Guest guest Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 Jason, I just finished reading Volker Scheid's, Currents of Tradition " , and in it he talks at length about many different famous Doctors. In reference to Qin Bo-Wei,Volker claims that he was more of a teacher/ scholar than a clinician, which is very interesting to me. I am curious as to your thoughts about this, as I know you have spent a great deal of time reading up on him. Trevor , " " wrote: > > Steve, > > > > The problem is (not saying you) many people do not look out for such > problems. For example, some people like Andrea, have symptoms almost > immediately, but for many, there are no immediate symptoms. It just chisels > away at the yin. This is why Qin Bo-Wei rarely used it long-term. As many > say, SHL approaches most often are used for short term gains. Long-term > approaches usually require a different strategy. > > > > It is hard to ignore the words of these great doctors. Especially > interesting is that all of them (that I mentioned earlier) lived in a damp > climate. > > > > -Jason > > On Behalf Of Stephen Bonzak > Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:26 AM > > Re: Re: Chai hu for yin xu > > > > That is interesting. I use chai hu quite frequently in clinic, but I > live in a much different climate than you do (maybe Chicago is more > like the climate that ZZJ practiced in). I rarely see chai hu cause > problems if the pattern warrants it's use. I have also been > experimenting with using Dr. Huang's recommendation to use chai hu > for people with chai hu body types and for people with chai hu > diseases. It seems to be working quite well. > > -Steve > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Trevor, Volker's book is excellent, no doubt. However, I think one has to look at the big picture when evaluating such a statement. Qin Bo-Wei was one of the strongest and most famous teachers in the 20th century, writing many of the earlier textbooks (and loads of articles) for the schools in the 20 century. His ability to clearly present complex ideas was unparalleled. He was an amazing synthesizer of ideas and there are some interesting stories about this in Volker's book. However, my teacher shadowed him for 15 years in the clinic. I have had long discussion about Dr. Qin's clinical aspects with my teacher. It should be known that Dr. Qin's clinical skills were also some of the best around. There are quite of few of his case studies circulating for this very reason. I have hundreds and they are far from meek. He was certainly one of the few individuals to achieve both a high proficiency in the clinic as well as his ability to teach and think about Chinese medicine clearly, hence one of the reasons I like him so much. So Volker's statement may be technically correct. He did so much in the field of medicine from an academic (and political) standpoint that it is hard to image anything else. Although, there were clinicians that were more famous than him, to assume for a second that Qin Bo-Wei was sitting in some ivory tower (not that you are) is incorrect. His ability to integrate what he taught into the clinic should not be under estimated. Consequently he developed a whole host of formulas that I personally use daily. Hope this answers your question a bit. -Jason On Behalf Of Trevor Erikson Wednesday, November 19, 2008 2:27 PM QIn Bo-Wei Jason, I just finished reading Volker Scheid's, Currents of Tradition " , and in it he talks at length about many different famous Doctors. In reference to Qin Bo-Wei,Volker claims that he was more of a teacher/ scholar than a clinician, which is very interesting to me. I am curious as to your thoughts about this, as I know you have spent a great deal of time reading up on him. Trevor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Jason, Thanks for your insights. I too am always searching for that good blend of teacher and clinician. I always want to question the validity of a " famous " doctors claim to to fame, whether it was from a purely theoretical place or if it was matched in clinical practice. I was very intrigued by some of the accomplishments that Volker attributed to Qin Bowei, particularly his diagnostic ability and the book he wrote on this. It seems that his diagnostic approach was meant to be placed into the mainstream standardized medical literature, but was replaced instead by the less superior 8 differential diagnosis. I am very curious to study Qin Bowei's methods and case studies. I noticed that Chip Chase recently translated a book of his. Any idea if it is related to Qin's diagnostic skills? Thanks, Trevor PS This is another area where I feel more motivated to actually learn the Chinese. Practitioners like yourself inspire me because of all this richness you have access to! , " " wrote: > > Trevor, > > > > Volker's book is excellent, no doubt. However, I think one has to look at > the big picture when evaluating such a statement. > > > > Qin Bo-Wei was one of the strongest and most famous teachers in the 20th > century, writing many of the earlier textbooks (and loads of articles) for > the schools in the 20 century. His ability to clearly present complex ideas > was unparalleled. He was an amazing synthesizer of ideas and there are some > interesting stories about this in Volker's book. > > > > However, my teacher shadowed him for 15 years in the clinic. I have had long > discussion about Dr. Qin's clinical aspects with my teacher. It