Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 What kind of response is this? If what are are discussing and practicing is Chinese medicine, let's do that. Chinese medicine is a way of thinking, a set of principles, and if you ignore those in treating your patients, it is no longer Chinese medicine. On Apr 11, 2005, at 12:58 AM, Pete Theisen wrote: > > wrote: >> I don't know about you, but I don't feel comfortable giving cold, >> moist >> substances to patients with wind/cold attacks, or with spleen qi or >> yang vacuity with damp or cold. It goes against the principles of > > Hi Z'ev! > > I have been using this myself for twenty plus years. TCM has no > monopoly > on truth, we can learn from the likes of Linus Pauling. > > Regards, > > Pete > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Matt, This is been my observation, yes. Also Dan Bensky has spoken about this in his Shang Han Lun lectures, and I believe Bob Flaws has come to similar conclusions in his writings, if my memory serves me well (sometimes it doesn't). Clearly there are many variables (source material, preparation, dosage), but seems to be primarily sour and secondarily sweet. Sour substances moisten, such as bai shao/white peony or wu mei/fr. mume. My experience is that Vit. C clears heat. I am not stating this as a definitive addition to the materia medica, but as an experimental observation. However, if we are practicing Chinese medicine, we do need to come to some consensus on new medicinal substances through observation, so that we could then use them alongside the other medicinals we use. This is my main point in this discussion. This isn't saying Vitamin C is BAD. I am just pointing out it is not good for everybody, for every cold or flu, or all the time. Let's just be careful in blanket recommendations. There are no medical panaceas, including vitamin C. What is good for one patient, in one clinical situation, is not necessarily good for everyone. Nor is it good for the same patient all the time. My understanding of one of Dan Bensky's lectures on the Shang Han Lun was that taking too much vitamin C can lead to driving the external pattern into the interior, producing a tai yin/spleen qi vacuity pattern, one symptom of which is diarrhea. On Apr 10, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Matt Bauer wrote: > So, are you saying Z'ev, that vitamin C is a cold, moist substance? If > so, who was it that determined this and how was this determined? It > cannot be from any CM classic text. Matt Bauer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 wrote: > Matt, > This is been my observation, yes. Also Dan Bensky has spoken about > this in his Shang Han Lun lectures, and I believe Bob Flaws has come to > similar conclusions in his writings, if my memory serves me well > (sometimes it doesn't). Clearly there are many variables (source > material, preparation, dosage), but seems to be primarily sour and > secondarily sweet. Sour substances moisten, such as bai shao/white > peony or wu mei/fr. mume. My experience is that Vit. C clears heat. I > am not stating this as a definitive addition to the materia medica, but > as an experimental observation. However, if we are practicing Chinese > medicine, we do need to come to some consensus on new medicinal > substances through observation, so that we could then use them > alongside the other medicinals we use. This is my main point in this > discussion. > > This isn't saying Vitamin C is BAD. I am just pointing out it is > not good for everybody, for every cold or flu, or all the time. Let's > just be careful in blanket recommendations. > > There are no medical panaceas, including vitamin C. What is good > for one patient, in one clinical situation, is not necessarily good for > everyone. Nor is it good for the same patient all the time. My > understanding of one of Dan Bensky's lectures on the Shang Han Lun was > that taking too much vitamin C can lead to driving the external > pattern into the interior, producing a tai yin/spleen qi vacuity > pattern, one symptom of which is diarrhea. Hi Z'ev! But Vitamin C clears the body very quickly, this is the whole point of using time-release, to maintain a consistent presence in the body without too much presence at any one time. You and Bensky are correct about too much, the time-release *prevents* huge doses from being " too much " . People will be sick forever unless they get Vitamin C because the body's natural defense system, defensive qi if you prefer, uses it. Nearly all animals make their own Vitamin C, man for some reason has to get it from dietary sources. When the body is under attack by a living pathogen more Vitamin C is needed, hence the higher dose which could never be tolerated unless it were in the form of time-release. Regards, Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Ahhh, yes the age old question, do we limit our knowledge to ancient ideas or include new knowledge much like the ancients did? Vit C is a necessary biological compound found within the human body and is a cofactor for various reactions as well as collagen synthesis. What does this have to do with immune system you ask? Well, if we take a look at some of Kiiko's work (Reflections on the Sea), she does make an argument for a connection between immunity and connective tissue. The shao yang is neither inside nor outside. This makes sense to me and I hope others as well. It is how you frame something that seems to matter most. We cannot become an island unto ourselves or we perish. Learn from both ancient and modern, then apply what works. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac >Pete Theisen <petet >Chinese Medicine >Chinese Medicine >Re: Antibiotics + TCM >Tue, 12 Apr 2005 23:03:13 -0400 > > 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Zev, I agree with the mindset and have found that this important concept is missing in many of today's graduates/students/practitioners. Even those coming over from mainland China tend to have a bias toward a western medical thinking. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > " " <zrosenbe >Chinese Medicine >Chinese Medicine >Re: Antibiotics + TCM >Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:40:45 -0700 > >What kind of response is this? > >If what are are discussing and practicing is Chinese medicine, let's do >that. Chinese medicine is a way of thinking, a set of principles, and >if you ignore those in treating your patients, it is no longer Chinese >medicine. > > >On Apr 11, 2005, at 12:58 AM, Pete Theisen wrote: > > > > > wrote: > >> I don't know about you, but I don't feel comfortable giving cold, > >> moist > >> substances to patients with wind/cold attacks, or with spleen qi or > >> yang vacuity with damp or cold. It goes against the principles of > > > > Hi Z'ev! > > > > I have been using this myself for twenty plus years. TCM has no > > monopoly > > on truth, we can learn from the likes of Linus Pauling. > > > > Regards, > > > > Pete > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Mike, No one is suggesting that we 'limit our knowledge'. However, if you want to use Vitamin C as a practitioner of Chinese medicine, the burden is on you (and me) to find out how it works in terms of Chinese materia medica. As the Chinese have done for millenia, when new substances have been discovered and adapted, they have been described according to qi, flavor, channel entry, actions and combinations with other medicinal substances. Their toxicity and contraindications have always been described as well. Then you need to get consensus over time as other practitioners share their experiences. There is plenty of room for creativity in Chinese medicine, if we know clearly how to use the tools of Chinese medicine. On Apr 13, 2005, at 6:58 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > Ahhh, yes the age old question, do we limit our knowledge to ancient > ideas > or include new knowledge much like the ancients did? Vit C is a > necessary > biological compound found within the human body and is a cofactor for > various reactions as well as collagen synthesis. > > What does this have to do with immune system you ask? Well, if we > take a > look at some of Kiiko's work (Reflections on the Sea), she does make an > argument for a connection between immunity and connective tissue. The > shao > yang is neither inside nor outside. This makes sense to me and I hope > others as well. It is how you frame something that seems to matter > most. > We cannot become an island unto ourselves or we perish. Learn from > both > ancient and modern, then apply what works. > > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 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? Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > " " <zrosenbe >Chinese Medicine >Chinese Medicine >Re: Antibiotics + TCM >Wed, 13 Apr 2005 07:58:11 -0700 > >Mike, > No one is suggesting that we 'limit our knowledge'. However, if you >want to use Vitamin C as a practitioner of Chinese medicine, the burden >is on you (and me) to find out how it works in terms of Chinese >materia medica. As the Chinese have done for millenia, when new >substances have been discovered and adapted, they have been described >according to qi, flavor, channel entry, actions and combinations with >other medicinal substances. Their toxicity and contraindications have >always been described as well. Then you need to get consensus over >time as other practitioners share their experiences. There is plenty of >room for creativity in Chinese medicine, if we know clearly how to use >the tools of Chinese medicine. > > >On Apr 13, 2005, at 6:58 AM, mike Bowser wrote: > > > > > Ahhh, yes the age old question, do we limit our knowledge to ancient > > ideas > > or include new knowledge much like the ancients did? Vit C is a > > necessary > > biological compound found within the human body and is a cofactor for > > various reactions as well as collagen synthesis. > > > > What does this have to do with immune system you ask? Well, if we > > take a > > look at some of Kiiko's work (Reflections on the Sea), she does make an > > argument for a connection between immunity and connective tissue. The > > shao > > yang is neither inside nor outside. This makes sense to me and I hope > > others as well. It is how you frame something that seems to matter > > most. > > We cannot become an island unto ourselves or we perish. Learn from > > both > > ancient and modern, then apply what works. > > > > > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Hi Z'ev - you wrote: " if we are practicing Chinese medicine, we do need to come to some consensus on new medicinal substances through observation, so that we could then use them alongside the other medicinals we use. This is my main point in this discussion. " Consensus