Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

[Guest guest]

This search has taken me towards functional medicine and

> Western nutrition than TCM and sales. yes sales. Anytime anyone

asks me about what I

> do it is a sales conversation that is if you want more patients

> will say it is well worth going to one of his weekend

> seminars. A real eye opener.

 

Working for Metagenics/Sun Ten in Australia has been a similar eye

opener for me. Over here, Naturopaths make so much more money than

those in TCM it is ridiculous, even though I am convinced ultimately

good TCM is a far " deeper " medicine. The seminars Metagenics runs for

their Naturpaths not only include the latest scientific data, but also

information on existing flaws in the orthodox healthcare system that a

functional medicine/western nutrition specialist could choose to focus

their business on, helping a lot of people and also really cleaning up.

 

The most important thing I learnt in my sales training is that it is

not enough to have the perfect solution to a client's problem and to

have the the most logical reason why it is the best thing for this

person to pay for your product/service, because people will always

resist change. It's not just about getting peole through the door, it

is also about that very important issue of compliance - you've got to

sell it, and to sell it means to bring what you do to a level where

your patient can comprehend the value, even if it is not an

explanation that does complete justice.

 

To me, the ability to sell something doesn't have to be about flogging

things to people that they don't need, it can also just mean

overcoming the natural resistance many patients have to making changes

in their normal way of doing and seeing things that are to their own

benefit.

 

The way top salespeople work today has changed quite a lot from the

old days of verbal judo where it was the salesperson's job to corner

the client until they had no choice but to say yes. Now it is much

more about good communication and listening, and creating and

maintaining quality relationships. The latest stuff by Brian Tracey I

have found particularly enlightening and would highly recommend it to

any clinician of whatever modality.

[Guest guest]

, " " <lionel.chan@a...>

wrote:

 

>

> The most important thing I learnt in my sales training is that it is

> not enough to have the perfect solution to a client's problem and to

> have the the most logical reason why it is the best thing for this

> person to pay for your product/service, because people will always

> resist change.

 

And in modern America for the average person, that means science. There are

rapidly

decreasing returns for those who market to the new age, holistic or spiritual

crowds.

There are only a small and shrinking number of people who find chinese tradition

or

philosophy appealing and logical. I was surprised to hear a colleague tell me

that most

patients come to us for our worldview. Not in a million years. Most come for

symptom

relief and they do not want any form of proselytization at any time. The idea

that you will

suck the average Joe into the daoist worldview is ludicrous. We have added a

class at

PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do not find this

worldview

familiar or appealing. If our students reject it, how much hope is there for

the public?

Luckily it doesn't matter since TCM's strength is not its worldview, buts it

empiricism. Who

cares about philosophy if it is not practical. Certainly not Americans who use

acupuncture.

 

[Guest guest]

Wow, this post is so full of rhetorical minefields, only a fool such as myself

would cross it.

Anyway: If not " most " patients come for Taoist Proselytization, should we

prepare

ourselves and students for those who do come for it? But then I'm not sure what

you mean

by the " average American " . If we set our sights on training for the average Joe

why not set

our sights on average practitioners? It was Mark Seem who in a class said that

patients

come in for treatment on their (I believe these are the words he used) body,

mind and

spirit. They may not know it or articulate but if you don't reach 2 out of these

3 then they

will deem your treatment a failure.

I think one missing link you have here is that many patients come in asking Why

they have

this illness. Even for the stupidest shoulder pain, " many " end up at this

question. If health

is an expression of Who We Are in this world then we darned well better train

our students

how to answer them.

 

Can you elaborate on this class?

We have added a class at

> PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do not find this

worldview

> familiar or appealing.

 

 

 

 

doug

 

 

 

 

 

, " " wrote:

> , " " <lionel.chan@a...>

wrote:

>

> >

> > The most important thing I learnt in my sales training is that it is

> > not enough to have the perfect solution to a client's problem and to

> > have the the most logical reason why it is the best thing for this

> > person to pay for your product/service, because people will always

> > resist change.

>

> And in modern America for the average person, that means science. There are

rapidly

> decreasing returns for those who market to the new age, holistic or spiritual

crowds.

> There are only a small and shrinking number of people who find chinese

tradition or

> philosophy appealing and logical. I was surprised to hear a colleague tell me

that most

> patients come to us for our worldview. Not in a million years. Most come for

symptom

> relief and they do not want any form of proselytization at any time. The idea

that you

will

> suck the average Joe into the daoist worldview is ludicrous. We have added a

class at

> PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do not find this

worldview

> familiar or appealing. If our students reject it, how much hope is there for

the public?

