Was Tom Verhaege throws a great party; now Teaching

[Guest guest]

Carl,

 

You've touched on a hugely important issue -- that teaching is its own

profession and being an expert in a subject does not make one a good

teacher of that subject. Unfortunately, the rule in our schools is

that our teachers are not professionally trained teachers. However,

this is not just a problem in our schools. After doing some research

on this, I'd say it's the rule at most schools teaching technical

subjects. In fact, once you get past secondary education in the U.S.,

I'd say this is the rule, not the exception. For instance, university

professors have never studied educational theory. So it's not just our

schools.

 

However, just because something is done a certain way by lots of

schools doesn't make it right or " best practices. " In my experience,

both as a student and a teacher, the teacher's primary profession is

to teach, and teaching means the communication of information and/or

skills. Whether the teacher is an expert in the subject being taught

is secondary to their ability to communicate the relevant information.

I would prefer a skilled communicator with only good knowledge of the

subject to an expert in the subject who is a poor communicator. No

matter how much of an expert a person is, if they cannot communicate

that brilliance to another, that brilliance is of no real value to the

purpose at hand -- the student's education.

 

Therefore, teachers ideally should be schooled in educational theory

and/or, at the very least, public speaking. I have written at length

about this in other places. As a for instance, androgogy (adult

education) is very different from pedagogy (childhood education) in

both theory and practice. If a person has not studied educational

theory, then they will tend to teach the same way they were taught.

That means that, if all their learning was conducted by pedagological

means, they will use pedagogical techniques by default even in an

andrological situation.

 

While most colleges and especially post-secondary technical schools

fall into this trap, our schools are especially poor in this regard

for two, interlinking reasons:

 

1. They pay very poorly and, therefore, they cannot attract the " best

and brightest. " In fact, most teachers at our schools are only

part-time teachers.

 

2. They rely heavily on non-native English speakers because

 

A. They are presumed experts in the subject matter, and

B. They are often willing to work for the extremely low wages the

schools pay.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Hi Bob, as a trained teacher who grew up in and was educated in Ireland I

agree with much of what you say here.

Just a quick cultural note, the system I grew up in did not give 100% out

very often believing that even the best has room to improve. In subjects

other than mathematics etc where there is a " right answer " 85% or above was

an " A " and considered very good. For instance James Joyce probable did not

get higher than that in English literature!!!. I think the Belgians may be

more in that school than in the American system where 100% isi more

common. So I would be pretty happy with 88%.

 

Be well

Maura

 

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Bob Flaws <pemachophel2001

wrote:

 

> Carl,

>

> You've touched on a hugely important issue -- that teaching is its own

> profession and being an expert in a subject does not make one a good

> teacher of that subject. Unfortunately, the rule in our schools is

> that our teachers are not professionally trained teachers. However,

> this is not just a problem in our schools. After doing some research

> on this, I'd say it's the rule at most schools teaching technical

> subjects. In fact, once you get past secondary education in the U.S.,

> I'd say this is the rule, not the exception. For instance, university

> professors have never studied educational theory. So it's not just our

> schools.

>

> However, just because something is done a certain way by lots of

> schools doesn't make it right or " best practices. " In my experience,

> both as a student and a teacher, the teacher's primary profession is

> to teach, and teaching means the communication of information and/or

> skills. Whether the teacher is an expert in the subject being taught

> is secondary to their ability to communicate the relevant information.

> I would prefer a skilled communicator with only good knowledge of the

> subject to an expert in the subject who is a poor communicator. No

> matter how much of an expert a person is, if they cannot communicate

> that brilliance to another, that brilliance is of no real value to the

> purpose at hand -- the student's education.

>

> Therefore, teachers ideally should be schooled in educational theory

> and/or, at the very least, public speaking. I have written at length

> about this in other places. As a for instance, androgogy (adult

> education) is very different from pedagogy (childhood education) in

> both theory and practice. If a person has not studied educational

> theory, then they will tend to teach the same way they were taught.

> That means that, if all their learning was conducted by pedagological

> means, they will use pedagogical techniques by default even in an

> andrological situation.

>

> While most colleges and especially post-secondary technical schools

> fall into this trap, our schools are especially poor in this regard

> for two, interlinking reasons:

>

> 1. They pay very poorly and, therefore, they cannot attract the " best

> and brightest. " In fact, most teachers at our schools are only

> part-time teachers.

