re: defining medicine/malpractice

[Guest guest]

Hi Todd:

Again, yes, I agree. I myself do not teach anything in which I am

not trained (one year Medical Qi Gong training with clinic, 2nd

degree black belt Tai Qi). I just caution our rationalist

practitioners not to missdiagnose when a person's problems are, at

their root, caused by intrusive though habits (many times learned

within family or consequence of inherited temperament). All the

acupuncture/herbs in the world will not teach them how to change

these habits to break this internal cycle. It may aleviate their

symptoms temporarily, however the power of the mind to take the

emporer's thone within us is supreme. So I do not imply to teach or

suggest practices without differential diagnosis or proper training.

I only suggest that to help a patient discontinue his own unwitting

contributions to his illness is the truly holistic treatment. Many

times, these ways of thinking and copeing (or not) are the primary

causes of the disease processes--neurotic anxiety, IBS sometimes,

insomnia etc. IOW, the thought begins the cascade of LV Qi

stagnation, Sp Qi Xu, shen disturbance etc. I believe that without

this as a serious consideration, we are only doing branch treatments

and the patient may be doomed to the once a week for

life " adjustment " for which Chiropractors are famous.

Thanks, Shanna

[Guest guest]

, " shannahickle "

<shannahickle> wrote:

> Hi Todd:

> Again, yes, I agree. I myself do not teach anything in which I am

> not trained (one year Medical Qi Gong training with clinic, 2nd

> degree black belt Tai Qi). I just caution our rationalist

 

My reply here is a bit off-topic, but I have to say something. You

are claiming to be a 2nd degree black belt in Tai Qi? What is that?

 

In pinyin, the martial art is called taijiquan (with a " j " ).

In Wade-Jiles it is called t'ai ch'i ch'uan.

There is no common transliteration scheme that would have the second

syllable " qi " as you have stated. This alone makes me question your

training.

Furthermore, with the exception of modern shuaijiao, there are no

tradition chinese martial arts that use a belt ranking system,

including taijiquan. The fact that you claim to hold a belt ranking

in an art with no belt ranking system again makes me question your

training.

 

I am not saying that you did not train, but more than likely, what you

trained in was not genuine taijiquan.

 

This statement of yours speaks to a post Todd made in the past few

days about yoga and taiji teachers here in this country. It really is

sad.

 

Brian C. Allen

[Guest guest]

, " bcataiji " <bcaom@c...> wrote:

 

> In Wade-Jiles it is called t'ai ch'i ch'uan.

 

I need a better editor. It is hard to make a point about

transliteration, when I make typos in the transliterations.

 

The above should read: t'ai chi ch'uan.

 

Brian C. Allen

[Guest guest]

Shanna,

 

I agree that, as doctors, we need to find out the causes of our

patients' disease and try to eliminate those causes. If those causes

are internal damage by the seven affects, then we need to address

those. However, you can change both specific thoughts and mood by

changing the chemistry in the brain, and you can change the chemistry

in the brain by changing what you put in your mouth, be that food,

Chinese herbs, or Western pharmaceuticals (which all ultimately boil

down to chemistry). So things are a little less simple than you seem

to suggest, not so black and white. What d'ya think?

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001> wrote:

> Shanna,

>

> I agree that, as doctors, we need to find out the causes of our

> patients' disease and try to eliminate those causes.

 

the causes must absolutely be rectified, but they can only be known

thru proper diff dx. If anyone thinks I have ever said otherwise,

think again. However, generic treatment of causes does not show any

sophistication in understanding. any counseling or emotional work or

talk therapy needs to be differential. yet most of these modalities

seem to be done without regard to dx by many in our field. or they

are done based upon very suspect diagnostic methods such as worsley

five phase, which appear to have little substantial foundation or

precedent in the chinese medical literature.

 

[Guest guest]

Todd/Brian,

 

Why wasn't this post moderated?

 

Brian is using an ad hominem argument, and primarily questioning the

training of a CHA member. This just isn't necessary. Bob and others have

addressed the SUBSTANCE of the original message - a common practice for

promoting dialogue and membership in an organization.

 

-Mike

 

 

> , " shannahickle "

> <shannahickle> wrote:

>> Hi Todd:

>> Again, yes, I agree. I myself do not teach anything in which I am

>> not trained (one year Medical Qi Gong training with clinic, 2nd

>> degree black belt Tai Qi). I just caution our rationalist

>

> My reply here is a bit off-topic, but I have to say something. You

> are claiming to be a 2nd degree black belt in Tai Qi? What is that?