> Luckily it doesn't matter since TCM's strength is not its worldview, buts it

empiricism.

Who

> cares about philosophy if it is not practical. Certainly not Americans who

use

acupuncture.

>

 

[Guest guest]

I should probably let Todd speak for himself here, but I think there

has been a little bit of a misunderstanding. Todds reply in the

context of his other writings make it clear he does not mean not

trying to treat patients on all levels, including that of patient

worldview, is a complete waster of time. But, from a marketing and

social-level point of view, if we want more TCM practitioners running

successful clinics and thereby making more of an impact on healthcare

generally, that must be more versed in science to at least first get

the attention of the " average American " as an entry point to any

further " Proselytization " s that may be appropriate.

 

Is that close to the mark Todd?

 

-Li

 

, " "

wrote:

> Wow, this post is so full of rhetorical minefields, only a fool such

as myself would cross it.

> Anyway: If not " most " patients come for Taoist Proselytization,

should we prepare

> ourselves and students for those who do come for it? But then I'm

not sure what you mean

> by the " average American " . If we set our sights on training for the

average Joe why not set

> our sights on average practitioners? It was Mark Seem who in a class

said that patients

> come in for treatment on their (I believe these are the words he

used) body, mind and

> spirit. They may not know it or articulate but if you don't reach 2

out of these 3 then they

> will deem your treatment a failure.

> I think one missing link you have here is that many patients come in

asking Why they have

> this illness. Even for the stupidest shoulder pain, " many " end up at

this question. If health

> is an expression of Who We Are in this world then we darned well

better train our students

> how to answer them.

>

> Can you elaborate on this class?

> We have added a class at

> > PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do

not find this

> worldview

> > familiar or appealing.

>

>

>

>

> doug

>

>

>

>

>

> , " "

wrote:

> > , " "

<lionel.chan@a...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> > > The most important thing I learnt in my sales training is that it is

> > > not enough to have the perfect solution to a client's problem and to

> > > have the the most logical reason why it is the best thing for this

> > > person to pay for your product/service, because people will always

> > > resist change.

> >

> > And in modern America for the average person, that means science.

There are rapidly

> > decreasing returns for those who market to the new age, holistic

or spiritual crowds.

> > There are only a small and shrinking number of people who find

chinese tradition or

> > philosophy appealing and logical. I was surprised to hear a

colleague tell me that most

> > patients come to us for our worldview. Not in a million years.

Most come for symptom

> > relief and they do not want any form of proselytization at any

time. The idea that you

> will

> > suck the average Joe into the daoist worldview is ludicrous. We

have added a class at

> > PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do

not find this

> worldview

> > familiar or appealing. If our students reject it, how much hope

is there for the public?

> > Luckily it doesn't matter since TCM's strength is not its

worldview, buts it empiricism.

> Who

> > cares about philosophy if it is not practical. Certainly not

Americans who use

> acupuncture.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I would like to interject an idea into all of this. First we should define

the term of which we speak. What science are we talking about? The common

politicized version (term) is the one that I think is being thrown around

here. If that is true, than I would disagree. I have an undergrad in

science (zoology to be accurate) and saw more than my share of

misinterpretations of things as they are in reality.

 

For example, one really big error, is the idea that blood formation only

comes from bone marrow (original study is very flawed). A Famous Japanese

hemotologist (awarded highest honors for his work) came to the conclusion

that other sources exist and proved it. The Japanese govt is a major

recognizer of merit, not a slouch.

 

So why are we still clinging to this idea and why is it that few of us know

about this work?

 

Another one while we are at it is the theory that the periodic table of the

elements (chemistry) is limited and absolute. The US govt (Army corp of

engineers I think) and other top universities have spent money, time and

came up with the same conclusion that elements can and do change without the

need for huge amounts of energy. Dr. Louis Kervran (France) was co-named as

Nobel Prize Nominee for his work in this area (physics). The Nobel

committee is a very reputable group.

 

So again, I ask you do we really want to know and correctly educate

ourselves and future generations of practitioners or do we just want to fit

into the current belief system (inaccurate)?

 

I am for curricula that encourages and examines critical thinking but it

must include the above info if we are to be accurate in our understanding

(scientifically) and more effective clinically.

