Severe shock and its effects help please

[Guest guest]

A good place to start might be to look at how school programs are

organized in China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea. As far as doing my own

school? Forget it, my hair is already turning white!

 

 

On Dec 19, 2004, at 4:55 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> Zev,

> So when do you plan to start your school? I would agree with you

> unfortunately it took you how many years to get to this level? If the

> schools cannot get graduates to an acceptable level than they need to

> change

> and focus on this material. As I recall there was little or no effort

> to go

> into the classics in school. Maybe that has changed. Lastly,

> practitioners

> will choose to define or describe ideas and concepts as they see fit

> and

> this may include commonly used ideas as well. We cannot change this.

> Some

> might call this progress. We cannot say that it is OK to use western

> medical conditions at one time and critique a homeopathic term the

> next.

> That is hypocritical. I have found more than a few references on here

> to

> western conditions. Later

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

[Guest guest]

I find it amazing that you or anyone else would think that Chinese

medicine is 'narrow or frozen'. The amount of material one can glean

from even one school of thought, such as Li Dongyuan's spleen-stomach

school is so vast that one can dedicate one's life to its study and

practice (CM) and never exhaust the material. I strongly disagree with

you that there is sufficient CM education in English if less than 1%

has been translated. This includes many of the foundational works,

such as Jin gui yao lue/Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet, Jing yue

quan shu/Collected Works of (Zhang) Jing-yue. There is a gold mine of

material, such as mingmen/lifegate fire theory, that could easily be

applied to kidney diseases, and reexamined in the light of modern

knowledge on the endocrine system. This is just one example.

 

Clinical expression in Chinese medicine will always be new and

creative, but source theory needs to be strengthened so that one

understands what one is doing. One can see from lists like these that

practitioners still have a difficult time figuring out for themselves

how to treat the challenging conditions that confront us.

 

If we take the present level of CM knowledge and 'integrate', as Mike

seems to suggest, the CM portion of the integrated medicine will

disappear with time, because CM is a minority medicine when compared

with WM. We are rushing off to integrate and add new ideas, basically

Western medicine to Chinese medicine, when the foundations of CM are so

weak in the West.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:23 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:

 

>

> this is only a question of time and popularity, novel uses of herbs

> is not very far away. While Nogier had nothing to do with CM, Voll did

> and instead of using yin and yang lingo he was looking at balance via

> the nervous system (and still used some yin yang lingo especially at

> the beginning). It is still yin and yang when one speaks of balanced

> servo systems. He then found additional points etc. That is further

> research and developments. I think to say it is not CM is a very

> narrow and fixed or frozen view. As far as what we know of CM in the

> west, to say that we know very little is to say that graduate of TCM

> in china know very little as most of the texts used in china BA

> programs have been translated. There are also many thousands of

> westerners that have been to china for various lengths, and finally

> again i would say that outcome, which one can evaluate without CM

> education at all, is easily seen when in china. Taken together i think

> the west has sufficient CM information (and man

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

You are talking about techonology, I am talking about actual theory,

structure of prescriptions, diagnosis, etc.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:24 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

 

>

> Now the Chinese idea of auricular map could be questioned here as

> well and

> what about herbal concentrates

> >>>Or Z'ev likeness of tinctures since there is not historical bases

> at all

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Dec 20, 2004, at 4:04 AM, Sharon wrote:

 

>

> I can't help but think that the meridians are part of the internal

> flow of

> energy... the Indians focused on the Charkas, external energy flow

> ???,...

> power therapies now use the meridians and acu points and charkas in

> ways

> that are not described in the texts translated into English that I

> have

> studied.

 

The relationship of chakras to channels is a very important and

interesting question, and not to be taken lightly.

>

> If such pathways are there, understanding them in principle and how to

> utilise them to attain or maintain health in practice is not a

> finished

> book.  And even if it were, the health challenges today are quite

> different

> to those found at different times over the last 2,000 years.  We

> would need

> to adapt the principles to the modern day conditions, eg moving from

> air con

> to hot humid climates via planes or instantly via door ways, just

> didn't

> happen 2,000 years ago.

