Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hi folks, I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated Medicine department and have found the whole experience to be fascinating. As most of you know, physicians are driving the IM movement. At a recent IM conference I was again struck by how the decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and physicians. Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to scientists and physicians. I am, however, opposed to having decisions made for me with no say. My question is this, what role do we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be invited in? Any thoughts would be most appreciated. Deb Pacik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 In a message dated 5/5/2004 11:54:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, zrosenbe writes: Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. Very well put Z`ev. I agree we do need a stronger profession. The question is how do we get that? In part we get that by sheer numbers. Make it as easy as possible for people to switch careers and help people with acupuncture. There are different reasons people choose to join our profession. Some are drawn to Acupuncture, some to herbology, others are integrating some western supplements. Even in China, acupuncturists and herbologists are trained differently and have a different license to practice. I think most here will acknowledge that even if a 2nd year student did boiler plate acupuncture, they would help people. Do a good intake and choose your points. Doesn't take 6 years to figure out. A lot of people I have talked to are going to acupuncture school to augment what they already do. By requiring a DOM to get a license we are effectively cutting the power of our profession overtime. There are a lot of people in school who are just barely able to put school into their life from a financial or time commitment. Remember what it was like for you? How many of your fellow students do you think would have decided to start school if the requirements took 50% more time and money? By adding a couple more years of school, the loss of income associated with that and a much higher debt ratio coming out of school, we would be effectively crippling the growth of our students and practitioners. This is completely opposite of what we really want to do. Acupuncture is new to the States. It takes time for society to accept a new form of healing. The more licensed acupuncturists that bring acupuncture to the masses, the more acceptance iacupuncture will receive. Because, lets face it,,,,, Acupuncture works. More people involved in the profession who advertise the wonders of it's healing abilities will create patients who describe to their friends how acupuncture healed the pain in their (fill in the blank). This will bring our profession to the for front. We do not need, nor want, medically oriented studies to promote what we do. Think Germany. Word of mouth is the grease that guide Acupuncture into the general populous. We need as many professionals talking about Acupuncture as we can get. Just say no to DOM. We would effectively be lynching our selves. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating everything else into the biomedical format, both politically-economically and practically. Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: > Hi folks, > > I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated > Medicine department > and have found the whole experience to be fascinating. As most of you > know, > physicians are driving the IM movement. At a recent IM conference I > was again struck > by how the decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and > physicians. > > Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to > scientists and > physicians. I am, however, opposed to having decisions made for me > with no say. My > question is this, what role do we TCM practitioners want to have in > this movement? > How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be > invited in? > > Any thoughts would be most appreciated. > > Deb Pacik > > > > Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, > religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. > > To translate this message, copy and paste it into this web link > page, http://babel.altavista.com/ > > > and > adjust accordingly. > > If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop > being delivered. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hi Z'ev and Pat, Pat is the one who inspired me to post on CMN about this topic. Oddly Bob Felt brought it up at the same moment as Pat. Must be that time of the year. So I'll simply support your notion, Z'ev, on this list. I agree that Western scientists or MDs will make decisions on behalf of CM unless CM stands up for itself. I simultaneously suggest that no one needs to sell CM out to the current owners of America's or Europe's economic junta. Everyone on this list has full autonomy over their immediate turf of professional practice ... especially at the most traditional level of CM. I'll personally say no more as this is too hot a topic for many on the list. I don't want to restimulate old stuff. The basic decision I've made as a general manager of a company is to not join the economic junta as it exists in my country, and yet to fly with the traditions and culture native to those of my company. That's a choice everyone has to come to on their own. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen ____ For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating everything else into the biomedical format, both politically-economically and practically. Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: > Hi folks, > > I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated > Medicine department > and have found the whole experience to be fascinating. As most of you > know, > physicians are driving the IM movement. At a recent IM conference I > was again struck > by how the decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and > physicians. > > Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to > scientists and > physicians. I am, however, opposed to having decisions made for me > with no say. My > question is this, what role do we TCM practitioners want to have in > this movement? > How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be > invited in? > > Any thoughts would be most appreciated. > > Deb Pacik > > > > Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, > religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. > > To translate this message, copy and paste it into this web link > page, http://babel.altavista.com/ > > > and > adjust accordingly. > > If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop > being delivered. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hi Cris, you said: > I think most here will acknowledge that even if a 2nd year student did > boiler plate acupuncture, they would help people. Do a good intake and choose > your points. Doesn't take 6 years to figure out. > > > Chris I must be one of the minority that do NOT acknowledge your premise. When I can create muscle spasms, menier's symdrome, IBS, excema and many more horrific disorders by wrong treatments I am left with the conclusion that Acupuncture is a deadly art as much as a wonderful healing modality. A scalpel in the hands of surgeon is a wondrous instrument in the hands of a child it is a nightmare. I have just been treating an acupuncture student that has spent 5 years with another acupuncturist, she was in a serious mess and had no idea why. I once read an interview of a chinese acupucturist who's son had learned and was practicing with her. Prompted by the reporter as to when did she think that her son who had been practicing acupuncture with her for 10 years could be trusted to practice with out supervison she said " Oh.. in another five years or so. Acupuncture is a complex art that requires personal development, observation and lots of undestanding, it takes many years to master. I wholeheartedly agree that we need lots more 'skilled' acupuncturist I commonly hear people saying to me " I tried acupuncture it din't work " or " I din't feel good so its not for me " . Since as acupuncturists we are all 'tarred with the same brush ' I would rather have fewer skilled acupuncturist that are truly healing people and promoting what is possible. Than many more poorly trained ones creating mayhem and giving the profesion an innapropriate review. its a bit like saying to a good contractor that is building excellent houses " Demand for our houses is intense we are not building fast enough. We need to speed up the process lets cut out the digging and pouring of the concrete foundations " . Salvador www.meridian-qi-acupuncture.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hi Zev and Deb, I agree that TCM is being integrated through the biomedical framework and nothing else. How would you envisage integration of TCM into the West Zev? I think that in the short term both medicines, WM and TCM can work alongside in a separate manner, but in the long term, they can only come together. How this is achieved is very important as TCM can easily come off worse. This is already seen in various hospitals in China where there is a large slant towards WM, although not totally the case it is the major practice. Of course, trying to fit TCM into a biomedical framework is ludicrous and is immensely limiting TCM in terms of its understanding and practical use. I agree that at the moment our profession is fragmented and therefore weak. I believe that the following 9 points are paramount to the benefit of TCM: 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM foundation. 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM practitioners. 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our profession. 5. regulation in all countries. 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law restrictions. 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a cookbook approach. 9. continued education for graduates. Does anyone have anymore points that should be included? Are the points sufficient for the progression of TCM? Attilio " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called > integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating > everything else into the biomedical format, both > politically-economically and practically. > > Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. > > Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? > Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: Hi folks, I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated Medicine department and have found the whole experience to be fascinating. As most of you know, physicians are driving the IM movement. At a recent IM conference I was again struck by how the decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and physicians. Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to scientists and physicians. I am, however, opposed to having decisions made for me with no say. My question is this, what role do we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be invited in? Any thoughts would be most appreciated. Deb Pacik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Chris wrote: >More people involved in the profession who advertise the wonders of it's > healing abilities will create patients who describe to their friends how > acupuncture healed the pain in their (fill in the blank). This will bring our > profession to the for front. I would have to respectfully disagree with you on this point, Chris. Successfully treating more and more patients who spread the good news about acupuncture has not and will not bring our " profession " to the for front. This has instead brought the procedure of " acupuncture " to the for front. The public thinks only of " acupuncture " not " Acupuncturists. " It is up to our profession to distinguish the acupuncture we offer from that of the many others who perform " acupuncture. " No one will do this for us and the more good publicity " acupuncture " gets, the more other health care professionals want a piece of it. Our " profession " has no identity as a viable profession in anyone else's eyes except our own. Continuing to ignore the need to promote the profession of " Acupuncturists " is getting more and more indefensible as the years go by and the practice of " acupuncture " gains more and more respect. I have tried for years to get the " leaders " of our " profession " to put all the controversial political issues regarding training and titles on the back burner and concentrate instead on promoting the " profession " of " Acupuncturists " as our priority number 1. So far – this has fallen on deaf ears. There are very straight-forward and achievable steps we could take to make this happen, but the political will to make this a priority has yet to materialize. How about an " Acupuncture Advisory Council " that handles all public outreach and education efforts and a 1-800 ACUPUNCTURE referral hotline? Such things could be easily achieved if the will existed to make it so. But - don't get me started – Matt Bauer Chinese Medicine , Musiclear@a... wrote: > In a message dated 5/5/2004 11:54:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > zrosenbe@s... writes: > Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. > > Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? > > Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. > > > > > Very well put Z`ev. I agree we do need a stronger profession. The > question is how do we get that? > > In part we get that by sheer numbers. Make it as easy as possible for > people to switch careers and help people with acupuncture. > > There are different reasons people choose to join our profession. Some > are drawn to Acupuncture, some to herbology, others are integrating some > western supplements. Even in China, acupuncturists and herbologists are trained > differently and have a different license to practice. > > I think most here will acknowledge that even if a 2nd year student did > boiler plate acupuncture, they would help people. Do a good intake and choose > your points. Doesn't take 6 years to figure out. > > A lot of people I have talked