should be > known that Dr. Qin's clinical skills were also some of the best around. > There are quite of few of his case studies circulating for this very reason. > I have hundreds and they are far from meek. > > > > He was certainly one of the few individuals to achieve both a high > proficiency in the clinic as well as his ability to teach and think about > Chinese medicine clearly, hence one of the reasons I like him so much. > > > > So Volker's statement may be technically correct. He did so much in the > field of medicine from an academic (and political) standpoint that it is > hard to image anything else. Although, there were clinicians that were more > famous than him, to assume for a second that Qin Bo-Wei was sitting in some > ivory tower (not that you are) is incorrect. His ability to integrate what > he taught into the clinic should not be under estimated. Consequently he > developed a whole host of formulas that I personally use daily. Hope this > answers your question a bit. > > > > -Jason > > > > > On Behalf Of Trevor Erikson > Wednesday, November 19, 2008 2:27 PM > > QIn Bo-Wei > > > > Jason, > > I just finished reading Volker Scheid's, Currents of Tradition " , and > in it he talks at length about many different famous Doctors. In > reference to Qin Bo-Wei,Volker claims that he was more of a teacher/ > scholar than a clinician, which is very interesting to me. I am > curious as to your thoughts about this, as I know you have spent a > great deal of time reading up on him. > > Trevor > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Trevor, This diagnostic approach that you refer to, that lost out to the 8 principle, is precisely the book I am working on. It is actually a little more complete-complex version than the one that was " officially " presented. His clear thinking and diagnostic clarity is something I have strive for. I think CM is ready for a more sophisticated model of integration. As mentioned in Volker's book this system lost out to a much more simplified model, I think largely due to politics. At around this time is when CM really took a nose dive, hence why I am currently spending so much energy at this time period and slightly before. CM was really hitting a nice peak. Chip did publish a Qin Bo-Wei book in the 90's. It is a complication of some useful essays, however, it does not contain the type of information that we are referring to. Unfortunately there is no commentary on the essays, but still worth reading. I will be putting out many articles etc on Qin Bo-Wei in the next years. I have translated a large amount of his works already. I have taught some of his material already and I find people are very receptive due to its inherent clarity. I actually think Qin's material has the potential to really raise the bar here in the West. Mostly because it presents a high level of information, in a way that the average person can understand. It is a nice balance of theory and clinical usefulness. Trevor, you should definitely learn Chinese. It is never too late. You are right, you can access some cool stuff. Most important is that it allows you to focus on topics or doctors that you like. Otherwise you are at the mercy of the author / translator. -Jason On Behalf Of Trevor Erikson Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:53 AM Re: QIn Bo-Wei Jason, Thanks for your insights. I too am always searching for that good blend of teacher and clinician. I always want to question the validity of a " famous " doctors claim to to fame, whether it was from a purely theoretical place or if it was matched in clinical practice. I was very intrigued by some of the accomplishments that Volker attributed to Qin Bowei, particularly his diagnostic ability and the book he wrote on this. It seems that his diagnostic approach was meant to be placed into the mainstream standardized medical literature, but was replaced instead by the less superior 8 differential diagnosis. I am very curious to study Qin Bowei's methods and case studies. I noticed that Chip Chase recently translated a book of his. Any idea if it is related to Qin's diagnostic skills? Thanks, Trevor PS This is another area where I feel more motivated to actually learn the Chinese. Practitioners like yourself inspire me because of all this richness you have access to! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Very cool Jason! I look forward to reading your translated work when done. Trevor , " " wrote: > > Trevor, > > > > This diagnostic approach that you refer to, that lost out to the 8 > principle, is precisely the book I am working on. It is actually a little > more complete-complex version than the one that was " officially " presented. > His clear thinking and diagnostic clarity is something I have strive for. I > think CM is ready for a more sophisticated model of integration. As > mentioned in Volker's book this system lost out to a much more simplified > model, I think largely due to politics. At around this time is when CM > really took a nose dive, hence why I am currently spending so much energy at > this time period and slightly before. CM was really hitting a nice peak. > > > > Chip did publish a Qin Bo-Wei book in the 90's. It is a complication of some > useful essays, however, it does not contain the type of information that we > are referring to. Unfortunately there is no commentary on the essays, but > still worth reading. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.