: Jeffrey Yuen clinically effective?

[Guest guest]

I think what some of the people on the user group is wondering...

is Jeffrey Yuen's theories and protocols clinically effective?

 

Can some of Jeffrey's students talk about this?

 

If we're saying that clinical effectiveness is the gold standard and

physiological, ,psychological and spiritual well-being/ integration is the

yardstick, can anyone talk about using his teachings in practice, not just

in theory?

 

Has Jeffrey done any clinical rounds and are there case studies available of

his own practice ?

 

Lonny Jarrett has written two books full of in-depth case-studies. Aside

from the theory, this is useful to understand how we can go the next step in

applying the theory to something concrete and tangible.

 

Thanks,

K

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

John,

 

I hesitate to speak out on these questions about Jeffrey because I do not

want to misrepresent him or his work, and I also know there must be people

" out there " who have a lot more experience studying with Jeffrey than me.

But I will say a few things.

 

I have only studied with Jeffrey at his own center in Chinatown in NYC, and

although he treats patients there himself, his private work is separate from

the classes he teaches, meaning, there is no clinical experience available

to people who study with him in this context. He occasionally treats

someone in the class as a demo, but these are but brief glimpses of how the

acupuncture might be applied. (I'm currently taking the two-year advanced

acupuncture course.)

 

In the first year we only covered the primary channels, so I have even yet

to study the " 5 channel system " that Steve mentions. That will come this

year. In the first year J. spent a lot of time teaching a history of CM,

while providing commentary on the various contributions of Daoism, Buddhism

and Confucianism to the medicine. From what I have gleaned, I would say

that the philosophical thought is " embedded " in the theory, rather than

sitting on the surface, if you get my drift. For example, J. spent some

time talking about the meaning of different words one might use when

referring to the strategy often call " regulating the Qi. " J. points out

that if someone says " rectify the Qi " this inherently implies a Confucian

influence, because the work " rectify " itself implies morality or a moral

gauge or stance. On the other hand " course the qi " implies a different

strategy, one perhaps more concerned with a person's " life course. " But if

anyone in a class would ask the question, " What points can I use with my

patient to help them figure which way to go in life? " Jeffrey would not

answer that question. Even if the question were phrased in a much more

specific way, he would not give a protocol in class because he is opposed in

principle to the idea of giving out " recipes, " as he calls them, for

treatments. His goal in teaching rather is to stimulate the thinking

process, and I would say, to teach an understanding of pathophysiology from

a CCM point of view.

 

He does often mention the Daoist notion of " curriculum " and how it differs

from a Buddhist idea of 'karma. " But it's really woven into the teaching; I

would say he is definitely not teaching a " spiritual " approach to CM, though

I know there might be those who think differently. He does not, as Steve

does, say " embodied spirit, " when referring to the person or the body, he

just says body. He has pointed out though, for example, to a Chinese

person, historically, if one said in a medical context " heart pain " that

could mean perhaps " blocked coronary vessels " but it could also mean " broken

heart, " with all that that implies.

 

J. does employ the terminology Shen (big Shen) by which he means, I think,

the cosmic influence, and shen (little shen) the spirit of the heart. He

also translates Ling as Soul, which I mentioned in another post. This way

of thinking about Ling/Soul has resonated with me, because I feel this is

the the terrain in which Jeffrey is working, this is the 'embodied spirit,'

which, once it is embodied no longer can be called a spirit exactly, because

once you have a body, you carry forward your soul, you curriculum, and you

build yourself a physical body through the Jing of your parents and through

the influence of the Shen, which J. says is seen as " that influence which is

above our own bloodline. "

 

J has pointed out that acupuncture was historically seen to work via the

principle of " resonance, " but then later people became uncomfortable with

the idea of resonance, and that was when the internal connections of

channels to organs were figured out. (I'd have to go to my notebooks to

quote some dates for that, and I don't have the time to do that right at the

moment.) He has said that the " religious " overtones of medical writing

began to be excised by the time the NeiJing was written.