>

> 2. They rely heavily on non-native English speakers because

>

> A. They are presumed experts in the subject matter, and

> B. They are often willing to work for the extremely low wages the

> schools pay.

>

> Bob

>

>

>

 

 

 

--

Maura Twomey, MBA, MAOM, Lic.Ac

Center and Spring Acupuncture

520 Centre Street,Jamaica Plain,MA 02130

http://www.centerandspringacupuncture.com

617 335 2475

 

Receive $20 off your next visit for each referral.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

It's a real pity that schools don't consider paying for teacher

training. I'm sure student satisfaction would go way up, which could

only be good for the school.

 

It's also surprising that more teachers don't seek out training. I

recently taught a short class on acupuncture to a group of laypeople

and was lucky in that a friend of mine with a master's in teaching

observed the class. Afterwards we had a 45 minute discussion on how I

could improve my teaching style. I was amazed, in only 45 minutes I

learned so much about teaching, and I have been " teaching " for almost

10 years. I could instantly see that a little training would make my

life so much easier and make teaching more fun for me and more

effective for the students in the classes I taught.

 

My friend specialized in second language teaching, so I wondered how

some of his suggestions would work in a TCM classroom where there is

just so much raw data that needs to be put to memory.

[Guest guest]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:29 PM, carlstimson <carlstimson wrote:

 

> My friend specialized in second language teaching, so I wondered how

> some of his suggestions would work in a TCM classroom where there is

> just so much raw data that needs to be put to memory.

>

 

 

 

 

 

Wow, that's a great point. How can foreign language instruction theory be

applied to herbs classes in particular?

 

The school I attended required us to learn both the Latin and the pinyin for

the herbs. It was like learning two foreign languages at the same time, and

THEN we had to hang on to all of these herb names made up of random sounds

all the tastes, temperatures, functions, channels, contraindications, etc...

crazy difficult to do.

 

--

, DAOM

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I don't require students to learn the Latin in Herbs classes, since it

isn't required on the state boards. I do give them extra credit when

they give the Latin in herb ID questions. I also show them scans of

patent medicines that contain the herbs we are studying. Since the

ingredients are frequently in Latin, they begin to see the need to

learn the Latin. I make it clear that if they don't know Latin or

Chinese characters, there will be many occasions when they will have

no idea what is in a patent medicine. That motivates the serious students.

 

- Bill Schoenbart

 

 

> The school I attended required us to learn both the Latin and the

pinyin for

> the herbs. It was like learning two foreign languages at the same

time, and

> THEN we had to hang on to all of these herb names made up of random

sounds

> all the tastes, temperatures, functions, channels,

contraindications, etc...

> crazy difficult to do.

>

> --

> , DAOM

> Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Bill,

 

I like the idea of giving students who want to go the extra-mile,

extra-credit.

 

There is a large education gap between some of the students:

some have 2 years of community college under their belt,

while others are coming in with advanced medical degrees.

 

Likewise, some students are at least as ambitious as allopathic med

students,

while others would be happy to not do any homework at all.

 

How do the experienced teachers on this group

work with this large variance in both age, background and intellectual

desire?

 

K.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Patent medicines are 19th and early 20th century proprietary medicines

sold by itinerant drug peddlers and other " quacks " and are what are

also called colloquially " snake oil. " The FDA was actually created to

put the kibosh on patent medicines. IMO, our profession continues to

shoot itself in the foot as long as we call ready-made Chinese herbal

medicines " patient medicines. "

 

Why is it we can't seem to break this bad habit of speech? If we keep

using this term to describe what we prescribe, then we should not be

surprised when other health professionals refuse to accord what we do

respect. By calling our ready-made medicines " patent medicines, " we

are saying in effect that our medicines are bogus and no better than

19th century " snake oils. "

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Up until the 1920s or so, the Western medical profession had this same

problem with great variance in the quality of its members (due to

great variance in its schools and their matriculation requirements),

and, as long as they had this problem, their profession was both low

in status in the community and low in income. When they tightened up

their matriculation and on-going academic requirements, the number of

schools decreased and, consequently, the number students fell (at

least for a time), but the status of the profession and their earning

potential vastly increased. (In Europe, it is academically easier to

get in and stay in medical school than here in the U.S. As a

consequence, MDs in Europe do not have the status or the incomes they

have in North America.)