to are going to acupuncture school to > augment what they already do. > > By requiring a DOM to get a license we are effectively cutting the power > of our profession overtime. There are a lot of people in school who are just > barely able to put school into their life from a financial or time commitment. > Remember what it was like for you? How many of your fellow students do you > think would have decided to start school if the requirements took 50% more > time and money? > > By adding a couple more years of school, the loss of income associated > with that and a much higher debt ratio coming out of school, we would be > effectively crippling the growth of our students and practitioners. > > This is completely opposite of what we really want to do. > > Acupuncture is new to the States. It takes time for society to accept a > new form of healing. The more licensed acupuncturists that bring acupuncture > to the masses, the more acceptance iacupuncture will receive. Because, lets > face it,,,,, Acupuncture works. > > More people involved in the profession who advertise the wonders of it's > healing abilities will create patients who describe to their friends how > acupuncture healed the pain in their (fill in the blank). This will bring our > profession to the for front. > > We do not need, nor want, medically oriented studies to promote what we > do. Think Germany. > > Word of mouth is the grease that guide Acupuncture into the general > populous. > > We need as many professionals talking about Acupuncture as we can get. > > Just say no to DOM. We would effectively be lynching our selves. > > Chris > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Z'ev wrote: > Who is doing the integrating, and who is doing the > assimilating? Western medicine should do the integrating, and we should assimilate them while they're not looking. Hugo __________ Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping " your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger./download/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Attilio, et al, At this point, I am not sure if I can add more points to the 9 you already have, and I don't necessarily agree that ingerating TCM into the " West " necessarily mean an integration through the biomedical framework. Perhaps we should look at the history of Chiropractic and Osteopathy disciplines in U.S. to learn something. (Obviously, I agree with Zev's point that " Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. " ) They both emerged ~100 years ago and used manipulative techniques to obstruction of some sort. They both struggled for a position, fighting against misunderstanding and poor regulations. One ended up being integrated under WM with the DO (Doctor of Osteopathy) title; the other, staking out as an independent discipline. I don't think TCM wants to be ended up as where DO or DC is today, but if the movement doesn't proceed cautiously, it is VERY EASY to fall into one of these two one of these scenarios. Note that TCM in China's hospital environment is getting closer to the DO scenario. So, what's the 10th point? Mike Liaw <attiliodalberto wrote: Hi Zev and Deb, I agree that TCM is being integrated through the biomedical framework and nothing else. How would you envisage integration of TCM into the West Zev? I think that in the short term both medicines, WM and TCM can work alongside in a separate manner, but in the long term, they can only come together. How this is achieved is very important as TCM can easily come off worse. This is already seen in various hospitals in China where there is a large slant towards WM, although not totally the case it is the major practice. Of course, trying to fit TCM into a biomedical framework is ludicrous and is immensely limiting TCM in terms of its understanding and practical use. I agree that at the moment our profession is fragmented and therefore weak. I believe that the following 9 points are paramount to the benefit of TCM: 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM foundation. 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM practitioners. 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our profession. 5. regulation in all countries. 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law restrictions. 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a cookbook approach. 9. continued education for graduates. Does anyone have anymore points that should be included? Are the points sufficient for the progression of TCM? Attilio " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called > integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating > everything else into the biomedical format, both > politically-economically and practically. > > Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. > > Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? > Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: Hi folks, I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated Medicine department and have found the whole experience to be fascinating. As most of you know, physicians are driving the IM movement. At a recent IM conference I was again struck by how the decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and physicians. Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to scientists and physicians. I am, however, opposed to having decisions made for me with no say. My question is this, what role do we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be invited in? Any thoughts would be most appreciated. Deb Pacik Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. http://babel.altavista.com/ and adjust accordingly. If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being delivered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Attilio, I also think CM and WM can and will come together, but the question is how and by whom. If it is a natural process of sharing and building of professional relationships over time with mutual respect, this is good. If it is a forced assimilation of CM technologies and repudiation of its underlying philosophy, this is not a good thing. On May 6, 2004, at 7:44 AM, wrote: > Hi Zev and Deb, > > I agree that TCM is being integrated through the biomedical > framework and nothing else. How would you envisage integration of > TCM into the West Zev? I think that in the short term both > medicines, WM and TCM can work alongside in a separate manner, but > in the long term, they can only come together. How this is achieved > is very important as TCM can easily come off worse. This is already > seen in various hospitals in China where there is a large slant > towards WM, although not totally the case it is the major practice. > > Of course, trying to fit TCM into a biomedical framework is > ludicrous and is immensely limiting TCM in terms of its > understanding and practical use. I agree that at the moment our > profession is fragmented and therefore weak. I believe that the > following 9 points are paramount to the benefit of TCM: > > 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM > foundation. > 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM practitioners. > 