in support of creative thought in Jazz, classical vs improv

[Guest guest]

According to the Maciocia Foundations of ,

 

The ST is the origin of " fluids "

The KD is the " governor of water "

The Lungs control " water passage " in descending and dispersing fluids

The San Jiao is the " official of irrigation " for fluids and yuan qi

 

All of the organs, zang and fu deal with fluids;

The SP is the first organ to separate pure from impure,

The SI is the primary organ that separates pure from impure.

The UB's impure fluids become urine.

The LI's impure fluids are not reabsorbed, but excreted.

The GB is the only fu organ that does not store food and drink.

 

Every organ has a yin and yang component and

as far as I remember from oral transmission,

the KD is the most important organ for the " yin " of the body;

because it is the lowest organ (water flows to the lowest places)

the one that is associated with water (elementally),

and because it stores both prenatal and postnatal jing (which is of yin

nature).

Furthermore, the KD can be separated between yin and yang (left and right).

 

This reminds me of jazz and the Miles Davis or John Coltrane phases of their

creative careers.

In 63, Coltrane went off the train and had his most phenomenal recording and

performing year of his life.

The album " Crescent " is my favorite. That was the peak of his work and play

in my view.

It was the perfect balance of the past and future. When you hear it, you

sit in the presence of the present moment. However, after that; his hun

wandered all over the ether until his death 4 years later.

Some people love his Atlantic years, which were relatively conservative; and

others dig his Impulse years, which allowed him to go to places no has ever

gone. Either way, he is a master of the trade and art, who changed the face

of jazz, like Sun Si Miao in medicine.

Finding that balance between the solid riffs and improvisation creates

blissful music;

is that the way of medicine too?

 

K.

[Guest guest]

Great point - the way I see it that some people hate the idea of

having to learn the basics because it seems dull, boring, mundane,

etc. Maybe it's because they see the successful improvisers and get

stars in their eyes - and therefore they want to just jump directly on

the rebellious bandwagon.

 

They realize, too late, that the reason why the improvisers are so

good is that they have complete mastery of the basics. There was a

line in an Imax film, " Racing with the Andretti's " that was great -

Michael said " anyone can drive fast, but not everyone can drive fast

and survive when things go wrong " or something to that effect.

Cheers

Geoff

 

, " "

<johnkokko wrote:

 

> Finding that balance between the solid riffs and improvisation creates

> blissful music;

> is that the way of medicine too?

>

> K.

>

[Guest guest]

Yes.. Jazz. I think it was Coltrane who said 99% of what he played live was

practice only 1% true improvisation. These guys worked hours and hours a day

mastering the basics. We just see their ideas on stage and say wow what

improvisation.

 

 

 

Although an album like Bitches Brew (Davis, McLaughlin etc...) may be

another story and Song X (Coleman, Haden, DeJohnette & Metheny) surely makes

one reconsider " structure " :-)..

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of G Hudson

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 1:05 PM

 

Re: in support of creative thought in Jazz, classical

vs improv

 

 

 

Great point - the way I see it that some people hate the idea of

having to learn the basics because it seems dull, boring, mundane,

etc. Maybe it's because they see the successful improvisers and get

stars in their eyes - and therefore they want to just jump directly on

the rebellious bandwagon.

 

They realize, too late, that the reason why the improvisers are so

good is that they have complete mastery of the basics. There was a

line in an Imax film, " Racing with the Andretti's " that was great -

Michael said " anyone can drive fast, but not everyone can drive fast

and survive when things go wrong " or something to that effect.

Cheers

Geoff

 

@ <%40>

, " "

<johnkokko wrote:

 

> Finding that balance between the solid riffs and improvisation creates

> blissful music;

> is that the way of medicine too?

>

> K.

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Even Cecil Taylor, the farthest out of them all, was a 99%/1% case.

Check out his free-form piano improvisations. .

 

 

On Feb 19, 2008, at 6:45 PM, wrote:

 

> Yes.. Jazz. I think it was Coltrane who said 99% of what he played

> live was

> practice only 1% true improvisation. These guys worked hours and

> hours a day

> mastering the basics. We just see their ideas on stage and say wow

> what

> improvisation.

>

> Although an album like Bitches Brew (Davis, McLaughlin etc...) may be

> another story and Song X (Coleman, Haden, DeJohnette & Metheny)

> surely makes

> one reconsider " structure " :-)..

>

> -Jason

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yes,

It's interesting how akin Chinese medicine is to jazz;

much more on the same vibration than classical music.

 

Jazz has a lot of room for improvisation and sixth, seventh and ninth

chords.

Acupuncture and herbal prescription writing plays out in similar ways,

with modulations and modifications of tested formulas and riffs.

 

Fascinating how blues and ragtime are the predecessors of jazz...

and the blues scale : 1, b3, 4, 5, b7

is also the pentatonic (five note scale) of the ancient Chinese.

 

The five tastes and the five notes....

 

So, when we're performing medicine,

we're actually making music

by tuning the strings of the pulses and channels

and using acupuncture as tuning forks.

 

K.

 

 

On Feb 19, 2008 7:14 PM, <zrosenbe wrote:

 

> Even Cecil Taylor, the farthest out of them all, was a 99%/1% case.

> Check out his free-form piano improvisations. .

>

>

>

> On Feb 19, 2008, at 6:45 PM, wrote:

>

> > Yes.. Jazz. I think it was Coltrane who said 99% of what he played

> > live was

> > practice only 1% true improvisation. These guys worked hours and

> > hours a day

> > mastering the basics. We just see their ideas on stage and say wow

> > what

> > improvisation.

> >

> > Although an album like Bitches Brew (Davis, McLaughlin etc...) may be

> > another story and Song X (Coleman, Haden, DeJohnette & Metheny)

> > surely makes

> > one reconsider " structure " :-)..

> >

> > -Jason

>

>

> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> San Diego, Ca. 92122

>

>

[Guest guest]

Oh, yes!

As I have been a Chinese instrument player and a conductor for a few years,

doing acupuncture and sensing/directing Qi to tune the patient has been akin to

tuning the orchistra before the show to me. It's interesting to learn the

linkage here from Jazz to acupuncture, then to Chinese music in this forum!