building is a very useful thing but I would argue a body must first reach a consensus on how to go about reaching a consensus. At issue in this thread is Vit. C, and more specifically - time released Vit. C. Pete insists that his clinical observation leads to one conclusion, while you quote some respected authorities citing another. Pete points out that he is only referring to a different variation - time released - that he claims alters vit.C's impact on the body. So how do we consider such an issue? We do not have a consensus on how to reach a consensus. One might wonder how such issues were dealt with over the long history of CM. I certainly wonder this. Unschuld states that different authorities disagreed over such seemingly straight-forward issues as the taste of medicinals, let alone questions regarding what channels their essences entered. And what about all the complex details of the jing-luo system expounded upon in the classics? How did they figure this out? The popularly accepted implication many of us seem to gloss over, is the idea that the essential knowledge of CM was discovered by ancient Sages of extra-ordinary sensory perception. Those herb-tasters and meridian sensors who could intuit things you or I today cannot so we must defer to the Classics. This is what I was alluding to in a posting some months ago when I asked if people believe in the Yellow Emperor? Now, granted, in the case of medicinals, we have at least a spotty paper trail we can trace to attempt to learn of the evolution of theories, but these contain little if any information I am aware of regarding how proponents of this school of thought or that reached their conclusions. Was it systematic clinical observation? If so where is the data? Was it intuition by extra-ordinary sensitive Sages? If so how do we separate the true Sage from the false? Is successful clinical outcomes following a particular school of thought the ultimate arbiter of such debate? I certainly favor the bottom-line of clinical outcomes, but in this instance Pete is telling us his protocol has achieved better than average clinical outcomes. My issue here is clarity regarding consensus building and why I believe we need to look seriously at what we know and don't know about how the information in the Classics themselves was reached. I believe as CM grows in modern time, we will need to better define what we believe about the roots of this medical system and what this tells us about how we can reach consensus on such emerging issues as how to classify new medicinal substances as vit. C. Perhaps more importantly, the greater acceptance of CM techniques in general will see a rise of differing ideas over how it should be applied such as " medical acupuncture " that will question traditional concepts. The more clear we are amongst ourselves regarding CM's roots, the better we will be able to protect its future. - Matthew Bauer - Chinese Medicine Tuesday, April 12, 2005 9:51 PM Re: Antibiotics + TCM Matt, This is been my observation, yes. Also Dan Bensky has spoken about this in his Shang Han Lun lectures, and I believe Bob Flaws has come to similar conclusions in his writings, if my memory serves me well (sometimes it doesn't). Clearly there are many variables (source material, preparation, dosage), but seems to be primarily sour and secondarily sweet. Sour substances moisten, such as bai shao/white peony or wu mei/fr. mume. My experience is that Vit. C clears heat. I am not stating this as a definitive addition to the materia medica, but as an experimental observation. However, if we are practicing Chinese medicine, we do need to come to some consensus on new medicinal substances through observation, so that we could then use them alongside the other medicinals we use. This is my main point in this discussion. This isn't saying Vitamin C is BAD. I am just pointing out it is not good for everybody, for every cold or flu, or all the time. Let's just be careful in blanket recommendations. There are no medical panaceas, including vitamin C. What is good for one patient, in one clinical situation, is not necessarily good for everyone. Nor is it good for the same patient all the time. My understanding of one of Dan Bensky's lectures on the Shang Han Lun was that taking too much vitamin C can lead to driving the external pattern into the interior, producing a tai yin/spleen qi vacuity pattern, one symptom of which is diarrhea. On Apr 10, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Matt Bauer wrote: > So, are you saying Z'ev, that vitamin C is a cold, moist substance? If > so, who was it that determined this and how was this determined? It > cannot be from any CM classic text. Matt Bauer http://babel.altavista.com/ and adjust accordingly. If you are a TCM academic and wish to discuss TCM with other academics, click on this link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 If Mike would allow an abridgment: Learn from both ancient and modern, and of one's own self, then apply what works. mike Bowser wrote: > Ahhh, yes the age old question, do we limit our knowledge to ancient > ideas > or include new knowledge much like the ancients did? Vit C is a > necessary > biological compound found within the human body and is a cofactor for > various reactions as well as collagen synthesis. > > What does this have to do with immune system you ask? Well, if we take a > look at some of Kiiko's work (Reflections on the Sea), she does make an > argument for a connection between immunity and connective tissue. The > shao > yang is neither inside nor outside. This makes sense to me and I hope > others as well. It is how you frame something that seems to matter > most. > We cannot become an island unto ourselves or we perish. Learn from both > ancient and modern, then apply what works. > > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser " <naturaldoc1@h...