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. > 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our > profession. > 5. regulation in all countries. > 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law > restrictions. > 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. > 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine > within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a > cookbook approach. > 9. continued education for graduates. > > Does anyone have anymore points that should be included? Are the > points sufficient for the progression of TCM? > > Attilio > > " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > > For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called > > integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating > > everything else into the biomedical format, both > > politically-economically and practically. > > > > Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. > > > > Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? > > > Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. > > > On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated > Medicine department and have found the whole experience to be > fascinating. As most of you know, physicians are driving the IM > movement. At a recent IM conference I was again struck by how the > decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and > physicians. > > Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to > scientists and physicians. I am, however, opposed to having > decisions made for me with no say. My question is this, what role do > we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? > > How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be > invited in? > > Any thoughts would be most appreciated. > > Deb Pacik > > > > Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, > religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. > > To translate this message, copy and paste it into this web link > page, http://babel.altavista.com/ > > > and > adjust accordingly. > > If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop > being delivered. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Attilio, I think you've provided a very good list for each of us to think about. As for having a Western medical foundation to practice TCM in the West, I really don't think we'll be able to make our own place along side WM until we do. As I see it, we have to be able to make our case in terms that WM professionals (and regulatory agencies) can understand. We cannot expect them to understand (or care to understand) TCM theory. We need science to back us up. As you said, we need to further research and quality control standards, but we also need to be able to understand this research in WM terms, not just rely on our TCM theory. Personally, I don't care to see TCM " assimilated " into a WM system, but I do think to stand on its own, those outside of TCM must be able to understand its benefits and applications within the health care system. If they can't do this on our terms, we'll have to do it on theirs. TCM theory and practical application in TCM schools may be strong, but biomedical sciences are relatively weak in comparison. This may not be vital to practice TCM, but we do need this understanding to push for our place in a Western medical system. At the very least, we need some solid leaders in TCM doing research, becoming vocal, and making our case. We have to be able to argue our it effectively. Perhaps these are areas where those opting for the DOM/DAOM degree can help the system as a whole. Just a few thoughts for the hopper to chew on. Every good wish, Andrea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 In a message dated 5/6/2004 5:21:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, zrosenbe writes: Otherwise, we will lose our footing from a deficient knowledge of CM as well as WM. I completely agree with what Z'ev has said here. Western Med people are generally more linear, " scientific " minded people. The more western eduction we put in schools, the more the students will tend to favor the " science " behind that philosophy at the sacrifice of TCM knowledge. As is happening in China, our the " new " TCM won't be that at all. It will be TCM as understood by a linear western mind. The jewels and wisdom will be lost, Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Andrea, I don't think science will 'confirm' the complexity and depth of Chinese medicine in our lifetime, as as pointed out. That is not to say that we shouldn't welcome unbiased studies, such as changes in the brain neurochemistry after acupuncture to help our case. Having been a professor at one of the largest TCM schools for the last fourteen years, I have to disagree that the CM programs are strong enough. I don't see that a majority of practitioners and students in our profession really know how to diagnose well, or really understand CM theory, as controversial as that statement may be. There is a movement in CM schools in America to increase hours, but interestingly all the hours are in WM. I think we need to improve the quality of WM programs in CM schools, but not necessarily increase the hours. There is knowledge that is appropriate for our profession, and knowledge that is appropriate for WM medical professionals. You also need to consider that CM information is harder to come by, and the fact that it is somewhat different than the WM knowledge base and much less accessible (99% is still in Chinese), means we need to put strong attention on how to increase the CM knowledge base in our profession. Otherwise, we will lose our footing from a deficient knowledge of CM as well as WM. On May 6, 2004, at 12:59 PM, Ai An Meng wrote: > Attilio, > > I think you've provided a very good list for each of us to think > about. > As for having a Western medical foundation to practice TCM in the > West, I really > don't think we'll be able to make our own place along side WM until > we do. As I > see it, we have to be able to make our case in terms that WM > professionals (and > regulatory agencies) can understand. We cannot expect them to > understand (or > care to understand) TCM theory. We need science to back us up. As > you said, we > need to further research and quality control standards, but we also > need to be > able to understand this research in WM terms, not just rely on our > TCM theory. > Personally, I don't care to see TCM " assimilated " into a WM system, > but I do think > to stand on its own, those outside of TCM must be able to > understand its benefits > and applications within the health care system. If they can't do > this on our terms, > we'll have to do it on theirs. > > TCM theory and practical application in TCM schools may be strong, > but biomedical > sciences are relatively weak in comparison. This may not be vital > to practice TCM, > but we do need this understanding to push for our place in a > Western medical system. > At the very least, we need some solid leaders in TCM doing > research, becoming vocal, > and making our case. We have to be able to argue our it > effectively. Perhaps