>

> I don't think we become static, I think that people, both

> practitioners

> utilising these power therapies and patients mastering them move

> exponentially past us.

 

It is not as easy as you think to 'move beyond' such a profound body of

knowledge. The superior practitioner applies these 'ancient

principles' to the problems of the modern day. Are you saying that

Chinese medicine cannot treat the 'jet set' patients we have today? Is

it limited by its history?

>

> I suppose we all have patients for whom we do the work, ie get rid of

> the

> incontinence etc, and then there are other patients, who don't want

> us to

> 'fix' it they want us to facilitate their learning and ability to

> directly

> manage the soft and hardware of their bodymindspirit.

 

Clearly there are different levels that we work on with different

patients.

>

> I suspect there will be places for those who want to have treatment

> done for

> them and also places for those who want to learn to master their

> BMS.  And

> maybe some of us practitioners will do both these things.

 

It happens every day in my own practice.

>

> Whilst respecting the roots of CM, one must still attend to the

> flowers of

> the tree, and also the transplanted seedlings of the tree found is so

> many

> different climates.

 

A tree can only grow as tall as its roots grow deep.

 

 

>

> Best wishes,

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

What concerns me with our profession is that nearly all of the

'innovations' being discussed are coming from biomedicine, and in the

case of Voll, while he may use balance of the nervous system, Chinese

medicine theory is totally 'buried in the mix'. If this is a projected

future of Chinese medicine, it will disappear within the huge body of

biomedicine. I, for one, am not interested in being assimilated by the

Borg mentality. I am all for growth and change, but is Chinese

medicine itself so weak and lacking confidence that the only growth is

by being assimilated by Western medicine?

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:23 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:

 

>

> this is only a question of time and popularity, novel uses of herbs

> is not very far away. While Nogier had nothing to do with CM, Voll did

> and instead of using yin and yang lingo he was looking at balance via

> the nervous system (and still used some yin yang lingo especially at

> the beginning). It is still yin and yang when one speaks of balanced

> servo systems. He then found additional points etc. That is further

> research and developments.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Amen! Let's truly mine the treasures of CM and then look at the necessity of

integration.

 

Kim Blankenship

 

 

 

 

<zrosenbe wrote:

I find it amazing that you or anyone else would think that Chinese

medicine is 'narrow or frozen'. The amount of material one can glean

from even one school of thought, such as Li Dongyuan's spleen-stomach

school is so vast that one can dedicate one's life to its study and

practice (CM) and never exhaust the material. I strongly disagree with

you that there is sufficient CM education in English if less than 1%

has been translated. This includes many of the foundational works,

such as Jin gui yao lue/Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet, Jing yue

quan shu/Collected Works of (Zhang) Jing-yue. There is a gold mine of

material, such as mingmen/lifegate fire theory, that could easily be

applied to kidney diseases, and reexamined in the light of modern

knowledge on the endocrine system. This is just one example.

 

Clinical expression in Chinese medicine will always be new and

creative, but source theory needs to be strengthened so that one

understands what one is doing. One can see from lists like these that

practitioners still have a difficult time figuring out for themselves

how to treat the challenging conditions that confront us.

 

If we take the present level of CM knowledge and 'integrate', as Mike

seems to suggest, the CM portion of the integrated medicine will

disappear with time, because CM is a minority medicine when compared

with WM. We are rushing off to integrate and add new ideas, basically

Western medicine to Chinese medicine, when the foundations of CM are so

weak in the West.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:23 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:

 

