Severe shock and its effects help please

[Guest guest]

Read Kim Taylor's " Medicine of Revolution: in Early

Communist China " , it describes how certain texts such as the Nan Jing

were delegitimized in the 20th century. Also, acupuncture fell out of

favor gradually throughout the Qing dynasty, so certain texts did as

well. The Japanese, however, picked up on the Nan Jing and made it

their primary source for several approaches to acupuncture which

survive to the present era. Paul Unschuld considers the Nan Jing to be

the primary classic for establishing systematic correspondence (first

developed in the Nei Jing corpus) as the basis for the practice of

Chinese medicine.

 

 

On Dec 23, 2004, at 12:47 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

>

> So what is in your estimation?  I'ld love to hear about this.  Later

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>

> On 12/23/04 1:23 PM, " " <zrosenbe wrote:

>

> >

> > This is a long discussion, but Nan Jing is no longer mainstream

> > medicine in mainland China.

> >

> >

> > On Dec 22, 2004, at 12:23 PM, Sharon wrote:

> >

>

 

 

[Guest guest]

On Dec 23, 2004, at 6:09 PM, Sharon wrote:

 

>

> Well said,

> Then on what basis is TCM TCM?  Does the fact that similar subjects

> are

> studied in China's CM colleges make it TCM?

 

I think this would be correct.

>

> As I recall from my undergraduate TCM days, the course started in

> Chinese

> medical philosophy 1 = tao; 2=yin and yang etc all the way up to 12. 

> Then

> in 2nd year we did this thing were Zang Fu became the holy grail.

>

This is the correct approach for internal medicine.

 

> Then we did this thing about point function which contained a mish

> mash of

> old stuff, ie he sea pts, cleft pts and modern day indications for

> points to

> treat Zang Fu syndromes.  A few other theories were thrown in, SHL

> cold

> penetration, the warm disease theory etc.

 

Most schools just give a short introduction to SHL and Wen Bing theory,

when a comprehensive course is necessary. At PCOM, we will be

requiring a course on SHL/WB next year. I teach it now as an elective.

 

As far as acupuncture goes, there is confusion between more classical

approaches (channel theory, five phase) and zang-fu based acupuncture.

There are various systems, but zang-fu acupuncture can be traced

somewhat to approaches developed by Li Dong-yuan (founder of the

Spleen-Stomach school). So, it is important to teach this theory as

well.

>

>

>

> I finally went back to school and upgraded to a degree which included

> a

> subect on History of Ideas which gave me an historical perspective of

> where

> the theories came from in time and social/economic/disease

> perspective.

> This was probably the biggest connection that was made to CM.  To see

> the

> Warm disease school come out of the epidemics of the 1700's and 1800's

> (excuse my preciseness I am not historian), what 1500 to 1600 years

> after

> the theory of cold penetration of SHL, was to start to grasp this

> living

> thing called CM.  To see that there were advocates of the SP/ST

> school v's

> Yin or the Yang predominates schools, or time based acupuncture

> schools

> starts to give multiple dimensions to this thing called CM.  School

> meaning

> a style or philosophical approach to ill health.  There were many

> different

> schools within and over the centuries lasting perhaps only the life

> time of

> the founding practitioner.

 

I think this was a good choice, and opened new options and horizons to

you.

>

> Since 2001, I have completed 120 hrs on Manaka and approximately 120

> hrs

> training on Toyohari styles.  Both of which give the sources to their

> work

> back to the classics and in the case of Manaka also to more modern

> texts and

> schools ie wrist ankle acup, CM point formula, Korean hand AP, Ear AP

> (Chinese, French and Olsen).

>

Also a great choice. I had the honor to study with Manaka while he was

still alive.

 

> So in another 5 years will the TCM undergraduate curriculum still be

> the

> same as today?  I think two things need to happen:

> 1.  Practitioners need to know where their style is coming from

> 2.  The principles of many styles.

>

 

This is a very important question. Where do we go with CM education?

On one hand, it is better to concentrate on a basic approach to gain

proficiency in one's tools, but without exposure to different

approaches, one will be limited in scope. Stay tuned.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

So why is this text not throughly studied in school?

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " " <zrosenbe

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:36:19 -0800

>

>Read Kim Taylor's " Medicine of Revolution: in Early

>Communist China " , it describes how certain texts such as the Nan Jing

>were delegitimized in the 20th century. Also, acupuncture fell out of

>favor gradually throughout the Qing dynasty, so certain texts did as

>well. The Japanese, however, picked up on the Nan Jing and made it

>their primary source for several approaches to acupuncture which

>survive to the present era. Paul Unschuld considers the Nan Jing to be

>the primary classic for establishing systematic correspondence (first

>developed in the Nei Jing corpus) as the basis for the practice of

>Chinese medicine.