these are > areas where those opting for the DOM/DAOM degree can help the > system as a whole. > > Just a few thoughts for the hopper to chew on. > > Every good wish, > > Andrea > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hi Attilio, Yes, I believe there is another point that is as important as it is difficult to express. Maintenance of the cultural substrate to borrow terminology from Ken Rose's publications. I personally would allude to " oral traditions " , but that's asking a lot of modern cultures that require literature as the primary premise of authenticity. Nevertheless, even in Western science labs there is a strong element of oral tradition and lineage through various scientists. If you read the literature of genetic engineering and work in various labs, you'll see what I mean. In Chinese medicine it's the cultural substrate arising from the land itself and the growers that attend to it as well as arising from the practitioners whose lives express their culture's philosophy and aesthetic. I would assign this to number 10 on your list though it would have so many subdivisions. Our own Western science requires a philosophy of science and a cultural context for it to proceed. There is a cultural expectation of what's appropriate and a societal expectation of what's wanted. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen - Chinese Medicine Thursday, May 06, 2004 7:44 AM Re: Integrated Medicine Hi Zev and Deb, I agree that TCM is being integrated through the biomedical framework and nothing else. How would you envisage integration of TCM into the West Zev? I think that in the short term both medicines, WM and TCM can work alongside in a separate manner, but in the long term, they can only come together. How this is achieved is very important as TCM can easily come off worse. This is already seen in various hospitals in China where there is a large slant towards WM, although not totally the case it is the major practice. Of course, trying to fit TCM into a biomedical framework is ludicrous and is immensely limiting TCM in terms of its understanding and practical use. I agree that at the moment our profession is fragmented and therefore weak. I believe that the following 9 points are paramount to the benefit of TCM: 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM foundation. 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM practitioners. 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our profession. 5. regulation in all countries. 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law restrictions. 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a cookbook approach. 9. continued education for graduates. Does anyone have anymore points that should be included? Are the points sufficient for the progression of TCM? Attilio " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called > integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating > everything else into the biomedical format, both > politically-economically and practically. > > Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. > > Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? > Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: Hi folks, I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated Medicine department and have found the whole experience to be fascinating. As most of you know, physicians are driving the IM movement. At a recent IM conference I was again struck by how the decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and physicians. Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to scientists and physicians. I am, however, opposed to having decisions made for me with no say. My question is this, what role do we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be invited in? Any thoughts would be most appreciated. Deb Pacik Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. http://babel.altavista.com/ and adjust accordingly. If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being delivered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Andrea, Attilio and Z'ev, I would caution most heartily against " taking your place along side WM " ... especially regarding Western scientific research as a basis for anything other than Western science. Some of you have heard me before on this topic. I've been and continue as a Western research scientist from a family of Western research scientists both in this generation and in the past generation. Western research science will yield Western science ... nothing more and nothing less. To go this route would be to throw away CM altogether. CM has far more to offer WM that the reverse. I'm a modern researcher in genetic engineering, though now not active. My cousin is extremely active and a leading light in this area of research. The " classic literature " of our science is from the late 1970s. The main body of literature is from 1988 onward to the present. Twenty years of cultural endeavor, no matter how advanced the scientist, is not a basis for the authenticity of anything. Please don't confuse Western science as a basis for anything that you are hoping to do with Chinese medicine ... clinically or theoretically. Such a pathway is meaningless, thoroughly unconvincing and a considerably act of disrespect to CM. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen - Ai An Meng Chinese Medicine Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:59 PM Re: Integrated Medicine Attilio, I think you've provided a very good list for each of us to think about. As for having a Western medical foundation to practice TCM in the West, I really don't think we'll be able to make our own place along side WM until we do. As I see it, we have to be able to make our case in terms that WM professionals (and regulatory agencies) can understand. We cannot expect them to understand (or care to understand) TCM theory. We need science to back us up. As you said, we need to further research and quality control standards, but we also need to be able to understand this research in WM terms, not just rely on our TCM theory. Personally, I don't care to see TCM " assimilated " into a WM system, but I do think to stand on its own, those outside of TCM must be able to understand its benefits and applications within the health care system. If they can't do this on our terms, we'll have to do it on theirs. TCM theory and practical application in TCM schools may be strong, but biomedical sciences are relatively weak in comparison. This may not be vital to practice TCM, but we do need this understanding to push for our place in a Western medical system. At the very least, we need some solid leaders in TCM doing research, becoming vocal, and making our case. We have to be able to argue our it effectively. Perhaps these are areas where those opting for the DOM/DAOM degree can help the system as a whole. Just a few thoughts for the hopper to chew on. Every good wish, Andrea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Emmanuel, I think you know that I agree enthusiastically with your position. Chinese medicine already has a strong foundation, and any need for verification from