Guest guest Posted July 6, 2004 Report Share Posted July 6, 2004 As one who has known Dr. Cheung for over 20 years now, I believe I have some insight into what gave him his abilities. He is the first to admit that he does not have much clinical experience in TCM, though his training as an MD allow him many insights that people trained solely in TCM will find it difficult to attain on their own. Dr. Cheung received his early childhood education at a Jesuit school in Burma. The Jesuits, reqardless of what one may think of them otherwise, are known for their razor-sharp minds and analytical abilities. From my very first class, his analytical-skeptical-questioning mind stood in stark contrast to every other ethnic Chinese teacher I have had. He is not content to accept things at face value, as the Jesuits' training teaches them to constantly search beneath the surface for hidden meanings, deceptions, illusions, and possibilities. I credit Dr. Cheung with many of the ideas I have pursued for over 15 years. In one of his classes, he questioned the dogmatic approach to traditional pulse taking, commenting on some reasons for why it might be **unnecessarily** difficult for students to learn. In this class, he analyzed the parameters of the pulse, incorporating observations from circulatory biophysics, fluid flow, viscosity, etc. Years later, I remembered this lecture when teaching my own students pulse taking, and observed the difficulties that had it matching the 28 pulse types to what they thought they might be feeling under their fingers. I reopened my own textbooks in circulatory biophysics from graduate school, and together with my nephew-colleague, Curt Kruse, designed a pulse simulation software program that would simulate many of the basic parameters Dr. Cheung had discussed. In the three years we've used it in our courses, we've noticed that students learn pulses much faster than ever before, because they can link the sensation with visually displayed parameters, many of which have close correlates in the biophysical model of pulsatile blood flow. For a summary of this, see: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/a/f.ahr2.educ.html#core http://www.rmhiherbal.org/tchs-cd/pu-01.html Dr. Cheung also recognized that the most important contribution of TCM was the principle of analyzing patterns of disharmony. Unlike many westerners and MDs who superficially study TCM and then proceed to design formulas for western disease categories, Dr. Cheung constantly warned us against this and frequently brought in case studies from China that illustrated the disastrous, and sometimes deadly, consequences of doing this. I've noticed in my own classes that of all my students, ER physicians catch on most quickly to the whole idea of TCM symptom-sign pattern recognition - they often shout with excitement that they've discovered an ancient tradition that neatly describes phenomena they've witnessed thousands of times, yet which are inadequately described in medical textbooks. I had Dr. Cheung for theory classes and Yat Ki Lai for clinic. Yat Ki Lai was the ultimate pragmatist and clinician, disdainful of fanciful theories that did not yield practical insights. He had no formal university education, but of all the people I've studied with, I can say I learned the vast majority of my clinical skills from him. The rest, that I had to figure out on my own, I credit Dr. Cheung with providing a pedagogical example of how to apply reason and logic to the traditions of Chinese medicine. Both teachers were frequently outspoken, not at all hesitant to correct mistakes and voice disagreements, a trait I am told is very " un-Chinese " . I feel very fortunate to have had them as teachers, and do my best to carry on their un-Chinese tradition of outspokenness. ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/ Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org > Mon, 5 Jul 2004 13:31:57 -0700 > " alon marcus " <alonmarcus >Re: Re: Digest Number 2057 > >Dr Cheung >>>>>Dr Cheung is a great teacher, but lets not forget that his TCM is self thought and not clinically based. Because he is a western MD he does have a great ability to look at the literature and see what is relevant. I was also greatly influenced by him and strongly so by the first day of schools when he stated very clearly that the reason why we have so many " pain pills " is because no one works well enough, trying to communicate to the class to keep TCM in perspective. For a dreamy eyed yang kid at school this was a very strong statement and truly helped shape my questioning attitude for the rest of my TCM training. I think most teachers and class mates however (not Dr Cheung) would have liked a more passive student >Alon ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/ Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 Yat Ki Lai was the ultimate pragmatist and clinician, disdainful of fanciful theories that did not yield practical insights. He had no formal university education, but of all the people I've studied with, I can say I learned the vast majority of my clinical skills from him. >>>I will have to second this. However, at the same time, many of my followups on the patients i seen him treat were a long-term disappointment Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 When I interned in the school clinic, I would often choose to put together the herbal formulas, since the other interns were mostly eager to do the acupuncture portion of the Tx. I would often talk to the patients afterward, give the cooking instructions, etc. What I realized from this was that many of the people who did not get good results had major issues of poor diet. I observed that most Chinese people, including TCM instructors, new to this country are fooled by the apparent cleanliness of everything, including the food supply, not realizing its many forms of toxicity. My own experience