> wrote: > I still think we need to > consider creating a school that would have more to offer in this way. Your > thoughts? > i'm curious to know if anyone has any idea as to how many new OM schools have been created in the last ten years (not just a name change, or ACAOM candidacy or accreditation, but a completely new school not founded or capitalized on any previous institution), versus how many schools have closed their doors... i'm talking USA here, the situation is probably much different in the UK or Oz. seems to me that opening an OM school that has any chance of survival these days would require a significant amount of human and investment capital. a lot more hoops exist today than in the 80's. i'm involved with a shiatsu school now and just getting the 600ish hour program up to AOBTA standards is a lot of work. IMHO it might be more productive to consider some kind of post-grad CE certification program. if we could somehow pass the peace pipe between the integrationists and the linguist-classicists we might actually be able to make some headway... rh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 kampo36: " if we could somehow pass the peace pipe between the integrationists and the linguist-classicists we might actually be able to make some headway... " > > Peace pipes won't work because the motive behind the smokers will at one time or another resurruct. The peace pipe yltimately will turn out to be of the variety of the one offered Chief Geronimo. What truly matters here is kampo36, his integrity and inherent wisdom. That is what students will buy, and belive me, they will side step any hurdle the system may throw. Holmes 1.888.TCM.CEUS kampo36 wrote: > > Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser " > <naturaldoc1@h...> wrote: > > I still think we need to > > consider creating a school that would have more to offer in this > way. Your > > thoughts? > > > > i'm curious to know if anyone has any idea as to how many new OM > schools have been > created in the last ten years (not just a name change, or ACAOM > candidacy or > accreditation, but a completely new school not founded or capitalized > on any previous > institution), versus how many schools have closed their doors... i'm > talking USA here, the > situation is probably much different in the UK or Oz. > > seems to me that opening an OM school that has any chance of survival > these days would > require a significant amount of human and investment capital. a lot > more hoops exist > today than in the 80's. i'm involved with a shiatsu school now and > just getting the 600ish > hour program up to AOBTA standards is a lot of work. > > IMHO it might be more productive to consider some kind of post-grad CE > certification > program. if we could somehow pass the peace pipe between the > integrationists and the > linguist-classicists we might actually be able to make some headway... > > rh > > > > > > > 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, > > > > ------ > * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 I thought Michael Tierra had provisional classification of vitamins (along with western herbs) according to channels and properties. I don't remember for sure; I'm on the left coast and my books are on the right. You could check his site: planetherbs.com Another awesome site for traditional medicine is Dharmananda's: itmonline.org Joe Reid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Chinese Medicine , dkakobad <dkaikobad@c...> wrote: > What truly matters here is kampo36, his integrity and inherent wisdom. > integrity maybe, but inherent wisdom.... oh boy are we in trouble LOL....... rh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 I agree, Robert, that to start a new school now would be like trying to start a new coffee shop chain to compete with Starbucks. Not too easy, and heavy on the capitalization, please. CEU's are the way to go. I don't really feel a battle line has been set between traditionalists and integrationists, I don't think there are enough informed 'traditionalists' for one thing, and all of us are integrationists to one degree or another in this modern world. I see the CM world as divided among very small groups of people who have a hard time working together on large goals. It is the nature of people who get involved with Chinese medicine to be largely staunch individualists. Let's party on. On Apr 13, 2005, at 9:32 AM, kampo36 wrote: > > > Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser " > <naturaldoc1@h...