 

Where do you fit?

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

> " " <lionel.chan

>

>

> Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>Tue, 02 Aug 2005 02:00:12 -0000

>

>I should probably let Todd speak for himself here, but I think there

>has been a little bit of a misunderstanding. Todds reply in the

>context of his other writings make it clear he does not mean not

>trying to treat patients on all levels, including that of patient

>worldview, is a complete waster of time. But, from a marketing and

>social-level point of view, if we want more TCM practitioners running

>successful clinics and thereby making more of an impact on healthcare

>generally, that must be more versed in science to at least first get

>the attention of the " average American " as an entry point to any

>further " Proselytization " s that may be appropriate.

>

>Is that close to the mark Todd?

>

>-Li

>

> , " "

>wrote:

> > Wow, this post is so full of rhetorical minefields, only a fool such

>as myself would cross it.

> > Anyway: If not " most " patients come for Taoist Proselytization,

>should we prepare

> > ourselves and students for those who do come for it? But then I'm

>not sure what you mean

> > by the " average American " . If we set our sights on training for the

>average Joe why not set

> > our sights on average practitioners? It was Mark Seem who in a class

>said that patients

> > come in for treatment on their (I believe these are the words he

>used) body, mind and

> > spirit. They may not know it or articulate but if you don't reach 2

>out of these 3 then they

> > will deem your treatment a failure.

> > I think one missing link you have here is that many patients come in

>asking Why they have

> > this illness. Even for the stupidest shoulder pain, " many " end up at

>this question. If health

> > is an expression of Who We Are in this world then we darned well

>better train our students

> > how to answer them.

> >

> > Can you elaborate on this class?

> > We have added a class at

> > > PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do

>not find this

> > worldview

> > > familiar or appealing.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > doug

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " "

> wrote:

> > > , " "

><lionel.chan@a...> wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > The most important thing I learnt in my sales training is that it is

> > > > not enough to have the perfect solution to a client's problem and to

> > > > have the the most logical reason why it is the best thing for this

> > > > person to pay for your product/service, because people will always

> > > > resist change.

> > >

> > > And in modern America for the average person, that means science.

> There are rapidly

> > > decreasing returns for those who market to the new age, holistic

>or spiritual crowds.

> > > There are only a small and shrinking number of people who find

>chinese tradition or

> > > philosophy appealing and logical. I was surprised to hear a

>colleague tell me that most

> > > patients come to us for our worldview. Not in a million years.

>Most come for symptom

> > > relief and they do not want any form of proselytization at any

>time. The idea that you

> > will

> > > suck the average Joe into the daoist worldview is ludicrous. We

>have added a class at

> > > PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do

>not find this

> > worldview

> > > familiar or appealing. If our students reject it, how much hope

>is there for the public?

> > > Luckily it doesn't matter since TCM's strength is not its

>worldview, buts it empiricism.

> > Who

> > > cares about philosophy if it is not practical. Certainly not

>Americans who use

> > acupuncture.

> > >

> >

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I can say that during my time in OM school (1989-1995) there was a major

shift in the education and a lessing of interns abilities. The previous

interns were better practitioners.

 

Since then, I have experienced a continuation of the problem that students

want to rely upon a western medical diagnosis to determine their treatment.

In fact, it is interesting to see on this and other forums a propensity for

practitioners to use western illness names, some of which are really a label

without any real understandable pathology.

 

Additionally, my current schooling (chiro) has similar issues with an

unacceptable world view. The school is teaching that chiro believes that

ALL illness is the product of a malfunctioning nervous system.

 

I can tell you that many younger students do not agree with this as it goes

against their popular knowledge as well as their previous education. If it

were true than, there would be greater success for all illnesses with it.

But as a result, there is a major split in the profession. I hope that we

can accomodate all and avoid this type of problem. Integrity, integrity,

integrity. This is what it comes down to. If we lie to our students then

what?

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

> " "

>

>

> Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>Mon, 01 Aug 2005 22:42:26 -0000

>

>Wow, this post is so full of rhetorical minefields, only a fool such as

>myself would cross it.

>Anyway: If not " most " patients come for Taoist Proselytization, should we

>prepare

>ourselves and students for those who do come for it? But then I'm not sure

>what you mean

>by the " average American " . If we set our sights on training for the average

>Joe why not set

>our sights on average practitioners? It was Mark Seem who in a class said

>that patients

>come in for treatment on their (I believe these are the words he used)

>body, mind and

>spirit. They may not know it or articulate but if you don't reach 2 out of

>these 3 then they

>will deem your treatment a failure.

