Antibiotics + TCM

[Guest guest]

Matt Bauer wrote:

 

<snip>

 

> We do not have a consensus on how to reach a consensus.

 

Hi Matt!

 

Excuse the blank reply, errant mouse click.

 

Yes, a consensus on what a consensus is, well put.

 

I have been working on a database as I previously posted. One of the

things it would do is gather clinical case studies including treatments

and outcomes, over time the file would get very large and would be

instantly searchable for statistics and the like. " Empirical research " .

 

The pills and laser acupuncture would make true double blind research

possible, " scientific research " , but the funding is most likely not

available.

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

wrote:

 

<snip>

 

> It is the nature of people who get involved with Chinese medicine to

> be largely staunch individualists. Let's

 

Hi Z'ev!

 

Who, me? :-)

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

Pete,

 

Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that NCCAOM is about

practitioner certification and not accredidation. Accredidation comes from

ACAOM, which is a separate entity.

 

My post was pointing out the need for quality in all areas and not a limited

focus. I think there is a lot that can be done to improve the quality of

the current education as well as being able to have grads that pass the

NCCAOM exam. In other words, turinging out quality graduates who are

prepared to run a practice.

 

What tends to come to mind is in the area of western sciences,

business/practice management, etc. For some programs the classical side of

things could be vastly improved as could student development such as

needling. Students should know the why and where an idea comes from as well

as its usage. Medical billing and report writing are usually lacking as

well. Anyway, I might have left something out or you might have another

opinion. Please share it.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

>Pete Theisen <petet

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Antibiotics + TCM

>Thu, 14 Apr 2005 03:06:29 -0400

>

>mike Bowser wrote:

> > Zev,

> >

> > Much agreed. You are preaching to the choir. How do we initiate

> " thought

> > classes " to get students to think straight about this as many are

>putting it

> > all into western ideas and terminology? This seems to be the most

> > important area for future investment in education. I still think we

>need to

> > consider creating a school that would have more to offer in this way.

>Your

> > thoughts?

>

>Hi Mike!

>

>It is a good idea in theory, but the 800 lb gorilla is the NCCAOM test

>which must be passed if the student's education is to be of any

>practical application. In my experience you have to teach to that test

>and it leaves little time, money or energy for anything else.

>

>It certainly could seem that they want the students to fail, obviously

>they get another fee on each retake. They will of course say the trick

>questions are to insure quality doctors, but it could well be all about

>money.

>

>They have the only game in town, spelled m-o-n-o-p-o-l-y. NCCAOM has the

>only accreditation there is.

>

>I have never seen anything NCCAOM was involved in that wasn't the best

>quality for their staff and executives. It certainly seems that they go

>in style on other people's money. Accreditation of a new school will

>most likely cost a million dollars before it is over, if you could even

>get it that cheap.

>

>Regards,

>

>Pete

[Guest guest]

mike Bowser wrote:

 

Hi Mike!

 

Inline:

 

> Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that NCCAOM is about

> practitioner certification and not accredidation. Accredidation comes from

> ACAOM, which is a separate entity.

 

You are probably right about the two names, it seemed to be the same

*sort* of people, though. I mean as in always wanting to get their hands

really, really deep into your pocket over and over again. Maybe even the

*same* people if you get high enough. Or maybe they just looked like the

same people, generic faces, it's been a while.

>

> My post was pointing out the need for quality in all areas and not a limited

> focus. I think there is a lot that can be done to improve the quality of

> the current education as well as being able to have grads that pass the

> NCCAOM exam. In other words, turinging out quality graduates who are

> prepared to run a practice.

>

> What tends to come to mind is in the area of western sciences,

> business/practice management, etc. For some programs the classical side of

> things could be vastly improved as could student development such as

> needling. Students should know the why and where an idea comes from as well

> as its usage. Medical billing and report writing are usually lacking as

> well. Anyway, I might have left something out or you might have another

> opinion. Please share it.

>

My point was that the students can't absorb all that in 3 or 4 years. It

would help if the teachers *really* spoke English or the students

*really* spoke Chinese, but that probably isn't going to happen.

 

It doesn't help that after *all*that* the student still has to wait 5 to

10 years for a payoff! If the medicare bill would just pass this might

change, but that, too, is a long shot. That statistic about 95% of

graduates not practicing is very disturbing.

 

TCM needs to hit a critical mass in political influence before it can

solve these problems.

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

Pete,

I got one for you. Since many states use the NCCAOM as a replacement for a

state written test, did you know that some mandate that you continue to be a

member as long as you are licensed? In other words, you pay state license

fee and you also pay NCCAOM membership fee. Does this sound like a mixing

of government and private sector that should not be? Membership beyond the

initial license should be optional and not mixed up with a government

license to practice. No other profession that I am aware of mandates such a

thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

I disagree with you about absorption of material. I am in a chiro program

and our sciences are medical school quality, they have to be for regional

accredidation. You would be amazed what students can do when they are

pushed to adapt. Our programs have had a tendency to pamper students too

much. I might catch a lot of crap for this statement but from my experience

it is true. My point in all of this was on quality of education and thought

process as Zev has mentioned many times here yet we continue to here posters

that want to argue in a medical way. If we really focused on creating

programs that stressed certain key points and encouraged creative thinking

for application the students would learn in no time.