 

<johnkokko wrote:

Yes,

It's interesting how akin Chinese medicine is to jazz;

much more on the same vibration than classical music.

 

Jazz has a lot of room for improvisation and sixth, seventh and ninth

chords.

Acupuncture and herbal prescription writing plays out in similar ways,

with modulations and modifications of tested formulas and riffs.

 

Fascinating how blues and ragtime are the predecessors of jazz...

and the blues scale : 1, b3, 4, 5, b7

is also the pentatonic (five note scale) of the ancient Chinese.

 

The five tastes and the five notes....

 

So, when we're performing medicine,

we're actually making music

by tuning the strings of the pulses and channels

and using acupuncture as tuning forks.

 

K.

 

On Feb 19, 2008 7:14 PM, <zrosenbe wrote:

 

> Even Cecil Taylor, the farthest out of them all, was a 99%/1% case.

> Check out his free-form piano improvisations. .

>

>

>

> On Feb 19, 2008, at 6:45 PM, wrote:

>

> > Yes.. Jazz. I think it was Coltrane who said 99% of what he played

> > live was

> > practice only 1% true improvisation. These guys worked hours and

> > hours a day

> > mastering the basics. We just see their ideas on stage and say wow

> > what

> > improvisation.

> >

> > Although an album like Bitches Brew (Davis, McLaughlin etc...) may be

> > another story and Song X (Coleman, Haden, DeJohnette & Metheny)

> > surely makes

> > one reconsider " structure " :-)..

> >

> > -Jason

>

>

> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> San Diego, Ca. 92122

>

>

[Guest guest]

I guess this music strand isn't going away so I'm going do a chorus...

doug

 

 

_________

This was one of the insights I liked from John Pirog's Meridian Style

Acupuncture. The points were like the holes in a flute. Manipulating

them like tones.

 

John wrote:

So, when we're performing medicine,

we're actually making music

by tuning the strings of the pulses and channels

and using acupuncture as tuning forks.

 

K.

_____________

I'm reminded that Miles Davis invented the " cool sound " because

according to his peers he " couldn't play the changes " , those hyper

complicated and fast chord changes that personified be-bop. So we get

The Kind of Blue, with structures so easy to play, yet impossibly

elegant. It is the biggest selling jazz record and produced thousands

of kids named Miles and not Thelonius or Dizzy. The guy was a genius

yet stripped the form to basics.

 

I'm going to bring up an old acquaintance, Elliot Sharp, who I knew

before he went to NYC and became well known in the avant garde music

world. (if you were into that kind of stuff) Elliot was a child

prodigy of the piano and when I knew him, a really good sax player and

guitarist. Would he make it as a great jazz player? Probably not. He

turned to " avant garde " which, sorry Elliot, I think is pretty much

crap. Not to my taste, but now he travels the world and in this

universe is at the top of the field. I just don't see where his

training helped him but I may be missing something.

 

Do I think he was calculating? Probably not. Anymore than others who

abandon TCM to pursue other types of " " . I'm reminded

now of Herbie Hancock, who was classically trained, can rock out, do

soundtracks and just won the Grammy for his album with Joni Mitchell.

This guy (who played on those great Miles records, for those who don't

know) can do it all. I've seen those doctors in China who do the same

specialty day after day. Very deep into what they do.

 

Personally I enjoy the improvisation... especially in the school

clinic where its a new patient every 10 minutes at times with just a

few minutes to get the whole story and make decisions. I can't compare

myself to Herbie, Miles, Elliot or doctors in Beijing but there is a

skill I have.

 

Then we see Coltrane who after mastering the changes and writing the

ridiculously complicated song/exercise Giant Steps goes back to

reclaim the blues from the reinvented show tunes that his predecessors

were so fond of. He found the best base for his " free improvisations "

was the simplicity of a few chords ala Impressions or the relatively

simple My Favorite Things.

 

We always on CHA that nobody is arguing against studying and knowing

your sh-... stuff. (Too many free form without knowledge of the

structure.) But the question always is when is it appropriate to pull

back into the essence of what you've found.

 

oh i'm just riffing now...

 

Doug

 

 

 

> Check out his free-form piano improvisations. .

>

>

> On Feb 19, 2008, at 6:45 PM, wrote:

>

> > Yes.. Jazz. I think it was Coltrane who said 99% of what he played

> > live was

> > practice only 1% true improvisation. These guys worked hours and

> > hours a day

> > mastering the basics. We just see their ideas on stage and say wow

> > what

> > improvisation.

> >

> > Although an album like Bitches Brew (Davis, McLaughlin etc...) may be

> > another story and Song X (Coleman, Haden, DeJohnette & Metheny)

> > surely makes

> > one reconsider " structure " :-)..

> >

> > -Jason

>

>

> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

[Guest guest]

Jason's correct again, and this is a very good analogy to what we are

talking about in this thread. The seeming freedom of jazz only comes

after hours and hours of practicing scales and technique and, for most

of the real greats, studying music theory. My son is a jazz tenor

saxophonist; so I know a little something about what it takes in terms

of study and practice to play good jazz.

 

Let's take Stanley Turrentine (4/5/1934-9/12/2000), aka " Mr. T " or

" The Sugar Man, " as an example. Mr. Turrentine was one of the

preeminent American jazz tenor saxophonists of the second half of the

20th century. Born in Pittsburgh, Mr. Turrentine took up saxophone at

the age of 11, encouraged by his father who had played the same

instrument with Al Cooper's Savoy Sultans. In an interview I once

heard with Mr. Turrentine on NPR, he said that his father made him

play a single note per day for at least one hour per day in order to

learn all the possible ways of sounding that note as well as to really

understanding that note. This kind of in-depth study and practice led

Mr. Turrentine to develop a sound that was described as: " A flexible

voice, it can deepen to a resonant honk, soar into one of the most

piercingly full-throated cries in jazz, and broaden to a thick,

sensuous vibrato on ballads. Turrentine tends to play on top of the

beat, making for a deep, trance-like groove, and his phrasing draws on

both modern jazz and R & B. Angular lines alternate with timeless blues

phraseology. "

[Guest guest]

Yes Bob, but just as there are many diverse traditions and theories in CM

there are also as many different styles and ways to approach playing one's

instrument. For instance, some people say playing scales and repetitive

exercises is the way to go while others emphasize practicing passages within

the music. If you're a clarinetist you have the choice of working to achieve

a German sound which is deeper or a more French sound which is lighter. Its

an art and most good art builds on previous good art and that is one way to

go but there are other ways to make a statement with music and art. consider

John Cage, Morton Feldman, La Monte Young, Harry Partch for examples and

both Coltrane and Ornette Coleman were influenced by those guys just as they

were by Monk and Bill Evans.

 

As a classical composer you might find yourself a Beethoven with both Haydn

and Mozart for your teachers or you might find yourself a Wagner, a full

blown genius and a megalomaniac, hardly able to play piano scales and with

the sketchiest ever so brief musical education. there's many ways to learn,

many paths to take and Its not just what you know or what you have mastered

and learned that counts the most in music but what you do with what you

know. The idea that everyone conforms to do the same thing, the same

standard, is an area which you and I would I am sure respectfully differ. I

say that with no hesitation that I have your teachings and books at the top

of my must get for my students. Still, I can only honor my evolution (which

again may not be too dissimilar to yours -- did I read that you got your

license with 100 hours of training and practiced pretty successfully after

that?) its a tribute to both you and I that we both dug our heals in and

deepened and pursued our education probably mostly self motivated. My path

was just a little different from yours in that for whatever reason learning

Chinese, spending a lot of time in China was not in the cards. I spent time

with a number of wonderful teachers including Miriam Lee for many years --

hardly a traditionalist in many ways since Dr. Tong and his points which she

used a great deal, were outside of the mainstream TCM tradition. I also

learned Ayurveda and of course my very first introduction to herbs was

learning to use the native plants of Northern California.

 

Like you, I feel a responsibility to all those influences, perhaps different

from yours and I try to make them work together which in their own

'work-in-progress way they do, having trained a number of the leading

herbalists in the country.

 

I know I have holes in my education and I'm sure we all do. We make whatever

we have work and keep trying to get better. To represent that no one is

entitled to an opinion about CM unless they've read the primary literature,

or unless they thoroughly mastered all of the classics is a little too rigid

and doesn't jive with my particular approach to music making.

 

Michael Tierra

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

Wednesday, February 20, 2008 9:31 AM

 

Re: in support of creative thought in Jazz, classical

vs improv

 

 

 

Jason's correct again, and this is a very good analogy to what we are

talking about in this thread. The seeming freedom of jazz only comes

after hours and hours of practicing scales and technique and, for most

of the real greats, studying music theory. My son is a jazz tenor

saxophonist; so I know a little something about what it takes in terms

of study and practice to play good jazz.

 

Let's take Stanley Turrentine (4/5/1934-9/12/2000), aka " Mr. T " or

" The Sugar Man, " as an example. Mr. Turrentine was one of the

preeminent American jazz tenor saxophonists of the second half of the

20th century. Born in Pittsburgh, Mr. Turrentine took up saxophone at

the age of 11, encouraged by his father who had played the same

instrument with Al Cooper's Savoy Sultans. In an interview I once

heard with Mr. Turrentine on NPR, he said that his father made him

play a single note per day for at least one hour per day in order to

learn all the possible ways of sounding that note as well as to really

understanding that note. This kind of in-depth study and practice led

Mr. Turrentine to develop a sound that was described as: " A flexible

voice, it can deepen to a resonant honk, soar into one of the most

piercingly full-throated cries in jazz, and broaden to a thick,

sensuous vibrato on ballads. Turrentine tends to play on top of the

beat, making for a deep, trance-like groove, and his phrasing draws on

both modern jazz and R & B. Angular lines alternate with timeless blues

phraseology. "

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed 5394 Spam messages and set aside

3289 Newsletters for me

You can use it too - and it's FREE! www.ellaforspam.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Right, but no matter what tradition you like, you have to have the

foundation down cold. To many people get swept up and dazzled and

want to skip to the end.

 

Geoff

 

, " Michael Tierra "

<mtierra wrote:

>

> Yes Bob, but just as there are many diverse traditions and theories

in CM

> there are also as many different styles and ways to approach playing

one's

> instrument.

[Guest guest]

I agree wholeheartedly, except for the 'down cold' bit -- in music and CM

there are too many traditions, too many opinions many of which have been

incorporated into the stream of learning to ever be able to say that one can

have it 'down cold.' If someone can say that i would distrust their level of

understanding.

 

Do any of you have Dr. John Shen's booklet. I've been

reading that lately. His cases are not the cut and pat precise pattern

diagnosis that we all aspire (and I want my students to learn). His case

studies go far beyond the simplistic pattern diagnosis that we try for. His

diagnosis includes descriptions for instance of a pregnant woman who had a

kidney infection. Because she was ill for three weeks prior, he decided that

her Qi was weak and the fetus was pressing against the kidney (I haven't

read this as a diagnostic sign, have you?). Because the fetus was pressing

on the kidney, that was why she had a kidney infection (doesn't sound like a

very classical description of the problem to me) -- then he found that she

was having frequent intercourse confirmed by her husband. He did ren zhong

(GV26) and within a few seconds she felt better (not a typical treatment for

kidney infections). He then showed her husband how to reapply it as needed

and a week later she was feeling better. Thos are the kinds of cases a

'master' records.

 

I think that one can be hampered by a slavish adherence to tradition. As

Bob Flaws has said he feels that acupuncture students are not trained

enough, (I might add not encouraged enough) to be able to make effective

discernments.

 

Michael Tierra

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of G Hudson

Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:51 AM

 

Re: in support of creative thought in Jazz, classical

vs improv

 

 

 

Right, but no matter what tradition you like, you have to have the

foundation down cold. To many people get swept up and dazzled and

want to skip to the end.

 

Geoff

 

@ <%40>

, " Michael Tierra "

<mtierra wrote:

>

> Yes Bob, but just as there are many diverse traditions and theories

in CM

> there are also as many different styles and ways to approach playing

one's

> instrument.

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed 5430 Spam messages and set aside

3302 Newsletters for me

You can use it too - and it's FREE! www.ellaforspam.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

What students and practitioners have to have " down cold " is all the

basic, foundational materials that form the standard TCM curriculum as

taught in China. In China, there are definite national standards with

right and wrong answers. It is only after one has all this down pat as

a basis that then there is room for creative interpretation and new

ideas. These standards are reflected in the standard national

textbooks of CM published in the PRC and used as required textbooks at

virtually all state-run TCM schools and colleges. These textbooks have

been created and edited by national committees for exactly the purpose

of teaching national standards as a basis. In my experience as a

teacher, American students as a whole are far from being clear about

and mastering (i.e., memorizing) this basic core curriculum. Further,

this material needs to be learned in translationally correct,

technically accurate terminology which is transparently correlated to

the original Chinese. Otherwise, students and practitioners will make

mistakes interpreting even these basic materials, viz. Michael T's not

knowing that securing and astringing medicinals (gu se yao) are what

Bensky calls stabilizing and binding medicinals. Because of not

knowing that very basic, elementary information, he went off on a

tangent in terms of interpreting a medicinal's functions and uses.

[Guest guest]

Bob, Without getting personal, I continually find great value in these

essential and basic texts that admittedly were not part of my

education. And of course many people who don't understand CM go into

other modalities all too quickly and our scope of practice allows them

to. But the " have to " part of your statement gets to me. What I don't

understand, and you'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt, is

how I and many of my American trained colleagues ended up in the same

place as our Chinese contemporaries. Given our herb texts (that really

don't stray that much from the original Chinese) we end up with the

almost the same formulas. So for the sake of argument again grant me

the conceit, that I or any number of the practitioners can write a

formula that cures patients just as well as those who " had to "

memorize the texts. When see something special in a formula and ask

about it, invariably it is not of that is basic knowledge but

something passed on from a teacher far from the classroom.

 

It's been said that the Asian model (I want go as far as to say

" mind " ) is to educate first to get the specifics and then to find the

general whereas the Western model is to get the general in order to

make sense of the specific details.

 

We've been around and around on this so many times. The reality is

that the schools can only accept the best memorizers, therefore

decreasing enrollment by 80%, (probably would of been myself as well)

or adapt teaching methods to some type of sanity as opposed to the

half-a... half-adopted Chinese methods we have now. It's clear that

you have invested a lot in the last decade of your long career in

Chinese texts, I just don't know the best way to get this approach in

to my own mind and those of my students.

Doug

 

 

And for those who think they are pretty up on the classics I offer:

 

 

 

 

http://www.classicalchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm

 

How a Great Physician Should Train for the Practice of Medicine

Sun Simiao (581-682)

 

Translated by Heiner Fruehauf

 

 

Everyone who aspires to be a great physician must be intimately

familiar with the following classics: the Simple Questions (Huangdi

neijing suwen), the Systematic Classic of Acupuncture and Moxibustion

(Zhenjiu jiayi jing), the Yellow Emperor's Needle Classic (Huangdi

neijing lingshu), and the Laws of Energy Circulation from the Hall of

Enlightenment (Mingtang liuzhu). Furthermore, one must master the

twelve channel systems, the three locations and nine positions of

pulse diagnosis, the system of the five zang and the six fu organs,

the concept of surface and interior, the acumoxa points, as well as

the materia medica in the form of single herbs, herb pairs, and the

classic formulas presented in the writings of Zhang Zhongjing

(fl.150-219, author of the Shanghan zabing lun), Wang Shuhe

(fl.210-286, author of the Maijing), Ruan Henan (4th century, author

of the Ruan Henan yaofang), Fan Dongyang (fl.308-372, author of the

Fan Dongyang fang), Zhang Miao (4th century), Jin Shao (4th century)

and other masters.

 

In addition, one should have a masterful grasp of the science of

determining the Yin-Yang of destiny (yinyang lu ming), all schools of

physiognomy (xiangfa), and the divinatory technique of interpreting

the five omens in fire-cracked turtle shells (shaogui wuzhao), as well

as the skill of Book of Change divination utilizing the system of the

heavenly stems and earthly branches forming a cycle of sixty years

(Zhouyi liuren). It is imperative that one masters all of these

methods with the depth of an expert, only then can one become a great

physician. Without this knowledge, it will be like having no eyes or

stumbling around at night—one will be destined to fall down and be

done at the outset.

 

Further, one needs to study the treatment methods assembled in this

collection (Beiji qianjin yaofang, 652) to a degree of perfection,

contemplate the marvelous principles that engendered them, and make

them one's own by applying great care and great depth—only then can

one begin to give knowledgeable advice on the path of medicine.

 

Further, one must be widely read in all categories of traditional

writing. Why? Because if one does not read the Five Classics (Yijing,

Liji, Shijing, Shujing, Lüshi chunqiu), the way of altruistic love and

self-restraint will remain alien to us. If one does not read the Three

Histories (Shiji, Hanshu, Dong guan ji), the important events of

ancient times and their repercussions in the present will fail to

inspire us. If one does not read the philosophical writings of the

ancient masters, the true essence of everything we face will remain

veiled. If one does not read the Classic of Medicine (Neijing), we may

never truly know the virtues of mercy and compassion. Without reading

the Laozi and the Zhuangzi, we won't know how to live in harmony with

nature and move in synch with the cycles of the macrocosm--causing

constant scruples that come with the belief in " good fortune " or " ill

fortune. "

 

Finally, one must investigate the intricate dynamics of the five phase

elements (wuxing xiuwang), and the astrological system of calculating

the position and relationship of the sun, the moon, and the five

planets (qiyao tianwen).

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you can study and learn all of these subjects well, there will not

be any obstacles on your path to medical practice, and the results

will be perfect in every way!---

 

 

 

 

_______________

In , " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> What students and practitioners have to have " down cold " is all the

> basic, foundational materials that form the standard TCM curriculum as

> taught in China. In China, there are definite national standards with

> right and wrong answers. It is only after one has all this down pat as

> a basis that then there is room for creative interpretation and new

> ideas. These standards are reflected in the standard national

> textbooks of CM published in the PRC and used as required textbooks at

> virtually all state-run TCM schools and colleges. These textbooks have

> been created and edited by national committees for exactly the purpose

> of teaching national standards as a basis. In my experience as a

> teacher, American students as a whole are far from being clear about

> and mastering (i.e., memorizing) this basic core curriculum. Further,

> this material needs to be learned in translationally correct,

> technically accurate terminology which is transparently correlated to

> the original Chinese. Otherwise, students and practitioners will make

> mistakes interpreting even these basic materials, viz. Michael T's not

> knowing that securing and astringing medicinals (gu se yao) are what

> Bensky calls stabilizing and binding medicinals. Because of not

> knowing that very basic, elementary information, he went off on a

> tangent in terms of interpreting a medicinal's functions and uses.

>

[Guest guest]

Doug,

I've always enjoyed that chapter of Sun Simiao's from the Qian Jin

Fang, but I always take it in context. Several of the medical

classics he mentioned are lost to us by time and decay, for example,

but certainly the Shang Han Za Bing Lun and Mai Jing should be taught

in the West. The Confucian classics may be another story, but the

rigorous philosophy does have value for us today, in training our

minds in yin/yang theory. I think the central idea of this essay is

that a broad education, broad literacy and an active mind are

essential in the study of medicine. We don't need to turn tortoise

shells perhaps these days

 

Fei Boxiong has a similar 'criteria-based' essay translated by

Volker Scheid that I quote here:

 

" Anyone desiring to study medicine without first studying the classics

of acupuncture - the Essential Questions and the Spiritual Pivot -

will never gain a clear understanding of the channels and collaterals.

Therefore, they will never understand how disorders evolve. If they do

not also study the classics of herbal medicine - the Discussions on

Cold Damage and the Essential Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet-

they will not know how to compose a prescription and to treat

appropriately. Those who do not read the four great masters of the Jin-

Yuan dynasties, finally, will never understand how to employ the

methods of supplementing, draining, warming or cooling and how to vary

the different treatment principles in an appropriate manner. "

 

 

 

Certainly we can follow Fei Bo-xiong's advice today. . .

 

Bob is right about clear and transparent translation methodology.

I've seen a marked improvement in student comprehension of the PCOM

cirriculum since we've had more teachers and students accessing the

Wiseman dictionary and translated works, and it has improved

comprehension of the Eastland texts as well. A high percentage of

teachers at PCOM have some level of medical Chinese literacy, and the

improvement in education can be seen in a much higher percentage of

graduates who actually prescribe herbal formulas for their patients as

opposed to just using supplements, kineseology, or tuning forks.

 

Which basic and essential texts are you referring to Doug?

 

 

On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:51 PM, wrote:

 

> Bob, Without getting personal, I continually find great value in these

> essential and basic texts that admittedly were not part of my

> education. And of course many people who don't understand CM go into

> other modalities all too quickly and our scope of practice allows them

> to. But the " have to " part of your statement gets to me. What I don't

> understand, and you'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt, is

> how I and many of my American trained colleagues ended up in the same

> place as our Chinese contemporaries. Given our herb texts (that really

> don't stray that much from the original Chinese) we end up with the

> almost the same formulas. So for the sake of argument again grant me

> the conceit, that I or any number of the practitioners can write a

> formula that cures patients just as well as those who " had to "

> memorize the texts. When see something special in a formula and ask

> about it, invariably it is not of that is basic knowledge but

> something passed on from a teacher far from the classroom.

>

> It's been said that the Asian model (I want go as far as to say

> " mind " ) is to educate first to get the specifics and then to find the

> general whereas the Western model is to get the general in order to

> make sense of the specific details.

>

> We've been around and around on this so many times. The reality is

> that the schools can only accept the best memorizers, therefore

> decreasing enrollment by 80%, (probably would of been myself as well)

> or adapt teaching methods to some type of sanity as opposed to the

> half-a... half-adopted Chinese methods we have now. It's clear that

> you have invested a lot in the last decade of your long career in

> Chinese texts, I just don't know the best way to get this approach in

> to my own mind and those of my students.

> Doug

>

> And for those who think they are pretty up on the classics I offer:

>

> http://www.classicalchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hilarious! and with all of that, its a wonder that any of us have gotten by

at all.

 

Have you all found that Doctors trained in China are always superior to

Western acupuncturists and herbalists? -- I certainly have not and I resent

the kind of elitism that comes from certain circles that would insist that

everyone adapts a certain terminology, however pedantically ugly it may be,

that everyone memorize all the formulas -- with some exception experienced

Chinese trained herbalists that I've met tend to have their 'favorites' that

they work with repeatedly -- One of the things i always loved that Bob Flaws

said was " It is said that new practitioners know 20 formulas to treat single

disease but old practitioners use a single formula to treat 20 diseases.?

Personally I have found that to be true and too much knowledge and

information floating around in one's head can be an even bigger detriment to

success than too little. Don't ya think?

 

Whatever we may think, and no matter how much we study it is my opinion that

the vast majority of us will always be western herbalists practicing Chinese

medicine -- and its been my observation that there are a lot of really

excellent Western Chinese medicine practitioners in our midst.

 

Michael Tierra

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of

Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:51 PM

 

Re: in support of creative thought in Jazz, classical

vs improv

 

 

 

Bob, Without getting personal, I continually find great value in these

essential and basic texts that admittedly were not part of my

education. And of course many people who don't understand CM go into

other modalities all too quickly and our scope of practice allows them

to. But the " have to " part of your statement gets to me. What I don't

understand, and you'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt, is

how I and many of my American trained colleagues ended up in the same

place as our Chinese contemporaries. Given our herb texts (that really

don't stray that much from the original Chinese) we end up with the

almost the same formulas. So for the sake of argument again grant me

the conceit, that I or any number of the practitioners can write a

formula that cures patients just as well as those who " had to "

memorize the texts. When see something special in a formula and ask

about it, invariably it is not of that is basic knowledge but

something passed on from a teacher far from the classroom.

 

It's been said that the Asian model (I want go as far as to say

" mind " ) is to educate first to get the specifics and then to find the

general whereas the Western model is to get the general in order to

make sense of the specific details.

 

We've been around and around on this so many times. The reality is

that the schools can only accept the best memorizers, therefore

decreasing enrollment by 80%, (probably would of been myself as well)

or adapt teaching methods to some type of sanity as opposed to the

half-a... half-adopted Chinese methods we have now. It's clear that

you have invested a lot in the last decade of your long career in

Chinese texts, I just don't know the best way to get this approach in

to my own mind and those of my students.

Doug

 

And for those who think they are pretty up on the classics I offer:

 

http://www.classica

<http://www.classicalchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm>

lchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm

 

How a Great Physician Should Train for the Practice of Medicine

Sun Simiao (581-682)

 

Translated by Heiner Fruehauf

 

Everyone who aspires to be a great physician must be intimately

familiar with the following classics: the Simple Questions (Huangdi

neijing suwen), the Systematic Classic of Acupuncture and Moxibustion

(Zhenjiu jiayi jing), the Yellow Emperor's Needle Classic (Huangdi

neijing lingshu), and the Laws of Energy Circulation from the Hall of

Enlightenment (Mingtang liuzhu). Furthermore, one must master the

twelve channel systems, the three locations and nine positions of

pulse diagnosis, the system of the five zang and the six fu organs,

the concept of surface and interior, the acumoxa points, as well as

the materia medica in the form of single herbs, herb pairs, and the

classic formulas presented in the writings of Zhang Zhongjing

(fl.150-219, author of the Shanghan zabing lun), Wang Shuhe

(fl.210-286, author of the Maijing), Ruan Henan (4th century, author

of the Ruan Henan yaofang), Fan Dongyang (fl.308-372, author of the

Fan Dongyang fang), Zhang Miao (4th century), Jin Shao (4th century)

and other masters.

 

In addition, one should have a masterful grasp of the science of

determining the Yin-Yang of destiny (yinyang lu ming), all schools of

physiognomy (xiangfa), and the divinatory technique of interpreting

the five omens in fire-cracked turtle shells (shaogui wuzhao), as well

as the skill of Book of Change divination utilizing the system of the

heavenly stems and earthly branches forming a cycle of sixty years

(Zhouyi liuren). It is imperative that one masters all of these

methods with the depth of an expert, only then can one become a great

physician. Without this knowledge, it will be like having no eyes or

stumbling around at night—one will be destined to fall down and be

done at the outset.

 

Further, one needs to study the treatment methods assembled in this

collection (Beiji qianjin yaofang, 652) to a degree of perfection,

contemplate the marvelous principles that engendered them, and make

them one's own by applying great care and great depth—only then can

one begin to give knowledgeable advice on the path of medicine.

 

Further, one must be widely read in all categories of traditional

writing. Why? Because if one does not read the Five Classics (Yijing,

Liji, Shijing, Shujing, Lüshi chunqiu), the way of altruistic love and

self-restraint will remain alien to us. If one does not read the Three

Histories (Shiji, Hanshu, Dong guan ji), the important events of

ancient times and their repercussions in the present will fail to

inspire us. If one does not read the philosophical writings of the

ancient masters, the true essence of everything we face will remain

veiled. If one does not read the Classic of Medicine (Neijing), we may

never truly know the virtues of mercy and compassion. Without reading

the Laozi and the Zhuangzi, we won't know how to live in harmony with

nature and move in synch with the cycles of the macrocosm--causing

constant scruples that come with the belief in " good fortune " or " ill

fortune. "

 

Finally, one must investigate the intricate dynamics of the five phase

elements (wuxing xiuwang), and the astrological system of calculating

the position and relationship of the sun, the moon, and the five

planets (qiyao tianwen).

 

If you can study and learn all of these subjects well, there will not

be any obstacles on your path to medical practice, and the results

will be perfect in every way!---

 

_______________

In @ <%40>

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> What students and practitioners have to have " down cold " is all the

> basic, foundational materials that form the standard TCM curriculum as

> taught in China. In China, there are definite national standards with

> right and wrong answers. It is only after one has all this down pat as

> a basis that then there is room for creative interpretation and new

> ideas. These standards are reflected in the standard national

> textbooks of CM published in the PRC and used as required textbooks at

> virtually all state-run TCM schools and colleges. These textbooks have

> been created and edited by national committees for exactly the purpose

> of teaching national standards as a basis. In my experience as a

> teacher, American students as a whole are far from being clear about

> and mastering (i.e., memorizing) this basic core curriculum. Further,

> this material needs to be learned in translationally correct,

> technically accurate terminology which is transparently correlated to

> the original Chinese. Otherwise, students and practitioners will make

> mistakes interpreting even these basic materials, viz. Michael T's not

> knowing that securing and astringing medicinals (gu se yao) are what

> Bensky calls stabilizing and binding medicinals. Because of not

> knowing that very basic, elementary information, he went off on a

> tangent in terms of interpreting a medicinal's functions and uses.

>

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed 5437 Spam messages and set aside

3306 Newsletters for me

You can use it too - and it's FREE! www.ellaforspam.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Bob Flaws said, "

 

" Further, this material needs to be learned in translationally correct,

technically accurate terminology which is transparently correlated to

the original Chinese. Otherwise, students and practitioners will make

mistakes interpreting even these basic materials, viz. Michael T's not

knowing that securing and astringing medicinals (gu se yao) are what

Bensky calls stabilizing and binding medicinals. Because of not

knowing that very basic, elementary information, he went off on a

tangent in terms of interpreting a medicinal's functions and uses. "

 

My response:

 

I'm sorry for you that have a need to resort to personal belittling rather

than understanding and clarification. Just because it may seem that someone

is not in complete agreement should not give cause for condescension and

disrespect.

 

I'm a little curious, many people commented on your wu me topic and this

took the discussion to many different places such as GERD, dermatology, etc

-- so what process did you to in considering my submissions as a

tangent?

 

On topic

While most definitions of astringe or astringent means to contract tissue

the result of astringing is to dry secretions. So in that sense, there is

some confusion in the English definition of astringe and one that often

requires frequent clarification among herbalists. i certainly don't mind

considering it every once in a while. Its funny, astringency is probably the

most ubiquitous properties of most herbs and one of a few most often

inviting confusion especially regarding the drying of secretions as opposed

to inhibiting them. While many herbs have tannins which are astringent, I

find myself hardly ever using them in practice unless they are considered as

'secondary properties.'

 

Some of the Chinese 'astringents' are very important tonics as you have

pointed out. I don't hesitate in using them but many others in the category

are similarly regarded as symptomatic modifiers to be combined with

appropriate tonics to achieve more lasting results.

 

I would offer that the term " stabilize and bind' does not have the same

misleading connotation of drying secretions which is a pretty good reason to

interpret the term as 'stabilize and bind.'

 

One of the definitions implied by the terms " astringent or astringe " is " to

dry " -- another is to restrain leakage. By avoiding the word " astringe " in

the English definition of the Chinese term 'ge se yao' and instead using the

terms Stabilize and Bind, there is no misunderstanding especially in

reference to herbs like Schizandra and We Wei both of which are not drying

and in fact generate fluids.

 

Western herbalists, who really are plagued with much greater areas of

disagreement, refer to an herb such as we wei zi and wu me as a tonic,

demulcent astringent.

 

Its really strange how the problems plaguing Western herbalists, lack of

consensus agreement of basic ideas, terms and principles threatens to be

exactly opposite with a certain rigid perspective in .

 

So if Western herbalists could come to more agreement and Chinese

practitioners can loosen up a bit and allow consensus and agreement to

evolve without imposing an awkward and cumbersome language and methodology

we all might be better able to get along and help the evolution of Chinese

medicine not only in the west but globally.

 

I for one much prefer the non-literal translation of Rumi's and Hafiz's

poetry by Landinsky as 'interpretations' rather than a dry literal

translation.

 

I appreciate and respect your courageous and valiant attempt to 'codify'

Chinese terms and and methodology to the English speaking world. I sincerely

suspect that it must be a very frustrating thing for you at times to see the

difficulties.

 

Considering the large numbers of people who are part of this forum, I think

we need to respect that not everyone will have the same perspective but this

is still a place where we can ask questions, share our views, offer

respectful comment and criticism and hopefully find resonance for some of

our own respective thoughts with the risk of exposing a certain level of

vulnerability.

 

I hope I can remain patient and respectful with your process as I hope in

turn you can with mine.

 

astringent

 

 

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/thistle.gif> Encyclopedia

Britannica Article

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_tl.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_tr.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif> Page 1 of 1

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_bl.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_br.gif>

 

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/memberlogin> Print Page

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_art_grey_bullet.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/memberlogin> Print Article

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_art_grey_bullet.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/memberlogin> E-mail Article

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_art_grey_bullet.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

<http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9009992#cite> Cite Article

<http://www.britannica.com/contribute?tocId=9009992> Send comments or

suggest changes to this article <javascript:void(0)> Share article with

your Readers

 

any of a group of substances that cause the contraction or shrinkage of

tissues and that dry up secretions.

 

_____

 

<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed 5434 Spam messages and set aside

3306 Newsletters for me

You can use it too - and it's FREE! www.ellaforspam.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Not so hilarious. We have gotten by all this time because of a dirty

little secret that we, as a profession as a whole, do not want to deal

with. That secret is that any and all acupuncture tends to achieve the

same results regardless of the theories it is based on. This is

because acupuncture is a multi-factorial interaction between patient

and practitioner, only a small part of which depends on the insertion

of needles. (For a Chinese discussion of this, see Cheng Tan-an on the

Importance of Spirit..., but please don't spin your wheels over the

word " spirit. " Here Cheng is only talking about the primacy of the

psychological aspects of acupuncture theory as opposed to its supposed

effects on things like qi, points, channels, yin-yang, etc. Chen was

one of the early 20th century Chinese who literally reinstituted the

practice of acupuncture in China when it was on the verge of expiry.)

 

Since the overwhelming majority of Western practitioners practice both

acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine on virtually all patients, it

is impossible to say what caused what part of any healing experienced.

In the case of medicine (as in all else), post hoc does not mean

propter hoc, that one thing necessarily caused another. In my

experience as a teacher and clinical mentor, many, many Western

practitioners only achieve the results they do because of the saving

grace of acupuncture. If practitioners only did Chinese herbal

medicine, I believe they would quickly see that their results were A)

not so good and B) more dependent on the correctness of their theory

and, therefore, on their pattern discrimination, treatment principles,

and hence their treatment plan. I can say this because I have only

routinely prescribed Chinese herbal medicine on my patients since 1990.

 

While pretty much anything goes with acupuncture, I don't think you

can say the same thing with internally administered medicines. While

also affected by so-called " nonspecific factors, " internally

administered medicines work primarily through biochemical pathways.

Therefore, outcomes are more dependent on getting those medicines

correct based on the combination of 1) theory, 2) individual

intelligence, and 3) individual clinical experience.

 

In any case, take away the simultaneous acupuncture and I think we

would get a much better picture of how the limitations of our

knowledge affect our clinical outcomes.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Michael,

 

And I'm sorry for you that you have taken my comments so personally.

To characterize them as " condescending " has more to do with your own

reaction to them than what I said. As a professional author and

editor, I chose my words extremely carefully. You seem to have loaded

them with emotional content they were not written to convey.

 

In any case, since this discussion has degenerated to ad hominem

attacks (as do all arguments if taken to their ultimate end-points,

since all points of view are based on personal likes and dislikes

which are ultimately based on personal history), I am going to bow

out. I've said what I had to say and am perfectly willing to stand by

that.

 

Bob

 

, " Michael Tierra "

<mtierra wrote:

>

> Bob Flaws said, "

>

> " Further, this material needs to be learned in translationally correct,

> technically accurate terminology which is transparently correlated to

> the original Chinese. Otherwise, students and practitioners will make

> mistakes interpreting even these basic materials, viz. Michael T's not

> knowing that securing and astringing medicinals (gu se yao) are what

> Bensky calls stabilizing and binding medicinals. Because of not

> knowing that very basic, elementary information, he went off on a

> tangent in terms of interpreting a medicinal's functions and uses. "

>

> My response:

>

> I'm sorry for you that have a need to resort to personal belittling

rather

> than understanding and clarification. Just because it may seem that

someone

> is not in complete agreement should not give cause for condescension and

> disrespect.

>

> I'm a little curious, many people commented on your wu me topic and this

> took the discussion to many different places such as GERD,

dermatology, etc

> -- so what process did you to in considering my

submissions as a

> tangent?

>

> On topic

> While most definitions of astringe or astringent means to contract

tissue

> the result of astringing is to dry secretions. So in that sense,

there is

> some confusion in the English definition of astringe and one that often

> requires frequent clarification among herbalists. i certainly don't mind

> considering it every once in a while. Its funny, astringency is

probably the

> most ubiquitous properties of most herbs and one of a few most often

> inviting confusion especially regarding the drying of secretions as

opposed

> to inhibiting them. While many herbs have tannins which are

astringent, I

> find myself hardly ever using them in practice unless they are

considered as

> 'secondary properties.'

>

> Some of the Chinese 'astringents' are very important tonics as you have

> pointed out. I don't hesitate in using them but many others in the

category

> are similarly regarded as symptomatic modifiers to be combined with

> appropriate tonics to achieve more lasting results.

>

> I would offer that the term " stabilize and bind' does not have the same

> misleading connotation of drying secretions which is a pretty good

reason to

> interpret the term as 'stabilize and bind.'

>

> One of the definitions implied by the terms " astringent or astringe "

is " to

> dry " -- another is to restrain leakage. By avoiding the word

" astringe " in

> the English definition of the Chinese term 'ge se yao' and instead

using the

> terms Stabilize and Bind, there is no misunderstanding especially in

> reference to herbs like Schizandra and We Wei both of which are not

drying

> and in fact generate fluids.

>

> Western herbalists, who really are plagued with much greater areas of

> disagreement, refer to an herb such as we wei zi and wu me as a tonic,

> demulcent astringent.

>

> Its really strange how the problems plaguing Western herbalists, lack of

> consensus agreement of basic ideas, terms and principles threatens to be

> exactly opposite with a certain rigid perspective in .

>

> So if Western herbalists could come to more agreement and Chinese

> practitioners can loosen up a bit and allow consensus and agreement to

> evolve without imposing an awkward and cumbersome language and

methodology

> we all might be better able to get along and help the evolution of

Chinese

> medicine not only in the west but globally.

>

> I for one much prefer the non-literal translation of Rumi's and Hafiz's

> poetry by Landinsky as 'interpretations' rather than a dry literal

> translation.

>

> I appreciate and respect your courageous and valiant attempt to 'codify'

> Chinese terms and and methodology to the English speaking world. I

sincerely

> suspect that it must be a very frustrating thing for you at times to

see the

> difficulties.

>

> Considering the large numbers of people who are part of this forum,

I think

> we need to respect that not everyone will have the same perspective

but this

> is still a place where we can ask questions, share our views, offer

> respectful comment and criticism and hopefully find resonance for

some of

> our own respective thoughts with the risk of exposing a certain level of

> vulnerability.

>

> I hope I can remain patient and respectful with your process as I

hope in

> turn you can with mine.

>

> astringent

>

>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/thistle.gif> Encyclopedia

> Britannica Article

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_tl.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_tr.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif> Page 1 of 1

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_bl.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_pagebox_crnr_br.gif>

>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/memberlogin> Print Page

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_art_grey_bullet.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/memberlogin> Print Article

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_art_grey_bullet.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/memberlogin> E-mail Article

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/ebol04_art_grey_bullet.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/images/dot.gif>

> <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9009992#cite> Cite Article

> <http://www.britannica.com/contribute?tocId=9009992> Send comments or

> suggest changes to this article <javascript:void(0)> Share article

with

> your Readers

>

> any of a group of substances that cause the contraction or shrinkage of

> tissues and that dry up secretions.

>

> _____

>

> << ella for Spam Control >> has removed 5434 Spam messages and set aside

> 3306 Newsletters for me

> You can use it too - and it's FREE! www.ellaforspam.com

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

" ...any and all acupuncture tends to achieve the

same results regardless of the theories it is based on. "

 

I have to interject here to disagree with that statement. In my

experience, the boiled down academic style of acupuncture we learn in

school - presumably direct from the PRC - is basically ineffective. I

am unsurprised when I see studies that show acupuncture to be no more

effective than sham acupuncture. They are using academic acupuncture.

On the other hand there are many practitioners who rely solely, or

primarily, on other acupuncture styles without herbs, and get

fantastic results.

 

I'm afraid anyone who thinks all styles of acupuncture are the same

has missed the boat. If you think that acupuncture cannot be effective

without herbs - with apologies - you have missed the boat.

 

Maybe we've gotten by because of a dirty secret, but in fact most have

not gotten by. Most have failed to practice acupuncture successfully

because they haven't learned an effective style. It's very sad to me

personally, so I had to pipe up to disagree.

 

 

 

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> Not so hilarious. We have gotten by all this time because of a dirty

> little secret that we, as a profession as a whole, do not want to deal

> with. That secret is that any and all acupuncture tends to achieve the

> same results regardless of the theories it is based on. This is

> because acupuncture is a multi-factorial interaction between patient

> and practitioner, only a small part of which depends on the insertion

> of needles. (For a Chinese discussion of this, see Cheng Tan-an on the

> Importance of Spirit..., but please don't spin your wheels over the

> word " spirit. " Here Cheng is only talking about the primacy of the

> psychological aspects of acupuncture theory as opposed to its supposed

> effects on things like qi, points, channels, yin-yang, etc. Chen was

> one of the early 20th century Chinese who literally reinstituted the

> practice of acupuncture in China when it was on the verge of expiry.)

>

> Since the overwhelming majority of Western practitioners practice both

> acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine on virtually all patients, it

> is impossible to say what caused what part of any healing experienced.

> In the case of medicine (as in all else), post hoc does not mean

> propter hoc, that one thing necessarily caused another. In my

> experience as a teacher and clinical mentor, many, many Western

> practitioners only achieve the results they do because of the saving

> grace of acupuncture. If practitioners only did Chinese herbal

> medicine, I believe they would quickly see that their results were A)

> not so good and B) more dependent on the correctness of their theory

> and, therefore, on their pattern discrimination, treatment principles,

> and hence their treatment plan. I can say this because I have only

> routinely prescribed Chinese herbal medicine on my patients since 1990.

>

> While pretty much anything goes with acupuncture, I don't think you

> can say the same thing with internally administered medicines. While

> also affected by so-called " nonspecific factors, " internally

> administered medicines work primarily through biochemical pathways.

> Therefore, outcomes are more dependent on getting those medicines

> correct based on the combination of 1) theory, 2) individual

> intelligence, and 3) individual clinical experience.

>

> In any case, take away the simultaneous acupuncture and I think we

> would get a much better picture of how the limitations of our

> knowledge affect our clinical outcomes.

>

> Bob

>