Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung styles of acupuncture

[Guest guest]

Ok. The exams don't cut it, I agree. Please take your time and go over your

points in detail. I am interested in what you have to say. Please

 

--- On Fri, 2/6/09, jasonwcom <jasonwcom wrote:

jasonwcom <jasonwcom

Re: Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung styles

of acupuncture

Chinese Medicine

Friday, February 6, 2009, 1:32 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine , Robert Chu

 

<chusauli@.. .> wrote:

 

>

 

> Again, the diagnosis of acupuncture is through the channels. Find

 

out what

 

> channel is out of balance and insert points into the affected channel.

 

> Acupuncture does not have dioagnosis like Liver Qi Stagnation or Sp Qi

 

> Deficiency - those are examples of herbal diagnosis. As for the

 

needling Ah

 

> Shi, that is done in the Ling Shu and other older texts - getting

 

channels

 

> palpated to see affected channels.

 

 

 

This isn't true there is plenty in lingshu about which pulse, which

 

needle technique, which points to use...

 

 

 

I think bagua systems are cool, but I don't think you can get as rapid

 

as result treating things like slipped discs and out of alignment

 

vertebrae without doing local points too, tui na or sotai or something

 

to correct alignment... Over time distal needling only may cure these

 

conditions but the result will be slow...

 

 

 

" Jingqi pulse diagnosis " as practiced by " community acupuncture "

 

centers is based on faulty theory from misunderstood readers of the

 

lingshu I am writing an article on it right now, I'll upload to the

 

group when its done...

 

Morant, van Nghi, Jeff Yuen those guys practice real classic Chinese

 

acupuncture, what's on nccaom and Cali exams is a joke, same goes for

 

standard " tcm " acupuncture which is taught in most schools its a

 

fragment of the Chinese system in ling shu, nan jing etc, da cheng

 

etc...- why teach luo points, reunion points, 5 shu system, mu/shu

 

points then never use it correctly, just teach it haphazardly then

 

guess what points to use, I am so embarrassed by the treatments some

 

of my esteemed colleagues are giving patients, the egos that go along

 

with them are worse...

 

 

 

>

 

> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:13 PM, mystir <ykcul_ritsym@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

> > From what little I know about it, I agree Robert. I just wanted

 

to make

 

> > that clearer.

 

> >

 

> > --- On Tue, 2/3/09, Robert Chu <chusauli@.. . <chusauli%40gmail. com>>

 

> > wrote:

 

> >

 

> > On the surface, it would seem that the Tan, Chen and Tung systems

 

are in

 

> >

 

> > opposition with TCM, but this is not the case.

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

[Guest guest]

Sorry to have taken so long to follow up with my original post but

I've been away. The original Author commented that he thought that Dr.

Tan's " balance method " might produce " better " results than TCM pattern

differentiation. I commented that this determination would be based

entirely on one's value system regarding what qualified as a " better "

result. It's interesting to see how much response a single sentence

regarding the importance of values generated!

 

At the outset let me say that I've heard Dr. Tan speak several times

and he's entertaining and knowledgeable. I'd love to know everything

he knows and I'd enjoy spending time seeing him work in his clinic.

Having said that, I haven't heard him say a word that went beyond,

'make pain go away as quickly as possible' with the implication that

one can then, 'see lots of patients, and make lots of money'. Success

is measured by how quickly pain is diminished, and by direct inference

how may patients a person sees, and how much money one makes. These

are transparently Orange meme values (google) and, at least in what

I've heard (5 hours), he hasn't demonstrated any pretense toward any

deeper or higher aspiration. My assessment has nothing to do with how

any given practitioner might apply what they know of the system in

context of the overall value sphere of his or her clinical practice. I

know plenty of superficial, pretentious, 5E practitioners and I've

known plenty of practitioners who exemplify depth in very many

traditions.

 

I don't see how Kim can claim that my one sentence was arrogant when

all I claimed was that a determination of " better " in any context

always rests with one's " values " . Isn't this just simply so?

 

All the survival challenges that face us today are issues determined

by human choice and this directly implicates our value systems as they

define an evolutionary hierarchy of consciousness. I consider that,

first and foremost, CM is the science of integrity and that the point

of the medicine is to help people transition from a relatively divided

state to increased states of integration and wholeness. From an

integral point of view this implicates all lines of development and,

most importantly, the evolution of the values and morality that

inform choices motivate define behavior.

 

From my perspective we have moved to a point of development where any

approach having less than an integral perspective on medicine is

outdated and irrelevant. Integral means, among other things, that the

entire scope of treatment of any given individual occurs in a very

large context. This context literally embraces the soul development of

the patient, the process of cosmic development, the patients life

conditions, constitutional type AND level of cultural development, and

ultimately his or her degree of integrity. And, of course, it includes

he patients health history, current condition, and all symptomatology.

