discussions

[Guest guest]

Hello:

I joined the TCM group but only to receive reports of information, not the discussion but have been receiving a LOT of emails, more than I have time to read. I only want to receive important information, but not ALL of the emails. PLEASE.

B. Yates, L.Ac.

[Guest guest]

Dear Esther,

 

I greatly appreciate your sensitivity regarding the exchanges on the TCM forum. I believe that your remarks are well considered and presented out of a caring concern for the harmony of our on-line community. Please be at ease regarding all of it as Attilio, Ken, myself and others are on top of it.

 

I believe that Attilio and Ken represent a bit differently the manner in which the balance must be maintained. I've taught in the college classroom since 1986, and I understand the challenge. One must keep a clear boundary for the safe interaction of all. Yet, there must also be a sense of playfulness in the mix. Really they each rely on each other. Playfulness unbounded would turn to injury. Boundaries without the dynamic of joyous play would lead to utter boredom and depression. They need each other.

 

I'm eliminating your off list comment and posting to the group. I believe as Matt indicates, we're all doing fine. Some like to cross swords, but there's no mortal combat involved. We all need to volunteer appropriately to keep the balance in the dynamic of the community. That's the nature of community. Thank you so very much for contacting me and really caring.

 

Emmanuel Segmen

 

[Guest guest]

Emmanuel and All,

 

As always, things are turning out differently

than I planned. I'd imagined just a couple of

days ago that I'd be spending the next few

days packing for my trip and enjoying some

beautiful weather in Beijing. But a quick

check in here and at CHA made me realize

there are some issues that I don't want to

neglect.

 

One of the more important ones, to me anyway,

is the character of discussions in these

forums. I realize that the common wisdom

in Chinese medicine circles is to seek peace

and harmony, but frankly, I don't get it.

 

It seems to me that what is needed at this

point in the development of Chinese

medicine is a long period of spirited

debate in which individuals who espouse

various orthodoxies are allowed to spell

out their thinking and to have it scrutinized

by as many others as care to take the time

to do so.

 

Such a process invariably involves our

egos (whatever they are or however we

define them) and our emotions. We're not

a bunch of walking abstractions. We're

just human beings.

 

The bickering goes with the territory

but it not the critical issue. The important

thing is that we subject our ideas, even

our most cherished beliefs, to the light

of day and allow others to see not only

what we think but how we think and how we

come to think what we think.

 

I've never understood why people with

at least one finger complain about the

contents of an email. All I've ever had

to do with unwanted emails is, with the

push of a single key, delete them.

 

Someone wrote to tell me that I was

missing the point about asking Lon to

stop talking about consciousness. No

doubt. I miss most points. That's another

reason for these discussions. Have you

ever noticed how hard it is to actually

get someone...anyone...to really understand

what you want to say?

 

I've found that you have to tell people

even relatively simple messages many, many

times before they begin to receive them.

 

As to my own character, I guess Emmanuel

painted a somewhat accurate picture, although

I feel more like William Blake than Clint

Eastwood. I do enjoy a good fight, but

more for the expression of skill, capacity,

and understanding than for the sheer excitement.

 

Blake said that opposition is true friendship,

and I take it as a kind of motto.

 

As a writer, I always appreciate hearing

from folks when something I've written

has been beneficial or simply enjoyable

to them. But the really precious feedback

I get is from people who want to rip me

apart for having said something or other.

 

These people perform a highly valuable

service to anyone who cares about the

quality of their expression. Vigorous

debate allows us to see where we are

weak, where our arguments can and should

be attacked, and conversely...although

far more rarely, where we make sense.

 

I read in a poem many years ago that

we are the victims of the sense we make,

and I think that remains as true today

as when the poet wrote it.

 

I say let's invite Lon back and let him

have his say. If you don't want to read

what he says, just don't read it.

 

I am always trying to get people to say

what's on their mind.

 

I value forums such as these because

they are big and noisy. I suppose my

particular self interests are far better

served than someone who comes simply hoping

to gain another technique or some particular

bit of insight into how to twirl a needle

or combine two herbs.

 

My dearly departed father used to say,

" I might not agree with what you're saying

but I'll fight to the death to defend your

right to say it. "

 

So saying, no doubt, he assumed the controls

of a B-24 and flew missions over Germany

in WWII believing that he was doing just

that.