 

IMO, our profession's educational system needs to go through a

shake-out where many of the smaller schools fail and go out of

business, and the larger schools need to implement and actually stick

too higher academic standards. Yes, the number of graduates will be

smaller, but those who do graduate will be more likely to stay in the

profession and make a very good living doing this medicine.

Eventually, the number of schools and, therefore, the number of

students would grow again because the profession is much more viable

as a career choice.

 

If one looks at the DCs as an example, they have failed to do exactly

this and, so, they continue to play second fiddle in the N. American

health care scene. They neither have the respect (status) or earning

potential of MDs no matter whether they call themselves " doctor " or not.

 

Part of this problem has to do with the different intellectual

capacities necessary for doing acupuncture (zhen jiu) and internal

medicine (zhong yi). By combining these two different (but related)

professions at the entry level, our schools have been forced to play

down to the " lowest common denominator. " As in China, there should be

two different degree tracts with different entrance requirements for

each. Zhen jiu is more like physical therapy in its requirements,

while zhong yi is more like (Western) medicine in its requirements.

 

Once again, if we keep doing what we're doing, we'll keep getting what

we're getting.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

I beg to differ on a couple of points you made. You fail to take into account

that the US is the only western country that does not have socialized medicine.

This has a profound impact on both status and income of physicians of whatever

kind. Most European countries also provide free or near-free university

education. They pay higher taxes, and get alot in return.) Medicine is not

solely allowed to be practiced by the wealthy and their children. I would argue

that this does not diminish the quality of medicine in these countries. What

limits it is the wealth of the country as a whole, and its access to technology.

Most European countries are far better served in number and quality of

physicians than the US and Canada, which is moving toward the US model. We see

the practice of medicine, both TCM and western as an entitlement to wealth, and

it is not until we rid ourselves of this sense of entitlement that we will have

a true culture of excellence in

medicine. In France, for instance, acupuncture is only practiced by MD's, and

is therefore covered by socialized medicine. The culture of entitlement and

wealth that goes with the practice of healing professions is something that is a

direct expression of the arrogance of health care providers, and while I think

we all need to earn a decent living, I think it is also criminal (at least it is

in my country) to turn away any patient in need of help for lack of funds. I

realize, Bob, we may have a fundamental paradigm difference, but Canadian and

European TCM practitioners do come out of a culture of socialized medicine and

this cannot help but impact on the way we practice. I also agree that schools

should be top quality, and so should their graduates. We are not Chinese, and

the way we teach and learn will be Western, but we can still be competent. I

believe that when we are able to see all health care a a right, not a

priviledge, we will be far better

practitioners.

 

Pauline Vaughan M.A. (Psych.) D.Ac.

Natural Medicine Clinic

54 Poyntz Street

Penetanguishene, ON

L9M 1N6

 

 

 

Bob Flaws <pemachophel2001

 

Thursday, May 8, 2008 11:58:11 AM

Re: Was Tom Verhaege throws a great party; now Teaching

 

 

Up until the 1920s or so, the Western medical profession had this same

problem with great variance in the quality of its members (due to

great variance in its schools and their matriculation requirements) ,

and, as long as they had this problem, their profession was both low

in status in the community and low in income. When they tightened up

their matriculation and on-going academic requirements, the number of

schools decreased and, consequently, the number students fell (at

least for a time), but the status of the profession and their earning

potential vastly increased. (In Europe, it is academically easier to

get in and stay in medical school than here in the U.S. As a

consequence, MDs in Europe do not have the status or the incomes they

have in North America.)

 

IMO, our profession's educational system needs to go through a

shake-out where many of the smaller schools fail and go out of

business, and the larger schools need to implement and actually stick

too higher academic standards. Yes, the number of graduates will be

smaller, but those who do graduate will be more likely to stay in the

profession and make a very good living doing this medicine.

Eventually, the number of schools and, therefore, the number of

students would grow again because the profession is much more viable

as a career choice.

 

If one looks at the DCs as an example, they have failed to do exactly

this and, so, they continue to play second fiddle in the N. American

health care scene. They neither have the respect (status) or earning

potential of MDs no matter whether they call themselves " doctor " or not.