>I think one missing link you have here is that many patients come in asking

>Why they have

>this illness. Even for the stupidest shoulder pain, " many " end up at this

>question. If health

>is an expression of Who We Are in this world then we darned well better

>train our students

>how to answer them.

>

>Can you elaborate on this class?

> We have added a class at

> > PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do not find

>this

>worldview

> > familiar or appealing.

>

>

>

>

>doug

>

>

>

>

>

> , " "

>wrote:

> > , " "

><lionel.chan@a...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> > > The most important thing I learnt in my sales training is that it is

> > > not enough to have the perfect solution to a client's problem and to

> > > have the the most logical reason why it is the best thing for this

> > > person to pay for your product/service, because people will always

> > > resist change.

> >

> > And in modern America for the average person, that means science. There

>are rapidly

> > decreasing returns for those who market to the new age, holistic or

>spiritual crowds.

> > There are only a small and shrinking number of people who find chinese

>tradition or

> > philosophy appealing and logical. I was surprised to hear a colleague

>tell me that most

> > patients come to us for our worldview. Not in a million years. Most

>come for symptom

> > relief and they do not want any form of proselytization at any time.

>The idea that you

>will

> > suck the average Joe into the daoist worldview is ludicrous. We have

>added a class at

> > PCOM designed to address the fact that most current students do not find

>this

>worldview

> > familiar or appealing. If our students reject it, how much hope is

>there for the public?

> > Luckily it doesn't matter since TCM's strength is not its worldview,

>buts it empiricism.

>Who

> > cares about philosophy if it is not practical. Certainly not Americans

>who use

>acupuncture.

> >

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of mike Bowser

> Since then, I have experienced a continuation of the problem that students

> want to rely upon a western medical diagnosis to determine their

treatment.

> In fact, it is interesting to see on this and other forums a propensity

> for

> practitioners to use western illness names, some of which are really a

> label

> without any real understandable pathology.

 

But the reality is that CM (in China) uses western disease names integrated

with CM patterns. This merging of views can give a much more complete

picture. Remember CM has always used disease names. IT is no surprise that

CM now uses both traditional Chinese disease names as well as Modern western

disease names. It only makes sense. And if you want to access material in

Chinese it is extremely helpful...

 

-Jason

[Guest guest]

I think what Mike is saying that there are many inquiries on how to

treat western diseases with points and herbs without even thinking of

pattern differentiation. It certainly can be useful sometimes to

have both the WM disease name and pattern info when gathering

information about treatment. However, without the pattern, treatment

of the disease is useless. Many patients have symptom patterns

without specific diseases, sometimes fitting what WM calls

'subclinical'.

 

In summation, sometimes we treat the patient with the disease,

sometimes the disease that the patient has.

 

 

On Aug 2, 2005, at 4:54 PM, wrote:

 

> But the reality is that CM (in China) uses western disease names

> integrated

> with CM patterns. This merging of views can give a much more complete

> picture. Remember CM has always used disease names. IT is no

> surprise that

> CM now uses both traditional Chinese disease names as well as

> Modern western

> disease names. It only makes sense. And if you want to access

> material in

> Chinese it is extremely helpful...

>

> -Jason

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jason,

That might be true in China but we are not there nor do we have the same

educational training.

I agree with you in theory but the reality is that many students are now

more interested in treating a western medical condition and have problems

trasferring this to CM patterns. I hope you would agree that this is a big

concern for our educational institutions.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

> " "

>

>

>RE: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>Tue, 2 Aug 2005 17:54:06 -0600

>

>

>

> >

> >

> > On Behalf Of mike Bowser

> > Since then, I have experienced a continuation of the problem that

>students

> > want to rely upon a western medical diagnosis to determine their

>treatment.

> > In fact, it is interesting to see on this and other forums a propensity

> > for

> > practitioners to use western illness names, some of which are really a

> > label

> > without any real understandable pathology.

>

>But the reality is that CM (in China) uses western disease names integrated

>with CM patterns. This merging of views can give a much more complete

>picture. Remember CM has always used disease names. IT is no surprise

>that

>CM now uses both traditional Chinese disease names as well as Modern

>western

>disease names. It only makes sense. And if you want to access material in

>Chinese it is extremely helpful...