>

> this is only a question of time and popularity, novel uses of herbs

> is not very far away. While Nogier had nothing to do with CM, Voll did

> and instead of using yin and yang lingo he was looking at balance via

> the nervous system (and still used some yin yang lingo especially at

> the beginning). It is still yin and yang when one speaks of balanced

> servo systems. He then found additional points etc. That is further

> research and developments. I think to say it is not CM is a very

> narrow and fixed or frozen view. As far as what we know of CM in the

> west, to say that we know very little is to say that graduate of TCM

> in china know very little as most of the texts used in china BA

> programs have been translated. There are also many thousands of

> westerners that have been to china for various lengths, and finally

> again i would say that outcome, which one can evaluate without CM

> education at all, is easily seen when in china. Taken together i think

> the west has sufficient CM information (and man

>

[Guest guest]

As I mentioned earlier, such innovations are rare with the

herbal/internal medicine tradition. They are much more common with

acupuncture. While pharmacological uses of herbs has increased, it

still has relatively little influence on how herbal prescriptions are

designed

>>>>>>>

 

this is only a question of time and popularity, novel uses of herbs is not very

far away. While Nogier had nothing to do with CM, Voll did and instead of using

yin and yang lingo he was looking at balance via the nervous system (and still

used some yin yang lingo especially at the beginning). It is still yin and yang

when one speaks of balanced servo systems. He then found additional points etc.

That is further research and developments. I think to say it is not CM is a very

narrow and fixed or frozen view. As far as what we know of CM in the west, to

say that we know very little is to say that graduate of TCM in china know very

little as most of the texts used in china BA programs have been translated.

There are also many thousands of westerners that have been to china for various

lengths, and finally again i would say that outcome, which one can evaluate

without CM education at all, is easily seen when in china. Taken together i

think the west has sufficient CM information (and many have sufficient clinical

experience) for people to describe their experiences in CM terms or to translate

CM into more modern language. I would hate to see this suppressed as at this

point i think very significant developments can come from western thinkers. If

it is true that homotoxicology came after studies of SHL than it is a very good

example of further development and synthesis of materia medica rooted in CM. It

should be considered part of modern CM (if true).

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Cop out!

 

" " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> That is for us as a profession, the question. I wouldn't venture to

> answer by myself.

>

>

> On Dec 19, 2004, at 11:21 PM, Sharon wrote:

>

> > Okay so define Chinese medicine.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I did present my personal point of view on this issue in answer to

Attilio's post, Godfrey. My point was we need to ask ourselves this

question as a profession.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:01 AM, acu_qichina wrote:

 

>

>

> Cop out!

>

> " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> > That is for us as a profession, the question.  I wouldn't venture to

> > answer by myself.

> >

> >

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zev,

I think you misunderstood me. Integration is inevitable and is already a

done deal in China. You should know this from the issues over classical

texts and the newer texts used in education. Our English texts also have

selected classical quotes of ideas taken out of context. Arguing over one

way or the other is not what I am proposing (not all or none). I propose a

third option and that is to change the way that education is taught (little

critical thought development) so that our experience with education can

provide knowledge in both. I think that SIOM has broken with the " norm " of

how our education is taught. This would allow us to have good working

knowledge of both at the level that would make us better practitioners.

Later

Mike Bowser, L Ac

 

>kim blankenship <kuangguiyu

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:47:38 -0800 (PST)

>

>

>Amen! Let's truly mine the treasures of CM and then look at the necessity

>of integration.

>

>Kim Blankenship

>

>

>

>

> <zrosenbe wrote:

>I find it amazing that you or anyone else would think that Chinese

>medicine is 'narrow or frozen'. The amount of material one can glean

>from even one school of thought, such as Li Dongyuan's spleen-stomach

>school is so vast that one can dedicate one's life to its study and

>practice (CM) and never exhaust the material. I strongly disagree with

>you that there is sufficient CM education in English if less than 1%

>has been translated. This includes many of the foundational works,

>such as Jin gui yao lue/Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet, Jing yue

>quan shu/Collected Works of (Zhang) Jing-yue. There is a gold mine of

>material, such as mingmen/lifegate fire theory, that could easily be

>applied to kidney diseases, and reexamined in the light of modern

>knowledge on the endocrine system. This is just one example.

