and elsewhere > that the language and medical literature > are being neglected will work. Again, it's > too soon to tell. > > But certainly anyone who wants to play it > safe and do the thing that has been proven, > not in a court of law but in the court of > history, to succeed can, as Karla so clearly > put it the other day, take some relatively > painless initial steps to get the process > going that eventually leads to understanding > Chinese medical Chinese. > > And if the folks who argue so bitterly against > it and shake their fingers at us and tell > us to be quiet would spend that time learning > one Chinese character each day, well, at the > end of a year they'd know 365. > > Ken > > , wrote: > > When considering where to side on the issue of the importance of > chinese > > language skills to the practice of CM, it strikes me that the > standard > > of judgment being requested is incorrect. It has been asked to > present > > proof that this is truly important. That it will improve one's > > abilities in the clinic. The proof being begged seems to be > > quantitative. How many cases has the method been applied to with > > success. In other words, a quasi scientific analysis. However, > debates > > of this sort might better be settled using the standards of a court > of > > law. What would an impartial third party think of the various > > arguments. Well, experts need to prove their credibility and give > their > > opinions and then it is evaluated in the context of other evidence > or > > logic. So is it relevant that everyone who has studied chinese > finds > > it of immense, incomparable benefit and the only people who do not > think > > it is important are people who have not studied it? Would a judge > put > > much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in > the > > field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit > > would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai > ji is > > of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good > > health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have > to > > rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it > is up > > to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and > > make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove > any > > of this. It is a judgment call. > > > > -- > > 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. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 Alon > To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to predict outcome. I am speaking here of what works as a medium for the successful transmission of Chinese medicine from one generation and from one area to the next. Everywhere that there has been a successful transmission of Chinese medicine to another cultural zone over the past several centuries, this transmission has included Chinese language materials. Now we in the West have been trying for a few decades to get things rolling more or less without these materials. I say it is too soon to tell because in places like Japan, Korea, Vietnam, etc. where the medicine was successfully synthesized with local traditions and a variant of Chinese medicine emerged, this took place long enough ago that we can look at the survival of the subject and its related application in the clinics of those countries as evidence that using Chinese works. It has also worked, by the way, as a successful medium for the movement ideas from these other areas and cultures back into the Chinese zone. There are important summaries of Chinese medicine that have been written by Korean and Japanese doctors, for example. There is, as of the present, not enough experience and data available to assess whether or not the no-Chinese approach really will prove itself to be workable. Believe me I am aware of the limitations that emerge in Chinese hospitals when it comes to dealing with the chaos of large populations of sick people. But I suggest that a good deal of this kind of chaos is inseparable from the wholesale practice of medicine anywhere at any time by any means. Illness is a disruption of the normal working order of certain natural systems. As Z'ev pointed out so clearly, the order of the systems of Chinese medicine are all coded in symbols that are Chinese. To use Chinese medicine one really ought to understand the meanings of those symbols and the data that is encoded in them as to how the tools function. The simplest and most direct path to understanding the meanings of those symbols is the study of the language. And I believe that it should be included in our common standards that we use to measure what it takes to effectively train someone to apply the tools and the systems of Chinese medicine to restore order where illness has turned it into chaos. I am, I might add, astonished that you would accuse me of oversimplification! Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 - As an example, consider Heiner Fruehauf's explorations into gu syndrome, a concept never mentioned in the english language literature before Fruehauf's JCM article several years back. >>> perhaps it is my English but what I am saying is 1. I do not understand how one can only truly learn a concept by understanding the Chinese character but not through a complete and thoughral "translation" explanation in another language. (And I am still waiting for an example) 2. Its not the totality of learning Chinese that I am questioning. If I was to practice internal medicine for the most part. And if I saw many patients that I was unable to help. And if my primary modality was only TCM. And if I have seen "respected experienced Dr" (not from books and journals but with my own eyes) that were very successful in treating these conditions, I would spend at least several hours a day learning Chinese or bugging the hall of these Drs so I could learn *(just as I do in studying my English materials and other types of therapies I use and all the MD's DO's PT's and DC's that I have been pestering for 13 years). To me personally and especially because I do musculoskeletal medicine, and because from what I have seen being around TCM for 20 years, musculoskeletal condition are very poorly treated by TCM, it is not worth my while Almost all my opinions were formed not from what I know, or my TCM abilities, but from observing the