>

>-Jason

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of

> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:37 PM

>

> Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> I think what Mike is saying that there are many inquiries on how to

> treat western diseases with points and herbs without even thinking of

> pattern differentiation. It certainly can be useful sometimes to

> have both the WM disease name and pattern info when gathering

> information about treatment. However, without the pattern, treatment

> of the disease is useless. Many patients have symptom patterns

> without specific diseases, sometimes fitting what WM calls

> 'subclinical'.

>

> In summation, sometimes we treat the patient with the disease,

> sometimes the disease that the patient has.

>

I get what you are saying, but very rarely do I ever just treat a pattern

without having a disease in mind... Really I have never heard of this...

People most of time have some complaint(S), and usually this lines up with a

disease, I.e. cough, insomnia, stomach pain, anxiety, or whatever... Even

going all the way back to Zhong Zhang Jing (or neijing right?) - things were

always about the disease, patterns are a further development and there to

differentiate the disease... Can you show some sources that discuss only

treating zang-fu patterns without a disease... I have never heard of a

patient i.e. coming to see me (unless a student) and say hey I have a

liver-spleen disharmony can you fix me...

 

-

[Guest guest]

I am not talking about symptoms (which are defined as disease in

Chinese medicine, but not necessarily in WM) such as coughing,

stomach pain, etc. Sometimes patients have several of these

symptoms. Sometimes just fatigue. Sometimes they feel 'out of

balance', their menstrual cycle is off, their elimination isn't

regular. Many of these conditions are considered to be 'sub-

clinical' in WM. We may diagnose, using SHL, 'tai yang disease', but

is this the same as a biomedical condition? Maybe, maybe not.

 

 

On Aug 2, 2005, at 7:11 PM, wrote:

 

> I get what you are saying, but very rarely do I ever just treat a

> pattern

> without having a disease in mind... Really I have never heard of

> this...

> People most of time have some complaint(S), and usually this lines

> up with a

> disease, I.e. cough, insomnia, stomach pain, anxiety, or

> whatever... Even

> going all the way back to Zhong Zhang Jing (or neijing right?) -

> things were

> always about the disease, patterns are a further development and

> there to

> differentiate the disease... Can you show some sources that

> discuss only

> treating zang-fu patterns without a disease... I have never heard of a

> patient i.e. coming to see me (unless a student) and say hey I have a

> liver-spleen disharmony can you fix me...

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of mike Bowser

> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 7:05 PM

>

> RE: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> Jason,

> That might be true in China but we are not there nor do we have the same

> educational training.

 

Eh????? My training did reflect the fact that Western Diseases are used, I

don't know when or where you went to school, but this 'china' mentality is

definitely present in the West. I don't buy your stance. Just for proof,

check out Flaws's book, " treatment of Western Disease with Chinese

Medicine. " Or his book on infertility, ENDOMETRIOS, and CM... Or many many

many other books that I own... The reality is that Western Diseases are a

real and important part of modern CM in the states and in China... and

denial of this is just ... well denial..

 

-

[Guest guest]

Again, I read something different in Mike's post. What I get from it

is that in Western CM schools, students get through their education

without an adequate knowledge of pattern differentiation so that they

can reframe disease diagnosis into individualized patterns.

 

 

On Aug 2, 2005, at 7:20 PM, wrote:

 

> Eh????? My training did reflect the fact that Western Diseases are

> used, I

> don't know when or where you went to school, but this 'china'

> mentality is

> definitely present in the West. I don't buy your stance. Just for

> proof,

> check out Flaws's book, " treatment of Western Disease with Chinese

> Medicine. " Or his book on infertility, ENDOMETRIOS, and CM... Or

> many many

> many other books that I own... The reality is that Western Diseases

> are a

> real and important part of modern CM in the states and in China... and

> denial of this is just ... well denial..

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of

> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:37 PM

>

> Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> I think what Mike is saying that there are many inquiries on how to

> treat western diseases with points and herbs without even thinking of

> pattern differentiation.