>

> In pinyin, the martial art is called taijiquan (with a " j " ).

> In Wade-Jiles it is called t'ai ch'i ch'uan.

> There is no common transliteration scheme that would have the second

> syllable " qi " as you have stated. This alone makes me question your

> training.

> Furthermore, with the exception of modern shuaijiao, there are no

> tradition chinese martial arts that use a belt ranking system,

> including taijiquan. The fact that you claim to hold a belt ranking

> in an art with no belt ranking system again makes me question your

> training.

>

> I am not saying that you did not train, but more than likely, what you

> trained in was not genuine taijiquan.

>

> This statement of yours speaks to a post Todd made in the past few

> days about yoga and taiji teachers here in this country. It really is

> sad.

>

> Brian C. Allen

>

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including

> board approved continuing education classes, an annual conference and a

> free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

, mshort@z... wrote:

/Brian,

>

> Why wasn't this post moderated?

>

> Brian is using an ad hominem argument, and primarily questioning the

> training of a CHA member. This just isn't necessary. Bob and others have

> addressed the SUBSTANCE of the original message - a common practice for

> promoting dialogue and membership in an organization.

>

> -Mike

 

I specifically stated that I was not questioning that the person

trained. I did ask what it was the person trained in out of

curiosity. I also gave the correct transliterations for taijiquan and

gave some information about belt systems in chinese martial arts.

 

I have trained in taijiquan for 14 years. The first 6 years, my

training was bogus, but I did not know. I was teaching, thinking

things were great. I look back on that now a bit embarassed.

 

If someone wrote they were a second degree black belt in Chinese

Herbology and that there favorite herb was Dong Quai, then I am sure

someone would question that, stating that there were no belt systems

in Chinese Herbology and that the correct transliteration in pinyin

was dang gui and in Wade-Giles, dang kuai.

 

I gave the person useful information to help them on their way, and as

usual, someone one this forum wants to be oversensitive and whine.

 

I realized my post was not herbal related, but it was related to an

ongoing topic that Todd started, so I decided to post it with the

hopes that the reader would be enlightened.

 

Since when is correcting blatant errors a bad thing? I would want the

same if I were in that position.

 

Brian C. Allen

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/17/04 6:10:06 PM, pemachophel2001 writes:

 

<< If a person opens their mouth in public, then they have to be prepared

 

for others' response, including criticism. >>

 

I agree with you, Bob. But let's make sure the same standard is applied to

ALL on the list.

 

Also, there is a difference between criticism of a person's statement of

ideas or theory and an attack to the person's credibility, especially is such an

attack is based on insufficient information. And let's be honest - we all know

a nasty/hurtful tone when we read it.

-roseanne

[Guest guest]

Hi Bob

Yes, of course, what you say is quite true. However, my question is

still what is the least invasive, most cost effective way to effect

deep and long lasting change for our patients? Consider this. One

type of patient represents the otherwise well adjusted person who

becomes emotionally and subsequently physically afflicted because of

stress, lifestyle, menopause, diet indiscretion etc. They respond

quickly and well to our treatments because they have experienced

balance previously in their lives and hence recognize normalcy when

they experience it and to emotional wellbeing as the

center of their personality. Another of the types of patients are

the major depressives or the anxious personalities who have

experienced little to no balance in their lives and have

no " neutral " to which to return. They have deeply ingrained coping

mechanisms and belief systems which help to continue to create the

imbalances and the chicken and egg continue to create each other.

While I believe that " mind exercises " would benefit both types, I

will concede that the first type is more likely to get a fully

positive outcome from our acu/herb treatments alone (although I

think fewer courses would be necessary and fewer relapses would

occur by empowering them with mind exercises). The second type

usually proves to be much more difficult to affect permanently.

Could self-regulation of neurotransmitters through " mind exercises "

help tip the scale and potentiate our treatments? Could this create

lasting changes (or at least tools to which to resort) in self-

esteem and belief systems to help prevent relapse?

The interesting thing about this thread is that it has been implied

that serious inclusion of meditation as medicine would " relegate us

to the dustbin of history " with respect to healing traditions. From

what I have read in the recent mainstream about what MD doctors are

suggesting and " believing in " , they are far more ready to suggest

meditation, biofeedback or yoga than TCM. Doesn't this imply a

bridge to credibility rather than a gap? Really acu/herbs sound

more " magical " to them than meditation. The question then is are we

really more attached to seeing our own " magical " outcomes with

acu/herbs and retaining the " all powerful practitioner " status than

empowering the patient? Isn't this what we have been fighting in the

reductionist, money motivated, invasive allopathic approach? I think

that acu/herbs will eventually find their proof and full acceptance

by the scientific community at large in neuroscience, biophysics,

and biochemistry rather than double blind studies. Meditation is

quickly gaining it's own credibility through study of these areas.