only thing i care about and that is outcome of extremely respected Chinese practioners. Of course if one can get more information on any subject one is served by it and therefore we both agree about biomedicine. I would only add that being a practioner in the west one is much more liable if one misses a serious diagnosis that if one does not keepup with the so called Chinese literature. And modern biomedicine is superior, for the most part, in doing that. Now again, If I have to decide (for myself) if to spend a lot of time learning something, and was lucky enough to see practioners that are suppose to be the "best" at practicing it, I immediately make this cost/benifit ratio for me by looking at outcomes. Now has far has much of the process used to day by modern physicians in China when treating treating hypertension, for example and other modernly defined diseases (and diseases where there is true pathology ie nonfunctional) they first begin with Chinese disease names such as headache, dizziness, insomnia and tingling, (if my memory from 20 yr ago serves me right is what hypertension analyzed from)is in my opinion erroneous. Just because some patients MAY have these symptoms does not put hypertension within such a category at all. To go from there and then start hypotheses on what patho-mechanisms can lead to headaches, dizziness, etc is just an exercise of similarites. And the number of failures of treatment of hypertension that I have seen in China as well as in the USA is what tells me the process is faulty. I do not think I have seen more than a handful of patients that had a blood pressure that was highter than 160/100 and that the response could notjust be explain by life stile changes, and for the most part can be explained better from biomedicine than TCM, (that is the Herbs were the only explanation) were treated successfully. I have seen hundreds of failures. To me that is how a process is evaluated not by the fact that it is rational and logical. Alon 1 Thursday, January 17, 2002 3:07 PM Re: judgement , "Alon Marcus" <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:> > -Would a judge put much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience in the field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying tai ji is of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we have to rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So it is up to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to prove any of this. It is a judgment call> >>>>>Todd I dont think anybody thinks it not of benefit> Alon I know you have said you think it may be valuable, but you do not think it is worth the time investment. Analogously, it is the same issue as the one of whether spending the time to learn biomedicine is valuable to one's practice. This is an area where you and I agree and one where the dissenters argue against its importance despite not having any advanced training in the area. So in either case, the only ones who can really make aneducated statement are those who have the knowledge and can thus make an accurate comparison. You have pointed out how vital you think orthopedics is to your practice. Others probably feel they do fine without it. But you know how much it has enhanced your practice and those who dismiss it have no real basis for their opinions. Just as those who do not use lab tests have no basis to dismiss that, either. So everyone may be doing fine with what they know. but how much better could one do? Only those who have taken the time to learn one of these things can ever know their true value.As an example, consider Heiner Fruehauf's explorations into gu syndrome, a concept never mentioned in the english language literature before Fruehauf's JCM article several years back. Now many people find this a useful, even vital framework in their practices, allowing them to get longterm relief from many complaints that never yielded to other therapies. If Heiner did not do this work, we would all have skipped along in ignorance, believing some things were just beyong the scope of TCM. It was chance that led him to this. And we still only have his one article and some supplementary work by Flaws in this area. But if one really wants to pursue this topic, one must learn to read Chinese. Sure, you can wait till someone else writes something more of interest on this topic, but that is leaving it to chance. By reading chinese, one can access the material they actually need for any given case at any time. You don't have to wait and hope that one of the few translators in the field will coincidentally serve your needs. It would be like me saying, too bad I don't know how to read a lab report. Maybe someone will explain it to me someday. till then, I'll just practice what I already know and hope for the best.ToddChinese 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 January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 - or that the language barrier made it difficult for them to communicate prognosis? Or that their skills were being stretched in the hospital setting? My experience is different than yours when it comes to prognosis and Chinese medicine. >>>>>Possibly. I was also told by many of my students that my expectations are to high. And that what I conceder failures are not by them. Often when they see my patients I conceder an outcome a failure when they do not. Actually I think it is the low expectations from what they have seen in school clinics act. that is the problem. I was also told that the quality of TCM in Guangzhou in not high. Also the hospital I worked in was a municipal hospital and not a collage hospital and one person told me that the Dr were not has high caliber. But as far as communication no. I had a TCM dr that spoke quite well and I have eventually sponsored him to the USA and we had hours of Heart To Heart talks on this subject. Now I am not saying that TCM is useless, I use it every day successfully. But from what I have seen the amount of exaggeration is un-forgivable. Another good example for me is Miriam Lee. I know that if you askn99% of her students they would tell you that she was nothing less than a miracle worker. I for one however think she had more failures then successes. Alon >>>>> Thursday, January 17, 2002 3:47 PM Re: Re: judgement Alon,While I cannot