 

The 5% was a statistic from down under, I believe, and not accurate for the

states. Keep up the faith and maybe we can brainstorm how a sample

curriculum might look and how to focus on the key principles.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

>Pete Theisen <petet

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Antibiotics + TCM

>Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:57:47 -0400

>

>mike Bowser wrote:

>

>Hi Mike!

>

>Inline:

>

> > Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that NCCAOM is about

> > practitioner certification and not accredidation. Accredidation comes

>from

> > ACAOM, which is a separate entity.

>

>You are probably right about the two names, it seemed to be the same

>*sort* of people, though. I mean as in always wanting to get their hands

>really, really deep into your pocket over and over again. Maybe even the

>*same* people if you get high enough. Or maybe they just looked like the

>same people, generic faces, it's been a while.

> >

> > My post was pointing out the need for quality in all areas and not a

>limited

> > focus. I think there is a lot that can be done to improve the quality

>of

> > the current education as well as being able to have grads that pass the

> > NCCAOM exam. In other words, turinging out quality graduates who are

> > prepared to run a practice.

> >

> > What tends to come to mind is in the area of western sciences,

> > business/practice management, etc. For some programs the classical side

>of

> > things could be vastly improved as could student development such as

> > needling. Students should know the why and where an idea comes from as

>well

> > as its usage. Medical billing and report writing are usually lacking as

> > well. Anyway, I might have left something out or you might have another

> > opinion. Please share it.

> >

>My point was that the students can't absorb all that in 3 or 4 years. It

>would help if the teachers *really* spoke English or the students

>*really* spoke Chinese, but that probably isn't going to happen.

>

>It doesn't help that after *all*that* the student still has to wait 5 to

>10 years for a payoff! If the medicare bill would just pass this might

>change, but that, too, is a long shot. That statistic about 95% of

>graduates not practicing is very disturbing.

>

>TCM needs to hit a critical mass in political influence before it can

>solve these problems.

>

>Regards,

>

>Pete

[Guest guest]

mike Bowser wrote:

> Pete, I got one for you. Since many states use the NCCAOM as a

> replacement for a state written test, did you know that some mandate

> that you continue to be a member as long as you are licensed? In

> other words, you pay state license fee and you also pay NCCAOM

> membership fee. Does this sound like a mixing of government and

> private sector that should not be? Membership beyond the initial

> license should be optional and not mixed up with a government license

> to practice. No other profession that I am aware of mandates such a

> thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

>

> I disagree with you about absorption of material. I am in a chiro

> program

 

Hi Mike!

 

Chiro instructors speak English, the books were originally written in

English, and chiro is part of Western culture, we aren't really talking

about the same thing.

 

Yeah, that stuff about NCCAOM is a travesty. I wonder how they managed

that, or rather I wonder who they " got to " . I think Michigan at one time

required MDs to be in the AMA, but maybe not. It isn't right if they do.

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

Clear confusion between government and private sector hard to argue for

governmental control are regulation.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

>Pete Theisen <petet

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Antibiotics + TCM

>Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:59:53 -0400

>

>mike Bowser wrote:

> > Pete, I got one for you. Since many states use the NCCAOM as a

> > replacement for a state written test, did you know that some mandate

> > that you continue to be a member as long as you are licensed? In

> > other words, you pay state license fee and you also pay NCCAOM

> > membership fee. Does this sound like a mixing of government and

> > private sector that should not be? Membership beyond the initial

> > license should be optional and not mixed up with a government license

> > to practice. No other profession that I am aware of mandates such a

> > thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

> >

> > I disagree with you about absorption of material. I am in a chiro

> > program

>

>Hi Mike!

>

>Chiro instructors speak English, the books were originally written in

>English, and chiro is part of Western culture, we aren't really talking

>about the same thing.

>

>Yeah, that stuff about NCCAOM is a travesty. I wonder how they managed

>that, or rather I wonder who they " got to " . I think Michigan at one time

>required MDs to be in the AMA, but maybe not. It isn't right if they do.

>

>Regards,

>

>Pete

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/16/2005 3:41:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

naturaldoc1 writes:

 

Actually and in many ways the government is more efficient at its

performance than the private sector. This does not boast well for letting

the markets remain in control.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

That's interesting. Got any examples of where the Gov. is more

efficient?

 

Chris

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

mike Bowser wrote:

> Clear confusion between government and private sector hard to argue for

> governmental control are regulation.

 

Hi Mike!

 

The government will always mess it up, what concerns me it the private

sector seems to be messing it up as well. All trying to line their own

pockets before the front line practitioners make the first penny.