 

I believe J. himself cultivates " resonance " in his approach to acu; I say

that because I feel the resonance in the classes, particularly when he gives

someone a demo treatment. (but also in the lectures) He speaks fairly

often of intention, though he doesn't make a big deal out of it, but he

quietly and without any kind of drama keeps reminding everyone that

intention is paramount.

 

Hope this helps some.

 

RoseAnne

 

 

 

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 9:20 AM, <johnkokko wrote:

 

> I think what some of the people on the user group is wondering...

> is Jeffrey Yuen's theories and protocols clinically effective?

>

> Can some of Jeffrey's students talk about this?

>

> If we're saying that clinical effectiveness is the gold standard and

> physiological, ,psychological and spiritual well-being/ integration is the

> yardstick, can anyone talk about using his teachings in practice, not just

> in theory?

>

> Has Jeffrey done any clinical rounds and are there case studies available

> of

> his own practice ?

>

> Lonny Jarrett has written two books full of in-depth case-studies. Aside

> from the theory, this is useful to understand how we can go the next step

> in

> applying the theory to something concrete and tangible.

>

> Thanks,

> K

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

RoseAnne, John, et. al.,

 

Thank you for the excellent review of your experience of Jeffrey's classes.

I agree with all your impressions, and can add a few of my own. However, I

can't speak for Jeffrey either, and do not want to be considered a source

for clarifications of " his teachings. " Of course, I also invite other of

Jeffrey's students to contribute their experience. The things I say about

Chinese medicine are my understanding, based on my studies. While my studies

have certainly been inspired by Jeffrey Yuen, I've also done a little

reading of my own over the years, and most importantly have worked

tirelessly to apply the channel systems and the body of theory they imply in

clinical practice.

 

RoseAnne mentioned quite accurately that the term " embodied spirit " is mine

rather than Jeffrey's. I use it because I believe it's a good reminder that

the " body " of Chinese medicine is not a complex biochemical machine, as in

modern science, but is animated by spirit and behaves according to various

principles. My study of Chinese medicine seeks to uncover and clarify the

nature of the most central principles of individual life, and how to apply

that understanding directly to understanding the dynamic nature of disease

and how to practice CM for the benefit of individual patients.

 

In response to John's first question: Studying with Jeffrey is undoubtedly

frustrating for some, because he steadfastly avoids giving protocols. Of

course, an individual can take any piece of information he or she learns and

turn it into a protocol, but I can say with assurance that Jeffrey does not

encourage that process. Jeffrey isn't even interested in efficiently

teaching a body of theory, though people who study with him and apply

themselves to working with what he teaches can learn a lot. He does not

share his case results, even with " senior students " (like me), because he

believes strongly that each practitioner must learn from his or her own

experience. He has said several times that I've heard over the years that he

can't transmit his experience.

 

For many years, Jeffrey did very few clinical practica. For the past couple

years they have been more common, but they are just " one time " evaluations

and then he will come up with a treatment strategy for any treatment

modality he's teaching. I've studied " with " him for sixteen years, and have

never had the opportunity to observe him work with a single patient over

time. That has obviously provided a HUGE challenge, because all of his

students have been left to figure out how to apply his teachings for

themselves. I have been applying my understanding of those teachings

exclusively in my private practice for at least a dozen years -- about half

the time I've been in practice. I'm not saying other approaches are wrong,

but this is the approach that interests me, and I've seen patients do

amazing things.

 

In addition to the concerns I shared about case studies in response to

Jason's post yesterday, I have concerns about sharing my case results

because of the following statement made by Duncan on one of the other

threads yesterday: Ideally as practitioners, our touchstones would be

clinical efficacy and patient improvement. Unfortunately, usually all we

have are self-reports of each other's effectiveness. Anyone who has spent

anytime thinking and studying such matters knows that self-reporting is

notoriously biased and unreliable.

 

I agree this is a challenging issue, and can't say that Duncan is wrong to

be skeptical of personal statements of results. Several years ago, I

suggested " prospective " case

studies<http://www.ccmforhealing.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/In-Defense-of-Ca\

se-Studies.pdf>where

patients have been medically evaluated, preferably both before and

after a series of treatments to provide more objectivity, but many of my

patients don't have health insurance and don't typically see medical

doctors, especially for follow-up evaluation if they're satisfied with the

results of their treatments. Yet, during the past couple days, three

different people have asked, so when I return home and can access my charts,

I'll write up a prospective cases. Thank you all for your interest, and for

those that aren't interested, please just ignore them.