 

Part of this problem has to do with the different intellectual

capacities necessary for doing acupuncture (zhen jiu) and internal

medicine (zhong yi). By combining these two different (but related)

professions at the entry level, our schools have been forced to play

down to the " lowest common denominator. " As in China, there should be

two different degree tracts with different entrance requirements for

each. Zhen jiu is more like physical therapy in its requirements,

while zhong yi is more like (Western) medicine in its requirements.

 

Once again, if we keep doing what we're doing, we'll keep getting what

we're getting.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

________________

Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

 

 

[Guest guest]

Bob and all,

 

1. What do you think the pre-requisite educational level for entrance into

a Zhen jiu school / zhong yi program should be?

2 year B.A. for Zhen jiu...?

4 year B.A. for Zhong yi...?

 

2. Should there be an entrance exam requirement?

GRE, MCAT, national physical therapy examination...

 

3. Should the matriculation hour requirement be raised to an entry-level

doctorate level?

(as of now: 4200 hours for Chiropractors/ >4200 hours for CA acupuncturists

who finish the optional DAOM programs)

For accredited/ candidate schools around the country, the educational hours

vary between 1800 hours - 3200 hours.

 

4. Are the NCCA CA board examinations comprehensive enough as it is (no

hands-on/ oral/ written testing) ?

What could be changed?

 

British Columbia has a 4 tier practice/title system. Each level requires

the passing of a competency exam.

The details are here: http://www.ctcma.bc.ca/applicants.asp

As you can see, both written and practical exams are conducted to prove

competency.

 

Would this work in the U.S?

 

 

K.

 

--

aka Mu bong Lim

Father of Bhakti

 

The Four Reliances:

Do not rely upon the individual, but rely upon the teaching.

As far as teachings go, do not rely upon the words alone, but rely upon the

meaning that underlies them.

Regarding the meaning, do not rely upon the provisional meaning alone, but

rely upon the definitive meaning.

And regarding the definitive meaning, do not rely upon ordinary

consciousness, but rely upon wisdom awareness.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

....

MDs have at least 3 examinations to pass before they can practice

independently:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Medical_Licensing_Examination

 

Step1, 2, 3

 

Markedly more difficult than the exams at Chinese medicine schools in this

country.

 

ACTCM in SF has a comprehensive exam every year, which has proven to be

effective for high percentage pass rates for the CA licensing boards. Do

you think that this should also also be required for schools across the

country?

 

Here's a mock comprehensive exam schedule:

 

1st year : Foundations/ Diagnosis (written - 100 questions in 2 hours)

 

2nd year: Acupuncture (written- 100 questions in 2 hours / practical point

location - 20 points in 20 min)

 

3rd year: Herbs/ Formulas (written - 100 questions in 2 hours / herb ID -

20 herbs in 20 min)

Western Med (written 100 questions in 2 hours / practical

physical exam)

 

4th year: Clinical (written- 200 questions in 5 hours / practical-oral

case-studies, 5 cases on 2nd day)

 

Finish w/ 4200 hours... 2400 didactic/ 1800 clinical

 

Allowed to sit for the National Acupuncture and Asian Medicine Certification

Examination...

 

8 levels:

1. Foundations and Diagnosis: (100 multiple-choice timed)

2. Acupuncture (100 multiple-choice timed), Practical point location (20

points in 20 minutes)

Clean Needle Technique (course/ certification), Practical acupuncture

needling exam (5 points/ techniques)

3. Western Med (100 multiple-choice timed), (Practical physical exam -

Cranial nerves/ reflex tests etc)

4. Herbs/ Formulas (200 multiple choice timed), (Herb ID - 20 herbs in 20

minutes)

5. Clinical Skills (200 questions in 5 hours / case study analysis/

defense, 5 cases)

 

At this point, licensed to practice with the title of A.M.D. " Asian

Medical Doctor "

 

Furthermore,

6. Dissertation: > 100 page research paper on classical or contemporary

study topic to be completed within 2 years.

7. Residency: 2-3 year residency with senior practitioner (at least 10

yrs experience) or at teaching hospital/ school.

8. Specialization exam

 

At this point, granted Ph.D. and Board Certified in OBGyn / Mental Health

etc.

