Guest guest Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 > Where exactly, and how exactly, do you suggest people learn to be >professionals in the field of aromatherapy? Well for a start people need to read all of my articles because they expose numerous con trick in this trade. Next they need to stop relying on what aromatherapy suppliers say on their websites many of which are just piles of marketing crap. They need to think, and that is a rarity nowadays. They need to stop making a big fuss about " how lovely charming, etc " a teacher is, and look at and double check the content of what they are teaching. They need to devote TIME and MONEY to researching in libraries on the relevant sciences surrounding aromatherapy. Took me two years solid doing just that before I even began to assemble my course at the request of a nursing school. If it were not for that I doubt I would have bothered. That time was on top of 4 years full time learning to be a herbalist plus two years plus working for an expert analyst. So put that into perspective over those who offer aromatherapy courses based on what the teachers have learned from other teachers with no sound training themselves. >Because just saying everyone " else " is in it for the money I never said that. I have said something like 95% of this trade teach significant amounts of trash. I do have a long history in this trade and I do know what the background is of many of the leaders. They got into it in the 1980s when everyone was jumping on the gravy chain. Many suppliers and teachers had no training or experience in the natural health fields. It was " lie as much as you can and grab as much cash as you can " . Many of these people are now considered leaders in the field and got their through clever marketing, not knowledge. Some of the old hands did learn a heck of a lot as they went along and I don't have a problem with that as long as they do not try and make out they are experts in everything to do with the trade. I have said before on newsgroups, I will never class myself as an expert in most of the subjects, far too much to learn in one lifetime. We all need to learn as we go along, but the big problem nowadays is people want sound bite education - as you clearly have found out - and not to learn properly. Just look at how long traditional healers are apprentices before they are considered knowledgeable enough to be healers. Often 7-10 years in primitive tribes is not uncommon. I should write a real history of this trade sometime and then people could see I am not the only one who has said these things, problem is most of the fighters of the con artists have just dropped out and gone on to other ventures. Martin ATFE , " SUSAN " <sueapito wrote: > > > Number of hours of education has nothing at all to do with quality. I would dispute that standards in the UK are higher than America. The trade associations here continue teaching the junk straight out of the aromatherapy novels.< > > " Number of hours " is pretty much a standard in every college and university, so I guess this organization is just mirroring a standard model for educational requirements. > > And we all know that you can have a Bachelors degree from Harvard or one from West Pennsyltucky Community College and have spent the same amount of hours, but most likely received a better education at the former (as well as spent considerably more money to receive it.) > > I know my kids educations costs between $43,000 and $48,000 A YEAR and they could easily have gone to community college for far less, but hopefully both will have exceptional educations as a result (along with being brilliant children, of course.) > > That said, Martin, if everyone listened to you the entire field of aromatherapy would die off because " everyone " is teaching nonsense. > > Where exactly, and how exactly, do you suggest people learn to be professionals in the field of aromatherapy? Because just saying everyone " else " is in it for the money and everyone " else " teaches crap isn't really all that helpful. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 _____ ATFE [ATFE ] On Behalf Of anew_kid4us Thursday, January 28, 2010 11:29 AM ATFE Re: EO and pregnancy. Hi Marcia, While I appreciate you clarifying your position on AIA, I would like to share something with you and the group to set the record straight. <<I think that their (AIA) educational standards now pretty much replicate what the original Steering Committee came up with way back in the day, adopted by NAHA and used for the ARC exam.>> As one of the writers of the AIA Educational Guidelines, I can say that they are not a replication of what was done previously by NAHA or the ARC. The intent of the writing of the new guidelines was to elevate the education standards in America, as well as to be more " on par " with those in England and Australia where the educational requirements are higher (400-665 hrs). In those countries you either study and achieve certification at that level, or you cannot practice aromatherapy. Unlike here in the US where a level 1 course as approved by NAHA is 30 hours. The AIA standards are not only focused on the number of hours of study, but the SUNSTANCE as well. Level 1 AIA is 100 hours, Level 2 is 200 hours and Level 3 is 400 hours minimum, with additional requirements with regard to A & P and Research. The information posted on the AIA website is a very broad and general overview of the levels. Believe me, it goes way deeper than than and is very detailed. Schools may voluntarily submit their applications for recognition at these levels, but the process is long and detailed. One need only to look at the list of currently approved schools, as compared to the when the revised guidelines came out (1 year ago), to see just how many schools have been recognized at the higher curriculum standards. The AIA is currently working with schools that have submitted, but have not yet been recognized, in an effort to encourage more schools to " beef up " their curriculums. I am not sure how that can be construed as " replicating " what has been done by other organisations previously or to say that the only thing AIA is interested in gaining students. I realize you were not the person who made that latter of those statements, but I wanted to address that as well. <<I also know Elizabeth Jones and worked early on with her at NAHA years ago. She is a lovely woman and I do not know enough about her particular program to comment, but I agree with Martin that some of the aromatherapy she seems to have taught you should be re-examined,>> Elizabeth has a very good school. I truly believe that all schools should consistently update their curriculum to be current with new findings in aromatherapy. The AIA guidelines are a living document that will grow, as well as the expectations of the schools that wish to be recognized by the AIA. Only Elizabeth, her administration and students know what is contained in her curriculum, so it would not be fair for anyone else to make comment or speculation on it. Not to mention the fact that it could be damaging to her reputation. I'm sure that Elizabeth would appreciate direct inquiries as opposed to speculation on ATFE about her program. By the way, the listing that was posted for COHBA and discussed here on this ATFE forum recently is more than 1 year old and has not been on the AIA website since April 2009. To discuss it now as if it is current would be improper and misleading. Thank you Marcia for your continued support of the AIA! The organization is a good and strong one! Lora Cantele ATFE (AT) (DOT) <ATFE%40> com, " Marcia Elston " <Marcia wrote: > > Lynn, I wanted to clarify that I didn't intend to disparage AIA when I said > all three orgs were working at dual or cross purposes. I, actually, am a > founding member and think that they're coming along and they are pretty much > in their formative years still. With a focus on clinical aromatherapy, they > no doubt will examine and re-examine the educational standards they have > adopted along as they grow and mature. However, I think that their > educational standards now pretty much replicate what the original Steering > Committee came up with way back in the day, adopted by NAHA and used for the > ARC exam. NAHA, I've given up on. ARC has their own set of problems and > maybe Stacey or someone else can enlighten you here if are really > interested. Educational standards for aromatherapy should be thoroughly > examined and updated. Corrercting misinformation that has now permeated > (and multiplied exponentially) going on 20 years (more if you count across > the pond) is a daunting task. I also know Elizabeth Jones and worked early > on with her at NAHA years ago. She is a lovely woman and I do not know > enough about her particular program to comment, but I agree with Martin that > some of the aromatherapy she seems to have taught you should be re-examined, > based on what you have posted here. I don't know if you feel comfortable > bringing questions and concerns back to Elizabeth, but it is a thought. > Perhaps students will eventually be teaching their teachers all over again > as we progress forward. > > You will see that pregnancy and potential essential oil toxicity is > complicated, as Robert, Martin and others have already pointed out. I agree > that there is probably over-caution. Better than no caution, however. > > Be Well, > Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence > http://www.wingedse <http://www.wingedseed.com> ed.com <http://www.wingedse <http://www.wingedseed.com/> ed.com/> > http://www.wingedse <http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com> ed.blogspot.com <http://www.wingedse <http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com/> ed.blogspot.com/> > http://www.aromacon <http://www.aromaconnection.org> nection.org <http://www.aromacon <http://www.aromaconnection.org/> nection.org/> > " We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston > Churchill > > _____ > > ATFE (AT) (DOT) <ATFE%40> com [ATFE (AT) (DOT) <ATFE%40> com] On Behalf Of Lynn > Saturday, January 23, 2010 2:49 PM > ATFE (AT) (DOT) <ATFE%40> com > Re: Re: EO and pregnancy. > > > > > Here is a link about the program...yeah, I know, AIA. It's an overview of > the program. > > http://www.alliance > <http://www.alliance <http://www.alliance-aromatherapists.org/aromatherapy_schools-collegebotanic > -aromatherapists.org/aromatherapy_schools-collegebotanic > alhealing.htm> > -aromatherapists.org/aromatherapy_schools-collegebotanicalhealing.htm > > *I came here to learn from what I consider the experts.* If any piece of my > education is erroneous, then I welcome the correction. > > Thanks for helping..............Lynn > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 7:53 AM, SUSAN <sueapito (AT) (DOT) > <sueapito%40> com> wrote: > > > > > > > ATFE (AT) (DOT) <ATFE%40> com > <ATFE%40>, Lynn <mrningdw@> > > wrote: > > > > > > I am a certified essential oil therapist, and these are the oils to > avoid > > during pregnancy.< > > > > Three questions...what does " certified essential oil therapist " mean? > > > > Are you licensed under another profession perhaps? > > > > Why? I mean those are pretty broad and strange recommendations; why Fennel > > or Peppermint for example? > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 << Number of hours of education has nothing at all to do with quality.>> <<The AIA procedures sound to me like the classic educational hogwash where hours, subjects, etc. take precedence over if the teachers know what they are talking about.>>  I agree, the number of hours doesn't matter as much as the substance and the quality! Those schools that submit for AIA recognition not only their hours, but also the substance of their curriculum, teaching methods, case studies, list of references, recommended resources, amongst other things.  They also submit information about the writer of their curriculum, the resources and references used to write their curriculum, the bios and credentials of their teachers, and then some. Like I said, it is a long, detailed and involved process. <<I would dispute that standards in the UK are higher than America. The trade associations here continue teaching the junk straight out of the aromatherapy novels. For example, I have had their students contact me and have been horrified that their teachers have never given them any documented safety data, and much of what they are taught on the therapeutics is also straight out of aromatherapy books.>> As of October 2008, I no longer believe the standards of the UK are higher than those in America, now that the new standards, as established by AIA, are in place. The requirements at AIA are higher than those of the AC, in which the IFA and IFPA follow. They are also higher than the IAAMA in Australia and certainly much higher than that of the NAHA. <<I have enquired in the past about getting my correspondence course 'recognised' by a nursing organisation in the USA. I gave up because all they were interested in was a mountain of idiotic paperwork with nothing at all about the quality of education. That organisation included aromatherapists nurses.>> I won’t comment about the AHNA, as I am not familiar enough with their processes and criteria having never applied myself. Food for thought! > Elizabeth has a very good school. <<Perhaps if you believe that, you can explain how it is that she teaches incorrect information over essential oils in pregnancy?>> Again, I encourage you to visit the AIA website to see the school(s) that have been recognized by the AIA. It is a short list. From your own website… <<The fact a course is " approved " by a so called leading trade association is almost meaningless. None of these organisations - apart from IATA in Canada, have ever undertaken an evaluation of the accuracy of what their members are teaching.>> The AIA is not one of these “so-called†organizations. The AIA has taken on this task and is dedicated to improving the quality of aromatherapy education. <<A ‘good’ training course in aromatherapy should help improve therapists skills. It should maximise the effects they can achieve by using essential oils in a safe and effective manner.>> The AIA strives to provide its members with educational opportunities to do this. <<If you want to use massage, then training is advisable because there are medical conditions where massage should not be used. However, it is vital to remember that massage is one therapy, and the use of essential oils is another. >> I agree. Massage is not a major part of the AIA curriculum guidelines, as it should be studied more in-depth at a specialized school. It is considered one type of application of essential oils, among others. An AIA recognized school may teach massage in their course, but the hours are not counted in full towards the overall requirement. <<In the USA and Canada, there are so called " advanced " courses that can cost several thousand Dollars…To this day much of their information is based around theoretical considerations based on the major components found in the oils, NOT on research based on the whole oils.