VSTF

[Guest guest]

Bob -

 

The Visioning Search Task Force (VSTF) did have it's first of a series

of three townhall meetings at the meetings in Safety Harbor sponsored by

the AOMAlliance. AAOM and CSOMA sponsor the next two. The next one is at

CSOMA Saturday August 3rd in San Francisco, and the final townhall

meeting is at the AAOM meeting in Orlando, November 14-16. It would be

good to have your opinions on record - maybe you can speak in the

townhall at one of those meetings or submit written testimony. the same

is true for others on this list.

 

Will Morris

 

 

I was at the National Alliance convention this last weekend where the

Visioning Commission had a " Town Meeting " to hear in-put from the rank

and file. It's interesting that so many people think things happen in

the world because of logic and rationality on the one hand and

righteousness and altruism on the other. In my experience, the bottom

line question is, " What's in it for me? " I believe that monetary value

and the flow of commerce is a main way of answering that question. I

believe commerce shapes history as much (if not more) than any other

factor. If an idea, product, or practice cannot/does not sell, then it

does not matter how seemingly good or beneficial that idea, practice,

or practice is. What matters is whether others perceive that idea,

practice, or product has value to them.

[Guest guest]

 

 

<

May 23, 2004 9:38:54 AM PDT

Tom Haines <thaines, dave molony

<Acuman1, William R. Morris <will

VSTF

 

Gentlemen

 

I read your article on VSTF in AT. I am not sure if you have invited

NOMAA and AOMNC to participate in your final round of talks. I believe

it would be a grave error to ignore these groups. Since VSTF was

initiated, these two groups have been founded. While still nascent, I

believe they have already risen to the level of important stakeholders.

I know there is a lot of animosity between the current VSTF

stakeholders and this new group, if the ongoing exchange of letters

printed in AT is any indication. But do not be mistaken. These groups

represent the views of a large number of practitioners, especially here

in CA. A close look at their program reveals it is pretty much exactly

what CSOMA and CAOMA were lobbying towards in last year's AB1943. I

know the task force is national, but CSOMA and CAOMA represent more

acupuncturists than all other national orgs combined. So if these

groups have a similar agenda to NOMAA and AOMNC, these latter groups

reflect the " vision " of a huge number of practitioners. NOMAA has also

gained footholds in NM, NV and FL, three states I predict will adopt

their program as one option. The current scandal at ACAOM will only

strengthen NOMAA, BTW. One of the goals of the task force is to give

greater involvement to practitioners in guiding the future of the

profession. NOMAA has changed the landscape rapidly since VSTF was

first convened. If this growing group of voices is left out of the

process, the process will be delegitimized.

 

I personally have nothing to gain either way. I do not belong to an

organization because I prefer to maintain my journalistic integrity as

much as possible. It is already compromised by my association with

PCOM, a major stakeholder. However this secure job also gives me a

certain amount of detachment. I will have a job whether we go doctoral

or not. I also do not maintain a private practice, so issues of

competition, workers comp, etc., do not affect my daily existence.

While I understand why so many have reacted viscerally to NOMAA and

AOMNC, I believe the positions of these groups and their patron saint,

Deke Kendall, have been grossly misrepresented. It is clear that those

who have promulgated these misrepresentations have either not read

Deke's work or choose to intentionally distort it, no doubt to protect

some threatened vested interests. I have read Deke's work cover to

cover and have also read the detailed PDF of NOMAA's proposed OMD. I

can say unequivocally that these documents show strong support for an

acupuncture education rooted in a rigorous understanding of the

classical texts. The desire to explain things as best possible in

terms of science seems to be all most have heard. What they missed is

that Deke and NOMAA are actually far stronger supporters of a

classical, channel based acupuncture than any current program I am

aware of.

 

Most schools teach TCM, a form of herbology and reduce acupuncture to

where it overlaps with herbal theory. NOMAA actually proposes a

restoration of acupuncture training in all its ancient glory. This is

a far cry from those who claim NOMAA would replace all TCM terms with

western reductionisms. The fact is that Deke makes a strong case for

his position and I really have yet to see even a single cogent

rebuttal. Many of the smartest people in the field have rallied around

Deke and that speaks volumes to me. The detractors seem to easily

drift into quasi-religious metaphors that completely ignore the actual

arguments Deke has made (and actually further strengthen his case). I

would ask that you seriously consider allowing NOMAA to formally join

this process or all your hard work will have been in vain. You may be

interested in my review of Deke's work from my website:

 

Deke Kendall proposes that the contents of the nei jing su wen are

largely based upon anatomy.  Yet, ironically as I read Deke, I have

developed a newfound interest in classical acupuncture. While Deke may

be dismissed as a reductionist, I think he is actually a great example

of the trend espoused by Zhang xi chun and embodied by Jiao shu de.

Maintaining the spirit of CM while integrating with the west. Deke most

definitely accomplished that goal.  His entire presentation of

physiology and anatomy is completely from the perspective of Western

Medicine serving Chinese, not vice-versa. He asserts that CM will be

proven to be real just as it is written, not by scrapping large parts

of the corpus to make it fit science (as the modern chinese did

somewhat in their state texts). He believes every word of nei jing and

he makes strong cases for pulse diagnosis and classical point selection

that never made sense to me before.  Far from reducing CM to prevailing

reductionistic ideas, Deke shows that there is different way of

understanding the neurovascular system and its role in health and

disease and the neijing details that. His model explains all the

effects of acupuncture satisfactorily and he attempts to ground his

ideas in a reading of the classics. Rather than reducing CM with his

model, Deke has actually paved the way for EXPANDING western science to

accommodate explanations of phenomena hitherto inconceivable. I think

work like Deke's is exactly what leads to a paradigm shift. The

structures of normal science are challenged from within and a more

expansive model is developed as a result.

 

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX: