RE: [SPAM] clinical skill vs. academic prowess

[Guest guest]

My apologies. I hope you didn't receive too many " letters to the editor " on

my account. I have enjoyed the peer review thread:-).

 

 

 

Best,

 

Sean

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of

Thursday, February 28, 2008 1:56 PM

 

[sPAM] Re: clinical skill vs. academic prowess

 

 

 

Sean, you've made the point about naturophathy. However innuendos

about 3rd person's credentials are not appropriate. I'm not sure where

Dan Bensky's translation style fits in but I am very impressed with

your style of argument though. ;-)

 

As you probably know the Redwing List has a fascinating and

informative thread going on about peer review.

Doug

 

" I don't know where the truth lies with his CM training, and don't

care much. I definitely do not want to reopen any of those issues,

but I do agree that a person can acquire many degrees, be an expert in

those fields and be justified in advertising the fact. "

 

>

 

@ <%40>

, " Sean Doherty " <sean

wrote:

>

> Jason,

>

> We have gone on and on about standards of practice over the years.

We claim

> there is a standard here in this country for Chinese medicine

(granted it

> could use improving) and that is the master's and now doctoral programs.

> You may quibble, but the standard for naturopaths is a four year

degree from

> one of the accredited schools. So if you say you practice that way, you

> really should have an ND after your name that came from that source.

> Granted there are people like Todd (and possibly yourself), that spent a

> certain number of years in naturopathic school, bailed and then went to

> study CM integrating their previous education to some degree. You

may put

> yourself into that category, but from the outside it doesn't look quite

> right. My undergrad was pre-med but I don't say I practice allopathic

> medicine. I know you have already qualified the degree to which you

practice

> these other modalities, but I just wanted to further clarify my

viewpoint.

>

>

>

> I am sure you have a broad knowledge base in the modalities that you

bring

> into your clinic, and I don't get the sense that you are a person

that likes

> to experiment on his patients. I would agree that any one point in

Western

> medicine is not conceptually difficult, but on the whole it is

voluminous.

> I mean, kudos to you if you've know the sum total of all the

biochemistry

> that is out there. It is funny because I remember that biochemistry

was Bob

> F's key differentiation between acupuncture and herbs. No argument

from me,

> and I doubt from you. I don't really want to argue the merits of

> naturopathic medicine, but I think there are a number of things that

> differentiate it from Western medicine, not least of which is it's

directive

> to treat the root cause of disease and not just the symptoms, just

like CM.

>

>

>

>

> I think the differentiation between " naturopaths " and " naturopathic

doctors "

> that Tim mentioned is not one that the majority of the population is

likely

> to navigate effectively. There are also some that would rather be called

> naturopathic physicians to further complicate matters. The difference

> between " doctor " and " physician " is huge. The latter gets hospital

> privileges.

>

>

>

> As far as functional medicine is concerned, that was coined by Jeff

Bland

> and since you like to go to the source, I figured you would have had

some

> exposure to his stuff, and although Tim is right that IFM symposia are

> pricey (they are week long events), JB has done plenty of day

seminars at

> lower cost, or you can get the Functional Medicine Updates for around

> $20/month.

>

>

>

> I am not arguing any one individuals ability to study a multitude of

topics

> deeply, just in the blurring of standards for ones own benefit. I don't

> quite understand your reference to Dan B. He has obviously

contributed a

> lot to the profession, but the rigor of his background in CM has been

> heavily debated on this list, as has his not wanting to conform to

Wiseman

> terminology, the latter of which I was under the impression that you

are a

> fierce proponent of. I don't know where the truth lies with his CM

> training, and don't care much. I definitely do not want to reopen

any of

> those issues, but I do agree that a person can acquire many degrees,

be an

> expert in those fields and be justified in advertising the fact.

>

>

>

> Peer review = good

>

>

>

> Sean

>

>

>

>

>

> _____