compare clinical experiences with yours in the sense that I haven't worked in Chinese hospitals, is it possible that the level of training and practice were lacking in some way in your fellow doctors, or that the language barrier made it difficult for them to communicate prognosis? Or that their skills were being stretched in the hospital setting? My experience is different than yours when it comes to prognosis and Chinese medicine.On Thursday, January 17, 2002, at 01:11 PM, Alon Marcus wrote: - I would only add that there is an enormousamount of quantative evidence in the 2,000plus years of the survival and transmissionof Chinese medicine. We know what works. >>>>>>To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to predict outcome.Alon dragon90405 Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:30 AM Re: judgementWell put.I would only add that there is an enormousamount of quantative evidence in the 2,000plus years of the survival and transmissionof Chinese medicine. We know what works.What we don't know is whether or not whatis being done in the States and elsewherethat the language and medical literatureare being neglected will work. Again, it'stoo soon to tell.But certainly anyone who wants to play itsafe and do the thing that has been proven,not in a court of law but in the court ofhistory, to succeed can, as Karla so clearlyput it the other day, take some relativelypainless initial steps to get the processgoing that eventually leads to understandingChinese medical Chinese.And if the folks who argue so bitterly againstit and shake their fingers at us and tellus to be quiet would spend that time learningone Chinese character each day, well, at theend of a year they'd know 365.Ken, wrote:> When considering where to side on the issue of the importance ofchinese> language skills to the practice of CM, it strikes me that thestandard> of judgment being requested is incorrect. It has been asked topresent> proof that this is truly important. That it will improve one's> abilities in the clinic. The proof being begged seems to be> quantitative. How many cases has the method been applied to with> success. In other words, a quasi scientific analysis. However,debates> of this sort might better be settled using the standards of a courtof> law. What would an impartial third party think of the various> arguments. Well, experts need to prove their credibility and givetheir> opinions and then it is evaluated in the context of other evidenceor> logic. So is it relevant that everyone who has studied chinese finds> it of immense, incomparable benefit and the only people who do notthink> it is important are people who have not studied it? Would a judgeput> much stock in the statements of witnesses who have no experience inthe> field for which they are testifying. How do I know what the benefit> would be if I do not have the skill? It would be like saying taiji is> of no benefit to health because I have not tried it and I am in good> health anyway. We can either test the method ourselves or we haveto> rely on people who have demonstrated expertise in the area. So itis up> to everyone to evaluate the credentials of the various witnesses and> make a decision on that basis. There is no objective way to proveany> of this. It is a judgment call.>> -- > Chinese Herbs> http://www..org> 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 I am speaking here of what works as amedium for the successful transmissionof Chinese medicine from one generationand from one area to the next. >>Ok. You see why I am so different. Alon - dragon90405 Thursday, January 17, 2002 3:53 PM Re: judgement Alon> To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to predict outcome. I am speaking here of what works as amedium for the successful transmissionof Chinese medicine from one generationand from one area to the next. Everywherethat there has been a successful transmissionof Chinese medicine to another cultural zoneover the past several centuries, this transmission has included Chinese languagematerials. Now we in the West have beentrying for a few decades to get thingsrolling more or less without thesematerials. I say it is too soon to tellbecause in places like Japan, Korea,Vietnam, etc. where the medicine wassuccessfully synthesized with localtraditions and a variant of Chinese medicineemerged, this took place long enoughago that we can look at the survivalof the subject and its related applicationin the clinics of those countries asevidence that using Chinese works. Ithas also worked, by the way, as a successfulmedium for the movement ideas from theseother areas and cultures back into theChinese zone. There are important summariesof Chinese medicine that have been writtenby Korean and Japanese doctors, for example.There is, as of the present, not enoughexperience and data available to assesswhether or not the no-Chinese approachreally will prove itself to be workable.Believe me I am aware of the limitationsthat emerge in Chinese hospitals whenit comes to dealing with the chaos oflarge populations of sick people. ButI suggest that a good deal of this kindof chaos is inseparable from the wholesalepractice of medicine anywhere at any timeby any means.Illness is a disruption of the normalworking order of certain natural systems.As Z'ev pointed out so clearly, theorder of the systems of Chinese medicineare all coded in symbols that are Chinese.To use Chinese medicine one really oughtto understand the meanings of those symbols and the data that is encoded in them as to how the tools function.The simplest and most direct path tounderstanding the meanings ofthose symbols is the study of the language.And I believe that it should be includedin our common standards that we use tomeasure what it takes to effectivelytrain someone to apply the tools and thesystems of Chinese medicine to restoreorder where illness has turned it intochaos.I am, I might add, astonished that youwould accuse me of oversimplification!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 January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 Believe me I am aware of the limitationsthat emerge in Chinese hospitals whenit comes to dealing with the chaos oflarge populations of sick people. ButI suggest that a good deal of this kindof chaos is inseparable from the wholesalepractice of medicine anywhere at any timeby any means.