Guest guest Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 I've scanned a lot of the " Herb regulation and the Doctorate " thread. At the risk of repeating things mentioned further back than I've looked... Clinical doctorate (OMD, DOM, DAOM, etc.) If acupuncture and/or oriental medicine does eventually become firmly established as a primary healthcare provider profession in the USA, it's entry-level will almost certainly be a clinical doctorate. This would take decades, and most likely would involve " grandfathering " in previously licensed providers. And when that happens, there will probably be a smaller number of schools offering it, which will more resemble medical, dental, chiropractic etc. institutions of today, at least more so than the typical family-run TCM school of today. Yet to be determined is whether such a doctorate would be largely determined by the TCM model as being promulgated as an instrument of foreign policy by the PRC, or by a western adaptation of oriental traditions on a broader historical and cultural basis. If the latter, it would have be accompanied by the emergence of related academic fields (and PhDs) to culturally validate various aspects of and relating to oriental medicine (and traditions, i.e. historical and sociological fields). As an example, which also relates to the influence of the PRC, there's a PhD dissertation written by Dr. Kim Taylor, " Medicine of Revolution: in Early Communist China, 1945-1963 " (University of Cambridge, 2000). This traces the historical and political events surrounding the creation of current TCM. (See: http://www.nri.org.uk/profiles/Kim_Taylor.html and http://asianmedcom.site.securepod.com/people/kim_taylor/) One of her points is that TCM eveolved as part of a push to bring China into conformity with modern western medicine. And Dr. Paul Unschuld (in " Medicine in China: a History of Ideas " , and more recently in the little, non-scholarly " " ) believes that the direction of TCM evolution in the PRC is to eventually obsolete the traditional aspects and create a new east-west medicine for the world, on essentially western methodological foundations. (Note: I use the term " TCM " to refer to a very specific and relatively new tradition, and not as a generic term historical or classical Chinese medicine as many people intend it.) Doctor of Philosophy Literally, " teacher of the love of wisdom " . This is a distinctly western cultural tradition, having two basic aspects. 1) It involves a discipline of knowledge ( " science " in a more general sense than it's modern association with the hard sciences and the " scientific method " ); the idea of knowledge/science for it's own sake, i.e. not in the service of religion, commerce, politics, etc. 2) It exists, since the time of emnergence of European universities, as a community of peers, with a feudal, guild-like process of initiating new members (the academic PhD program, culminating in comprehensive oral exams and " defense " of a dissertation before committees of established peers). The field of oriental medicine, as a western institution, will require related academic fields and products like dissertations and post-doctoral papers, books etc. Two example directions already emerging: 1) Dr. Paul Unschuld's (and other western historical scholars) work on the historical aspects of Chinese medicine. (Kim Taylor's work, for instance, is influenced by his.) I think it must be mentioned that many students and practitioners of TCM have a problem relating to Unschuld's (and probably others') viewponts, as they are not clinicians, and are sometimes perceived as having no " real " understanding of medicine. Which allows me to emphasize a major point I'd like to make, which is that we, as pracititioners, must learn to understand and respect such viewpoints. We are not responsble, though, to accept these viewpoints in every detail, just as within the field of history of medicine there are alternative and conflicting, and constantly evolving theories. As an example, the legendary notions that acupuncture and Chinese " medicine " are 5000 years old, is, by a board consensus of historians in the west and in the PRC, strictly legend. Historically, acupuncture and the medical system as we know it from the Han era classics, is no more than about 2100-2200 years old. There is evidence of healing arts and techniques, heavily mixed with religious practices, going further back maybe 1000 years, but not as a medical system. BUT, this in no way detracts from the remarkable of achievement of the Han medical system -- its foundation in a science of natural law, its elaborate systemization, and its record of efficacy. From a traditonal oriental point of view, validation has to honor the ancestors, lest they lose face with the assertion of something truely new that they had no notion of. From a western point of view, validation comes from evidence (facilitated by a measure of of intrepretative and communication skills). 