is that 80% of chronic illnesses in America are due in part to dietary issues, and if these are not addressed, mediocre outcomes will result, in spite of correctly chosen herbal formulas. A major aspect of my current focus is on nutrition and environmental health issues, which I did not learn in TCM training, but picked up from other sources. > " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus >Re: Dr. Cheung > >Yat Ki Lai was the ultimate pragmatist and clinician, disdainful of fanciful theories that did not yield practical insights. He had no formal university education, but of all the people I've studied with, I can say I learned the vast majority of my clinical skills from him. >>>>I will have to second this. However, at the same time, many of my followups on the patients i seen him treat were a long-term disappointment >Alon > ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/ Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 , rw2@r... wrote: My own experience is that 80% of chronic illnesses in America are due in part to dietary issues, and if these are not addressed, mediocre outcomes will result, in spite of correctly chosen herbal formulas. I find most chinese teachers downplay, ignore or even ridicule any emphasis on dietary issues in the US, same with environmental toxicity. I also think diet is the main cause of most illness, moreso than emotional factors. I don't think spiritual issues play a role in physical illness, unless you are talking about karma (which seems more and more like a theory of nature to me rather than anything mystical). Certainly being atheist or not practicing self-cultivation do not rank as major causes of disease in my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 For me, this is the great weakness in the presentation of Chinese medicine in the West, is the inattention paid to dietary and environmental factors in health and disease. I think Li Dongyuan was correct in how he integrated dietary and emotional factors as causes of chronic diseases, so I do think emotional, and, yes, spiritual factors are important as well. By spiritual factors, I mean what Heiner Fruehauf spoke about at the CHA forum, namely that going against one's purpose in life (in choice of life partner, profession, place of residence, artistic expression, etc.) leads eventually to sickness. People who hate their jobs and lives cannot be healthy in any fashion. On Jul 7, 2004, at 11:35 AM, wrote: > , rw2@r... wrote: > My own experience is that 80% of chronic illnesses in America are due > in part to dietary > issues, and if these are not addressed, mediocre outcomes will result, > in spite of correctly > chosen herbal formulas. > > I find most chinese teachers downplay, ignore or even ridicule any > emphasis on dietary > issues in the US, same with environmental toxicity. I also think diet > is the main cause of > most illness, moreso than emotional factors. I don't think spiritual > issues play a role in > physical illness, unless you are talking about karma (which seems more > and more like a > theory of nature to me rather than anything mystical). Certainly > being atheist or not > practicing self-cultivation do not rank as major causes of disease in > my mind. > > > > > > 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. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 > By spiritual factors, I mean what Heiner Fruehauf spoke about at the > CHA forum, namely that going against one's purpose in life (in choice > of life partner, profession, place of residence, artistic expression, > etc.) leads eventually to sickness. People who hate their jobs and > lives cannot be healthy in any fashion. Why label these as " spiritual? " These are all and only " unfulfilled desires. " This is a well known subcategory of internal causes of disease. I see no good reason to redefine these as " spiritual. " Only muddies the waters (which are already muddy enough) and plays to the New Age loopty-loos. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 That is fine with me, Bob. I understand what you mean. I identify with the term spiritual for these factors, because this is how Moses Maimonides, the physician/rabbi, defined it one thousand years ago. But in the modern vernacular, 'spiritual' means many things to many people. I certainly don't want to play into the unnecessary mystification of Chinese medicine if it can be avoided. On Jul 7, 2004, at 1:26 PM, Bob Flaws wrote: >> By spiritual factors, I mean what Heiner Fruehauf spoke about at the >> CHA forum, namely that going against one's purpose in life (in choice >> of life partner, profession, place of residence, artistic expression, >> etc.) leads eventually to sickness. People who hate their jobs and >> lives cannot be healthy in any fashion. > > Why label these as " spiritual? " These are all and only " unfulfilled > desires. " This is a well known subcategory of internal causes of > disease. I see no good reason to redefine these as " spiritual. " Only > muddies the waters (which are already muddy enough) and plays to the > New Age loopty-loos. > > Bob > > > > > 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. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > That is fine with me, Bob. I understand what you mean. I identify > with the term spiritual for these factors, because this is how Moses > Maimonides, the physician/rabbi, defined it one thousand years ago. semantics seems to part of this dispute as I know you and I largely agree on the details of the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2004 Report Share Posted July 8, 2004 I find most chinese teachers downplay, ignore or even ridicule any emphasis on dietary issues in the US, same with environmental toxicity. >>>>I would have to say, and evidence supports, that genetics plays a greater role than anything else. Alon 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.