>>>>>>Actually at least as far as the patients I have seen and perhaps because they wanted to impress us, there was not much chaos. Patient got as much time as they needed, at least during my real rotations. When I just observed some of the Lao (Old) masters the volume was incredible. But, I could just pick cases I liked and take the patient aside and have my friend translate their chart. Which I did often. So for the most part it looked like they got good quality care. It was me that just time and time again, insisted on bringing patients back to see their charts and talk to them so I can evaluate result with my own eyes. I am just not one that trusts"period. That goes for Biomedicine and osteopathy as well by the way. Alon - dragon90405 Thursday, January 17, 2002 3:53 PM Re: judgement Alon> To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to predict outcome. I am speaking here of what works as amedium for the successful transmissionof Chinese medicine from one generationand from one area to the next. Everywherethat there has been a successful transmissionof Chinese medicine to another cultural zoneover the past several centuries, this transmission has included Chinese languagematerials. Now we in the West have beentrying for a few decades to get thingsrolling more or less without thesematerials. I say it is too soon to tellbecause in places like Japan, Korea,Vietnam, etc. where the medicine wassuccessfully synthesized with localtraditions and a variant of Chinese medicineemerged, this took place long enoughago that we can look at the survivalof the subject and its related applicationin the clinics of those countries asevidence that using Chinese works. Ithas also worked, by the way, as a successfulmedium for the movement ideas from theseother areas and cultures back into theChinese zone. There are important summariesof Chinese medicine that have been writtenby Korean and Japanese doctors, for example.There is, as of the present, not enoughexperience and data available to assesswhether or not the no-Chinese approachreally will prove itself to be workable.Believe me I am aware of the limitationsthat emerge in Chinese hospitals whenit comes to dealing with the chaos oflarge populations of sick people. ButI suggest that a good deal of this kindof chaos is inseparable from the wholesalepractice of medicine anywhere at any timeby any means.Illness is a disruption of the normalworking order of certain natural systems.As Z'ev pointed out so clearly, theorder of the systems of Chinese medicineare all coded in symbols that are Chinese.To use Chinese medicine one really oughtto understand the meanings of those symbols and the data that is encoded in them as to how the tools function.The simplest and most direct path tounderstanding the meanings ofthose symbols is the study of the language.And I believe that it should be includedin our common standards that we use tomeasure what it takes to effectivelytrain someone to apply the tools and thesystems of Chinese medicine to restoreorder where illness has turned it intochaos.I am, I might add, astonished that youwould accuse me of oversimplification!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 January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 The simplest and most direct path tounderstanding the meanings ofthose symbols is the study of the language.And I believe that it should be includedin our common standards that we use tomeasure what it takes to effectivelytrain someone to apply the tools and thesystems of Chinese medicine to restoreorder where illness has turned it intochaos.>>>>But that has nothing to do with analyzing outcomes as I will define an outcome Alon - dragon90405 Thursday, January 17, 2002 3:53 PM Re: judgement Alon> To say we know what works is truely an oversimplification. As anybody that has worked in a hospital in China (with open eyes and critical mind) can see when patients are treated with obsoluty no ability to predict outcome. I am speaking here of what works as amedium for the successful transmissionof Chinese medicine from one generationand from one area to the next. Everywherethat there has been a successful transmissionof Chinese medicine to another cultural zoneover the past several centuries, this transmission has included Chinese languagematerials. Now we in the West have beentrying for a few decades to get thingsrolling more or less without thesematerials. I say it is too soon to tellbecause in places like Japan, Korea,Vietnam, etc. where the medicine wassuccessfully synthesized with localtraditions and a variant of Chinese medicineemerged, this took place long enoughago that we can look at the survivalof the subject and its related applicationin the clinics of those countries asevidence that using Chinese works. Ithas also worked, by the way, as a successfulmedium for the movement ideas from theseother areas and cultures back into theChinese zone. There are important summariesof Chinese medicine that have been writtenby Korean and Japanese doctors, for example.There is, as of the present, not enoughexperience and data available to assesswhether or not the no-Chinese approachreally will prove itself to be workable.Believe me I am aware of the limitationsthat emerge in Chinese hospitals whenit comes to dealing with the chaos oflarge populations of sick people. ButI suggest that a good deal of this kindof chaos is inseparable from the wholesalepractice of medicine anywhere at any timeby any means.Illness is a disruption of the normalworking order of certain natural systems.As Z'ev pointed out so clearly, theorder of the systems of Chinese medicineare all coded in symbols that are Chinese.To use Chinese medicine one really oughtto understand the meanings of those symbols and the data that is encoded in them as to how the tools function.The simplest and most direct path tounderstanding the meanings ofthose symbols is the study of the language.And I believe that it should be includedin our common standards that we use tomeasure what it takes to effectivelytrain someone to apply the tools and thesystems of Chinese medicine to restoreorder where illness has turned it intochaos.I am, I might add, astonished that youwould accuse me of oversimplification!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.