>

>Clinical expression in Chinese medicine will always be new and

>creative, but source theory needs to be strengthened so that one

>understands what one is doing. One can see from lists like these that

>practitioners still have a difficult time figuring out for themselves

>how to treat the challenging conditions that confront us.

>

>If we take the present level of CM knowledge and 'integrate', as Mike

>seems to suggest, the CM portion of the integrated medicine will

>disappear with time, because CM is a minority medicine when compared

>with WM. We are rushing off to integrate and add new ideas, basically

>Western medicine to Chinese medicine, when the foundations of CM are so

>weak in the West.

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:23 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> >

> > this is only a question of time and popularity, novel uses of herbs

> > is not very far away. While Nogier had nothing to do with CM, Voll did

> > and instead of using yin and yang lingo he was looking at balance via

> > the nervous system (and still used some yin yang lingo especially at

> > the beginning). It is still yin and yang when one speaks of balanced

> > servo systems. He then found additional points etc. That is further

> > research and developments. I think to say it is not CM is a very

> > narrow and fixed or frozen view. As far as what we know of CM in the

> > west, to say that we know very little is to say that graduate of TCM

> > in china know very little as most of the texts used in china BA

> > programs have been translated. There are also many thousands of

> > westerners that have been to china for various lengths, and finally

> > again i would say that outcome, which one can evaluate without CM

> > education at all, is easily seen when in china. Taken together i think

> > the west has sufficient CM information (and man

> >

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Bingo! You have just found the key problem. Our profession has become lost

and seeks bio med to justify us. I would say stay tuned as new areas of

research are going to blow your doors off as they support some of the

ancient theories. I like the discovery of fluid-filled ducts that have

large amounts of hormones/chemicals that follow the jing luo vessels. I

have often wondered why they called them vessels. True science has a double

edged blade and I think we are going to see this more and more as new

discoveries are proved. We need to be up on this info as a way to provide

evidence for these theories. I agree that the theories are what is

important. Bio med only sees the tool. Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:42:30 -0800

>

>What concerns me with our profession is that nearly all of the

>'innovations' being discussed are coming from biomedicine, and in the

>case of Voll, while he may use balance of the nervous system, Chinese

>medicine theory is totally 'buried in the mix'. If this is a projected

>future of Chinese medicine, it will disappear within the huge body of

>biomedicine. I, for one, am not interested in being assimilated by the

>Borg mentality. I am all for growth and change, but is Chinese

>medicine itself so weak and lacking confidence that the only growth is

>by being assimilated by Western medicine?

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:23 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> >

> > this is only a question of time and popularity, novel uses of herbs

> > is not very far away. While Nogier had nothing to do with CM, Voll did

> > and instead of using yin and yang lingo he was looking at balance via

> > the nervous system (and still used some yin yang lingo especially at

> > the beginning). It is still yin and yang when one speaks of balanced

> > servo systems. He then found additional points etc. That is further

> > research and developments.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Has anyone figured out how to treat merucry or flouride toxicity with TCM?

There are some things TCM cannot treat as they did not exist back then.

Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:38:27 -0800

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 4:04 AM, Sharon wrote:

>

> >

> > I can't help but think that the meridians are part of the internal

> > flow of

> > energy... the Indians focused on the Charkas, external energy flow

> > ???,...

> > power therapies now use the meridians and acu points and charkas in

> > ways

> > that are not described in the texts translated into English that I

> > have

> > studied.

>

>The relationship of chakras to channels is a very important and

>interesting question, and not to be taken lightly.

> >

> > If such pathways are there, understanding them in principle and how to

> > utilise them to attain or maintain health in practice is not a

> > finished

> > book.  And even if it were, the health challenges today are quite

> > different

> > to those found at different times over the last 2,000 years.  We

> > would need

> > to adapt the principles to the modern day conditions, eg moving from

> > air con

> > to hot humid climates via planes or instantly via door ways, just

> > didn't

> > happen 2,000 years ago.