 

My understanding of the continuum of life

will not allow me to remain silent when I

see people's emotions and discomforts suddenly

being allowed to rise to the level of determining

factors in the stifling of another human being's

expression.

 

I may have missed the point entirely that

this forum was designed and is intended

for an altogether different purpose.

 

However, as John Lennon said, and as I am

always experiencing, life is what happens

while you're making other plans.

 

To me one of the truly great things about

traditional Chinese medicine is the thinking

that underlies it. And one of the extraordinary

things about this mode of thinking is that

it can...and should be extended into any and

all aspects of the life that it is designed to

protect and nourish.

 

Anyhow, I don't want to beat a dead horse,

but I did want to make my own thoughts

more clear to those who care.

 

Now I'm going back to finish packing, and

maybe I'll get in a swim this afternoon.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

I say let's invite Lon back and let himhave his say. If you don't want to readwhat he says, just don't read it. -ken

 

 

I agree 100%. Of course each list-owner

may do as he wants - it is his list anyway...

But I would invite him back for sure - geo

[Guest guest]

Ken said: "It seems to me that what is needed at thispoint in the development of Chinesemedicine is a long period of spiriteddebate in which individuals who espousevarious orthodoxies are allowed to spellout their thinking and to have it scrutinizedby as many others as care to take the timeto do so."

 

I agree in spades. That was my motivation on my fumbled attempt to raise questions about Unschuld's work. But the questions looming on the horizon involve more than any one person's work. I am quite concerned that in the coming years, various people, with various theories, will raise serious questions about the history, theories and efficacy of CM, especially acupuncture. I see this shaping up from three current trends; historians such as Unschuld who point out serious misunderstanding about the roots of CM, modern researchers such as Ulett who claim to have found how acupuncture really works in scientific terms, and those from the CM profession such as D. Kendall who propose the theories most of us currently practice under are based on poor translations and CM has nothing to do with "subtle energy" or "energy pathways." These new group of critics,unlike those in the past, are those who actually support CM as having value.

 

I am concerned about the thousands of students and recent graduates of acupuncture schools who made the sacrifice to spend lots of money and time studying a field that some it's own supporters now say is based on false understanding. My concern over this prompted me to propose a topic for a talk at next years Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine Alliance's annual conference. I proposed titling this talk "Defending Tradition" and thought I would describe these three groups and then engage the audience in a discussion about these issues. After the feedback I received on this list about my Unschuld remarks however, I called the Alliance and told them I am not sure I want to go through with the talk. I don't want to cheese people off I, like Ken, think we need to start talking about this though.

 

I mentioned to the Alliance E.O., that it would be great if a panel could be brought together to do just as Ken suggested. I do not think the Alliance is able to do it at their next conference, but perhaps such a thing could be organized by someone in the near future.

 

For those who may not be aware, George Ulett was the first scientist to do any acupuncture research in the U.S. He recently authored a book with Han, the leading acupuncture researcher in China. I have not yet read this, but Ulett wrote a scathing article for the Skeptical Inquirer stating that all the traditional theories about acupuncture are a bunch of baloney and his research has found how it really works. He states he can teach any doctor to do more effective (electro)acupuncture with minimal training based on accepted knowledge of physiology.

 

Deke (Donald) Kendall's book, "The Dao of " is another interesting development. I have not yet read this but I have known Deke for years, I heard him lecture on in last year in San Diego and we have talked about his theories a bit. Deke is a very smart man and has done great work in our field, both scientifically/academically and politically (this is rare). I have great respect for him and will learn my lesson and not say much about his theories other than to say he believes Morant(sp?) mistranslated qi when he called it vital energy and also mistranslated meridians. These mistakes, according to Deke, have been passed on ever since. CM is based on anatomical physiology. Qi is air and meridians are blood vessels. I better stop there as I need to study his work more thoroughly.

 

Add these three together and I feel the confidence with which our profession operates is in for some interesting times.Ken - would you be interested in taking part in a discussion on a panel? It would be very tricky to organize fairly, and participants would need to know no one is being set up. Lots of logistical problems as well but I think it is time we try to pull something like this together. Thoughts? I'll be gone for the day (I think)but could respond tomorrow.