 

 

From my perspective consciousness (shen) is the primary motivating

force of the universe. One's clinical perspective has to range from

the greatest spiritual depth one has authentically realized (and lived

up to) to the outermost level of the patient's condition. If a

practitioner holds such a view then all traditions have their place

because one is looking from a perspective that will understand their

correct hierarchical relevance in any given clinical situation.

Without such a broad perspective, I'd say that mere pain relief just

creates a world with unevolved people who feel good. And, frankly, so

too does merely " balancing meridians " or Constitutional type for that

matter outside of the shared value of integrative change. From a

developmental perspective, such a practice merely perpetuates

ignorance, creates stagnation in the developmental stream, and

promotes illness.

 

Being ale to relieve pain efficiently is priceless and can buy a lot

of credibility with patients that can be applied toward motivating

them to develop greater integrity. Of course, some patients wont be

interested, and some will need pain relief pronto if any other

significant work is to be done. I have no specific technical issue

with the tradition in questions, or with any tradition, but the

perspective and context of the tradition is lacking, according to what

I've seen, in light of the challenges and call of the time in which we

live. In part, my determination is based on the transcendence of

" compassion " as the primary value for those in the main demographic of

those who administer and receive CM in the West at the dawn of the

21'st century.

 

The highest purpose of medicine is rectification of the soul for the

sake of cultural change, and for the sake of evolution itself. Every

other goal, as significant as they may, comes after.

 

Warm regards, Lonny Jarrett

[Guest guest]

To me, a result is the elimination of the pain and the problem that causes the

pain. Not much value system there. The problem either is, or it isn't.

Whatever make that particular problem go away is the superior method.

 

Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, LAc

 

 

 

:

Revolution: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 19:18:57 +0000Re:

Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung styles of acupuncture

 

 

 

Sorry to have taken so long to follow up with my original post butI've been

away. The original Author commented that he thought that Dr.Tan's " balance

method " might produce " better " results than TCM patterndifferentiation. I

commented that this determination would be basedentirely on one's value system

regarding what qualified as a " better " result. It's interesting to see how much

response a single sentenceregarding the importance of values generated!At the

outset let me say that I've heard Dr. Tan speak several timesand he's

entertaining and knowledgeable. I'd love to know everythinghe knows and I'd

enjoy spending time seeing him work in his clinic. Having said that, I haven't

heard him say a word that went beyond,'make pain go away as quickly as possible'

with the implication thatone can then, 'see lots of patients, and make lots of

money'. Successis measured by how quickly pain is diminished, and by direct

inferencehow may patients a person sees, and how much money one makes. Theseare

transparently Orange meme values (google) and, at least in whatI've heard (5

hours), he hasn't demonstrated any pretense toward anydeeper or higher

aspiration. My assessment has nothing to do with howany given practitioner might

apply what they know of the system incontext of the overall value sphere of his

or her clinical practice. Iknow plenty of superficial, pretentious, 5E

practitioners and I'veknown plenty of practitioners who exemplify depth in very

manytraditions. I don't see how Kim can claim that my one sentence was arrogant

whenall I claimed was that a determination of " better " in any contextalways

rests with one's " values " . Isn't this just simply so?All the survival challenges

that face us today are issues determinedby human choice and this directly

implicates our value systems as theydefine an evolutionary hierarchy of

consciousness. I consider that,first and foremost, CM is the science of

integrity and that the pointof the medicine is to help people transition from a

relatively dividedstate to increased states of integration and wholeness. From

anintegral point of view this implicates all lines of development and,most

importantly, the evolution of the values and morality thatinform choices

motivate define behavior.From my perspective we have moved to a point of

development where anyapproach having less than an integral perspective on

medicine isoutdated and irrelevant. Integral means, among other things, that

theentire scope of treatment of any given individual occurs in a verylarge

context. This context literally embraces the soul development ofthe patient, the

process of cosmic development, the patients lifeconditions, constitutional type

AND level of cultural development, andultimately his or her degree of integrity.