 

After 4 years of B.A/ B.S., then 4 years of graduate school, then

residency/dissertation (2-3 years) = 10 yrs.

you could receive a title of " A.M.D. " Asian Medical Doctor, Ph.D. and

Board Certification in your area of specialty.

 

This would be equivalent to the allopathic M.D. title. both in rigor of

training and professional status.

 

 

Just an idea,

K.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 10:18 AM, <johnkokko wrote:

 

> Bob and all,

>

> 1. What do you think the pre-requisite educational level for entrance into

> a Zhen jiu school / zhong yi program should be?

> 2 year B.A. for Zhen jiu...?

> 4 year B.A. for Zhong yi...?

>

> 2. Should there be an entrance exam requirement?

> GRE, MCAT, national physical therapy examination...

>

> 3. Should the matriculation hour requirement be raised to an entry-level

> doctorate level?

> (as of now: 4200 hours for Chiropractors/ >4200 hours for CA

> acupuncturists who finish the optional DAOM programs)

> For accredited/ candidate schools around the country, the educational hours

> vary between 1800 hours - 3200 hours.

>

> 4. Are the NCCA CA board examinations comprehensive enough as it is (no

> hands-on/ oral/ written testing) ?

> What could be changed?

>

> British Columbia has a 4 tier practice/title system. Each level requires

> the passing of a competency exam.

> The details are here: http://www.ctcma.bc.ca/applicants.asp

> As you can see, both written and practical exams are conducted to prove

> competency.

>

> Would this work in the U.S?

>

>

> K.

>

> --

> aka Mu bong Lim

> Father of Bhakti

>

> The Four Reliances:

> Do not rely upon the individual, but rely upon the teaching.

> As far as teachings go, do not rely upon the words alone, but rely upon the

> meaning that underlies them.

> Regarding the meaning, do not rely upon the provisional meaning alone, but

> rely upon the definitive meaning.

> And regarding the definitive meaning, do not rely upon ordinary

> consciousness, but rely upon wisdom awareness.

 

 

 

 

--

aka Mu bong Lim

Father of Bhakti

 

The Four Reliances:

Do not rely upon the individual, but rely upon the teaching.

As far as teachings go, do not rely upon the words alone, but rely upon the

meaning that underlies them.

Regarding the meaning, do not rely upon the provisional meaning alone, but

rely upon the definitive meaning.

And regarding the definitive meaning, do not rely upon ordinary

consciousness, but rely upon wisdom awareness.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Bob,

 

If you look in any dictionary, you will find a definition for Patent

Medicine to be something like this: " A nonprescription drug or other

medical preparation that is often protected by a trademark. "

 

I understand that the term has a sordid history, but I don't think

that using the term will somehow undermine our credibility as a

profession. The kind of person who would call us quacks will do so

anyway, no matter what we call our prepared medicines. I do think you

make a good point, though.

 

- Bill

 

 

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> Patent medicines are 19th and early 20th century proprietary medicines

> sold by itinerant drug peddlers and other " quacks " and are what are

> also called colloquially " snake oil. " The FDA was actually created to

> put the kibosh on patent medicines. IMO, our profession continues to

> shoot itself in the foot as long as we call ready-made Chinese herbal

> medicines " patient medicines. "

>

> Why is it we can't seem to break this bad habit of speech? If we keep

> using this term to describe what we prescribe, then we should not be

> surprised when other health professionals refuse to accord what we do

> respect. By calling our ready-made medicines " patent medicines, " we

> are saying in effect that our medicines are bogus and no better than

> 19th century " snake oils. "

>

> Bob

>

[Guest guest]

Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, College Edition:

 

Patent medicine, a trade-marked medical preparation usually containing

secret ingredients or made by secret formula.

 

This is also not a meaning we want associated with our medicines.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, College

Edition:

>

> Patent medicine, a trade-marked medical preparation usually containing

> secret ingredients or made by secret formula.

>

> This is also not a meaning we want associated with our medicines.

>

> Bob

>

 

Good point Bob. Old habits die hard. I even wrote a book around 12

years ago with the term Patent Medicines in the title (the publisher

chose the title). I'll try to start using the term Prepared Medicines

instead.

 

- Bill

[Guest guest]

I'm a little luke-warm on the term " prepared medicines " . What do you think

about " over the counter herbs " ? I mean, they are the herbal equivalent of

OTC drugs.