2)Ted Kaptchuk (and others) are engaged in western academic endeavors exploring why research evidence into the efficacy of oriental (or more broadly speaking, alternative) medicine has so far been relatively inconclusive. Kaptchuk's recent, extensively published work has been in the meta-analysis of experimental methodology, exploring the significance of aspects such as the placebo effect and bias, even to the extent of challenging some of the foundations of bio-medical experimental methodology. Just as Unschuld uses insights from the study of the history of Chinese medicine to gain a deeper understanding of the western tradition (in his latest book, " Was ist Medizin? " ), Kaptchuk is, on the basis of insights from the practice and theory of oriental medicine, pushing the envelop, stimulating further refinement in the ongoing development of western methodology. (One of the virtures of western science, it it's committment to continuous challenge and further development). For examples of Kaptchuk's work, see these websites: http://www.annals.org/cgi/search?fulltext=Kaptchuk http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/136/11/817 http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/326/7404/1453 http://www.elsevier.com/cdweb/journals/08954356/viewer.htt? vol=54 & viewtype=i ssue & iss=6#S089543560000347 [Note: to make this long URL work, you have to edit it, taking out end-of-line characters, i.e. where they break-over into new lines, which is an artifact of the email formatting functions.] One more point. Some of us may have noticed the " PhD " offered by the " American Global University " . This institution is a degree mill, based in Montana, the last State lacking enforcement of traditional academic standards. This " PhD " is not recognized or accredited by any agency authorized by the US Dept. of Education. The BPPVE (California State agency that approves advances degrees) has been fighting these and other similar fraudulent degrees for years. Unfortunately, there are now 100-200 acupuncturists in the USA representing themselves as " PhD in Oriental Medical Research " from this institution. For the California Acupuncture/OM Board, as in the eyes of the ACAOM, use of this " PhD " in conjuction with pracitice representation and L.Ac. or the NCCAOM diplomates is considered unprofessional behavior and liable for regulatory disciplinary action. By any accepted standards, this " PhD " is not an " earned " degree. It is bought, and awarded for participation in classes one weekend a month for about a year, and a 10,000 page " paper " . Even worse, there are concerted efforts using the media and political pressure to gain an aura of acceptance for this fraudulent representation. A lot of people are determined to " save face " for their bogus title. This amounts to a blatant insult to western academic tradition, and a disgrace to our profession. It is the dark side of the quest for validation and legitimacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 OF COURSE it will be determied, and run in the mold of, western-style medicine. Why think ANYTHING else? Western will engulf and devour these " family-run " little places that we've all been taught in, and the classes of these future schools will only faintly resemble the present courses. --- chris_macie < wrote: > I've scanned a lot of the " Herb regulation and the > Doctorate " thread. > At the risk of repeating things mentioned further > back than I've > looked... > > Clinical doctorate (OMD, DOM, DAOM, etc.) > > If acupuncture and/or oriental medicine does > eventually become firmly > established as a primary healthcare provider > profession in the USA, > it's entry-level will almost certainly be a clinical > doctorate. This > would take decades, and most likely would involve > " grandfathering " in > previously licensed providers. And when that > happens, there will > probably be a smaller number of schools offering it, > which will more > resemble medical, dental, chiropractic etc. > institutions of today, at > least more so than the typical family-run TCM school > of today. > > Yet to be determined is whether such a doctorate > would be largely > determined by the TCM model as being promulgated as > an instrument of > foreign policy by the PRC, or by a western > adaptation of oriental > traditions on a broader historical and cultural > basis. If the latter, > it would have be accompanied by the emergence of > related academic > fields (and PhDs) to culturally validate various > aspects of and > relating to oriental medicine (and traditions, i.e. > historical and > sociological fields). > > As an example, which also relates to the influence > of the PRC, > there's a PhD dissertation written by Dr. Kim > Taylor, " Medicine of > Revolution: in Early Communist > China, 1945-1963 " > (University of Cambridge, 2000). This traces the > historical and > political events surrounding the creation of current > TCM. > > (See: http://www.nri.org.uk/profiles/Kim_Taylor.html > and > http://asianmedcom.site.securepod.com/people/kim_taylor/) > > One of her points is that TCM eveolved as part of a > push to bring > China into conformity with modern western medicine. > And Dr. Paul > Unschuld (in " Medicine in China: a History of > Ideas " , and more > recently in the little, non-scholarly " Chinese > Medicine " ) believes > that the direction of TCM evolution in the PRC is to > eventually > obsolete the traditional aspects and create a new > east-west medicine > for the world, on essentially western methodological > foundations. > > (Note: I use the term " TCM " to refer to a very > specific and > relatively new tradition, and not as a generic term > historical or > classical Chinese medicine as many people intend > it.) > > Doctor of Philosophy > > Literally, " teacher of the love of wisdom " . This is > a distinctly > western cultural tradition, having two basic > aspects. 