Integrated Medicine

[Guest guest]

Z'ev,

 

In this book Damasio is eloquent on the presentation of emotions as the

" bedrock of the mind " and what I've been taught of as " gifts " . Emotions are

appropriate to the moment, but they become useful when investigated after

the content of the moment has been abstracted. Anger transforms to ardor,

strength and generosity ... fear transforms to clarity ... sadness to

service. Emotion as a gift is so hidden in its context that it seems not

useful. One needs the practice of identifying the emotional gifts in any

situation.

 

There are long taught oral traditions on this, and I sense that Damasio has

some of this training. Or he is incredibly insightful. This book is an eye

opener for those who haven't learned to value emotions as gifts ... and also

for those who have.

 

Respectfully,

Emmanuel Segmen

___________________

 

 

All of his books cover this subject, but his latest book, " Looking for

Spinoza " perhaps is the most complete one.

 

 

[Guest guest]

<<<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.>>>

 

Hi Emmanual,

 

I agree wholeheartedly with Z'ev.

 

Unfortunately, 'verification' is the only way I can forsee pacifying the

decision makers in charge of creating the laws and regulations that impact

Chinese medicine here in the West.

 

When I mentioned CM having a place " alongside WM, " I wasn't suggesting

that we should rely on WM as basis for CM practice. Not at all. I agree that

would be a huge mistake. I do not want to see TCM assimilated into WM. I

think that would be self-defeating and a serious waste of .

My point concerns politics more than medicine. I'm referring to us having the

*right* to practice CM, as it is meant to be practiced, in the first place. I'm

not nearly as concerned with leveling the playing field with WM as I am with

there being a field for us to play on.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Andrea

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Attilio!

 

I am of the belief that we can't control anyone, so the best we can do is

groom ourselves professionally until we are so attractive that people are

drawn to us. Research, education and maybe quit the cat-fights (blush) . . .

 

At 12:04 AM 5/7/2004, you 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.

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

On 7 May 2004, at 0:42, Emmanuel Segmen wrote:

 

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

Best regards,

 

Email: <

 

WORK : Teagasc Research Management, Sandymount Ave., Dublin 4, Ireland

Mobile: 353-; [in the Republic: 0]

 

HOME : 1 Esker Lawns, Lucan, Dublin, Ireland

Tel : 353-; [in the Republic: 0]

WWW : http://homepage.eircom.net/~progers/searchap.htm

[Guest guest]

As far as expanding CM training, I think that comprehensive courses on

such classical texts as the Shang Han Lun, Nan Jing, Warm Disease

Theory and the Jia Yi Jing need to be covered. In addition, more time

spent on teaching pulse diagnosis, pattern differentiation, and complex

cases.

 

For WM, simply tailoring the courses to Chinese medicine students.

This means the instructors need to know something about Chinese

medicine, and apply anatomy, physiology, biology, and other subjects to

the requirements of our field. There are a vast number of subjects in

Western medicine that could otherwise be tailored to specialities such

as orthopedic or trauma medicine, for example.

 

 

On May 7, 2004, at 1:25 AM, Ai An Meng wrote:

 

>

> 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?

 

 

[Guest guest]

A little more attention to prognosis, perhaps?

 

Pat

 

 

As far as expanding CM training, I think that comprehensive courses on

such classical texts as the Shang Han Lun, Nan Jing, Warm Disease

Theory and the Jia Yi Jing need to be covered. In addition, more time

spent on teaching pulse diagnosis, pattern differentiation, and complex

cases.

 

For WM, simply tailoring the courses to Chinese medicine students.

This means the instructors need to know something about Chinese

medicine, and apply anatomy, physiology, biology, and other subjects to

the requirements of our field. There are a vast number of subjects in

Western medicine that could otherwise be tailored to specialities such

as orthopedic or trauma medicine, for example.

 

 

On May 7, 2004, at 1:25 AM, Ai An Meng wrote:

 

>

> 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?

 

 

[Guest guest]

Really good direction. Sometimes when talking with not even new tcm

practitioners, their reference and logic is more western science and medicine

model, and not seeming to feel the need to get to a understanding of the basic

idioms of tcm, such as yin/yang etc. The group here at times openly displays

how moved they are by embracing the teachings and revelations inherent in

old chinese medical philosophy. Little joys.

Chinese Medicine , " "

<zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> As far as expanding CM training, I think that comprehensive courses on

> such classical texts as the Shang Han Lun, Nan Jing, Warm Disease

> Theory and the Jia Yi Jing need to be covered. In addition, more time

> spent on teaching pulse diagnosis, pattern differentiation, and complex

> cases.