 

And what is wrong with that? There are many points and herbs that across the

board, almost independent of patterns, work for a given disease... I have

seen this... Not to speak for but he (I think) has mentioned numerous

times he believes that this is a valid approach... But Todd aside, many

Chinese also feel this is true... I personally will always differentiate

into patterns. I like it... but there are books and methods, research etc.

that DO NOT do as much differentiating, and they get results in many

diseases. Like I said I do not advocate this, but it is a real method! I

have no problem with a person, like I did yesterday, asking if anyone has

any information on a disease (i.e. azospermia) - This is how Westerns and

the Chinese organize information. What is the alternative?, maybe... " hey

does anyone have any information on what I think is a kidney essence def.

with liver qi stag? " Silly... I want info on the whole disease and I want to

read about it... It would be folly for me just to assume that the pattern I

see is going to treat such a disease, especially when CM has evolved so much

with modern technology. But I agree that CM offers so much more than just

treating a western disease by itself without patterns... but that is one

view..

 

 

 

It certainly can be useful sometimes to

> have both the WM disease name and pattern info when gathering

> information about treatment.

Yes almost always... I would always want both...

 

However, without the pattern, treatment

> of the disease is useless.

Not always.., that is proven... I would rather treat a disease than some

pattern.

 

Many patients have symptom patterns

> without specific diseases, sometimes fitting what WM calls

> 'subclinical'.

Then I ask, why are they coming to you?? They have no chief complaint?

 

-

[Guest guest]

There is one major difference between the way Chinese medicine

defines a disease/bing and some diseases in Western medicine.

 

CM always bases its diagnoses on sense perception of symptoms and how

they appear (baby moth for pustular tonsils, wind fire eye, white

patch wind, visceral agitation, etc.). Whereas many diseases in WM

require the use of technologies that extend beyond that apparent to

the senses, including azospermia.

 

I have no problem with gathering info on such conditions, and I've

treated biomedical conditions that require a lot of data, including,

of course, cancer patients. However, especially in cases where

patients are being treated already with drugs, surgery, etc., or are

in recovery mode, it is a pattern or combination of patterns that is

being treated, not cancer directly. OK, they may have nausea,

dizziness, fatigue, you can call these 'diseases' if you like.

 

On Aug 2, 2005, at 7:30 PM, wrote:

 

> Many patients have symptom patterns

>

>> without specific diseases, sometimes fitting what WM calls

>> 'subclinical'.

>>

> Then I ask, why are they coming to you?? They have no chief complaint?

 

They are coming to improve their health and feel better, Jason.

 

Z'ev

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of

> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:19 PM

>

> Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> I am not talking about symptoms (which are defined as disease in

> Chinese medicine, but not necessarily in WM) such as coughing,

> stomach pain, etc. Sometimes patients have several of these

> symptoms.

What are we talking about here? These 'symptoms' ARE diseases in CM...

right? Are we talking WM or CM??? anyway... I think we are both saying the

same thing...???

 

-

 

Sometimes just fatigue. Sometimes they feel 'out of

> balance', their menstrual cycle is off, their elimination isn't

> regular. Many of these conditions are considered to be 'sub-

> clinical' in WM. We may diagnose, using SHL, 'tai yang disease', but

> is this the same as a biomedical condition? Maybe, maybe not.

>

>

> On Aug 2, 2005, at 7:11 PM, wrote:

>

> > I get what you are saying, but very rarely do I ever just treat a

> > pattern

> > without having a disease in mind... Really I have never heard of

> > this...

> > People most of time have some complaint(S), and usually this lines

> > up with a

> > disease, I.e. cough, insomnia, stomach pain, anxiety, or

> > whatever... Even

> > going all the way back to Zhong Zhang Jing (or neijing right?) -

> > things were

> > always about the disease, patterns are a further development and

> > there to

> > differentiate the disease... Can you show some sources that

> > discuss only

> > treating zang-fu patterns without a disease... I have never heard of a

> > patient i.e. coming to see me (unless a student) and say hey I have a

> > liver-spleen disharmony can you fix me...

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of

> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:28 PM

>

> Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> Again, I read something different in Mike's post. What I get from it

> is that in Western CM schools, students get through their education

> without an adequate knowledge of pattern differentiation so that they

> can reframe disease diagnosis into individualized patterns.

 

Maybe some do have this problem, But when I went to school, this

differentiation was taught the first year. I don't think this is a school

problem...

 

-

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of

> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:48 PM

>

> Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> There is one major difference between the way Chinese medicine

> defines a disease/bing and some diseases in Western medicine.

>

> CM always bases its diagnoses on sense perception of symptoms and how

> they appear (baby moth for pustular tonsils, wind fire eye, white

> patch wind, visceral agitation, etc.). Whereas many diseases in WM

> require the use of technologies that extend beyond that apparent to

> the senses, including azospermia.