>> I think you need to revisit this statement. The AIA website clearly states its Vision, Mission and Goals. It is an organization dedicated to essential oil research and bringing that scientific research to its members and the schools it recognizes. AIA is now a fast-growing independent, international member-based organization providing education using scientific research and traditional information to promote the responsible use of aromatherapy. We serve the public, researchers, educators, healthcare professionals, industry, and the media. Our Vision The AIA is a leading international aromatherapy organization making aromatherapy a readily accessible and respected holistic healing modality. Our Mission AIA unites aromatherapists from around the world to advance research and professionalism within the aromatherapy industry. As a result the public has the option for a safe, natural and complementary form of health care. Our Goals Provide education to the public using scientific-based research and traditional information. Promote responsible use of aromatherapy. Raise educational standards for aromatherapy training. Bring conventional medicine and natural therapies, with emphasis on professional aromatherapy, into a more harmonious relationship. Serve as a resource for the furtherance of professional education and interconnection of serious practitioners of aromatherapy. Serve the public, researchers, educators, healthcare professionals, industry, and the media. We at AIA share your desire for improved standards of education. You seem to pride yourself on your knowledge and desire to improve standards, so why are you so keen on disparaging an organization that shares this goal with you? Lora --- On Fri, 1/29/10, Martin <aromamedical wrote: Martin <aromamedical Re: EO and pregnancy. ATFE Friday, January 29, 2010, 5:01 AM  Number of hours of education has nothing at all to do with quality. I would dispute that standards in the UK are higher than America. The trade associations here continue teaching the junk straight out of the aromatherapy novels. For example, I have had their students contact me and have been horrified that their teachers have never given them any documented safety data, and much of what they are taught on the therapeutics is also straight out of aromatherapy books. The AIA procedures sound to me like the classic educational hogwash where hours, subjects, etc. take precedence over if the teachers know what they are talking about. I have enquired in the past about getting my correspondence course 'recognised' by a nursing organisation in the USA. I gave up because all they were interested in was a mountain of idiotic paperwork with nothing at all about the quality of education. That organisation included aromatherapists nurses. > Elizabeth has a very good school. Perhaps if you believe that, you can explain how it is that she teaches incorrect information over essential oils in pregnancy? Martin Watt ATFE , " anew_kid4us " <anew_kid4us@ ...> wrote: > > > Hi Marcia, > > While I appreciate you clarifying your position on AIA, I would like to share something with you and the group to set the record straight. > > <<I think that their (AIA) educational standards now pretty much replicate what the original Steering Committee came up with way back in the day, adopted by NAHA and used for the ARC exam.>> > > As one of the writers of the AIA Educational Guidelines, I can say that they are not a replication of what was done previously by NAHA or the ARC. The intent of the writing of the new guidelines was to elevate the education standards in America, as well as to be more " on par " with those in England and Australia where the educational requirements are higher (400-665 hrs). In those countries you either study and achieve certification at that level, or you cannot practice aromatherapy. Unlike here in the US where a level 1 course as approved by NAHA is 30 hours. The AIA standards are not only focused on the number of hours of study, but the SUNSTANCE as well. Level 1 AIA is 100 hours, Level 2 is 200 hours and Level 3 is 400 hours minimum, with additional requirements with regard to A & P and Research. The information posted on the AIA website is a very broad and general overview of the levels. Believe me, it goes way deeper than than and is very detailed. > > Schools may voluntarily submit their applications for recognition at these levels, but the process is long and detailed. One need only to look at the list of currently approved schools, as compared to the when the revised guidelines came out (1 year ago), to see just how many schools have been recognized at the higher curriculum standards. The AIA is currently working with schools that have submitted, but have not yet been recognized, in an effort to encourage more schools to " beef up " their curriculums. I am not sure how that can be construed as " replicating " what has been done by other organisations previously or to say that the only thing AIA is interested in gaining students. I realize you were not the person who made that latter of those statements, but I wanted to address that as well. > > <<I also know Elizabeth Jones and worked early on with her at NAHA years ago. She is a lovely woman and I