 

Just one more comment, before I pack it in for tonight: I'm afraid Thea

over-estimated my mastery of Chinese herbal medicine. I consider my work

with acupuncture more highly developed than my work with herbs, though I've

put a lot of time and energy into working with herbs, especially during the

past 8-10 years. I practice acupuncture and herbs together (with other

modalities, such as teaching patients qigong exercises), and am more

interested in my patient's well-being than I am in carefully discriminating

how each modality works. All that said, I'm working on clarifying how best

to express my clinical thinking in a case study.

 

Steve

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Thanks RoseAnne and Steven for sharing this.

I'm wondering when books will be published by J.Yuen's students,

consolidating his teachings without compromising meaning and context.

I've talked with people who have graduated from AUCM in LA

and have finished dissertations and there are people like you two,

who have studied with him through CEU's and the NY program.

There are people like me, who have read audio transcripts and have

heard the recordings from www.conferencerecording.com.

 

As far as I know, there is only 1 book that talks about this material,

written by Jeffrey Jacob " The Acupuncturist's Clinical Handbook " ,

which only lists protocols without providing the narrative behind the

channel

and point selection.

 

After almost 20 years of teaching in the U.S., you would think that

there would be books published by now, no?

I know that J. Yuen's tradition is through " oral transmission " .

Has this process carried over to his students as well?

What is the benefit of keeping the teachings orally transmitted in this day

and age?

 

Thanks,

K

[Guest guest]

My classmate from Emperors and AUCM Matia Brizman has published her dissertation

on interstitial Cystitis that has a lot of JY concepts in it. I bought it

online. Also Kia Sinay who has been doing articles for California journals.

Doug

 

 

, <johnkokko wrote:

>

> Thanks RoseAnne and Steven for sharing this.

> I'm wondering when books will be published by J.Yuen's students,

> consolidating his teachings without compromising meaning and context.

> I've talked with people who have graduated from AUCM in LA

> and have finished dissertations and there are people like you two,

> who have studied with him through CEU's and the NY program.

> There are people like me, who have read audio transcripts and have

> heard the recordings from www.conferencerecording.com.

>

> As far as I know, there is only 1 book that talks about this material,

> written by Jeffrey Jacob " The Acupuncturist's Clinical Handbook " ,

> which only lists protocols without providing the narrative behind the

> channel

> and point selection.

>

> After almost 20 years of teaching in the U.S., you would think that

> there would be books published by now, no?

> I know that J. Yuen's tradition is through " oral transmission " .

> Has this process carried over to his students as well?

> What is the benefit of keeping the teachings orally transmitted in this day

> and age?

>

> Thanks,

> K

>

[Guest guest]

Hi folks,

 

John: A book is a great idea. Indeed, there should undoubtedly be several

books. I started working on what I considered at the time a basic

introduction to the CCM theory I was learning from Jeffrey after I'd been

studying with him for about 3 years. I worked on that project for about a

half dozen years, until I realized that no matter how hard I worked, I was

growing farther away from completing it rather than closer. Perhaps even

worse than that, my writing was quite dense. Several years ago, I decided

to change gears, and started writing shorter pieces. I focused on making

more readable, which has required considerable work. While some may think I

still have a long way to go, I've archived my essays on my website.

 

If anyone is looking for reading material about the principles of practicing

pre-Song style acupuncture, check out my

website<http://www.ccmforhealing.com/>.

If you want more detailed material about applying each of the channel

systems, consider attending the four weekend series of seminars of the

channel systems. While this short series certainly isn't comprehensive, it

does provide interested practitioners a working knowledge of each channel

system, complete with practica of specific clinical skills for working with

each of them. I've already prepared almost 100 pages of written notes for this

series<http://www.ccmforhealing.com/classes/professional-ceu-seminars/the-channe\

ls-and-vessels-of-acupuncture/>,

and have engaged a medical illustrator to make a " next generation " version

of illustrations of the channel systems. We hope to have a first draft of

those before the series begins in the Bay Area this fall. While teaching the

series during the next year, I expect to refine and further develop the

materials I've already prepared. In other words, my book(s) is/are in the

works. I'm interested to see what other long term students of Jeffrey put

together. While Jeffrey doesn't discourage such efforts, he also doesn't

openly and overtly support them.

