fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

[Guest guest]

Hi Thomas, Michael & All

 

I have often thought about this issue:

What do TCM practitioners need to know regarding the medicinals?

 

 

Michael said:

Western herbalists are so far ahead of Chinese herbalists in

regard for their appreciation of plants

 

Stephen:

that statement is an overgeneralization and I must assume you

mean Western herbalists are ahead on botanical science

 

" appreciation " ? probably a different word applies

Most practitioners I know who practice herbal medicine have a

great love and appreciation for plants..

did you mean something different?

 

Michael said:

too often TCM graduates in the West have swallowed what they

learn in school and don't even bother to learn the

Latin binomials

 

Stephen:

This is true enough -

Question:

If signs and symptoms lead to diagnosis which leads to a formula

-

How does knowing the Latin make someone a better practitioner?

Do others think that this is important knowledge?

 

Thomas said:

nearly every Western herbalist has at least a basic understanding

of botany, something that is essentially abscent in Chinese

herbal training.

 

Stephen:

Although we use rhizomes frequently and perhaps many students and

practitioners don't actually know what a rhizome is -

Although few of us have any sense of which medicinals are

annuals, biennials or perennials -

Does this knowledge make someone a better practitioner?

If we rely on various sources for our herbs or granules - perhaps

the product isn't botanically exact...but if the clinical results

are good....does it matter?

 

just curious

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users:

http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Stephen et al,

 

As was mentioned by Ben and Andrea (in different ways) there are advantages

to having a least a basic understanding of botany, and I agree with each of

their points. Let me flesh out an idea that I have about why it is

important. When we learn botany, specifically field botany, we learn to make

observations and discriminate patterns seen within the structures of plants

to categorize them. First we need to get to a family, then to a genus, then

to a species (note that there are other larger groups that are sometimes

necessary to distinguish before family, but as we get more skilled this

becomes less and less necessary....sound familiar?). Once we learn some of

these patterns, we begin to recognize families, then even genera...finally

species can be recognized based on our experience. I see this as pattern

discrimination, albeit different from ±çÖ¤ (bianzheng). Thus, this training is

kinda like a warm-up for something practitioners will need to do with

patients. Furthermore, I strongly believe that understanding patterns in

nature (you could read this as ecology) help practitioners to understand

patterns in people.

 

So, yes I think all students should have at least basic botany training.

AND, I believe it is required curriculum, though mostly glossed over.

 

This all begins to speak to what I believe is a great weakness in the

education of students in the West. Their undergraduate education, if they

have one, is often completely unrelated to Chinese medicine or any facet of

it. I believe developing such a curriculum is far more important than the

" doctorate " programs that have come into being in recent years. Building

another story on the house that has a poorly constructed foundation seems

like folly to me.

 

Thomas

 

 

Beijing, China

Author of " Western Herbs According to Traditional : A

Practitioners Guide "

Check out my blog: www.sourcepointherbs.blogspot.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Bravo, Thomas.  I agree.

 

Andrea Beth

 

Traditional Oriental Medicine

Happy Hours in the CALM Center

635 S. 10th St.

Cottonwood, AZ  86326

(928) 274-1373

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, wrote:

 

 

Re:fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Thursday, May 28, 2009, 1:11 AM

 

Stephen et al,

 

As was mentioned by Ben and Andrea (in different ways) there are advantages

to having a least a basic understanding of botany, and I agree with each of

their points. Let me flesh out an idea that I have about why it is

important. When we learn botany, specifically field botany, we learn to make

observations and discriminate patterns seen within the structures of plants

to categorize them. First we need to get to a family, then to a genus, then

to a species (note that there are other larger groups that are sometimes

necessary to distinguish before family, but as we get more skilled this

becomes less and less necessary....sound familiar?). Once we learn some of

these patterns, we begin to recognize families, then even genera...finally

species can be recognized based on our experience. I see this as pattern

discrimination, albeit different from è¾©è¯ (bianzheng). Thus, this training is

kinda like a warm-up for something practitioners will need to do with

patients. Furthermore, I strongly believe that understanding patterns in

nature (you could read this as ecology) help practitioners to understand

patterns in people.

 

So, yes I think all students should have at least basic botany training.

AND, I believe it is required curriculum, though mostly glossed over.

 

This all begins to speak to what I believe is a great weakness in the

education of students in the West. Their undergraduate education, if they

have one, is often completely unrelated to Chinese medicine or any facet of

it. I believe developing such a curriculum is far more important than the

" doctorate " programs that have come into being in recent years. Building

another story on the house that has a poorly constructed foundation seems

like folly to me.

 

Thomas

 

 

Beijing, China

Author of " Western Herbs According to Traditional : A

Practitioners Guide "

Check out my blog: www.sourcepointherbs.blogspot.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

hello Thomas,

 

Although I understand your point for western students in Chinese medicine, since

you are in Beijing,  I think that you know the Doctors

here do not need such botany knowledge for their practice right?( I remember

that you said China TCM doctors lack the basic Botany knowledge) .  The first

importance for them is how to diagnosis the patient - correct diagnosis -> right

prescription(treatment), then their job is done. The patient will go to the

right place to get the right medicinals. There is someone or a dept, specially

responsible in purchasing the right medicinals from good sources.

 

In addition to herbs, Chinese medicine includes over 80 minerials/ some animal

mdicinals which are important in treating some diseases. should you suggest

to include courses in mineral and animal into tcm courses?

 

Steve

 

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, wrote:

 

 

 

Re:fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Thursday, May 28, 2009, 1:11 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stephen et al,

 

As was mentioned by Ben and Andrea (in different ways) there are advantages

to having a least a basic understanding of botany, and I agree with each of

their points. Let me flesh out an idea that I have about why it is

important. When we learn botany, specifically field botany, we learn to make

observations and discriminate patterns seen within the structures of plants

to categorize them. First we need to get to a family, then to a genus, then

to a species (note that there are other larger groups that are sometimes

necessary to distinguish before family, but as we get more skilled this

becomes less and less necessary... .sound familiar?). Once we learn some of

these patterns, we begin to recognize families, then even genera...finally

species can be recognized based on our experience. I see this as pattern

discrimination, albeit different from è¾©è¯ (bianzheng). Thus, this training is

kinda like a warm-up for something practitioners will need to do with

patients. Furthermore, I strongly believe that understanding patterns in

nature (you could read this as ecology) help practitioners to understand

patterns in people.

 

So, yes I think all students should have at least basic botany training.

AND, I believe it is required curriculum, though mostly glossed over.

 

This all begins to speak to what I believe is a great weakness in the

education of students in the West. Their undergraduate education, if they

have one, is often completely unrelated to Chinese medicine or any facet of

it. I believe developing such a curriculum is far more important than the

" doctorate " programs that have come into being in recent years. Building

another story on the house that has a poorly constructed foundation seems

like folly to me.

 

Thomas

 

 

Beijing, China

Author of " Western Herbs According to Traditional : A

Practitioners Guide "

Check out my blog: www.sourcepointherb s.blogspot. com