> wrote: >> I still think we need to >> consider creating a school that would have more to offer in this way. >> Your >> thoughts? >> > > i'm curious to know if anyone has any idea as to how many new OM > schools have been > created in the last ten years (not just a name change, or ACAOM > candidacy or > accreditation, but a completely new school not founded or capitalized > on any previous > institution), versus how many schools have closed their doors... i'm > talking USA here, the > situation is probably much different in the UK or Oz. > > seems to me that opening an OM school that has any chance of survival > these days would > require a significant amount of human and investment capital. a lot > more hoops exist > today than in the 80's. i'm involved with a shiatsu school now and > just getting the 600ish > hour program up to AOBTA standards is a lot of work. > > IMHO it might be more productive to consider some kind of post-grad CE > certification > program. if we could somehow pass the peace pipe between the > integrationists and the > linguist-classicists we might actually be able to make some headway... > > rh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Robert, There have been more than a couple. I can name at least two and think there may be more. Now the programs that have closed may be reflective of the size of school as well. Some of these were small mom and pop programs. There have been a couple of bigger surprises though in closing of two large schools (mismanagement of funds). The central issue, for me, is not the regs but to deliver a quality program in all of its areas of education. This would be ideal. As was mentioned on another post here the idea of ceu is a viable option. Party on. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > " kampo36 " <kampo36 >Chinese Medicine >Chinese Medicine >Re: Antibiotics + TCM >Wed, 13 Apr 2005 16:32:07 -0000 > > >Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser " ><naturaldoc1@h...> wrote: > > I still think we need to > > consider creating a school that would have more to offer in this way. >Your > > thoughts? > > > >i'm curious to know if anyone has any idea as to how many new OM schools >have been >created in the last ten years (not just a name change, or ACAOM candidacy >or >accreditation, but a completely new school not founded or capitalized on >any previous >institution), versus how many schools have closed their doors... i'm >talking USA here, the >situation is probably much different in the UK or Oz. > >seems to me that opening an OM school that has any chance of survival these >days would >require a significant amount of human and investment capital. a lot more >hoops exist >today than in the 80's. i'm involved with a shiatsu school now and just >getting the 600ish >hour program up to AOBTA standards is a lot of work. > >IMHO it might be more productive to consider some kind of post-grad CE >certification >program. if we could somehow pass the peace pipe between the >integrationists and the >linguist-classicists we might actually be able to make some headway... > >rh > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 I think you are wise to an incredible degree and a rare healer. And I have sat, over decades, in close quarters, with stellar teachers of a Sufi spiritual sort with pedigrees reaching over hundreds of years, and have found them wanting. As they say, you are what you have found yourself to be, and how will you gainsay that. Arya Holmes kampo36 wrote: > > Chinese Medicine , dkakobad > <dkaikobad@c...> > wrote: > > > What truly matters here is kampo36, his integrity and inherent wisdom. > > > > integrity maybe, but inherent wisdom.... oh boy are we in trouble > LOL....... > > rh > > > > > > > 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, > > > > ------ > * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 This is a very good point. I will think about this and get back to you. I don't see doing it through starting another school (the major headaches of which tend to get in the way of such projects). I like to do things lean and mean, in a modular fashion. Revolutions tend to happen in small ways, not large. On Apr 13, 2005, at 8:14 AM, 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? > > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Am a Lone Walker and not much of a networked to know where the wind blows in terms of the professional weather wane. And therefore did not know that people diagnosed when they knew little about 5 E methodology. To each his hemlock, but it makes me uncomfortable that so many healers supposedly know so little about that exquisitely colorful beast Five Elementosaurus. And that recently saw in a candid post from Australia where they have still not learned sophisticated double talk, that acu schools spawned graduates who called it a day after 2 years in the harness. How does USA and Canada compare? And Euro country? Are we in consort with a monolith which is falling apart as we speak? What in the heck is going to step into the void? Holmes 1.888.TCM.CEUS mike Bowser wrote: > Robert, > There have been more than a couple. I can name at least two and think > there > may be more. Now the programs that have closed may be reflective of the > size of school as well. Some of these were small mom and pop programs. > There have been a couple of bigger surprises though in closing of two > large > schools (mismanagement of funds). The central issue, for me, is not the > regs but to deliver a quality program in all of its areas of education. > This would be ideal. > > As was mentioned on another post here the idea of ceu is a viable option. > Party on. > > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > > > > > " kampo36 " <kampo36 > >Chinese Medicine > >Chinese Medicine > >Re: Antibiotics + TCM > >Wed, 13 Apr 2005 16:32:07 -0000 > > > > > >Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser " > ><naturaldoc1@h...