do not know enough about her particular program to comment, but I agree with Martin that some of the aromatherapy she seems to have taught you should be re-examined, >> > > Elizabeth has a very good school. I truly believe that all schools should consistently update their curriculum to be current with new findings in aromatherapy. The AIA guidelines are a living document that will grow, as well as the expectations of the schools that wish to be recognized by the AIA. Only Elizabeth, her administration and students know what is contained in her curriculum, so it would not be fair for anyone else to make comment or speculation on it. Not to mention the fact that it could be damaging to her reputation. I'm sure that Elizabeth would appreciate direct inquiries as opposed to speculation on ATFE about her program. By the way, the listing that was posted for COHBA and discussed here on this ATFE forum recently is more than 1 year old and has not been on the AIA website since April 2009. To discuss it now as if it is current would be improper and misleading. > > Thank you Marcia for your continued support of the AIA! The organization is a good and strong one! > > Lora Cantele > > ATFE , " Marcia Elston " <Marcia@> wrote: > > > > Lynn, I wanted to clarify that I didn't intend to disparage AIA when I said > > all three orgs were working at dual or cross purposes. I, actually, am a > > founding member and think that they're coming along and they are pretty much > > in their formative years still. With a focus on clinical aromatherapy, they > > no doubt will examine and re-examine the educational standards they have > > adopted along as they grow and mature. However, I think that their > > educational standards now pretty much replicate what the original Steering > > Committee came up with way back in the day, adopted by NAHA and used for the > > ARC exam. NAHA, I've given up on. ARC has their own set of problems and > > maybe Stacey or someone else can enlighten you here if are really > > interested. Educational standards for aromatherapy should be thoroughly > > examined and updated. Corrercting misinformation that has now permeated > > (and multiplied exponentially) going on 20 years (more if you count across > > the pond) is a daunting task. I also know Elizabeth Jones and worked early > > on with her at NAHA years ago. She is a lovely woman and I do not know > > enough about her particular program to comment, but I agree with Martin that > > some of the aromatherapy she seems to have taught you should be re-examined, > > based on what you have posted here. I don't know if you feel comfortable > > bringing questions and concerns back to Elizabeth, but it is a thought. > > Perhaps students will eventually be teaching their teachers all over again > > as we progress forward. > > > > You will see that pregnancy and potential essential oil toxicity is > > complicated, as Robert, Martin and others have already pointed out. I agree > > that there is probably over-caution. Better than no caution, however. > > > > Be Well, > > Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence > > http://www.wingedse ed.com <http://www.wingedse ed.com/> > > http://www.wingedse ed.blogspot. com <http://www.wingedse ed.blogspot. com/> > > http://www.aromacon nection.org <http://www.aromacon nection.org/> > > " We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston > > Churchill > > > > _____ > > > > ATFE [ATFE ] On Behalf Of Lynn > > Saturday, January 23, 2010 2:49 PM > > ATFE > > Re: Re: EO and pregnancy. > > > > > > > > > > Here is a link about the program...yeah, I know, AIA. It's an overview of > > the program. > > > > http://www.alliance > > <http://www.alliance -aromatherapists .org/aromatherap y_schools- collegebotanic > > alhealing.htm> > > -aromatherapists. org/aromatherapy _schools- collegebotanical healing.htm > > > > *I came here to learn from what I consider the experts.* If any piece of my > > education is erroneous, then I welcome the correction. > > > > Thanks for helping..... ......... Lynn > > > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 7:53 AM, SUSAN <sueapito (AT) (DOT) > > <sueapito% 40> com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > ATFE (AT) (DOT) <ATFE% 40. com> com > > <ATFE%40 .com>, Lynn <mrningdw@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I am a certified essential oil therapist, and these are the oils to > > avoid > > > during pregnancy.< > > > > > > Three questions... what does " certified essential oil therapist " mean? > > > > > > Are you licensed under another profession perhaps? > > > > > > Why? I mean those are pretty broad and strange recommendations; why Fennel > > > or Peppermint for example? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Brilliantly said Susan! Thank you!  Lora --- On Sat, 1/30/10, SUSAN <sueapito wrote: SUSAN <sueapito Re: EO and pregnancy. ATFE Saturday, January 30, 2010, 10:04 AM  > Number of hours of education has nothing at all to do with quality. I would dispute that standards in the UK are higher than America. The trade associations here continue teaching the junk straight out of the aromatherapy novels.