 

Matt Bauer P.S. My tentative title "Defending Tratition" does not mean I want to hold on to any concepts we now understand better. I am all for progress in knowledge, I just happen to believe much of the ancient stuff was spot on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

kenrose2008

Chinese Medicine

Friday, August 08, 2003 7:07 PM

Re: Traditional (TCM) discussions

Emmanuel and All,As always, things are turning out differentlythan I planned. I'd imagined just a couple ofdays ago that I'd be spending the next fewdays packing for my trip and enjoying somebeautiful weather in Beijing. But a quickcheck in here and at CHA made me realizethere are some issues that I don't want toneglect.One of the more important ones, to me anyway,is the character of discussions in theseforums. I realize that the common wisdomin Chinese medicine circles is to seek peaceand harmony, but frankly, I don't get it.It seems to me that what is needed at thispoint in the development of Chinesemedicine is a long period of spiriteddebate in which individuals who espousevarious orthodoxies are allowed to spellout their thinking and to have it scrutinizedby as many others as care to take the timeto do so.Such a process invariably involves ouregos (whatever they are or however wedefine them) and our emotions. We're nota bunch of walking abstractions. We'rejust human beings.The bickering goes with the territorybut it not the critical issue. The importantthing is that we subject our ideas, evenour most cherished beliefs, to the lightof day and allow others to see not onlywhat we think but how we think and how wecome to think what we think.I've never understood why people withat least one finger complain about thecontents of an email. All I've ever hadto do with unwanted emails is, with thepush of a single key, delete them.Someone wrote to tell me that I wasmissing the point about asking Lon tostop talking about consciousness. Nodoubt. I miss most points. That's anotherreason for these discussions. Have youever noticed how hard it is to actuallyget someone...anyone...to really understandwhat you want to say?I've found that you have to tell peopleeven relatively simple messages many, manytimes before they begin to receive them.As to my own character, I guess Emmanuelpainted a somewhat accurate picture, althoughI feel more like William Blake than ClintEastwood. I do enjoy a good fight, butmore for the expression of skill, capacity,and understanding than for the sheer excitement.Blake said that opposition is true friendship,and I take it as a kind of motto.As a writer, I always appreciate hearingfrom folks when something I've writtenhas been beneficial or simply enjoyableto them. But the really precious feedbackI get is from people who want to rip meapart for having said something or other.These people perform a highly valuableservice to anyone who cares about thequality of their expression. Vigorousdebate allows us to see where we areweak, where our arguments can and shouldbe attacked, and conversely...althoughfar more rarely, where we make sense.I read in a poem many years ago thatwe are the victims of the sense we make,and I think that remains as true todayas when the poet wrote it.I say let's invite Lon back and let himhave his say. If you don't want to readwhat he says, just don't read it.I am always trying to get people to saywhat's on their mind.I value forums such as these becausethey are big and noisy. I suppose myparticular self interests are far betterserved than someone who comes simply hopingto gain another technique or some particularbit of insight into how to twirl a needleor combine two herbs.My dearly departed father used to say, "I might not agree with what you're sayingbut I'll fight to the death to defend yourright to say it."So saying, no doubt, he assumed the controlsof a B-24 and flew missions over Germanyin WWII believing that he was doing justthat.My understanding of the continuum of lifewill not allow me to remain silent when Isee people's emotions and discomforts suddenlybeing allowed to rise to the level of determiningfactors in the stifling of another human being'sexpression.I may have missed the point entirely thatthis forum was designed and is intendedfor an altogether different purpose.However, as John Lennon said, and as I amalways experiencing, life is what happenswhile you're making other plans.To me one of the truly great things abouttraditional Chinese medicine is the thinkingthat underlies it. And one of the extraordinarythings about this mode of thinking is thatit can...and should be extended into any andall aspects of the life that it is designed toprotect and nourish.Anyhow, I don't want to beat a dead horse,but I did want to make my own thoughtsmore clear to those who care.Now I'm going back to finish packing, andmaybe I'll get in a swim this afternoon.KenFor practitioners, students and those interested in TCM. Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, religious, spam messages or flame another member. If you want to change the way you receive email message, i.e. individually, daily digest or none, then visit the groups’ homepage: Chinese Medicine/ Click ‘edit my membership' on the right hand side and adjust accordingly.

[Guest guest]

Matt,

 

Briefly...

 

I don't want to talk about Deke Kendall's

work as I don't know him and haven't read

his new book. But I do want to respond to

a couple of ideas that you mentioned.