> >

> > I don't think we become static, I think that people, both

> > practitioners

> > utilising these power therapies and patients mastering them move

> > exponentially past us.

>

>It is not as easy as you think to 'move beyond' such a profound body of

>knowledge. The superior practitioner applies these 'ancient

>principles' to the problems of the modern day. Are you saying that

>Chinese medicine cannot treat the 'jet set' patients we have today? Is

>it limited by its history?

> >

> > I suppose we all have patients for whom we do the work, ie get rid of

> > the

> > incontinence etc, and then there are other patients, who don't want

> > us to

> > 'fix' it they want us to facilitate their learning and ability to

> > directly

> > manage the soft and hardware of their bodymindspirit.

>

>Clearly there are different levels that we work on with different

>patients.

> >

> > I suspect there will be places for those who want to have treatment

> > done for

> > them and also places for those who want to learn to master their

> > BMS.  And

> > maybe some of us practitioners will do both these things.

>

>It happens every day in my own practice.

> >

> > Whilst respecting the roots of CM, one must still attend to the

> > flowers of

> > the tree, and also the transplanted seedlings of the tree found is so

> > many

> > different climates.

>

>A tree can only grow as tall as its roots grow deep.

>

>

> >

> > Best wishes,

> >

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Does not a concentrated herb change you formula composition? I consider

this a change in actual theory as it applies directly to the formula. Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:00:31 -0800

>

>Alon,

> You are talking about techonology, I am talking about actual theory,

>structure of prescriptions, diagnosis, etc.

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:24 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> >

> > Now the Chinese idea of auricular map could be questioned here as

> > well and

> > what about herbal concentrates

> > >>>Or Z'ev likeness of tinctures since there is not historical bases

> > at all

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

What, not immortal? How about a little He Shou Wu?

On another note, your knowledge would provide for invaluable insight into

much needed classical theories that need to be covered. I think that once

we are able to set up a norm then it would be really simple for schools to

replicate this. We could change our schools to a much higher level.

Lastly, how do you feel about classical coverage in the DAOM program there?

Are you teaching in this program? Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:41:52 -0800

>

>A good place to start might be to look at how school programs are

>organized in China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea. As far as doing my own

>school? Forget it, my hair is already turning white!

>

>

>On Dec 19, 2004, at 4:55 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> > Zev,

> > So when do you plan to start your school? I would agree with you

> > unfortunately it took you how many years to get to this level? If the

> > schools cannot get graduates to an acceptable level than they need to

> > change

> > and focus on this material. As I recall there was little or no effort

> > to go

> > into the classics in school. Maybe that has changed. Lastly,

> > practitioners

> > will choose to define or describe ideas and concepts as they see fit

> > and

> > this may include commonly used ideas as well. We cannot change this.

> > Some

> > might call this progress. We cannot say that it is OK to use western

> > medical conditions at one time and critique a homeopathic term the

> > next.

> > That is hypocritical. I have found more than a few references on here

> > to

> > western conditions. Later

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

[Guest guest]

I think you are missing the point, Mike. Chinese medical theory is

very flexible. One doesn't use modern technology in this example to

change the theory, just the application of the herbs. One doesn't

design the formula on the basis of freeze-dried herb or liquid extract

technology, one adapts the dosages of the ingredients.

 

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:54 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> Does not a concentrated herb change you formula composition?  I

> consider

> this a change in actual theory as it applies directly to the

> formula.  Later

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I am not teaching in the DAOM program due to the difficulties I have

teaching weekend courses (the Sabbath the main one). I think that the

schools are improving as time goes on, but the real study, in my

opinion, begins after graduation. We need post-graduate courses, and

we need to encourage practitioners to study as much as possible.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 11:07 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> What, not immortal?  How about a little He Shou Wu?