< " Number of hours " is pretty much a standard in every college and university, so I guess this organization is just mirroring a standard model for educational requirements. And we all know that you can have a Bachelors degree from Harvard or one from West Pennsyltucky Community College and have spent the same amount of hours, but most likely received a better education at the former (as well as spent considerably more money to receive it.) I know my kids educations costs between $43,000 and $48,000 A YEAR and they could easily have gone to community college for far less, but hopefully both will have exceptional educations as a result (along with being brilliant children, of course.) That said, Martin, if everyone listened to you the entire field of aromatherapy would die off because " everyone " is teaching nonsense. Where exactly, and how exactly, do you suggest people learn to be professionals in the field of aromatherapy? Because just saying everyone " else " is in it for the money and everyone " else " teaches crap isn't really all that helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 I am afraid this message came out a mess and it is hard to tell what the writer is saying, but it looks like a defense of the AIA and pushing their educational rhetoric. I was not going to continue this theme, but if people keep plugging this organisation on this group I will make it my business to expose the wrong information on their web site and on their teachers web sites line by line. I have already found enough to show their teachers are just parroting wrong information found in the popular aromatherapy books. Martin Watt ATFE , Dan Cantele <anew_kid4us wrote: > > > > > << Number of hours of education has nothing at all to do with quality.>> > <<The AIA procedures sound to me like the classic educational hogwash where hours, subjects, etc. take precedence over if the teachers know what they are talking about.>>  > I agree, the number of hours doesn't matter as much as the substance and the quality! Those schools that submit for AIA recognition not only their hours, but also the substance of their curriculum, teaching methods, case studies, list of references, recommended resources, amongst other things.  They also submit information about the writer of their curriculum, the resources and references used to write their curriculum, the bios and credentials of their teachers, and then some. Like I said, it is a long, detailed and involved process. > <<I would dispute that standards in the UK are higher than America. The trade associations here continue teaching the junk straight out of the aromatherapy novels. For example, I have had their students contact me and have been horrified that their teachers have never given them any documented safety data, and much of what they are taught on the therapeutics is also straight out of aromatherapy books.>> > As of October 2008, I no longer believe the standards of the UK are higher than those in America, now that the new standards, as established by AIA, are in place. The requirements at AIA are higher than those of the AC, in which the IFA and IFPA follow. They are also higher than the IAAMA in Australia and certainly much higher than that of the NAHA. > <<I have enquired in the past about getting my correspondence course 'recognised' by a nursing organisation in the USA. I gave up because all they were interested in was a mountain of idiotic paperwork with nothing at all about the quality of education. That organisation included aromatherapists nurses.>> > I won’t comment about the AHNA, as I am not familiar enough with their processes and criteria having never applied myself. Food for thought! > > > Elizabeth has a very good school. > <<Perhaps if you believe that, you can explain how it is that she teaches incorrect information over essential oils in pregnancy?>> > Again, I encourage you to visit the AIA website to see the school(s) that have been recognized by the AIA. It is a short list. > From your own website… > <<The fact a course is " approved " by a so called leading trade association is almost meaningless. None of these organisations - apart from IATA in Canada, have ever undertaken an evaluation of the accuracy of what their members are teaching.>> > The AIA is not one of these “so-called†organizations. The AIA has taken on this task and is dedicated to improving the quality of aromatherapy education. > <<A ‘good’ training course in aromatherapy should help improve therapists skills. It should maximise the effects they can achieve by using essential oils in a safe and effective manner.