western science is only 'political correctness', once one studies the foundations of CM. The studies part that I mentioned is just one of cross-cultural interest, " ah, let's see what this phenomenon looks like through the lens of magneto-resonance. " It is not necessary in order to 'prove' or 'verify' CM. The brain imaging study was of interest to me, having just seen Antonio Damasio, the neuroscientist, share his research on the brain through time-lapse brain scans. Interesting stuff, showing how the emotions affect different areas of the brain and viscera. On May 6, 2004, at 4:16 PM, Emmanuel Segmen wrote: > Andrea, Attilio and Z'ev, > > I would caution most heartily against " taking your place along side > WM " ... especially regarding Western scientific research as a basis > for anything other than Western science. Some of you have heard me > before on this topic. > > I've been and continue as a Western research scientist from a family > of Western research scientists both in this generation and in the past > generation. Western research science will yield Western science ... > nothing more and nothing less. To go this route would be to throw > away CM altogether. CM has far more to offer WM that the reverse. > I'm a modern researcher in genetic engineering, though now not > active. My cousin is extremely active and a leading light in this > area of research. The " classic literature " of our science is from the > late 1970s. The main body of literature is from 1988 onward to the > present. > > Twenty years of cultural endeavor, no matter how advanced the > scientist, is not a basis for the authenticity of anything. Please > don't confuse Western science as a basis for anything that you are > hoping to do with Chinese medicine ... clinically or theoretically. > Such a pathway is meaningless, thoroughly unconvincing and a > considerably act of disrespect to CM. > > Respectfully, > Emmanuel Segmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Deb Pacik wrote; >My question is this, what role do >we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? >How can we become key players rather than waiting at the >door to be invited in? Many alternative therapies including chinese medicines have proved themselves capable of competing for the management and even cure of many diseases and ailments, and anyone who cares to look will find that this is true. I believe there are several reasons why it (TCM and its modern varients) hasn't gotten on an equal footing with western science based medicine as I hoped and worked for when I was naive, but these obstacles originate from the sadder part of human minds. And the same reasons keep personal and global human activity toxic, exploitive, and unsustainable. Insane greed, pride, isolation and fear, -or-; lack of peace, humility, love and vision. At least until the demographic winter passes. peace fran Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Hi Zev, Do you have any details on how I can read Antonio Damasio's research on emotions and the viscera? I also find that interesting and would love to read more about it. Kind regards Attilio <Chinese Traditional Medicine> Chinese Traditional Medicine [zrosenbe] 07 May 2004 00:26 Chinese Medicine Re: Integrated Medicine The brain imaging study was of interest to me, having just seen Antonio Damasio, the neuroscientist, share his research on the brain through time-lapse brain scans. Interesting stuff, showing how the emotions affect different areas of the brain and viscera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Hi Emmanuel, Perhaps then, the 10th point should be 'the maintaining and understanding of cultural traditions both written and oral'. Attilio Emmanuel Segmen [susegmen] 06 May 2004 22:51 Chinese Medicine Re: Integrated Medicine Hi Attilio, Yes, I believe there is another point that is as important as it is difficult to express. Maintenance of the cultural substrate to borrow terminology from Ken Rose's publications. I personally would allude to " oral traditions " , but that's asking a lot of modern cultures that require literature as the primary premise of authenticity. Nevertheless, even in Western science labs there is a strong element of oral tradition and lineage through various scientists. If you read the literature of genetic engineering and work in various labs, you'll see what I mean. In Chinese medicine it's the cultural substrate arising from the land itself and the growers that attend to it as well as arising from the practitioners whose lives express their culture's philosophy and aesthetic. I would assign this to number 10 on your list though it would have so many subdivisions. Our own Western science requires a philosophy of science and a cultural context for it to proceed. There is a cultural expectation of what's appropriate and a societal expectation of what's wanted. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM foundation. 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM practitioners. 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our profession. 5. regulation in all countries. 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law restrictions. 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a cookbook approach. 9. continued education for graduates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Hi Zev, I really hope WM and TCM will come together through the mutual respect and admiration for each others systems, but I just don't see it happening. A lot of WM practitioners and those in power are arrogant and hostile to anything that doesn't fit the biomedical framework, like a bad taste bought through from the dark ages where herbalists were drowned as witches. On the other hand, many TCM practitioners are also overly anti WM and hostile to a biomedical framework. So what are we to do? How can we build a bridge between the two is the sea is too choppy? If we don't it will be the shores of TCM that will fail to flourish and lay barren on the rocks. Kind regards Attilio Chinese Traditional Medicine [zrosenbe] 06 May 2004 19:40 Chinese Medicine Re: Integrated Medicine Attilio, I also think CM and WM can and will come together, but the question is how and by whom. If it is a natural process of sharing and building of professional relationships over time with mutual respect, this is good. If it is a forced assimilation of CM technologies and repudiation of its underlying philosophy, this is not a good thing. On May 6, 2004, at 7:44 AM, wrote: > Hi Zev and Deb, > > I agree that TCM is being integrated through the biomedical > framework and nothing else. How would you envisage integration of TCM > into the West Zev? I think that in the short term both medicines, WM > and TCM can work alongside in a separate manner, but in the long > term, they can only come together. How this is achieved is very > important as TCM can easily come off worse. This is already seen in > various hospitals in China where there is a large slant towards WM, > although not totally the case it is the major practice. > > Of course, trying to fit TCM into a biomedical framework is > ludicrous and is immensely limiting TCM in terms of its understanding > and practical use. I agree that at the moment our profession is > fragmented and therefore weak. I believe that the following 9 points > are paramount to the benefit of TCM: > > 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM > foundation. 