 

Are there misunderstandings in the English

language literature based on errors in translation?

 

Definitely. As you said, in spades.

 

Does " qi " mean " air " and " only air " ?

 

Definitely not.

 

The references and quotations to support

this are in my book about Qi. Anyone

who wants to get a little better

understanding of what the Chinese have

thought qi means over the past 3,000

years can pick up a copy of A Brief History

of Qi. That's why it was written.

 

Would I be interested in taking part in

a panel discussion along the lines you

mention?

 

Definitely.

 

Contact me off the list if you want

to pursue it.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

Kendall who propose the theories most of us currently practice under are based on poor translations and CM has nothing to do with "subtle energy" or "energy pathways."

\>>>>Well that is my question is it "poor" translation or deep understanding of Chinese language and medicine? It seems to me that he takes a lot of translatory license but since i can read the original i cant tell

Alon

[Guest guest]

Beautiful. Maybe you are a reincarnation of William Blake after all.

 

 

On Friday, August 8, 2003, at 07:07 PM, kenrose2008 wrote:

 

> To me one of the truly great things about

> traditional Chinese medicine is the thinking

> that underlies it. And one of the extraordinary

> things about this mode of thinking is that

> it can...and should be extended into any and

> all aspects of the life that it is designed to

> protect and nourish.

[Guest guest]

I think you shouldn't be embarrassed about a title such as " Defending

Tradition " . There is nothing to apologize for.

 

There is a tremendous gold mine of material in classical sources, and

one can base a modern practice on Shang Han Lun herbal medicine or Nan

Jing acupuncture and be right in step with a very sophisticated and

timely approach to medicine.

 

I agree with Zhang Xi-chun, the early 20th century Chinese physician;

the practice of Chinese medicine is primarily a philosophy and way of

life, and the role of the physician is to teach others how to manage

their qi transformation, after mastering one's own qi transformation.

 

 

On Saturday, August 9, 2003, at 11:35 AM, matt bauer wrote:

 

> Matt Bauer   P.S. My tentative title " Defending Tratition " does not

> mean I want to hold on to any concepts we now understand better. I am

> all for progress in knowledge, I just happen to believe much of the

> ancient stuff was spot on.  

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/9/2003 10:59:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, inandor writes:

 

I say let's invite Lon back and let him

have his say. If you don't want to read

what he says, just don't read it. -ken

 

 

 

 

Ken, although Lon is a nice guy, writes good books and is interesting, his presence hear would change the fundamental scope of the group away from Acupuncture. I watched this decimate another group. To many off topic posts and scores of great people left as the traffic was to high.

Lon is an exception to the general rule of open discussion because of his love is to incite augment consciousness. Ion words his posts in a way to rile people up to the point were many can't help but to reply. We have already lost several knowable people due to the scope of the off topic posts.

It is not as simple as just disregard his posts. His posts and the replies will encompass the majority of the posts as the overwhelming number of posts will negate many peoples desire to add the traffic.

I like Lon and he is fun to debate with. But this isn't the place to do it.

If you want to set up a sister sight where consciousness is the main topic then do it. I believe Lon would be disappointed with that because it is not just the desire to discuss consciousness that he is after. He wants new audiences.

Your insistence we change the scope of this group baffles me as it is clear to me the drawbacks to it would far outweigh the benefits. The alternative is easy. Set up another chat group about conciseness. Every one wins that way.

 

Chris

[Guest guest]

my feeling is the fact that people are waking up to

the fact that energic medicine is the thing for this

century. but theya re unable to pinpoint as yet

through any machines is the problem. wm needs

everything to be visible. if not it does not exist.

i would like everyone to prove to me gravity, or air

by just showing it to me without inference from other

issues. but the same rule is not acceptable for cm.

by rubbishing our knowledge base maybe they feel they

can score & strip us of our basis & then get it on

board through different channels like trigger points,

tens, etc as is being done over the years.

anand

 

 

--- Alon Marcus <alonmarcus wrote: >

Kendall who propose the theories most of us

> currently practice under are based on poor

> translations and CM has nothing to do with " subtle

> energy " or " energy pathways. "

> \>>>>Well that is my question is it " poor "

> translation or deep understanding of Chinese

> language and medicine? It seems to me that he takes

> a lot of translatory license but since i can read

> the original i cant tell

> Alon

 