>> > The AIA strives to provide its members with educational opportunities to do this. > <<If you want to use massage, then training is advisable because there are medical conditions where massage should not be used. However, it is vital to remember that massage is one therapy, and the use of essential oils is another. >> > I agree. Massage is not a major part of the AIA curriculum guidelines, as it should be studied more in-depth at a specialized school. It is considered one type of application of essential oils, among others. An AIA recognized school may teach massage in their course, but the hours are not counted in full towards the overall requirement. > <<In the USA and Canada, there are so called " advanced " courses that can cost several thousand Dollars…To this day much of their information is based around theoretical considerations based on the major components found in the oils, NOT on research based on the whole oils.>> > I think you need to revisit this statement. The AIA website clearly states its Vision, Mission and Goals. It is an organization dedicated to essential oil research and bringing that scientific research to its members and the schools it recognizes. > AIA is now a fast-growing independent, international member-based organization providing education using scientific research and traditional information to promote the responsible use of aromatherapy. We serve the public, researchers, educators, healthcare professionals, industry, and the media. > Our Vision > The AIA is a leading international aromatherapy organization making aromatherapy a readily accessible and respected holistic healing modality. > Our Mission > AIA unites aromatherapists from around the world to advance research and professionalism within the aromatherapy industry. As a result the public has the option for a safe, natural and complementary form of health care. > Our Goals > > Provide education to the public using scientific-based research and traditional information. > Promote responsible use of aromatherapy. > Raise educational standards for aromatherapy training. > Bring conventional medicine and natural therapies, with emphasis on professional > aromatherapy, into a more harmonious relationship. > Serve as a resource for the furtherance of professional education and interconnection > of serious practitioners of aromatherapy. > Serve the public, researchers, educators, healthcare professionals, industry, and the media. > We at AIA share your desire for improved standards of education. You seem to pride yourself on your knowledge and desire to improve standards, so why are you so keen on disparaging an organization that shares this goal with you? > Lora > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 As you were chalenged with reading the text, I can send it to you separately.  The reply was NOT in defense of the AIA nor is it a plug for the organization!  You seem to be a defender of truth, as am I. I reply not for your benefit, but for that of the other readers in this forum. I believe that you are predisposed to believe that there is no one in the aromatherapy world that is doing anything to your satisfaction. Any attempt to show the truth about this organization has been immediately dismissed by you. The fact of the matter is that you are not a member of the AIA and have no first hand knowledge of the work of this organization.  Had you actually taken the time to read my reply you would have discovered that the AIA shares your desire for improved standards of aromatherapy education.  You seem to pride yourself on your knowedge and desire to improve standards, so I do not understand why you are so keen on disparaging an organization that shares this goal with you and is working hard to that end?  This will be my last post on the issue and I respectfully decline my membership to this forum, as your participation doesn't seem to do anything to promote aromatherapy in a positive way and franky I choose to no longer be a part of the negative energy that you bring to (what is upposed to be) an educational forum for all. It seems you are more concerned with plugging your own agenda.  I invite the other readers of the ATFE to visit the AIA website and encourage them to talk with our members about their experience of the organization.  Lora   --- On Thu, 2/4/10, Martin <aromamedical wrote: Martin <aromamedical Re: EO and pregnancy. ATFE Thursday, February 4, 2010, 4:49 AM  I am afraid this message came out a mess and it is hard to tell what the writer is saying, but it looks like a defense of the AIA and pushing their educational rhetoric. I was not going to continue this theme, but if people keep plugging this organisation on this group I will make it my business to expose the wrong information on their web site and on their teachers web sites line by line. I have already found enough to show their teachers are just parroting wrong information found in the popular aromatherapy books. Martin Watt ATFE , Dan Cantele <anew_kid4us@ ...> wrote: > > > > > << Number of hours of education has nothing at all to do with quality.>> > <<The AIA procedures sound to me like the classic educational hogwash where hours, subjects, etc. take precedence over if the teachers know what they are talking about.>>  > I agree, the number of hours doesn't matter as much as the substance and the quality! Those schools that submit for AIA recognition not only their hours, but also the substance of their curriculum, teaching methods, case studies, list of references, recommended resources, amongst other things.  