 

I don't think this is true! you cannot say that CM only uses sense

perception to dx. CM DOES now use disease names like endometriosis,

azospermia, they are NOT exclusive to western medicine anymore... China and

CM has absorbed these.. CM has also absorbed the technology, etc... You MAY

say that classically these diseases were not defined as they are today, but

we live in the present, and things have surely evolved... I do not see this

black and white divide you mention.. And the (modern) that

I read does not reflect this divide either. And no one can deny the level

of information that comes with such a disease label...

 

>

> I have no problem with gathering info on such conditions, and I've

> treated biomedical conditions that require a lot of data, including,

> of course, cancer patients. However, especially in cases where

> patients are being treated already with drugs, surgery, etc., or are

> in recovery mode, it is a pattern or combination of patterns that is

> being treated, not cancer directly.

 

Well there is a hx of Cancer being treated with CM directly, not just random

patterns... There is a whole lingo according to some doctors around this

disease. I.e. cancer toxin and anti-cancer qi. If you are treating CA you

don't just treat nausea and fatigue... I think what you are referring to is

assisting WM in the treatment of Cancer, a much different thing!

 

OK, they may have nausea,

> dizziness, fatigue, you can call these 'diseases' if you like.

Yes these are diseases and have been for over 2000 years in CM...

 

-

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of

Cancer, a much different thing!

>

> OK, they may have nausea,

> > dizziness, fatigue, you can call these 'diseases' if you like.

> Yes these are diseases and have been for over 2000 years in CM...

>

> -

>

Just to be clear from my terse response.. I am not denying that i.e.

dizziness & fatigue are symptoms. They are both symptoms and diseases as

far as I understand the way CM categorizes things. When someone walks

through the door and they say I cannot sleep, can you help me. This is a

disease. And in CM literature one can look up this 'complaint' and get

patterns from it... Therefore I think of it as a disease. Of course it

could show up in a list of symptoms (for another disease) and therefore

contribute to the pattern dx. But CM has always been organized by disease

(or symptom) not by patterns, and I think that is the real point. The

diseases have just changed and evolved over time... Hence endometriosis is

now a valid CM disease!

 

-

[Guest guest]

Yes, the patterns are 'taught'. But graduates, in my estimation, are

not getting it.

 

 

On Aug 2, 2005, at 8:02 PM, wrote:

 

> Maybe some do have this problem, But when I went to school, this

> differentiation was taught the first year. I don't think this is a

> school

> problem...

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I agree with you on this. The original issue that Mike discussed, as

I remember, was that there are many inquiries on the various Chinese

medicine discussion groups about how to treat a biomedical disease

without attempting to discern patterns, or look at source texts, or

define cases in more detail. On a more positive note, case histories

have been presented in more detail in recent months on these sites.

While there are special herbs, points and prescriptions for specific

diseases, this is only one part of the solution. If the inquiries

(usually on other CM groups) were made with a greater knowledge base

in both WM and CM, it would be less of a problem.

 

I'm ready to move on to something else.

 

 

On Aug 2, 2005, at 8:28 PM, wrote:

 

> Just to be clear from my terse response.. I am not denying that i.e.

> dizziness & fatigue are symptoms. They are both symptoms and

> diseases as

> far as I understand the way CM categorizes things. When someone walks

> through the door and they say I cannot sleep, can you help me.

> This is a

> disease. And in CM literature one can look up this 'complaint' and

> get

> patterns from it... Therefore I think of it as a disease. Of

> course it

> could show up in a list of symptoms (for another disease) and

> therefore

> contribute to the pattern dx. But CM has always been organized by

> disease

> (or symptom) not by patterns, and I think that is the real point. The

> diseases have just changed and evolved over time... Hence

> endometriosis is

> now a valid CM disease!

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, " "

<@c...> wrote:

you cannot say that CM only uses sense

> perception to dx. CM DOES now use disease names like endometriosis,

> azospermia, they are NOT exclusive to western medicine anymore...

China and

> CM has absorbed these..

 

Modern Chinese medicine is often integrative in its scope and the

information that it utilizes. However, the use of modern disease

names is a hallmark trait of integrated modern CM and WM medicine, not

TCM itself. There is nothing better or worse about the evidence based

approach (EBM) or the traditional approach of using TCM disease names

and pattern diagnosis, but they are distinct systems that have their

own strengths and weaknesses.