 

Regards,

 

Pete

>

>

>

>>Pete Theisen <petet

>>Chinese Medicine

>>Chinese Medicine

>>Re: Antibiotics + TCM

>>Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:59:53 -0400

>>

>>mike Bowser wrote:

>>

>>>Pete, I got one for you. Since many states use the NCCAOM as a

>>>replacement for a state written test, did you know that some mandate

>>>that you continue to be a member as long as you are licensed? In

>>>other words, you pay state license fee and you also pay NCCAOM

>>>membership fee. Does this sound like a mixing of government and

>>>private sector that should not be? Membership beyond the initial

>>>license should be optional and not mixed up with a government license

>>>to practice. No other profession that I am aware of mandates such a

>>>thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

>>>

>>>I disagree with you about absorption of material. I am in a chiro

>>>program

>>

>>Hi Mike!

>>

>>Chiro instructors speak English, the books were originally written in

>>English, and chiro is part of Western culture, we aren't really talking

>>about the same thing.

>>

>>Yeah, that stuff about NCCAOM is a travesty. I wonder how they managed

>>that, or rather I wonder who they " got to " . I think Michigan at one time

>>required MDs to be in the AMA, but maybe not. It isn't right if they do.

>>

[Guest guest]

Actually and in many ways the government is more efficient at its

performance than the private sector. This does not boast well for letting

the markets remain in control.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

>Pete Theisen <petet

>Chinese Medicine

>Chinese Medicine

>Re: Antibiotics + TCM

>Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:12:49 -0400

>

>mike Bowser wrote:

> > Clear confusion between government and private sector hard to argue for

> > governmental control are regulation.

>

>Hi Mike!

>

>The government will always mess it up, what concerns me it the private

>sector seems to be messing it up as well. All trying to line their own

>pockets before the front line practitioners make the first penny.

>

>Regards,

>

>Pete

> >

> >

> >

> >>Pete Theisen <petet

> >>Chinese Medicine

> >>Chinese Medicine

> >>Re: Antibiotics + TCM

> >>Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:59:53 -0400

> >>

> >>mike Bowser wrote:

> >>

> >>>Pete, I got one for you. Since many states use the NCCAOM as a

> >>>replacement for a state written test, did you know that some mandate

> >>>that you continue to be a member as long as you are licensed? In

> >>>other words, you pay state license fee and you also pay NCCAOM

> >>>membership fee. Does this sound like a mixing of government and

> >>>private sector that should not be? Membership beyond the initial

> >>>license should be optional and not mixed up with a government license

> >>>to practice. No other profession that I am aware of mandates such a

> >>>thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

> >>>

> >>>I disagree with you about absorption of material. I am in a chiro

> >>>program

> >>

> >>Hi Mike!

> >>

> >>Chiro instructors speak English, the books were originally written in

> >>English, and chiro is part of Western culture, we aren't really talking

> >>about the same thing.

> >>

> >>Yeah, that stuff about NCCAOM is a travesty. I wonder how they managed

> >>that, or rather I wonder who they " got to " . I think Michigan at one time

> >>required MDs to be in the AMA, but maybe not. It isn't right if they do.

> >>

[Guest guest]

mike Bowser wrote:

> Actually and in many ways the government is more efficient at its

> performance than the private sector. This does not boast well for letting

> the markets remain in control.

 

Hi Mike!

 

Yes, I am trying to use supply and demand in my practice, isn't really

working.

 

Regards,

 

Pete

[Guest guest]

I agree whole heartedly. Why not open our discussion to other methods

that help the body heal.

 

Anne

 

Pete Theisen wrote:

 

> wrote:

> > What kind of response is this?

> >

> > If what are are discussing and practicing is Chinese medicine, let's

> > do that.

>

> Hi Z'ev!

>

> When I went to TCM medical school we learned both TCM and Western

> medicine, I thought everyone did. If there is something OTC that will

> help a patient, I think we should recommend it. If it is OTC, they

> should not have to go to a MD to get it, or hear about it. Usually I am

> criticized as being too TCM, so this is a departure in that sense.

>

> If you think that although time release vitamin c works for me in not

> having colds, it won't work for anyone else - then, for heaven's sake,

> don't recommend it. But this is a discussion list for patient's problems

> as well as a discussion list for pages and pages of theory about what

> the translations *really* mean etc., etc..

>

> When I offered my reply to the issue it was if the vitamin c (or drug)

> causes diarrhea, not if you use vitamin c at all. I think *time*release*

> vitamin c is preferable to the drug, preferable to staying sick and

> preferable to the diarrhea, even if it is not TCM.

>

> In my post I also mentioned it was not TCM. If you are determined to

> deprecate anything that is not TCM that is your privilege, but as far as

> I remember this is not one of the list rules that we deprecate (and

> never mention) everything not TCM, particularly if we have found

> something to work and work well. I think it is proper that we consider

> such things.

>

> Regards,

>

> Pete

>

>

>

> http://babel.altavista.com/

>

>

> and

> adjust accordingly.

>

> Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside the

> group requires prior permission from the author.

>

> If you are a TCM academic and wish to discuss TCM with other

> academics,

>

>

>

> ------

>