>

> For WM, simply tailoring the courses to Chinese medicine students.

> This means the instructors need to know something about Chinese

> medicine, and apply anatomy, physiology, biology, and other subjects to

> the requirements of our field. There are a vast number of subjects in

> Western medicine that could otherwise be tailored to specialities such

> as orthopedic or trauma medicine, for example.

>

>

> On May 7, 2004, at 1:25 AM, Ai An Meng wrote:

>

> >

> > 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?

>

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks, Andrea.

 

I understand your perspective better now. I have strong feelings regarding

Western science ... being a Western scientist. On one hand our cohort is under

significant attack from the current U.S. administration ... Nobel laureates and

the like getting kicked off of committees for demanding integrity from

regulatory bodies. On the other hand, authenticity for CM can never be defined

through the lens of WM, much less Western science. It's somewhat of a

conundrum, but nevertheless, one must not take an unwise step simply because

it's the only step in view for the moment. CM has managed to live for thousands

of years. I sense that it will be possible for CM to have full integrity in the

future and in our culture. While it may not happen in my life time for the

many, I will work to make it so. It has mostly happened in my lifetime in some

locales for the few. With proper nourishment, it will prosper.

 

Respectfully,

 

Emmanuel Segmen

 

 

<<<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.>>>

 

Hi Emmanual,

 

I agree wholeheartedly with Z'ev.

 

Unfortunately, 'verification' is the only way I can forsee pacifying the

decision makers in charge of creating the laws and regulations that impact

Chinese medicine here in the West.

 

When I mentioned CM having a place " alongside WM, " I wasn't suggesting

that we should rely on WM as basis for CM practice. Not at all. I agree that

would be a huge mistake. I do not want to see TCM assimilated into WM. I

think that would be self-defeating and a serious waste of .

My point concerns politics more than medicine. I'm referring to us having the

*right* to practice CM, as it is meant to be practiced, in the first place.

I'm

not nearly as concerned with leveling the playing field with WM as I am with

there being a field for us to play on.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Andrea

 

[Guest guest]

At this point TCM practitioners have a unique opportunity to lay the founda=

tion for

how TCM and WM will work together in the future. I think the way we approac=

h this

topic will help decide whether acupuncture in hospitals is practiced accord=

ing to

research or based on traditional theory.

 

Right now there are scientists and physicians who absolutely reject acupunc=

ture

regardless of the research. There are the middle ground folks who look onl=

y at the

research or are curious about acupuncture and may even refer patients but d=

on't

know that much about it yet are open to learning more. There is the small m=

inority

that believes that acupuncture works and should be practiced using the trad=

itional

theory.

 

I think that most acupunturists would agree that to practice acupuncture ba=

sed solely

on research would be ridiculous. But what if we use the research as a way f=

or people

(not just physicians and scientists) to consider using acupuncture earlier =

in health

care before surgery and lots of pharmaceuticals.

 

Deb

 

Chinese Medicine , " Attilio D'Alberto "

<attiliodalberto> wrote:

> Hi Zev,

>

> I really hope WM and TCM will come together through the mutual respect an=

d

> 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 boug=

ht

> through from the dark ages where herbalists were drowned as witches. On t=

he

> 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 shor=

es

> of TCM that will fail to flourish and lay barren on the rocks.

>

> Kind regards

>

> Attilio

>

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

>

>

>

> [zrosenbe@s...]

> 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.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us

and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us,

" oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR

ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be

compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what

will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking

otherwise?

PARADE magazine, and just about every Monday section

of every daily newspaper touts WM as the ONLY way to

health. We're up against HUGE, well-funded competition

in the U.S. , so we have to stick together and hang in

there, and not wait for WM to extend their help. They

have NO interest in helping anyone but themselves.

JG

--- meridians_acupuncture

<meridians_acupuncture wrote:

> At this point TCM practitioners have a unique

> opportunity to lay the founda=

> tion for

> how TCM and WM will work together in the future. I

> think the way we approac=

> h this

> topic will help decide whether acupuncture in

> hospitals is practiced accord=

> ing to

> research or based on traditional theory.

>

> Right now there are scientists and physicians who

> absolutely reject acupunc=

> ture

> regardless of the research. There are the middle

> ground folks who look onl=

> y at the

> research or are curious about acupuncture and may

> even refer patients but d=

> on't

> know that much about it yet are open to learning

> more. There is the small m=

> inority

> that believes that acupuncture works and should be

> practiced using the trad=

> itional

> theory.

>

> I think that most acupunturists would agree that to

> practice acupuncture ba=

> sed solely

> on research would be ridiculous. But what if we use

> the research as a way f=

> or people

> (not just physicians and scientists) to consider

> using acupuncture earlier =

> in health

> care before surgery and lots of pharmaceuticals.