> On another note, your knowledge would provide for invaluable insight

> into

> much needed classical theories that need to be covered.  I think that

> once

> we are able to set up a norm then it would be really simple for

> schools to

> replicate this.  We could change our schools to a much higher level. 

> Lastly, how do you feel about classical coverage in the DAOM program

> there? 

> Are you teaching in this program?  Later

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

While some form of integration is 'a done deal', I think we need to

think more carefully about how this is done, and have some say in that

process. Otherwise we will disappear.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:35 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

>

> Zev,

> I think you misunderstood me.  Integration is inevitable and is

> already a

> done deal in China.  You should know this from the issues over

> classical

> texts and the newer texts used in education.  Our English texts also

> have

> selected classical quotes of ideas taken out of context.  Arguing

> over one

> way or the other is not what I am proposing (not all or none).  I

> propose a

> third option and that is to change the way that education is taught

> (little

> critical thought development) so that our experience with education

> can

> provide knowledge in both.  I think that SIOM has broken with the

> " norm " of

> how our education is taught.  This would allow us to have good working

> knowledge of both at the level that would make us better

> practitioners. 

> Later

> Mike Bowser, L Ac

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zev,

I am not saying that the principles of CM can't treat jet lag. In fact I

learnt how to treat jet lag using acupuncture points from a kinesiologist...

not in my acupuncture study. I have learnt much about acupuncture seeing

how non-acupuncturist use the meridians.

 

I am saying if you look at Peak States and Whole Hearted Healing. The

healing of original trauma whilst the egg and sperm are being produced, is

probably something most acupuncturist are ignorant of. These people have

quite fascinating integrative theories of meridians and charkas. How many

practitioners know, use or teach, simple treatments such as EFT with their

clients?

 

I have just finished 120 hr post graduate study in Manaka protocols which at

last taught me of open point, time based treatment, sound therapy, colour

therapy (these are simple applications of the 5 phase correspondences), the

best extra vessel treatments, etc etc etc.

 

I am saying as a graduate of a 4 yr standard TCM program I didn't have much

comprehension of the the tree, its roots or that there were so many off

shoots. CM doesn't have a monopoly on understanding and using meridians and

acupoints. And those acupuncturist that think so, may find themselves left

behind.

Best wishes,

 

 

[zrosenbe]

Tuesday, 21 December 2004 2:38 AM

Chinese Medicine

Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

 

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 4:04 AM, Sharon wrote:

 

>

> I can't help but think that the meridians are part of the internal

> flow of

> energy... the Indians focused on the Charkas, external energy flow

> ???,...

> power therapies now use the meridians and acu points and charkas in

> ways

> that are not described in the texts translated into English that I

> have

> studied.

 

The relationship of chakras to channels is a very important and

interesting question, and not to be taken lightly.

>

> If such pathways are there, understanding them in principle and how to

> utilise them to attain or maintain health in practice is not a

> finished

> book. And even if it were, the health challenges today are quite

> different

> to those found at different times over the last 2,000 years. We

> would need

> to adapt the principles to the modern day conditions, eg moving from

> air con

> to hot humid climates via planes or instantly via door ways, just

> didn't

> happen 2,000 years ago.

>

> I don't think we become static, I think that people, both

> practitioners

> utilising these power therapies and patients mastering them move

> exponentially past us.

 

It is not as easy as you think to 'move beyond' such a profound body of

knowledge. The superior practitioner applies these 'ancient

principles' to the problems of the modern day. Are you saying that

Chinese medicine cannot treat the 'jet set' patients we have today? Is

it limited by its history?

>

> I suppose we all have patients for whom we do the work, ie get rid of

> the

> incontinence etc, and then there are other patients, who don't want

> us to

> 'fix' it they want us to facilitate their learning and ability to

> directly

> manage the soft and hardware of their bodymindspirit.

 

Clearly there are different levels that we work on with different

patients.

>

> I suspect there will be places for those who want to have treatment

> done for

> them and also places for those who want to learn to master their

> BMS. And

> maybe some of us practitioners will do both these things.