=====

Anand Bapat

Pain Management Specialist

Sports Injury Specialist

Blacktown, Parramatta, Punchbowl, & Hammondville

0402 472 897

 

 

 

______________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://uk.messenger./

[Guest guest]

Matt:

historians such as Unschuld who point out serious misunderstanding

about the roots of CM,

modern researchers such as Ulett who claim to have found how

acupuncture really works in scientific terms, and

those from the CM profession such as D. Kendall who propose the

theories most of us currently practice under are based on poor

translations and CM has nothing to do with " subtle energy " or " energy

pathways. "

 

Alwin:

Looks like an interesting seminar / forum to me with loads of

interesting discussions.

I would also consider to add someone from the field of philosophy of

science. I can imagine that a lot of discussion could develop from

having a western scientific mind vs eastern scientific mind. Someone

like that could moderate endless discussions which arise from having

a different philosophical / cultural viewpoint.

 

Alwin

[Guest guest]

Well... in fact I think you are right. Anyway one gets tired of reading Andrew Cohen's ideas through an intermediary....

 

-geo-

 

-----Mensagem Original----- De: Musiclear

Para: Chinese Medicine

Enviada em: Domingo, 10 de Agosto de 2003 09:28

Assunto: Re: Re: Traditional (TCM) discussions

In a message dated 8/9/2003 10:59:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, inandor writes:

I say let's invite Lon back and let himhave his say. If you don't want to readwhat he says, just don't read it. -ken Ken, although Lon is a nice guy, writes good books and is interesting, his presence hear would change the fundamental scope of the group away from Acupuncture. I watched this decimate another group. To many off topic posts and scores of great people left as the traffic was to high. Lon is an exception to the general rule of open discussion because of his love is to incite augment consciousness. Ion words his posts in a way to rile people up to the point were many can't help but to reply. We have already lost several knowable people due to the scope of the off topic posts. It is not as simple as just disregard his posts. His posts and the replies will encompass the majority of the posts as the overwhelming number of posts will negate many peoples desire to add the traffic. I like Lon and he is fun to debate with. But this isn't the place to do it. If you want to set up a sister sight where consciousness is the main topic then do it. I believe Lon would be disappointed with that because it is not just the desire to discuss consciousness that he is after. He wants new audiences. Your insistence we change the scope of this group baffles me as it is clear to me the drawbacks to it would far outweigh the benefits. The alternative is easy. Set up another chat group about conciseness. Every one wins that way. Chris For practitioners, students and those interested in TCM. Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, religious, spam messages or flame another member. If you want to change the way you receive email message, i.e. individually, daily digest or none, then visit the groups’ homepage: Chinese Medicine/ Click ‘edit my membership' on the right hand side and adjust accordingly.

[Guest guest]

by rubbishing our knowledge base maybe they feel theycan score & strip us of our basis & then get it onboard through different channels like trigger points,tens, etc as is being done over the years.>>>I think you are assuming motives here that are not part of mainstream science

Alon

[Guest guest]

I agree with Zhang Xi-chun, the early 20th century Chinese physician; the practice of Chinese medicine is primarily a philosophy and way of life, and the role of the physician is to teach others how to manage their qi transformation, after mastering one's own qi transformation.>>>>Sounds great

Alon

[Guest guest]

Hi everyone, I'm new to the group...

 

--- Alwin van Egmond <

wrote:

> translations and CM has nothing to do with " subtle

> energy " or " energy pathways. "

 

The first time I read this theory I was somewhat

stunned, but it turned into a kind of awe. My 70 year

old TCM teacher, trained in WM first then in CM

doesn't understand his own language apparently. Oh

well, what can be done? Theorising is endless by

nature.

 

thanks,

Hugo

 

______________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://uk.messenger./

[Guest guest]

Hi Hugo

 

This reference to my previous email can leave some strange feelings

because of your way of cutting quotes out of my e-mail.

 

Of course I didn't write nor do support this out of context cutting

which comes from a mail from Matt and is a remark about the

viewpoints of Deke Kendall.

 

Just to put things straight again.

 

Alwin

 

Chinese Medicine , Hugo Ramiro

<subincor> wrote:

> Hi everyone, I'm new to the group...