 

At the hospital in Taiwan where I study, the internal medicine

department has two divisions that reflect these two approaches. One

department uses WM disease names and uses similar treatments for

patients with the same disease, usually based on research and

pharmacology. The other department uses only TCM disease names and

pattern diagnosis as the basis for determining treatment. Both are

aware of Western diseases and TCM patterns, but the treatment style is

different. Both sides get good results and they generally respect the

other camp.

 

Nowadays, many doctors are losing the ability to perform good pattern

diagnosis and have mediocre pulse-taking abilities because they rely

on WM disease diagnosis when determining treatment. But these same

doctors are often well-educated about other important factors of

modern medicine, including research design. Everyone just has

different strengths. A great deal of research designs now incorporate

WM disease names but the experimental groups are divided based on TCM

patterns- this is somewhat of a halfway point between the medicines.

Even the WM disease-based practioners often vary their treatment

slightly depending on the constitution of the patient.

 

I think that the Chinese generally have less conflict about

integrating CM and WM, but I think it is erroneous to think that

diseases like endometriosis have become a part of TCM itself. These

diseases are part of Chinese medical healthcare and are understood and

considered by all CM doctors, but there are many physicians who

continue to rely on traditional disease names and patterns when

determining therapy. Although the two medicines are often integrated

in clinical practice, they are still studied and practiced on their

own as well. Cancer and endometriosis are discussed and treated by

Chinese TCM doctors and are mentioned in integrated textbooks, but

these are not TCM disease names.

 

Eric

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of Eric Brand

>

> I think that the Chinese generally have less conflict about

> integrating CM and WM, but I think it is erroneous to think that

> diseases like endometriosis have become a part of TCM itself. These

> diseases are part of Chinese medical healthcare and are understood and

> considered by all CM doctors, but there are many physicians who

> continue to rely on traditional disease names and patterns when

> determining therapy. Although the two medicines are often integrated

> in clinical practice, they are still studied and practiced on their

> own as well. Cancer and endometriosis are discussed and treated by

> Chinese TCM doctors and are mentioned in integrated textbooks, but

> these are not TCM disease names.

>

 

This is completely debatable; I have books that say otherwise...

 

-

[Guest guest]

I think I need to clarify my point. I was noticing a tendency of

grads/students to overly-rely upon WM to treat and seemed to be stuck if

someone does not have a WM illness. That was all. People are more than

just their WM illness and in fact, I beleive, that the illness is only a

part of who they are and useless without other info.

 

I do think the PRC does not have the hangups we in the west do with WM names

of illnesses but then they also do not have the competition between groups

which can and does sometimes get in the way of training and practice. Try

to treat cancer, for example, in CA and you will be arrested as it is

illegal. Hopefully you get the point.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>

>

>Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>Tue, 2 Aug 2005 19:27:42 -0700

>

>Again, I read something different in Mike's post. What I get from it

>is that in Western CM schools, students get through their education

>without an adequate knowledge of pattern differentiation so that they

>can reframe disease diagnosis into individualized patterns.

>

>

>On Aug 2, 2005, at 7:20 PM, wrote:

>

> > Eh????? My training did reflect the fact that Western Diseases are

> > used, I

> > don't know when or where you went to school, but this 'china'

> > mentality is

> > definitely present in the West. I don't buy your stance. Just for

> > proof,

> > check out Flaws's book, " treatment of Western Disease with Chinese

> > Medicine. " Or his book on infertility, ENDOMETRIOS, and CM... Or

> > many many

> > many other books that I own... The reality is that Western Diseases

> > are a

> > real and important part of modern CM in the states and in China... and

> > denial of this is just ... well denial..

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

> On Behalf Of mike Bowser

> Wednesday, August 03, 2005 5:54 AM

>

> Re: Re: Learning from Chiropractic marketing - Brian Tracey

>

> I think I need to clarify my point. I was noticing a tendency of

> grads/students to overly-rely upon WM to treat and seemed to be stuck if

> someone does not have a WM illness. That was all. People are more than

> just their WM illness and in fact, I beleive, that the illness is only a

> part of who they are and useless without other info.

 

Yes I clearly agree with this, some students DO NOT get it... So we seem to

be on the same page... It seemed from your 1st msg. that you were against

using western medicine disease names as a whole... But I see your point. In

Boulder, though, most students (high %) and practitioners, at least that I

know, are pretty with it and know how to differentiate using patterns...

Maybe the tide is turning, or maybe it is just Boulder.

 

-