1) It involves > a discipline of knowledge ( " science " in a more > general sense than > it's modern association with the hard sciences and > the " scientific > method " ); the idea of knowledge/science for it's own > sake, i.e. not > in the service of religion, commerce, politics, etc. > 2) It exists, > since the time of emnergence of European > universities, as a community > of peers, with a feudal, guild-like process of > initiating new members > (the academic PhD program, culminating in > comprehensive oral exams > and " defense " of a dissertation before committees of > established > peers). > > The field of oriental medicine, as a western > institution, will > require related academic fields and products like > dissertations and > post-doctoral papers, books etc. Two example > directions already > emerging: > > 1) Dr. Paul Unschuld's (and other western historical > scholars) work > on the historical aspects of Chinese medicine. (Kim > Taylor's work, > for instance, is influenced by his.) > > I think it must be mentioned that many students and > practitioners of > TCM have a problem relating to Unschuld's (and > probably others') > viewponts, as they are not clinicians, and are > sometimes perceived as > having no " real " understanding of medicine. Which > allows me to > emphasize a major point I'd like to make, which is > that we, as > pracititioners, must learn to understand and respect > such viewpoints. > We are not responsble, though, to accept these > viewpoints in every > detail, just as within the field of history of > medicine there are > alternative and conflicting, and constantly evolving > theories. > > As an example, the legendary notions that > acupuncture and > Chinese " medicine " are 5000 years old, is, by a > board consensus of > historians in the west and in the PRC, strictly > legend. Historically, > acupuncture and the medical system as we know it > from the Han era > classics, is no more than about 2100-2200 years old. > There is > evidence of healing arts and techniques, heavily > mixed with religious > practices, going further back maybe 1000 years, but > not as a medical > system. BUT, this in no way detracts from the > remarkable of > achievement of the Han medical system -- its > foundation in a science > of natural law, its elaborate systemization, and its > record of > efficacy. From a traditonal oriental point of view, > validation has to > honor the ancestors, lest they lose face with the > assertion of > something truely new that they had no notion of. > From a western point > of view, validation comes from evidence (facilitated > by a measure of > of intrepretative and communication skills). > > 2)Ted Kaptchuk (and others) are engaged in western > academic endeavors > exploring why research evidence into the efficacy of > oriental (or > more broadly speaking, alternative) medicine has so > far been > relatively inconclusive. Kaptchuk's recent, > extensively published > work has been in the meta-analysis of experimental > methodology, > exploring the significance of aspects such as the > placebo effect and > bias, even to the extent of challenging some of the > foundations of > bio-medical experimental methodology. Just as > Unschuld uses insights > from the study of the history of Chinese medicine to > gain a deeper > understanding of the western tradition (in his > latest book, " Was ist > Medizin? " ), Kaptchuk is, on the basis of insights > from the practice > and theory of oriental medicine, pushing the > envelop, stimulating > further refinement in the ongoing development of > western methodology. > (One of the virtures of western science, it it's > committment to > continuous challenge and further development). > > For examples of Kaptchuk's work, see these websites: > > http://www.annals.org/cgi/search?fulltext=Kaptchuk > > http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/136/11/817 > > === message truncated === Hotjobs: Enter the " Signing Bonus " Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./signingbonus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Personal opinion I have heard a lot about this being the case, by those who have not taken the courses. I have not and only have read the information they send, but it seems to me that it could go either way depending onthe laziness of the candidate and the people reading the material and commenting. Question. Has anyone taken the course who hasn't found it to be legit? Dropped out because it was less than they wanted, even though they tried to do it right? You know, they may expect people to be adults, although they may reward the lazy folks or cheaters too by not watching too carefully. I don' t necessarily put my support behind this particular institution, or any for that matter, but, just like the mom and pop colleges we seem to support as a profession, we might consider supporting development of these " advanced " programs by making them legit from within. Maybe it is an overly optimistic reverie I am experiencing to consider this, but I am always hopeful for any group that has good intentions. Look at ow our