 

It happens every day in my own practice.

>

> Whilst respecting the roots of CM, one must still attend to the

> flowers of

> the tree, and also the transplanted seedlings of the tree found is so

> many

> different climates.

 

A tree can only grow as tall as its roots grow deep.

 

>

> Best wishes,

>

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

The material you describe as being limited may not be what you call

CM, but is actually TCM. Open points, time based treatment,

extraordinary vessel treatments are clearly described in the Chinese

classics such as the Nan Jing and Jia Yi Jing, and are clearly 'Chinese

medicine'. Some of the confusion about what is Chinese medicine comes

from the herbal bias of the modern CM education, which effects the

styles of acupuncture being taught . While those TCM styles are also

valid, the Japanese, in my opinion, as a whole have kept the broader

view in acupuncture education and treatment.

 

Modern application of herbal therapy is based on bian zheng lun

zhi/pattern differentiation, and much of TCM acupuncture is designed to

conform with zang-fu/viscera-bowel pattern differentiation. The more

channel-based approaches to acupuncture, however, also come from the

Chinese medical literature, but are not being taught as extensively. I

agree with you, it is very important to learn these styles if one wants

to be as effective as possible.

 

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 12:26 PM, Sharon wrote:

 

>

> I have just finished 120 hr post graduate study in Manaka protocols

> which at

> last taught me of open point, time based treatment, sound therapy,

> colour

> therapy (these are simple applications of the 5 phase

> correspondences), the

> best extra vessel treatments, etc etc etc.

>

> I am saying as a graduate of a 4 yr standard TCM program I didn't

> have much

> comprehension of the the tree, its roots or that there were so many

> off

> shoots.  CM doesn't have a monopoly on understanding and using

> meridians and

> acupoints.  And those acupuncturist that think so, may find

> themselves left

> behind.

> Best wishes,

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zev

I am quite aware that the Japanese Meridian therapist that I have studied

are based on the Nan Jing.

 

I so realised how herbal medicine has 'corrupted' acupuncture when I did

basic herbal studies. The fundamentals of Zang fu are herbal and not

meridian based and yet brought in as some of the guiding principles of

acupuncture in standard TCM.

 

Perhaps one of the reason Japanese meridian therapy is much closer to the

classics is because herbal medicine is a separate license and the

competition between what herbal and acupuncture can treat is not present as

it is in TCM. That is apart from the revolution in the 1920's in Japan to

head back to the classics.

 

Having Oriental practitioners such as Manaka who can read the classics and

share them to a modern day audience of practitioners is invaluable. That he

was also an exceptional western medical doctor with a comprehension of

modern physics was also a bonus. That he sought to investigate the

underlying theory of acupuncture and present a theory of integration is a

double bonus because he was interested in principles of inter relationships

as well as Chinese point formulae for disease states.

 

Back to TCM: What was included in my school, was based on its sister school

in China and that of course was also politicised, by the westerns as well as

the Chinese. So it can pay to go outside the 'square' and discover what was

excluded. In fact one can choose any point in time and geography and study

CM accordingly. However, I suppose that any study is but an entry point

into oneself and how to influence BMS through whatever media one selects.

Be that herbs, or gold non-inserted needles.

best wishes,

 

 

[zrosenbe]

Tuesday, 21 December 2004 6:41 AM

Chinese Medicine

Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

 

 

Sharon,

The material you describe as being limited may not be what you call

CM, but is actually TCM. Open points, time based treatment,

extraordinary vessel treatments are clearly described in the Chinese

classics such as the Nan Jing and Jia Yi Jing, and are clearly 'Chinese

medicine'. Some of the confusion about what is Chinese medicine comes

from the herbal bias of the modern CM education, which effects the

styles of acupuncture being taught . While those TCM styles are also

valid, the Japanese, in my opinion, as a whole have kept the broader

view in acupuncture education and treatment.