>

> Deb

>

> Chinese Medicine ,

> " Attilio D'Alberto "

> <attiliodalberto> wrote:

> > Hi Zev,

> >

> > I really hope WM and TCM will come together

> through the mutual respect an=

> d

> > 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 boug=

> ht

> > through from the dark ages where herbalists were

> drowned as witches. On t=

> he

> > 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 shor=

> es

> > of TCM that will fail to flourish and lay barren

> on the rocks.

> >

> > Kind regards

> >

> > Attilio

> >

> >

>

Chinese Traditional Medicine

> >

> >

> >

> > [zrosenbe@s...]

> > 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

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./careermakeover

[Guest guest]

It's already happened in China, judging by the reports Attilio is

sending back.

 

 

On May 10, 2004, at 8:03 AM, John Garbarini wrote:

 

> If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us

> and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us,

> " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR

> ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be

> compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what

> will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking

> otherwise?

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Haven't we already realized a similar situation with Osteopathy?

I don't even think TCM will go as far as Osteopathy if it's INTEGRATED

with WM.

 

Mike L.

 

<zrosenbe wrote:

It's already happened in China, judging by the reports Attilio is

sending back.

 

 

On May 10, 2004, at 8:03 AM, John Garbarini wrote:

 

> If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us

> and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us,

> " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR

> ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be

> compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what

> will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking

> otherwise?

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , John Garbarini

<johnlg_2000> wrote:

> If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us

> and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us,

> " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR

> ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be

> compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what

> will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking

> otherwise?

 

 

IF we let WM define us...that is my point. Now is the time for us to enter the

conversation with WM practitioners, not in a year or five.

 

Assuming that we will be assimilated or that WM will define the practice of

acupuncture only ends the discussion before it even begins.

 

Suppose we bring to the table the research showing some of the mechanisms of how

acupuncture works in a biomedical model. Once we have shown this we can explain

our theory (slowly and over a period of time) and how it is important to base

treatment on it.

 

I have met many physcians and scientists who are willing to grapple with TCM

theory

and try to understand it. They admit that it is far from their training and

don't

completely understand but they are willing to engage in conversation about it.

 

Deb

[Guest guest]

I agree that we should never let the allopaths define our profession. However,

TCM can benefit greatly by using current scientific understanding of various

subjects like endocrinology, immunology, and physiology to help refine TCM

theory. Although scientists, physicians, and statisticians can help to refine

TCM theory, it is us, The TCM Professionals, who should take the lead and guide

the effort, because we have the most knowledge and understanding of our own

theories of healing.

 

There is already a book by Donald E. Kendall called " Dao of -

Understanding An Ancient Healing Art " which I think is the best book so far in

the English language that explains how acupuncture works to scientists and

physician who are interested in TCM. I'm in the process of reading it right

now, and I am impress with it. Check it out on Amazon or Barnes & Noble.

 

meridians_acupuncture <meridians_acupuncture wrote:

Chinese Medicine , John Garbarini

<johnlg_2000> wrote:

> If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us

> and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us,

> " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR

> ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be

> compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what

> will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking

> otherwise?

 

 

IF we let WM define us...that is my point. Now is the time for us to enter the

conversation with WM practitioners, not in a year or five.

 

Assuming that we will be assimilated or that WM will define the practice of

acupuncture only ends the discussion before it even begins.

 

Suppose we bring to the table the research showing some of the mechanisms of how

acupuncture works in a biomedical model. Once we have shown this we can explain

our theory (slowly and over a period of time) and how it is important to base

treatment on it.

 

I have met many physcians and scientists who are willing to grapple with TCM

theory

and try to understand it. They admit that it is far from their training and

don't

completely understand but they are willing to engage in conversation about it.

 

Deb

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

This is an important topic that needs to be addressed. You can learn from the

experience the Chiropractors have gone thru.

 

I graduated from Los Angles College of Chiropractic and also from Samra

University of Oriental Medicine in Los Angles.

 

Western Medicine has finally some what accepted Chiropractic, in a sense the

Chiropractic profession fell between the the cracks. It is not always defined as

alternative medicine but its also not completely accepted as a part of Western

medicine.

 

I believe a large part of the reason we have finally somewhat been accepted by

the Western MD's is our effectiveness for treating low back pain.

 

In my opinion this has not been the best for the profession because in a sense,

certain members and organizations of the Chiropractic profession are excited to

finally been accepted by western medicine and to be paid by the insurance

companies.