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM > practitioners. 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. > 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our > profession. > 5. regulation in all countries. > 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law > restrictions. > 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. > 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine > within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a > cookbook approach. > 9. continued education for graduates. > > Does anyone have anymore points that should be included? Are the > points sufficient for the progression of TCM? > > Attilio > > " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > > For me, this is the whole problem in the West with so-called > > integrative medicine. It is totally one-directional, integrating > > everything else into the biomedical format, both > > politically-economically and practically. > > > Truthfully, it should be called 'assimilative medicine'. > > > > Who is doing the integration, and who is being assimilated? > > > Until we have a stronger profession, we should proceed with caution. > > > On May 5, 2004, at 6:50 PM, meridians_acupuncture wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I've been providing acupuncture at a hospital in an Integrated > Medicine department and have found the whole experience to be > fascinating. As most of you know, physicians are driving the IM > movement. At a recent IM conference I was again struck by how the > decision-makers in this " new " field are all scientists and > physicians. > > Now, please don't misunderstand me, I have no opposition to > scientists and physicians. I am, however, opposed to having > decisions made for me with no say. My question is this, what role do > we TCM practitioners want to have in this movement? > > How can we become key players rather than waiting at the door to be > invited in? > > Any thoughts would be most appreciated. > > Deb Pacik > > > > Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, > religious, spam messages,flame another member or swear. > > To translate this message, copy and paste it into this web link > page, http://babel.altavista.com/ > > > and > adjust accordingly. > > If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop > being delivered. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 All of his books cover this subject, but his latest book, " Looking for Spinoza " perhaps is the most complete one. On May 6, 2004, at 8:52 PM, Attilio D'Alberto wrote: > Hi Zev, > > Do you have any details on how I can read Antonio Damasio's research > on > emotions and the viscera? I also find that interesting and would love > to > read more about it. > > Kind regards > > Attilio > > <Chinese Traditional Medicine> > Chinese Traditional Medicine > > > [zrosenbe] > 07 May 2004 00:26 > Chinese Medicine > Re: Integrated Medicine > > > The brain imaging study was of interest to me, having just seen > Antonio Damasio, the neuroscientist, share his research on the brain > through time-lapse brain scans. Interesting stuff, showing how the > emotions affect different areas of the brain and viscera. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Attilio, I believe we are talking at least a few generations. CM is very new in the West, and our understanding of it is still relatively immature in the profession. There are powerful political and economic forces that are holding back its development, both in the West and in Asian countries. At the same time, in the West it has grown from nothing to a force to be contended with, and in China, Japan and Korea, it continues to hold its own. Chinese herbal medicine is a formidable industry, for example, generating hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue in China alone. While what you say is true about the WM profession, especially the economic forces of the pharmaceutical and insurance industries, the public at large remains interested in what Chinese medicine can do, and there are many physicians, nurses and other health professionals who are interested in and are sympathetic to our work. I've always believed that true revolutions start in the hearts of people and spread, one by one, through compassionate communication. I may be a 'sixties person' with stars in my eyes, but the only dreams history seems to support and renew are those that remain soulful and honest. On May 6, 2004, at 9:04 PM, Attilio D'Alberto wrote: > Hi Zev, > > I really hope WM and TCM will come together through the mutual > respect and > admiration for each others systems, but I just don't see it happening. > > A lot of WM practitioners and those in power are arrogant and hostile > to > anything that doesn't fit the biomedical framework, like a bad taste > bought > through from the dark ages where herbalists were drowned as witches. > On the > other hand, many TCM practitioners are also overly anti WM and > hostile to a > biomedical framework. So what are we to do? How can we build a bridge > between the two is the sea is too choppy? If we don't it will be the > shores > of TCM that will fail to flourish and lay barren on the rocks. > > Kind regards > > Attilio > > Chinese Traditional Medicine > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Hi Z'ev, I, too, am fascinated by Damasio's work as well as most areas of gross and microscopic physiology. That's why I studied it, researched it and currently teach it. I especially enjoy the kinds of inquiry that you've posted below. In addition, you have already posted, as have I, that the philosophical premises of any science supports the authenticity of that science through the context of the practices of that science. Thus, the only thing that I felt was missing from Attilio's points #1 though #9 was philosophical integrity as point #10. As Attilio was a former philosophy student, I figure he could very well relate to this issue. There is no philosophical integrity in " proving " the validity of CM with the practices of WM or Western science. Though Western science as a basic and not a clinical science can indeed incorporate any philosophical premise from CM and test it. However, this furthers Western science, not CM. Now that I have your ear, another newsy tidbit. Today in a nutrition section of my physiology class, my students and I have been falling down laughing as regards the Atkins diet and the power of corporate marketing. Perhaps that's better than falling down crying. In the past my own messages here on a server have been sponsored by Atkins. The reason for my students laughter tonight is that I presented a marketing ploy to sell colostrum as a low carbohydrate product for Atkins diet lovers. Let's hear it for ketoacidosis as a precursor to " balanced health " . I must respectfully say good night. Emmanuel Segmen Emmanuel, I think you know that I agree enthusiastically with your position. Chinese medicine already has a strong foundation, and any need for verification from western science is only 'political correctness', once one studies the foundations of CM. The studies part that I mentioned is just one of cross-cultural interest, " ah, let's see what this phenomenon looks like through the lens of magneto-resonance. " It is not necessary in order to 'prove' or 'verify' CM. The brain imaging study was of interest to me, having just seen Antonio Damasio, the neuroscientist, share his research on the brain through time-lapse brain scans. Interesting stuff, showing how the emotions affect different areas of the brain and viscera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 <<<I don't think science will 'confirm' the complexity and depth of Chinese medicine in our lifetime, as as pointed out. That is not to say that we shouldn't welcome unbiased studies, such as changes in the brain neurochemistry after acupuncture to help our case.