>

> --- Alwin van Egmond <@v...>

> wrote:

> > translations and CM has nothing to do with " subtle

> > energy " or " energy pathways. "

>

> The first time I read this theory I was somewhat

> stunned, but it turned into a kind of awe. My 70 year

> old TCM teacher, trained in WM first then in CM

> doesn't understand his own language apparently. Oh

> well, what can be done? Theorising is endless by

> nature.

>

> thanks,

> Hugo

>

>

____________________

__

> Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

 

> Messenger http://uk.messenger./

[Guest guest]

Those interested in learning more about Deke Kendall's views can read the testimony he gave to the White House Commission on CAM at AcupunctureToday.com/guild.html This was in their Feb., 2001 issue.

 

Some may also be interested to learn Deke's view of the physiologic basis of OM is also the basis of the new organization trying to get approved to accredit acupuncture schools. There was an article on this in a recent (4- 5 months ago?) Acupuncture Today issue. Apparently, they want to establish that version of OM in all the schools they will approve.

 

Deek's book is quite long (although he told me 1/2 of his original manuscript was edited out) so this brief article gives him no room to explain why he feels as he does. But, it can give a general idea of his theories.

 

Matt Bauer

 

-

Alon Marcus

Chinese Medicine

Saturday, August 09, 2003 5:33 PM

Re: Re: Traditional (TCM) discussions

 

Kendall who propose the theories most of us currently practice under are based on poor translations and CM has nothing to do with "subtle energy" or "energy pathways." Those interested in

\>>>>Well that is my question is it "poor" translation or deep understanding of Chinese language and medicine? It seems to me that he takes a lot of translatory license but since i can read the original i cant tell

AlonFor practitioners, students and those interested in TCM. Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, religious, spam messages or flame another member. If you want to change the way you receive email message, i.e. individually, daily digest or none, then visit the groups’ homepage: Chinese Medicine/ Click ‘edit my membership' on the right hand side and adjust accordingly.

[Guest guest]

It makes an interesting and informative read. My sole objection is the glossing over of meridian theory in order to satisfy a simplistic rational explanation of a complex field in biology. It may have kept the old fuddy duddies at the White House Commission happy, but it certainly does not satisfy me.

 

Here is an alternative take on the physiological basis of TCM:

 

" According to the Standard Acupuncture Nomenclature proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) [11], there are about 400 acupuncture points and 20 meridians/vessels connecting most of the points. Since the 1950s, it has been discovered and confirmed by researchers in several countries with refined techniques [12] that most acupuncture points correspond to the high electric conductance points on the body surface [13-17] and vice versa [18]. The high skin conductance of the meridian system is further supported by the finding of a high density of gap junctions at the sites of acupuncture points [ 19-22]. Gap junctions are hexagonal protein complexes that form channels between adjacent cells. It is well established in cell biology that gap junctions facilitate intercellular communication and increase electric conductivity. Acupuncture and meridian points have also been found to have higher temperature [23], metabolic rates, and carbon dioxide release [24].

 

The chapter written by Shang ( Clinical Acupuncture Scientific Basis 3-540-64054-1; CHAPTER 4 pp69-82; The Past, Present, and Future of Meridian System Research ) provides a novel argument for the existence of meridians and acupoints based on the developing embryo. Meridians have a morphological functionality, predate the emergence of any other communication system in the embryo (nervous, vascular, lymphatic), and indeed go a long way to explaining why ".. the knee bone is connected to the thigh bone .. " .

 

Cheers,

 

Sammy.

 

matt bauer [acu.guy]11 August 2003 21:28Chinese Medicine Subject: Re: Re: Traditional (TCM) discussions

Those interested in learning more about Deke Kendall's views can read the testimony he gave to the White House Commission on CAM at AcupunctureToday.com/guild.html This was in their Feb., 2001 issue.

 

Some may also be interested to learn Deke's view of the physiologic basis of OM is also the basis of the new organization trying to get approved to accredit acupuncture schools. There was an article on this in a recent (4- 5 months ago?) Acupuncture Today issue. Apparently, they want to establish that version of OM in all the schools they will approve.

 

Deek's book is quite long (although he told me 1/2 of his original manuscript was edited out) so this brief article gives him no room to explain why he feels as he does. But, it can give a general idea of his theories.