> wrote: > > > I still think we need to > > > consider creating a school that would have more to offer in this way. > >Your > > > thoughts? > > > > > > >i'm curious to know if anyone has any idea as to how many new OM schools > >have been > >created in the last ten years (not just a name change, or ACAOM > candidacy > >or > >accreditation, but a completely new school not founded or capitalized on > >any previous > >institution), versus how many schools have closed their doors... i'm > >talking USA here, the > >situation is probably much different in the UK or Oz. > > > >seems to me that opening an OM school that has any chance of survival > these > >days would > >require a significant amount of human and investment capital. a lot more > >hoops exist > >today than in the 80's. i'm involved with a shiatsu school now and just > >getting the 600ish > >hour program up to AOBTA standards is a lot of work. > > > >IMHO it might be more productive to consider some kind of post-grad CE > >certification > >program. if we could somehow pass the peace pipe between the > >integrationists and the > >linguist-classicists we might actually be able to make some headway... > > > >rh > > > > > > > > > > > > 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, > > > > ------ > * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2005 Report Share Posted April 13, 2005 Pete, You make a good point here. For me, the issue is not vitamin C itself, but how it is used. The same with any medicine, natural or pharmaceutical, it is the intelligence with which it is applied. This is what is important about Chinese medicine, in my opinion. The philosophy of analyzing nature and phenomena, and applying this philosophy to life, health and disease. We seem to forget this all too often, and have to remind ourselves about yin and yang again and again. On Apr 13, 2005, at 1:50 AM, Pete Theisen wrote: > Hi Z'ev! > > But Vitamin C clears the body very quickly, this is the whole point of > using time-release, to maintain a consistent presence in the body > without too much presence at any one time. You and Bensky are correct > about too much, the time-release *prevents* huge doses from being " too > much " . > > People will be sick forever unless they get Vitamin C because the > body's > natural defense system, defensive qi if you prefer, uses it. Nearly all > animals make their own Vitamin C, man for some reason has to get it > from > dietary sources. > > When the body is under attack by a living pathogen more Vitamin C is > needed, hence the higher dose which could never be tolerated unless it > were in the form of time-release. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2005 Report Share Posted April 14, 2005 wrote: <snip> > We seem to forget this all too Hi Z'ev! Forget! We had a cabin-party joke in boy scouts about why does everyone forget, but I *forgot* the punch line. <g> If anyone is interested email me off list and I might remember. Forgetting is a very serious problem, especially for doctors. I have been working ten years now on a clinic database project that will serve as a TCM doctor's memory jogger and also keep online medical records which will automatically convert to case studies for empirical research. We only think we remember when we try to rely on the unassisted brain, especially as we get as far up in years as I am. I look *everything* up, to prevent mistakes. I have about worn out the books, but I can buy new books meanwhile, and some day the clinic database will be working. Should be done with the clinic database in another ten years, I will let you all know. If anyone wants to test the beta, that should be ready in five years. <g,d & r> Regards, Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2005 Report Share Posted April 14, 2005 mike Bowser wrote: > Ahhh, yes the age old question, do we limit our knowledge to ancient ideas > or include new knowledge much like the ancients did? Vit C is a necessary > biological compound found within the human body and is a cofactor for > various reactions as well as collagen synthesis. > > What does this have to do with immune system you ask? Well, if we take a > look at some of Kiiko's work (Reflections on the Sea), she does make an > argument for a connection between immunity and connective tissue. The shao > yang is neither inside nor outside. This makes sense to me and I hope > others as well. It is how you frame something that seems to matter most. > We cannot become an island unto ourselves or we perish. Learn from both > ancient and modern, then apply what works. Hi Mike! I am guessing, but my guess is that rather soon modern science will be discovering that some of the molecules found in TCM tonic herbs are essential nutrients. It will be years before they go so far as establishing a MDR, of course. Regards, Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2005 Report Share Posted April 14, 2005 mike Bowser wrote: > Zev, > > I agree with the mindset and have found that this important concept is > missing in many of today's graduates/students/practitioners. Even those > coming over from mainland China tend to have a bias toward a western medical > thinking. Hi Mike! Quite right, and I didn't mean to go in that " bias toward a western medical " direction although it could have been taken