Guest guest Posted October 15, 2003 Report Share Posted October 15, 2003 In a message dated 10/15/03 2:58:28 AM, writes: > All the more so, those whose eradite scholarship and tenacity brought > Oriental medicine to the fore in America, to be viewed as a legitimate > mainstream medicine by the public and press, and not just esoteric folk > medicine to be practiced by greying hippies and the heath food store set. > The result as we've spoken about before, is different than Chinese > medicine as practiced in Asia. American Oriental medicine continues to > evolve, grow and change and the wonderful passionate spirit of sharing > that I look forward to reading several times daily on posts from CHA is a > mirror of that spirit. So thank you all for this wonderful ride. > This is another point I might like to make, and that is that we need to sort of copyright our field of medicine in a way that makes it whole, but not full. I personally like to write Oriental Medicine with two caps to signify this. It is not a medicine practiced by Orientals, but a two word noun, deserving of a double cap and bringing an different definition with it. The basis, the foundation of our understanding of healing with this field remains " East Asian Ethno-medicine " , but how we tweak that as individual practitioners with patients is Oriental Medicine. The foundation needs to be seriously grokked to grasp the field and to understand what it is we are doing to the patient and how to observe what that patients response is, and the serious academic discussion held in this forum need to dig deeper into the depths of what went before, but those cloistered in private practice will do what Chinese did in similar circumstances and improvise with whatever materials are in our armamentorium will provide the most advantage to our patients. As we go through the next decades and centuries and report back to our colleges our observations and results via the filter we look at medicine through, we will see the development of Oriental Medicine's evolution, and there is no need to sell it out to black/white Biological Medicine's perspective. I feel that it can stand on it's own. This is my own humble personal opinion, and not that of any organization I am a member of in any way. I deeply respect those who to this forum and look forward to any discussion on the subject of Oriental Medicine. David Molony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2003 Report Share Posted October 15, 2003 Yehudah and David, I enjoyed both your posts. And appreciated what you said. On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at 09:27 PM, acuman1 wrote: > > In a message dated 10/15/03 2:58:28 AM, writes: > > >> All the more so, those whose eradite scholarship and tenacity brought >> Oriental medicine to the fore in America, to be viewed as a legitimate >> mainstream medicine by the public and press, and not just esoteric >> folk >> medicine to be practiced by greying hippies and the heath food store >> set. >> The result as we've spoken about before, is different than Chinese >> medicine as practiced in Asia. American Oriental medicine continues >> to >> evolve, grow and change and the wonderful passionate spirit of sharing >> that I look forward to reading several times daily on posts from CHA >> is a >> mirror of that spirit. So thank you all for this wonderful ride. >> > > This is another point I might like to make, and that is that we need > to sort > of copyright our field of medicine in a way that makes it whole, but > not full. > I personally like to write Oriental Medicine with two caps to signify > this. > It is not a medicine practiced by Orientals, but a two word noun, > deserving of > a double cap and bringing an different definition with it. The basis, > the > foundation of our understanding of healing with this field remains > " East Asian > Ethno-medicine " , but how we tweak that as individual practitioners > with patients > is Oriental Medicine. The foundation needs to be seriously grokked to > grasp > the field and to understand what it is we are doing to the patient and > how to > observe what that patients response is, and the serious academic > discussion held > in this forum need to dig deeper into the depths of what went before, > but > those cloistered in private practice will do what Chinese did in > similar > circumstances and improvise with whatever materials are in our > armamentorium will > provide the most advantage to our patients. As we go through the next > decades and > centuries and report back to our colleges our observations and results > via the > filter we look at medicine through, we will see the development of > Oriental > Medicine's evolution, and there is no need to sell it out to > black/white > Biological Medicine's perspective. I feel that it can stand on it's > own. > > This is my own humble personal opinion, and not that of any > organization I am > a member of in any way. I deeply respect those who to this > forum > and look forward to any discussion on the subject of Oriental Medicine. > David Molony > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2003 Report Share Posted October 16, 2003 David, I agree with you 100% that Oriental Medicine as practiced in the West is its own distinct philosophy, science and medicine. I use the term science deliberately, as every science has its own rules, laws and definitions. As our Medicine continues to evolve, (less so in that we are so internationally interconnected, than perhaps would have been the case if, for example, Teddy Roosevelt had gone to China, and been exposed to Acupuncture a century ago )I believe that slowly we will grow apart from our " Chinese Elders " . But we are now post-adolescents (going on to grad school?) in our maturation process,and we can think differently and can develop a new way. Yet we will still have the same last name. Now that I think about it, I think that it is profound and visionary that the new doctoral title is Doctor of Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine, as you say David, in caps. One other point implicit in what you say has been a topic of discussion over the past few weeks, and that is integrity in the area of research. Our thirst and youthful energy to validate our medicine has created a high quality of health care, and parallel to that clinical success will accelerate quality research to continue to prove the eficacy of our work. It is the very integrity (same root as integration), wholism and honesty which will further validate our studies and clinical trials. Our taking the high road will make it inconceivable to have to fudge test results. Bottom line is that EXCELLENCE BREEDS MORE EXCELLENCE. Yehuda ______________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2003 Report Share Posted October 17, 2003 Dear Ken, I think that it IS important for the medicine we study, practice and research to be named, because from where we are practicing it, many, if not most of those who we hope to expose to it, educate concerning it, and heal with it view it as exotic and different. I can hear you saying, so?, and I answer that even though branding it may not well serve it, consider that the public and media that we relate to, and the govenments under whose grace we flourish, require clarity, and require points of reference. Of course you can never describe to a blind person who has never seen, the color red, but you can in some comfortable and understandable way gain their trust and use relatively comprehensible references. Therefore, forgive my insistance on beating this issue, but I think it is important, and I see nothing wrong with calling what we do, " Oriental Medicine " , " East Asian Medicine " or even " Eastern Medicine " , as a contrast to " Western Medicine " . Remember, their medicine is the point of reference, and again, in order to get funding, legislative reform and greater freedom of practice, we need to remove from their line of vision even the slightest inkling that what we do lacks substance or is merely placebo. Doesn't that recognition and validation matter? Doesn't it go way beyond wannabe egotism? Yehuda PS 'Got your note from school. I'm sorry I missed you. I'll be calling you early next week. On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:06:04 -0000 " kenrose2008 " <kenrose2008 writes: > David, > > Well put. > > I tend to favor East Asian Medicine > if one wants to use a term to refer > in summary form to and include > all of the various traditional approaches > to medical care that have emerged > in this part of the world. > > I inherited a journal that had already > been named Oriental Medicine but > never really liked that designation. > > I question whether or not branding > " the medicine " is really an appropriate > approach. > > Why not simply certify the safety of > individual practitioners with a basic > safety exam and let individual practitioners > select the modalities they feel best > suited to deliver, according to whatever > " medical traditions " they have learned? > > As we see, that's what people will do > anyway; and by supporting this approach > rather than trying to counter it with > standardized training in " the medicine " > we might actually enhance overall > clinical efficacy by allowing individuals > to concentrate on developing their > healing skills while they are in school > rather than to prepare to take comprehensive > examinations in a subject that never > existed before. > > By the way, if you win the lottery will > you be writing a check to support > a materials development project? > > Ken > > > 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.