 

Matt Bauer

 

-

Alon Marcus

Chinese Medicine

Saturday, August 09, 2003 5:33 PM

Re: Re: Traditional (TCM) discussions

 

Kendall who propose the theories most of us currently practice under are based on poor translations and CM has nothing to do with "subtle energy" or "energy pathways." Those interested in

\>>>>Well that is my question is it "poor" translation or deep understanding of Chinese language and medicine? It seems to me that he takes a lot of translatory license but since i can read the original i cant tell

AlonFor practitioners, students and those interested in TCM. Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, religious, spam messages or flame another member. If you want to change the way you receive email message, i.e. individually, daily digest or none, then visit the groups’ homepage: Chinese Medicine/ Click ‘edit my membership' on the right hand side and adjust accordingly.

[Guest guest]

Meridians have a morphological functionality,

 

>>>>Can he do this for all the channels? I know of several possibilities but only for a few CM systems

Alon

[Guest guest]

State sponsored TCM salesmanship propaganda. Why am I not surprised? If their 'real understanding of OM' doesn't have full 100% clinical cure for everybody, who do they blame then? Let 100 flowers bloom, let 100 schools contend. I wish I had a dollar for every jackass that thought they knew better than the old masters, as they first started learning. All that type were not so good in clinic. But if you legislate people's expectations down, then you can say whatever you want and bring in some serious cash. And be the king. And never lose a night's sleep worrying about your patients.

peace franmatt bauer <acu.guy wrote:

 

Those interested in learning more about Deke Kendall's views can read the testimony he gave to the White House Commission on CAM at AcupunctureToday.com/guild.html This was in their Feb., 2001 issue.

 

Some may also be interested to learn Deke's view of the physiologic basis of OM is also the basis of the new organization trying to get approved to accredit acupuncture schools. There was an article on this in a recent (4- 5 months ago?) Acupuncture Today issue. Apparently, they want to establish that version of OM in all the schools they will approve.

 

Deek's book is quite long (although he told me 1/2 of his original manuscript was edited out) so this brief article gives him no room to explain why he feels as he does. But, it can give a general idea of his theories.

 

Matt Bauer

 

-

Alon Marcus

Chinese Medicine

Saturday, August 09, 2003 5:33 PM

Re: Re: Traditional (TCM) discussions

 

Kendall who propose the theories most of us currently practice under are based on poor translations and CM has nothing to do with "subtle energy" or "energy pathways." Those interested in

\>>>>Well that is my question is it "poor" translation or deep understanding of Chinese language and medicine? It seems to me that he takes a lot of translatory license but since i can read the original i cant tell

AlonFor practitioners, students and those interested in TCM. Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, religious, spam messages or flame another member. If you want to change the way you receive email message, i.e. individually, daily digest or none, then visit the groups’ homepage: Chinese Medicine/ Click ‘edit my membership' on the right hand side and adjust accordingly.

[Guest guest]

Let 100 flowers bloom, let 100 schools contend. I wish I had a dollar for every jackass that thought they knew better than the old masters

>>>and i would have made a lot of money for every patient i seen "old masters" fail to successfully treat both in us and china

Alon

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/12/2003 12:33:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, alonmarcus writes:

 

 

Let 100 flowers bloom, let 100 schools contend. I wish I had a dollar for every jackass that thought they knew better than the old masters

>>>and i would have made a lot of money for every patient i seen "old masters" fail to successfully treat both in us and china

Alon

 

 

Come on,,,, what's this about. We live in a different world and in a different environment with different stresses, pollutants, food, desires, time constraints, expectations and on on on.

We also have a wealth of different biochemical understandings and supplements.

Why would anyone desire to limit themselves to only using what was known and available one hundred or one thousand years ago?

The best possibility for healing would be to use all the understandings we have available with all the supplements we have available and educate the patient as to what would be the healthiest lifestyle given the lifestyle they choose to live.

Let's not squabble over,,,,,,,,any silly thing.

 

Chris

[Guest guest]

--- Alwin van Egmond <

wrote:

> Of course I didn't write nor do support this out of

> context cutting

> which comes from a mail from Matt and is a remark

> about the

> viewpoints of Deke Kendall.

 

Sorry, yes I know, I should have been clearer.

 

> Just to put things straight again.

 

Thanks,

 

Hugo =]

 

 

______________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://uk.messenger./

[Guest guest]

Let's not squabble over,,,,,,,,any silly thing.>>>>Seen like we always do so don't we

Alon