>>> Hi Z'ev, I Agree. My concern is that if we avoid this entirely, we may well be at the mercy of decision makers who have no understanding of the theoretical basis of TCM and have no desire to. <<<Having been a professor at one of the largest TCM schools for the last fourteen years, I have to disagree that the CM programs are strong enough.>>> I actually meant to contrast science to CM theory, not to suggest whether or not our CM programs are strong enough. Having not started TCM school yet, I can only judge from what I see in the current curricula of the various schools I've looked into. Frankly, I'm interested in the DOM, because I think the additional training would allow additional opportunities to improve skill in syndrome differentiation and treatment. I'm also hoping advanced Chinese herbal pharmacology will be an option. <<<I don't see that a majority of practitioners and students in our profession really know how to diagnose well, or really understand CM theory, as controversial as that statement may be. There is a movement in CM schools in America to increase hours, but interestingly all the hours are in WM.>>> Your points are well taken. I've actually heard this complaint from more than a few recent graduates... that they don't really feel prepared to be out there treating patients on their own yet. I've also noticed that there seems to be a great deal of disparity among schools. The approaches are so widely different from one program to the next. I was actually quite surprised to discover that some of the schools have become so Westernized, so 'academic,' that much of the *culture* behind CM theory is virtually missing. This approach totally baffles me. This was a key factor in selecting the school(s) I wanted to apply to. My interest is very much in Chinese theory. I was careful to select a program strong in that area. I'm also pleased that under the new hours requirements, they've selected to increase their clinical hours and added courses in case management and public health, rather than increasing WM training. <<<I think we need to improve the quality of WM programs in CM schools, but not necessarily increase the hours. There is knowledge that is appropriate for our profession, and knowledge that is appropriate for WM medical professionals.>>> These are excellent points. How would you like to see WM training restructured within the programs at the Master's level? What do you think should be included or eliminated? Along with that, what areas within CM do you think need to be expanded, aside from clinical training? <<<You also need to consider that CM information is harder to come by, and the fact that it is somewhat different than the WM knowledge base and much less accessible (99% is still in Chinese), means we need to put strong attention on how to increase the CM knowledge base in our profession.>>> I have wondered for a while now if this might not be contributing to a more Westernized approach to CM training. As language is the primary means of transmitting culture, relying solely on translations can often be problematic, particularly when there is a shortage of material in a secondary language to begin with. Often times, something is lost when you have to rely on someone else's interpretations. It seemed a logical step to me to begin learning Mandarin. I hope that I can become proficient enough in the language in a couple of years to access to the Chinese medical texts directly. The more material I can have access to, the better. If there is a way to make more of this information available to the profession as a whole, it should definitely be a priority. I agree that a strong foundation in CM is vital. After all, the length of a tree's branches is directly proportional to the depth of its roots. Regards, Andrea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Hi Attilio, Yes. Excellent. Others can amplify on this topic. I can give examples of growing traditions, seasonal and daily synchronicities for both farmers and practitioners ... really so many details. You statement is clear and complete as a single sentence. Emmanuel Segmen Hi Emmanuel, Perhaps then, the 10th point should be 'the maintaining and understanding of cultural traditions both written and oral'. Attilio Emmanuel Segmen [susegmen] 06 May 2004 22:51 Chinese Medicine Re: Integrated Medicine Hi Attilio, Yes, I believe there is another point that is as important as it is difficult to express. Maintenance of the cultural substrate to borrow terminology from Ken Rose's publications. I personally would allude to " oral traditions " , but that's asking a lot of modern cultures that require literature as the primary premise of authenticity. Nevertheless, even in Western science labs there is a strong element of oral tradition and lineage through various scientists. If you read the literature of genetic engineering and work in various labs, you'll see what I mean. In Chinese medicine it's the cultural substrate arising from the land itself and the growers that attend to it as well as arising from the practitioners whose lives express their culture's philosophy and aesthetic. I would assign this to number 10 on your list though it would have so many subdivisions. Our own Western science requires a philosophy of science and a cultural context for it to proceed. There is a cultural expectation of what's appropriate and a societal expectation of what's wanted. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen 1. a high level of education for practitioners that includes a WM foundation. 2. a central mouth-piece to voice the concerns of TCM practitioners. 3. public education in the positive uses of TCM. 4. political lobbying for more inclusion and less restriction of our profession. 5. regulation in all countries. 6. the assurance of quality products that do not break local law restrictions. 7. the testing of herbs for quality control. 8. research into the benefits of acupuncture and herbal medicine within a framework that suits syndrome differentiation and not a cookbook approach. 9. continued education for graduates. 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.