 

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:32 PM, bill_schoenbart <plantmed2

wrote:

 

> Good point Bob. Old habits die hard. I even wrote a book around 12

> years ago with the term Patent Medicines in the title (the publisher

> chose the title). I'll try to start using the term Prepared Medicines

> instead.

>

> - Bill

>

 

 

--

, DAOM

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

OTC has a drug connotation, so I don't feel comfortable with that

wording. The term Patent Medicine is readily identifiable in a TCM

context, while Prepared Medicine could be anything. But the negative

associations that Bob mentioned can't be ignored.

 

 

 

, " Al Stone " <al wrote:

>

> I'm a little luke-warm on the term " prepared medicines " . What do you

think

> about " over the counter herbs " ? I mean, they are the herbal

equivalent of

> OTC drugs.

>

> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:32 PM, bill_schoenbart <plantmed2

> wrote:

>

> > Good point Bob. Old habits die hard. I even wrote a book around 12

> > years ago with the term Patent Medicines in the title (the publisher

> > chose the title). I'll try to start using the term Prepared Medicines

> > instead.

> >

> > - Bill

> >

>

>

> --

> , DAOM

> Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

The other issue with the term,

" Patent medicine " is that most of the pills/tablets that are available are

not patented at all.

They are classical/ traditional formulas that are public domain.

 

Actually, pharmaceuticals are the true " patent medicine " , if we look at it

that way.

 

This can confuse patients and suppliers.

 

I like the term : " prepared medicine " or just saying specifically

" pills " , " tablets " , " capsules " , " tinctures " , " wines " , " plasters " etc.

 

Chinese prepared medicinals...

Asian prepared medicinals...

 

K.

 

 

 

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 9:21 PM, bill_schoenbart <plantmed2

wrote:

 

> OTC has a drug connotation, so I don't feel comfortable with that

> wording. The term Patent Medicine is readily identifiable in a TCM

> context, while Prepared Medicine could be anything. But the negative

> associations that Bob mentioned can't be ignored.

>

> --- In

<%40>,

> " Al Stone " <al wrote:

> >

> > I'm a little luke-warm on the term " prepared medicines " . What do you

> think

> > about " over the counter herbs " ? I mean, they are the herbal

> equivalent of

> > OTC drugs.

> >

> > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:32 PM, bill_schoenbart <plantmed2

> > wrote:

> >

> > > Good point Bob. Old habits die hard. I even wrote a book around 12

> > > years ago with the term Patent Medicines in the title (the publisher

> > > chose the title). I'll try to start using the term Prepared Medicines

> > > instead.

> > >

> > > - Bill

> > >

> >

> >

> > --

> > , DAOM

> > Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

If we keep doing what we're doing, we'll keep getting what we're getting.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

John,

 

Good point. My meta-issue is that sloppy use of words leads to sloppy

thinking and communication.

 

Kong-zi (Confucius): " First rectify the words. "

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " "

<johnkokko wrote:

>

> The other issue with the term,

> " Patent medicine " is that most of the pills/tablets that are

available are

> not patented at all.

> They are classical/ traditional formulas that are public domain.

>

> Actually, pharmaceuticals are the true " patent medicine " , if we look

at it

> that way.

>

> This can confuse patients and suppliers.

>

> I like the term : " prepared medicine " or just saying specifically

> " pills " , " tablets " , " capsules " , " tinctures " , " wines " , " plasters " etc.

>

>

 

When I mention them to patients, I refer to them as pills. " Prepared

Medicine " doesn't really convey the dosage form, so it seems more

appropriate as a general description. If I offer a patient a choice of

pills, dried extracts, or liquid extracts, they get the point. I don't

think many patients would know what I was talking about if I offered

them " patent medicines " .

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> John,

>

> Good point. My meta-issue is that sloppy use of words leads to sloppy

> thinking and communication.

>

> Kong-zi (Confucius): " First rectify the words. "

>

> Bob

>

 

 

Bob,

 

By " sloppy " , do you mean unclear? Other practitioners know exactly

what is meant by " patent medicines " when the term is used, but

" prepared medicines " is a more general term that doesn't convey the

dosage form. You make a good point about the negative connotations for

the term " patent medicines " , and maybe it should be phased out, but if

you are proposing a term that is even less specific, couldn't that be

described as " sloppy " ?

 

- Bill