 

I believe Jeffrey wants, and I certainly want, to see the practice of

Chinese medicine in the west grow more about developing a thinking process

than about accumulating information. I think there many ways to do that. One

can, as Jason stated quite passionately, study the cases of insightful

physicians of the past. However, since Chinese medicine has evolved and

transformed so dramatically over the centuries, too much focus on one

historical period may provide a distorted sense of the broad and deep

history of CM. One might also go back to the philosophical roots of CM, as

discussed on another recent thread. Of course, this becomes a VERY vast

endeavor, and there can be as many paths as people.

 

Certainly, there is much valuable clinical information, both historically in

Chinese medicine and recently in contemporary research on physiology and

patho-physiology. There is also a vitally important thinking process that

focuses on understanding the dynamic and responsive nature of individual

human life that lay at the core of classical Chinese medicine. I hope we can

support each other is discerning the nature of the embodied spirit, and in

developing the thinking process such work inspires -- to help us become more

effective practitioners. I believe that using the conceptual framework of

the five systems of channels helps me understand the challenges and

opportunities of each individual's life more clearly, and to find

discriminating and accurate ways to address therapeutically their individual

struggles with disease.

 

I just reread my essay on the value of case

studies<http://www.ccmforhealing.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/In-Defense-of-Ca\

se-Studies.pdf>,

and saw that space constraints at the time of publication forced me to edit

out my original comment concerning prospective cases, which are ones with

full " before and after " medical evaluation. That idea was included by just a

mere twist in the concluding sentence, and when I posted my essays on the

site I posted my final submissions, because those were the ones with the

fewest grammatical errors. Anyway, I consider prospective cases studies the

" gold standard " for evaluating the physical aspect of the healing process,

though they don't necessarily evaluate the functional/physiological status

of healing process accurately, and obviously can't measure the

psychological, emotional, and dare I say " spiritual " aspects of life. I

believe all of these are important, and if people wish I can discuss those

topics in greater detail later.

 

I'll write up a couple prospective cases when I get a chance. In the

meantime, I'd like to share just one more comment about healing process. A

few days ago, I posted a comment about this topic that inspired at least one

very critical reaction. I'd like to clarify and perhaps further elucidate my

original comment, because it has substantial clinical implications. I

believe it's important for CM practitioners to stay in accurate relation

with our work. We stimulate healing process; we don't control or generate

it. It is not our qi that causes healing to happen, though putting our qi

with clear intention into our work can stimulate profoundly transformations

in our patients. It remains our patients' qi that specifically generates

their healing, and our work focuses on nourishing as well as facilitating

it.

 

In addition to inspiring bloated egos among some practitioners, confusion

about the basic nature of healing work can lead to squandering the patient's

wei qi in maintaining pathogenic process in a relatively less expressive

state, rather than focusing the effort to transform it. We certainly have

our colleagues in western medicine to thank for accentuating the standard of

short-term symptomatic relief, rather than the profound transformations of

true healing. Our patients (actually, their embodied spirits) are in such

desperate need of our educating them concerning such basic issues of human

hygiene as drinking enough water and getting enough sleep.

 

Laura posted an excellent comment recently on the thread about lactation,

stating that new mothers that are having difficulty with lactation should

minimize stress by focusing on little other than their new babies for the

first couple months after birth. Often profound healing requires the same

single-minded (and single-hearted) focus. There are so many reasons this is

true, and I believe we need to be secure enough in our work to speak up for

the needs of the embodied spirit, even when they may be at variance with the

desires (and perhaps needs) of the person living in the broader society.

While society supports individuals in many ways, it also puts pressures on

us. Many individuals benefit from developing a clear sense of what they need

as individually embodied spirits, especially when that differs from how they

learned to behave and think as children.

 

Steve