that way. Regards, Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2005 Report Share Posted April 14, 2005 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2005 Report Share Posted April 14, 2005 Matt Bauer wrote: > Hi Z'ev - you wrote: " if we are practicing Chinese > medicine, we do need to come to some consensus on new medicinal > substances through observation, so that we could then use them > alongside the other medicinals we use. This is my main point in this > discussion. " > > Consensus building is a very useful thing but I would argue a body must first reach a consensus on how to go about reaching a consensus. At issue in this thread is Vit. C, and more specifically - time released Vit. C. Pete insists that his clinical observation leads to one conclusion, while you quote some respected authorities citing another. Pete points out that he is only referring to a different variation - time released - that he claims alters vit.C's impact on the body. So how do we consider such an issue? We do not have a consensus on how to reach a consensus. > > One might wonder how such issues were dealt with over the long history of CM. I certainly wonder this. Unschuld states that different authorities disagreed over such seemingly straight-forward issues as the taste of medicinals, let alone questions regarding what channels their essences entered. And what about all the complex details of the jing-luo system expounded upon in the classics? How did they figure this out? The popularly accepted implication many of us seem to gloss over, is the idea that the essential knowledge of CM was discovered by ancient Sages of extra-ordinary sensory perception. Those herb-tasters and meridian sensors who could intuit things you or I today cannot so we must defer to the Classics. This is what I was alluding to in a posting some months ago when I asked if people believe in the Yellow Emperor? > > Now, granted, in the case of medicinals, we have at least a spotty paper trail we can trace to attempt to learn of the evolution of theories, but these contain little if any information I am aware of regarding how proponents of this school of thought or that reached their conclusions. Was it systematic clinical observation? If so where is the data? Was it intuition by extra-ordinary sensitive Sages? If so how do we separate the true Sage from the false? Is successful clinical outcomes following a particular school of thought the ultimate arbiter of such debate? I certainly favor the bottom-line of clinical outcomes, but in this instance Pete is telling us his protocol has achieved better than average clinical outcomes. > > My issue here is clarity regarding consensus building and why I believe we need to look seriously at what we know and don't know about how the information in the Classics themselves was reached. I believe as CM grows in modern time, we will need to better define what we believe about the roots of this medical system and what this tells us about how we can reach consensus on such emerging issues as how to classify new medicinal substances as vit. C. Perhaps more importantly, the greater acceptance of CM techniques in general will see a rise of differing ideas over how it should be applied such as " medical acupuncture " that will question traditional concepts. The more clear we are amongst ourselves regarding CM's roots, the better we will be able to protect its future. - Matthew Bauer - > > Chinese Medicine > Tuesday, April 12, 2005 9:51 PM > Re: Antibiotics + TCM > > > Matt, > This is been my observation, yes. Also Dan Bensky has spoken about > this in his Shang Han Lun lectures, and I believe Bob Flaws has come to > similar conclusions in his writings, if my memory serves me well > (sometimes it doesn't). Clearly there are many variables (source > material, preparation, dosage), but seems to be primarily sour and > secondarily sweet. Sour substances moisten, such as bai shao/white > peony or wu mei/fr. mume. My experience is that Vit. C clears heat. I > am not stating this as a definitive addition to the materia medica, but > as an experimental observation. However, if we are practicing Chinese > medicine, we do need to come to some consensus on new medicinal > substances through observation, so that we could then use them > alongside the other medicinals we use. This is my main point in this > discussion. > > This isn't saying Vitamin C is BAD. I am just pointing out it is > not good for everybody, for every cold or flu, or all the time. Let's > just be careful in blanket recommendations. > > There are no medical panaceas, including vitamin C. What is good > for one patient, in one clinical situation, is not necessarily good for > everyone. Nor is it good for the same patient all the time. My > understanding of one of Dan Bensky's lectures on the Shang Han Lun was > that taking too much vitamin C can lead to driving the external > pattern into the interior, producing a tai yin/spleen qi vacuity > pattern, one symptom of which is diarrhea. > > > On Apr 10, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Matt Bauer wrote: > > > So, are you saying Z'ev, that vitamin C is a cold, moist substance? If > > so, who was it that determined this and how was this determined? It > > cannot be from any CM classic text. Matt Bauer > > > > http://babel.altavista.com/ > > and adjust accordingly. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.