schools have progressed over the past 20 years. David Molony In a message dated 1/17/04 3:59:01 AM, writes: >One more point. Some of us may have noticed the " PhD " offered by > >the " American Global University " . This institution is a degree mill, > >based in Montana, the last State lacking enforcement of traditional > >academic standards. This " PhD " is not recognized or accredited by any > >agency authorized by the US Dept. of Education. The BPPVE (California > >State agency that approves advances degrees) has been fighting these > >and other similar fraudulent degrees for years. Unfortunately, there > >are now 100-200 acupuncturists in the USA representing themselves > >as " PhD in Oriental Medical Research " from this institution. For the > >California Acupuncture/OM Board, as in the eyes of the ACAOM, use of > >this " PhD " in conjuction with pracitice representation and L.Ac. or > >the NCCAOM diplomates is considered unprofessional behavior and > >liable for regulatory disciplinary action. > > > >By any accepted standards, this " PhD " is not an " earned " degree. It > >is bought, and awarded for participation in classes one weekend a > >month for about a year, and a 10,000 page " paper " . Even worse, there > >are concerted efforts using the media and political pressure to gain > >an aura of acceptance for this fraudulent representation. A lot of > >people are determined to " save face " for their bogus title. This > >amounts to a blatant insult to western academic tradition, and a > >disgrace to our profession. It is the dark side of the quest for > >validation and legitimacy. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Why is it that this would take decades to accomplish when we are already just about where we need to be? Legislators here in Florida have repeatedly confirmed that all the AP/OM profession needs is an entry level requirement of a Bachelors degree PLUS an additional 3200 hours. The education is already at that level. 'Grandfathering' is the easiest of tasks to accomplish and certainly not as big an issue as some would have us all believe. The issue of professional title is legislated as it is now. All graduates that come after a certain fuiture date...... in order to be recognized in that legislated title would need the educational entry level doctor degree requirements. Simple. Yes, much fewer schools would be offering such entry level doctor degree programs and more than likely those schools would be the established regionally accredited such as say Nova University, University of Miami, etc. It is easy to see why there is so much internal opposition to this pathway. The majority of both the schools and the present tangential accreditation organzations would be obsolete. Richard In a message dated 1/17/2004 3:58:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes: I've scanned a lot of the "Herb regulation and the Doctorate" thread. At the risk of repeating things mentioned further back than I've looked...Clinical doctorate (OMD, DOM, DAOM, etc.)If acupuncture and/or oriental medicine does eventually become firmly established as a primary healthcare provider profession in the USA, it's entry-level will almost certainly be a clinical doctorate. This would take decades, and most likely would involve "grandfathering" in previously licensed providers. And when that happens, there will probably be a smaller number of schools offering it, which will more resemble medical, dental, chiropractic etc. institutions of today, at least more so than the typical family-run TCM school of today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 At least in the TCM world, Montana, is one of only two states (Hawaii being the other) that has standards that doesn't allow others including MDs/DOs/DCs to practice acupuncture on a night-school-academy week-end warrior 100 hrs. In a message dated 1/17/2004 3:58:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes: One more point. Some of us may have noticed the "PhD" offered by the "American Global University". This institution is a degree mill, based in Montana, the last State lacking enforcement of traditional academic standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 I will have to fax it to you fax number? - acudoc11 Chinese Medicine Monday, January 19, 2004 12:04 PM Re: Re: Doctorates At least in the TCM world, Montana, is one of only two states (Hawaii being the other) that has standards that doesn't allow others including MDs/DOs/DCs to practice acupuncture on a night-school-academy week-end warrior 100 hrs. In a message dated 1/17/2004 3:58:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes: One more point. Some of us may have noticed the "PhD" offered by the "American Global University". This institution is a degree mill, based in Montana, the last State lacking enforcement of traditional academic standards. Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. To change your email settings, i.e. individually, daily digest or none, visit the groups’ homepage: Chinese Medicine/ click ‘edit my membership' on the right hand side and adjust accordingly. To send an email to<Chinese Medicine- > from the email account you joined with. You will be removed automatically but will still recieve messages for a few days. 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.