>

>

>On Dec 23, 2004, at 12:47 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> >

> > So what is in your estimation?  I'ld love to hear about this.  Later

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

> >

> > On 12/23/04 1:23 PM, " " <zrosenbe wrote:

> >

> > >

> > > This is a long discussion, but Nan Jing is no longer mainstream

> > > medicine in mainland China.

> > >

> > >

> > > On Dec 22, 2004, at 12:23 PM, Sharon wrote:

> > >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

zev, <Micheal also practices very eclectic medicine using as much

western approches as CM

alon

 

Chinese Medicine ,

wrote:

> How does Nan Jing medicine qualify as being eclectic?

>

> Makes me wonder what they are teaching then.

> Best wishes,

>

>

>

>

> [zrosenbe@s...]

> Thursday, 23 December 2004 2:08 AM

> Chinese Medicine

> Re: Severe shock and its effects help please

>

>

> I personally think we should be teaching all of these branches of

> Chinese medicine in our schools, if only an introduction, and

> continuing into post-graduate or doctorate courses. I've fought

to

> have Jin-Yuan and Nan Jing medicine taught at PCOM, and met quite

a bit

> of resistance from both Chinese and Western faculty.

>

> One of my main teachers, Michael Broffman of Marin County, Ca.,

teaches

> what he calls 'eclectic Chinese medicine', largely based on the

Nan

> Jing, but also including Jin-Yuan medicine (Li Dongyuan, Zhu

Danxi) as

> well). He feels we need the flexibility of different approaches

to

> deal with the complexity of illnesses in the modern era.

>

>

> On Dec 22, 2004, at 12:57 AM, wrote:

>

> >

> > One could add to your list of exceptions the practitioners (I

would

> > estimate some 50 to 100 or more) who have studied extensively

in the

> > classics with Jeffery Yuen (at the Swedish Institute in NY and

AUCM

> > in LA).

> > This study includes serious clinical application of the various

> > treatment

> > styles. Examples I'm aware of include " su wen " medicine, " nan

jing "

> > medicine, sinew channel medicine (I'm not sure of the exact

sources

> > here),

> > and the " 4 masters " of the Song-Jin-Yuan era.

> >

> >

>

> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> San Diego, Ca. 92122

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

It is just being released in January, I think. I got a pre-publication

copy, on the recommendation of Paul Unschuld.

 

 

On Dec 24, 2004, at 8:02 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> So why is this text not throughly studied in school?

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

[Guest guest]

Michael is, quite clearly, a genius. His use of western medicines,

both naturopathic and allopathic, however, is based on a theoretical

foundation of Chinese medicine, specifically Nan Jing. He gets as

complete a picture of the patient as possible using Chinese diagnostic

methods, and then designs a program for the patient using both Chinese

and " Western' approaches. If one has the deep knowledge Michael has

of Chinese medicine, you can do integrative medicine without much

difficulty. Also, his specialty is cancer, so he needs to have a

comprehensive knowledge of WM on cancer as well.

 

 

On Dec 25, 2004, at 12:37 PM, alonmarcus2003 wrote:

 

>

> zev, <Micheal also practices very eclectic medicine using as much

> western approches as CM

> alon

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Zev,

 

> in 2nd year we did this thing were Zang Fu became the holy grail.

>

This is the correct approach for internal medicine.

 

By this do you mean the only / the best to treat internal problems is with

Zang Fu theory?

 

>

Also a great choice. I had the honor to study with Manaka while he was

still alive.

 

Lucky you!

Best wishes

Sharon

 

> So in another 5 years will the TCM undergraduate curriculum still be

> the

> same as today? I think two things need to happen:

> 1. Practitioners need to know where their style is coming from

> 2. The principles of many styles.

>

 

This is a very important question. Where do we go with CM education?

On one hand, it is better to concentrate on a basic approach to gain

proficiency in one's tools, but without exposure to different

approaches, one will be limited in scope. Stay tuned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.822 / Virus Database: 560 - Release 22/12/2004

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

At 06:10 PM 12/25/04 -0800, you wrote:

>

>It is just being released in January, I think. I got a pre-publication

>copy, on the recommendation of Paul Unschuld.

>

>

>On Dec 24, 2004, at 8:02 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

>> So why is this text not throughly studied in school?

>> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

And it has been available for some time as a photocopy of the doctoral

dissertation, through the Needham Research Institute, where Dr. Taylor works.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zang-fu pattern differentiation is perhaps the basis for internal (i.e.

herbal) medicine treatment, but one could also use yin fire theory,

latent qi warm disease theory, and many other approaches as well.

 

 

On Dec 26, 2004, at 1:19 PM, Sharon wrote:

 

> >

> This is the correct approach for internal medicine.

>

> By this do you mean the only / the best to treat internal problems is

> with

> Zang Fu theory?

>

>