So why should we abandon ground which previously belonged to us only

to be proved wrong for doing so by western practitioners? Isn't the

next step for them to accuse us, after bringing more " proof " to bear

on how acu/herbs operate, of not being well educated enough to carry

on our own practices in acu/herbs since they have all the proof of

why it works? I don't believe in " mainstreaming " all the more

esoteric or subtle new age methods into our medicine. But I do

believe after reading the scientific evidence and through my own

personal experience that meditation in particular and other forms of

mind training including biofeedback should be embraced and

recommended to our patients where appropriate just as the allopaths

are doing. I certainly would be quite red-faced to find myself

caught with my pants down on this. Remember, there was probably a

day for most of us when we thought acu/herbs were bunk and had no

possibility of effecting real changes in a person's health.

Respectfully, Shanna

[Guest guest]

If a person opens their mouth in public, then they have to be prepared

for others' response, including criticism. I agree with Brian that we

should not be too defensive and afraid of criticism (both giving and

receiving). That also stiffles useful, constructive dialogue. I also

agree that one should consider the feelings of the other person and

read each post at least twice before hitting the send button. A few

extra words can go a long way in turning vinegar into honey or at

least water.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Shanna,

 

At our clinic, deep relaxation (meditation by another name) has always

been one of the cornerstones of our prescritive methodology as one of

the " three free therapies. " However, I think Todd is referring to

sectarian, spiritualist forms of meditation. I do think it is

typically best to secularize these kinds of practices.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Bob,

Oh. Yea, that's why I like to refer to it as " mind exercises " . Glad

to see you're recommending it. I think it's pretty important

(obviously). What do you think of Tonglin in particular (I

see " pemacho " in your ID. Does that stand for Pema Chodron who is a

great proponent of Tonglin?)? Would that be too sectarian to be

appropriate? It sure seems effective. I back up theory of that, or

secularize that, with western psychology studies of Alice Miller's

Drama of the Gifted Child where she discusses the importance of

adopting the " internalized empathic protector " (mother love) in

cultivating mental health. Comments?

Shanna

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001> wrote:

> Shanna,

>

> At our clinic, deep relaxation (meditation by another name) has

always

> been one of the cornerstones of our prescritive methodology as one

of

> the " three free therapies. " However, I think Todd is referring to

> sectarian, spiritualist forms of meditation. I do think it is

> typically best to secularize these kinds of practices.

>

> Bob

[Guest guest]

, ra6151@a... wrote:

 

> attack is based on insufficient information. And let's be honest -

we all know

> a nasty/hurtful tone when we read it.

> -roseanne

 

Do we (whoever " we " are)? I'm sure many people are prone to

misinterpretting tone in a written forum. That is the nature of the

written word.

 

Because this is a commonly known phenomenon, it would be better to

take an objective reading of posts, rather than to try to read emotion

into it. Without personally knowing a poster and his specific views,

it is entirely inappropriate to assign any tone to his posts. Even in

knowing a poster and his specific views, errors in assigning a tone to

his posts can still be made.

 

If one is secure in what they know and what they present, standing on

firm ground, then one should not feel threatened by what one reads.

 

If people would read the words (all of them) in a post rather than

investing emotionally into a post, I believe much more information

could be passed back and forth on this forum, rather than much of the

complaining and whining that has been happening of late.

 

Brian C. Allen

[Guest guest]

" What do you think of Tonglin in particular? "

 

Great if you're trying to become a Bodhisattva. I'm not sure if this

is the best technique for restoring health.

 

" Does Pemacho stand for Pema Chodron who is a great proponent of Tonglin? "

 

Sorry, Pema Chophel is my name within the Longchen Nyingthig subsect

of Nyingma Tibetan Buddhism, although, living in Boulder, I have met

Pema Chodron many years ago. I believe Chodron means lamp or light of

Dharma. My name, Chophel, means propagator or increasor or Dharma.