 

Modern application of herbal therapy is based on bian zheng lun

zhi/pattern differentiation, and much of TCM acupuncture is designed to

conform with zang-fu/viscera-bowel pattern differentiation. The more

channel-based approaches to acupuncture, however, also come from the

Chinese medical literature, but are not being taught as extensively. I

agree with you, it is very important to learn these styles if one wants

to be as effective as possible.

 

On Dec 20, 2004, at 12:26 PM, Sharon wrote:

 

>

> I have just finished 120 hr post graduate study in Manaka protocols

> which at

> last taught me of open point, time based treatment, sound therapy,

> colour

> therapy (these are simple applications of the 5 phase

> correspondences), the

> best extra vessel treatments, etc etc etc.

>

> I am saying as a graduate of a 4 yr standard TCM program I didn't

> have much

> comprehension of the the tree, its roots or that there were so many

> off

> shoots. CM doesn't have a monopoly on understanding and using

> meridians and

> acupoints. And those acupuncturist that think so, may find

> themselves left

> behind.

> Best wishes,

>

[Guest guest]

I agree with you. In fact, this is one of the main reasons why I have been

writing a text on the integration of biological principles as a support for

our theories of OM. I had contacted about this. I am back in school

working on a doctorate and will not have much time to finish. Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:29:50 -0800

>

>While some form of integration is 'a done deal', I think we need to

>think more carefully about how this is done, and have some say in that

>process. Otherwise we will disappear.

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:35 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> >

> > Zev,

> > I think you misunderstood me.  Integration is inevitable and is

> > already a

> > done deal in China.  You should know this from the issues over

> > classical

> > texts and the newer texts used in education.  Our English texts also

> > have

> > selected classical quotes of ideas taken out of context.  Arguing

> > over one

> > way or the other is not what I am proposing (not all or none).  I

> > propose a

> > third option and that is to change the way that education is taught

> > (little

> > critical thought development) so that our experience with education

> > can

> > provide knowledge in both.  I think that SIOM has broken with the

> > " norm " of

> > how our education is taught.  This would allow us to have good working

> > knowledge of both at the level that would make us better

> > practitioners. 

> > Later

> > Mike Bowser, L Ac

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Their loss. How about creating a distance learning course available online

(no Sabbath conflict) on the various classics? Which ones would you like to

see covered? Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:28:37 -0800

>

>I am not teaching in the DAOM program due to the difficulties I have

>teaching weekend courses (the Sabbath the main one). I think that the

>schools are improving as time goes on, but the real study, in my

>opinion, begins after graduation. We need post-graduate courses, and

>we need to encourage practitioners to study as much as possible.

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 11:07 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> > What, not immortal?  How about a little He Shou Wu?

> > On another note, your knowledge would provide for invaluable insight

> > into

> > much needed classical theories that need to be covered.  I think that

> > once

> > we are able to set up a norm then it would be really simple for

> > schools to

> > replicate this.  We could change our schools to a much higher level. 

> > Lastly, how do you feel about classical coverage in the DAOM program

> > there? 

> > Are you teaching in this program?  Later

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

So what about the increased dosages of these concentrates. They are much

larger in some cases than the source texts appear to be advising. Later

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:26:23 -0800

>

>I think you are missing the point, Mike. Chinese medical theory is

>very flexible. One doesn't use modern technology in this example to

>change the theory, just the application of the herbs. One doesn't

>design the formula on the basis of freeze-dried herb or liquid extract

>technology, one adapts the dosages of the ingredients.

>

>

>

>On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:54 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> > Does not a concentrated herb change you formula composition?  I

> > consider

> > this a change in actual theory as it applies directly to the

> > formula.  Later

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Okay so define Chinese medicine.

 

 

>>>>>>Good question Sharon\\

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Now the Chinese idea of auricular map could be questioned here as well and

what about herbal concentrates

>>>Or Z'ev likeness of tinctures since there is not historical bases at all