the future of CM / was headaches

[Guest guest]

I think this whole line of thought is underscored by the fact that so many

of

our colleagues already rely on methods other than TCM to make their dx,

methods of dubious value I might add (such as NAET, vegatesting,

bioresonance electroacupuncture dx, o-ring, AK, etc.).

>>> I can understand the characterization of these " other methods " as

dubious in their value. However, I would point out that any subjective (as defined it) diagnostic method, including pulse and tongue, could easily

be placed in the same dubious category because of their subjectivity. It

seems clear to me that there will always be a place for both objective and

subjective diagnostic tools because we will all be long gone before

diagnostic tools are developed that can objectively obtain the breadth of

information that can be gained from skillfully implemented subjective

diagnostic methods. It is impossible to come out of a graduate program and

have mastered difficult subjective diagnostic skills. There is a learning

curve that is inevitable and all should be encouraged to persist in their

use of these methods. Perhaps if additional objective diagnostic tools were

available to practitioners of TCM then the initial years of the learning

curve would not subject patients to the limitations of new practitioner

skills and would also provide corroboration to the practitioner of the

subjective diagnostic perspective they glean from each patient. It has also

become clear to me that some people are innately more gifted than others at

gaining valuable diagnostic information using subjective methods. Further,

people have affinities for different forms of subjectivity, whether

vegatesting, AK, or pulse diagnosis. One will often work better for one

person than another. The problem with the non-TCM subjective diagnostic

methods mentioned is that there is not a clearly established precedent for

how these methods are optimally integrated with the practice of TCM. These

non-TCM methods cause many, but not all, of their users to replace their TCM

diagnostic skills with the new method instead of integrating the information

gained from each. That of course could be changed with an intentional

effort if it was determined to be worthwhile.

 

Stephen Morrissey

 

 

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]

, " stephen " <stephen@b...> wrote:

However, I would point out that any subjective (as

defined it) diagnostic method, including pulse and tongue, could easily

> be placed in the same dubious category because of their subjectivity.

 

except that TCM dx has a millenium behind it.

 

It

> seems clear to me that there will always be a place for both objective and

> subjective diagnostic tools because we will all be long gone before

> diagnostic tools are developed that can objectively obtain the breadth of

> information that can be gained from skillfully implemented subjective

> diagnostic methods.

 

probably true

 

Perhaps if additional objective diagnostic tools were

> available to practitioners of TCM then the initial years of the learning

> curve would not subject patients to the limitations of new practitioner

> skills and would also provide corroboration to the practitioner of the

> subjective diagnostic perspective they glean from each patient.

 

yes.

 

Further,

> people have affinities for different forms of subjectivity, whether

> vegatesting, AK, or pulse diagnosis. One will often work better for one

> person than another.

 

several of these have been shown to have very low reproducibility and/

or are based upon theories that derive from a distortion of chinese

ideas, such as calling TCM " energy medicine "