 

The problem with this is we are being put into a system for treating only a few

aspects of a wide range of things that can be treated with spinal manipulation,

etc.

 

If the practioners of TCM and Acupuncture are not careful, I feel this will

also happen.

 

Right now we are not a real threat to western medicine because we are " good for

pain " .

 

What will happen once western medicine starts to notice that we are getting

either the same or even better results with the same illnesses that they are

treating.

 

In my opinion this is what will happen.

 

Western Medicine will educate the media who in turn educates the public about

how unsafe and dangerous TCM and acupuncture is for any disorder or condition

other than pain.

 

Or they will take the TCM and acupuncture and " improve it to a higher standard "

that only western medicine is now better to treat.

 

The other problem that I see is happening in the TCM arena is a division in the

profession in regards to which style of treatment is best. Five elements,

8-principles, TCM, Classical, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, you get the point.

 

This is an area the Chiropractic profession really screwed up with. Instead of

uniting ourselves to become a strong profession to help fight against the system

and educate the politicians, media and the public concerning the effectivenss of

Chiropractic we as a profession were to busy fighting amongst oursselves as to:

(who had the better treatment, who should be treated, what kinds of conditions

should be treated, etc " .

 

So as a result of this and personal bias's there were different associations

formed. This caused contention and lack of unity within the profession.

 

Finally after all these years the profession is starting to become more united

to address the issues that effects the profession as a whole.

 

Hopefully the practioners of TCM and Acupuncture will learn from these terrible

mistakes and become unified in order to protect the profession and to educate

the politicians, media and the public.

 

The other thing would be to fight any others that want to infringe upon our

profession without the proper education requirements. I always had an interest

in acupuncture and decided to go back to college and receive my masters degree

in TCM.

 

Although others find it easier to take the easy way out with a short course of

acupuncture. Actually I have been helping the Utah Association of Acupuncturist

to fight the Chiropractors from doing Acupuncture.

 

This has alway amazed me. When it comes to spinal manipulation, it is my opinion

that the best trained profession is the Chiropractic profession due to the fact

we spend a large part of our training doing this in school.

 

When it comes to other professions who want to do spinal manipulation, the

Chiropractor's become outraged by this and do all they can so that others are

unable to do this. I totally agree with this...

 

But what makes certain Chiropractors feel they can do the same thing to another

profession (Acupuncturist's) with a total lack of respect for the training that

profession has gone thru.

 

Now be sure not to group all the Chiropractors together because there are those

who also disagree with what a few are doing in the profession.

 

 

I can train any of you in 100-200 hours in spinal manipulation.

 

Does this mean that you will be proficient, that you will not hurt others, that

you are better the the Chiropractors, I don't think so.

 

I am proud to be a Chiropractor but just as proud to be a practioner of TCM.

 

In reality, the public would do well receving treatment in both professions.

 

Now for my last point, do not get all caught up in letting insurance reimburse

us for our treatment. There are both advantages and disadvantages.

 

The biggest long term problem is all the disadvantages. Eventually the insurance

company will tell you how to practice and what you can and cannot do to receive

payment plus all the paper work. In the long run, its not worth it.

 

Remember, people pay money for what they want, but not what they need...

 

I see this in my own practice. A patient wants to come in for treatment because

of severe head heads, etc. but they just cannot afford it. But at they same

time they can afford to go to Starbuck 1-2 times per day, purchase the brand new

car, etc.

 

I also try to be compassionate for those patients that really have hardships and

make it affordable for them.

 

We should not discredit ourselves as a profession to feel lucky that we finally

got insurance coverage for Acupuncture.

 

Alternative, Integrated Medicine need to stand on it own and not get caught up

in the insurance coverage. You can see what is happening now with coverage to

other professions and its not only the HMO's that are doing this.

 

It is happening to the Medical Doctor's, Chiropractors, Physical therapist's,

etc.

 

I would like to say in closing that it would be great to both the profession and

the public if we become more of the Integrated Medicine movement, but it needs

to be on terms as a profession and not be dictated to us by other professions or

associations.

 

All my best,

 

Brian N Hardy, DC, LAc, DACBN, CCN

 

 

 

<zrosenbe wrote:

It's already happened in China, judging by the reports Attilio is

sending back.

 

 

On May 10, 2004, at 8:03 AM, John Garbarini wrote:

 

> If TCM lets WM define us, they will take the lot of us

> and place us on a " shelf, " where they will define us,

> " oh, this is OK for back pain, and some MINOR

> ailments, but that's about IT. " We will be

> compartmentalized, and hung out to dry. THAT'S what

> will happen ,why even DELUDE yourselves into thinking

> otherwise?