They also submit information about the writer of their curriculum, the resources and references used to write their curriculum, the bios and credentials of their teachers, and then some. Like I said, it is a long, detailed and involved process. > <<I would dispute that standards in the UK are higher than America. The trade associations here continue teaching the junk straight out of the aromatherapy novels. For example, I have had their students contact me and have been horrified that their teachers have never given them any documented safety data, and much of what they are taught on the therapeutics is also straight out of aromatherapy books.>> > As of October 2008, I no longer believe the standards of the UK are higher than those in America, now that the new standards, as established by AIA, are in place. The requirements at AIA are higher than those of the AC, in which the IFA and IFPA follow. They are also higher than the IAAMA in Australia and certainly much higher than that of the NAHA. > <<I have enquired in the past about getting my correspondence course 'recognised' by a nursing organisation in the USA. I gave up because all they were interested in was a mountain of idiotic paperwork with nothing at all about the quality of education. That organisation included aromatherapists nurses.>> > I won’t comment about the AHNA, as I am not familiar enough with their processes and criteria having never applied myself. Food for thought! > > > Elizabeth has a very good school. > <<Perhaps if you believe that, you can explain how it is that she teaches incorrect information over essential oils in pregnancy?>> > Again, I encourage you to visit the AIA website to see the school(s) that have been recognized by the AIA. It is a short list. > From your own website… > <<The fact a course is " approved " by a so called leading trade association is almost meaningless. None of these organisations - apart from IATA in Canada, have ever undertaken an evaluation of the accuracy of what their members are teaching.>> > The AIA is not one of these “so-calledâ€� organizations. The AIA has taken on this task and is dedicated to improving the quality of aromatherapy education. > <<A ‘good’ training course in aromatherapy should help improve therapists skills. It should maximise the effects they can achieve by using essential oils in a safe and effective manner.>> > The AIA strives to provide its members with educational opportunities to do this. > <<If you want to use massage, then training is advisable because there are medical conditions where massage should not be used. However, it is vital to remember that massage is one therapy, and the use of essential oils is another. >> > I agree. Massage is not a major part of the AIA curriculum guidelines, as it should be studied more in-depth at a specialized school. It is considered one type of application of essential oils, among others. An AIA recognized school may teach massage in their course, but the hours are not counted in full towards the overall requirement. > <<In the USA and Canada, there are so called " advanced " courses that can cost several thousand Dollars…To this day much of their information is based around theoretical considerations based on the major components found in the oils, NOT on research based on the whole oils.>> > I think you need to revisit this statement. The AIA website clearly states its Vision, Mission and Goals. It is an organization dedicated to essential oil research and bringing that scientific research to its members and the schools it recognizes. > AIA is now a fast-growing independent, international member-based organization providing education using scientific research and traditional information to promote the responsible use of aromatherapy. We serve the public, researchers, educators, healthcare professionals, industry, and the media. > Our Vision > The AIA is a leading international aromatherapy organization making aromatherapy a readily accessible and respected holistic healing modality. > Our Mission > AIA unites aromatherapists from around the world to advance research and professionalism within the aromatherapy industry. As a result the public has the option for a safe, natural and complementary form of health care. > Our Goals > > Provide education to the public using scientific-based research and traditional information. > Promote responsible use of aromatherapy. > Raise educational standards for aromatherapy training. > Bring conventional medicine and natural therapies, with emphasis on professional > aromatherapy, into a more harmonious relationship. > Serve as a resource for the furtherance of professional education and interconnection > of serious practitioners of aromatherapy. > Serve the public, researchers, educators, healthcare professionals, industry, and the media. > We at AIA share your desire for improved standards of education. You seem to pride yourself on your knowledge and desire to improve standards, so why are you so keen on disparaging an organization that shares this goal with you? > Lora > > 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.