Pema means lotus. In my lineage, Pema is an allusion to Padmasambhava

(the " self-born lotus " ), the founder of the Nyingma sect as well as to

my teacher, Jetsun (Rev.) Pema. Although I got to be a Lopon or

acharya/teacher within that lineage, mostly I'm just Bob, and

especially when it comes to the practice of medicine.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Brian et al.,

 

Tone IS hard to gauge accurately in written communications. As

communications gurus tell us, 70% of live communication has nothing to

do with words. So, without facial and body language as well as

inflection and tone of voice, written language is easy misinterpreted.

 

That's why, in my experience, it is so important to go the extra mile

to make sure people understand exactly what your tone is meant to be.

This can be done by using more meta-language, e.g., in my opinion, I

think, I believe, it may be, it could be, in my experience, IMO, IMHO,

etc. It can also be done by using emoticons, such as :-) to let the

reader know that you are not angry or being negative. Given the

limitations of written discourse, I believe we owe it to each other to

go the extra distance to make sure we communicate as precisely as

possible to our readership, including tone. Otherwise, we are not

communicating completely and accurately.

 

Just my two cents learned over years and years of speaking and writing

in public. :-)

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001> wrote:

 

> etc. It can also be done by using emoticons, such as :-) to let the

> reader know that you are not angry or being negative. Given the

> limitations of written discourse, I believe we owe it to each other to

> go the extra distance to make sure we communicate as precisely as

> possible to our readership, including tone. Otherwise, we are not

> communicating completely and accurately.

 

Thanks for the information, Bob. I'll keep that in mind. However, as

those that know me can attest, I am fairly monotone in nature and

expression. For the most part, what I write is meant to be without

tone. I guess I'll have to use a bunch of smilies :') so people do

not feel attacked when questioned or asked for clarification.

 

Brian C. Allen

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001>

wrote:

> " What do you think of Tonglin in particular? "

>

> Great if you're trying to become a Bodhisattva. I'm not sure if this

> is the best technique for restoring health.

 

and even if it was or is a great technique for restoring health, there is still

the issue of

differential dx and necessity of medical training. does one need to be trained

in medicne

and differential diagnosis to teach or practice such a technique. Consider yoga

for

example or transcendental meditation. there is significant evidence that simple

generic

techniques derived from these practices can have profound health benefits even

when

separated from their religious/spiritual context. I have no doubt that such

methods as

well as many others used for centuries worldwide are probably more beneficial

when done

on a daily basis than regular use of herbs and or acupuncture. I even suspect

daily prayer

when done by believers is effective (though studies suggest even nonbelievers

benefit,

those studies are quite flawed, IMO - see the skeptical inquirer and search for

prayer). the

point is that such practices are healthful and someone needs to teach them, but

such

practices are not medicine because no diff dx is done. Our medical training is

geared

towards expertise in diff dx. If one is not interested in developing this

expertise, whether

western, japanese, chinese, etc., I am not sure why one would want to go to

medical

school in the first place? It would just be annoying. I know plenty of yoga

and tai ji

teachers and HHPs and LMT's who earn more than many L.Ac. and with a lot less

loan debt

and not having to deal with licenses and boards, etc. If I didn't discover the

value of

sticking needles in people, I probably would have gone Roger's route and just

practiced as

an unlicensed herbalist and skipped all the bull myself.

 

[Guest guest]

At 7:02 AM +0000 6/19/04, wrote:

>and even if it was or is a great technique for restoring health,

>there is still the issue of differential dx and necessity of medical

>training. does one need to be trained in medicne and differential

>diagnosis to teach or practice such a technique. .... the point is

>that such practices are healthful and someone needs to teach them,

>but such practices are not medicine because no diff dx is done. Our

>medical training is geared towards expertise in diff dx. If one is

>not interested in developing this expertise, whether western,

>japanese, chinese, etc., I am not sure why one would want to go to

>medical school in the first place? It would just be annoying.

--

 

 

 

I agree with you that getting a medical license simply to teach

meditation would be odd, and an enormous waste of time. But are you

suggesting that, for example, meditation should not be taught in the

context of medical practice?

 

I recommend it and teach meditation to a small proportion of my

patients who I think may be helped by it, eg in those dealing with

chronic pain, or those who don't regulate their lives well. I teach a

standard vipassana practice, which I learned in the context of a

training in Mindfullness Based Stress Reduction, which has been well

researched and is widely used in hospital based programs. My own

regular practice, based in a religious tradition, is different from

that.

 

Regulating life and reducing pain are an important part of the ethos

of Chinese medicine. There is evidence that meditation is helpful for

these things (at least to my satisfaction). I use it as a matter of

judgement, but not as on the basis of differential diagnosis.

Judgement, in my view, is an important part of medical practice.

 

Rory

--