And, of course, it includeshe patients health history, current condition, and

all symptomatology. From my perspective consciousness (shen) is the primary

motivatingforce of the universe. One's clinical perspective has to range fromthe

greatest spiritual depth one has authentically realized (and livedup to) to the

outermost level of the patient's condition. If apractitioner holds such a view

then all traditions have their placebecause one is looking from a perspective

that will understand theircorrect hierarchical relevance in any given clinical

situation.Without such a broad perspective, I'd say that mere pain relief

justcreates a world with unevolved people who feel good. And, frankly, sotoo

does merely " balancing meridians " or Constitutional type for thatmatter outside

of the shared value of integrative change. From adevelopmental perspective, such

a practice merely perpetuatesignorance, creates stagnation in the developmental

stream, andpromotes illness. Being ale to relieve pain efficiently is priceless

and can buy a lotof credibility with patients that can be applied toward

motivatingthem to develop greater integrity. Of course, some patients wont

beinterested, and some will need pain relief pronto if any othersignificant work

is to be done. I have no specific technical issuewith the tradition in

questions, or with any tradition, but theperspective and context of the

tradition is lacking, according to whatI've seen, in light of the challenges and

call of the time in which welive. In part, my determination is based on the

transcendence of " compassion " as the primary value for those in the main

demographic ofthose who administer and receive CM in the West at the dawn of

the21'st century.The highest purpose of medicine is rectification of the soul

for thesake of cultural change, and for the sake of evolution itself. Everyother

goal, as significant as they may, comes after. Warm regards, Lonny Jarrett

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

>

> To me, a result is the elimination of the pain and the problem that

causes the pain. Not much value system there. The problem either is,

or it isn't. Whatever make that particular problem go away is the

superior method.

>

> Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, LAc

 

 

 

Lonny: And, of course, this depends on what you think " the problem " is

and that depends on one's value system.

[Guest guest]

Its interesting to me that the UCLA MD acupuncture course uses Helm's

book, Acupuncture Energetics- I was told that this is based on a

french system ..[ Maurice Mussant? ]

 

In spite of the 300 hours- this seems like a relatively advanced

system - as compared with standard TCM acupuncture.

Any opinions on the validity of the system itself?

 

HFL

[Guest guest]

The problem is that for which the patient complains, it is not what either you

nor I think, but the patient's complaint. If he says it's gone, neither you nor

I can tell him it's not. That is what they pay us for. I take money or other

remuneration from a patient, and in return I give him relief or resolution of

the problem. Fair trade and not much more to philosophize about.

 

Don J Snow, DAOM, MPH, LAx

 

 

 

:

Revolution: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 00:04:33 +0000Re:

Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung styles of acupuncture

 

 

 

>> > To me, a result is the elimination of the pain and the problem thatcauses

the pain. Not much value system there. The problem either is,or it isn't.

Whatever make that particular problem go away is thesuperior method. > > Don

Snow, DAOM, MPH, LAcLonny: And, of course, this depends on what you think " the

problem " isand that depends on one's value system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The problem is that for which the patient complains, it is not what

either you

nor I think, but the patient's complaint.

 

 

 

Lonny: Google " orange meme " . What you are conveying is a VALUE SYSTEM

not a fixed reality. And it happens to be one that emerged in the

1800's. It also, is wholly consistent with your notion that

practitioners of CM should have a " premed " background. Both are

" ORANGE meme " values.

[Guest guest]

Lonny,

Do you think that there should be a 4 year bachelor degree pre-requisite

before entering TCM college?

 

I think that a humanities degree can prime a Chinese medicine practitioner

in a more effective way

than a pre-med degree can, but of course that all depends on what your goal

in healing is...

If your goal is to make money and integrate with mainstream medical systems,

then the " orange meme "

value system is critical. If your goal is to get to the core of the person

and affect long term life style changes,

then the practitioner needs to see and speak to the world through a

different value system.

 

Can you talk about what kind of meme value system is needed to work on those

layers of humanity?

 

K

 

 

 

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 7:01 PM, sppdestiny <Revolution wrote:

 

> The problem is that for which the patient complains, it is not what

> either you

> nor I think, but the patient's complaint.

>

> Lonny: Google " orange meme " . What you are conveying is a VALUE SYSTEM

> not a fixed reality. And it happens to be one that emerged in the

> 1800's. It also, is wholly consistent with your notion that

> practitioners of CM should have a " premed " background. Both are

> " ORANGE meme " values.

>

>

>

 

 

 

--

 

www.tcmreview.com

 

The Four Reliances:

Do not rely upon the individual, but rely upon the teaching.

As far as teachings go, do not rely upon the words alone, but rely upon the

meaning that underlies them.

Regarding the meaning, do not rely upon the provisional meaning alone, but

rely upon the definitive meaning.

And regarding the definitive meaning, do not rely upon ordinary

consciousness, but rely upon wisdom awareness.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi John,

 

 

I think we have to acknowledge that CM education should be

tailored for many different outcomes according to interest. I have no

problem with an orange memer getting a premed education and going on

to do clinical research, endorphin studies, and work with insurance

companies etc etc etc. But the door has to be open for those who want

to actually practice and develop CM on its own terms. It's an

interesting question today as we really move toward integral practice.

Does that mean that each individual has to have expertise in all

quadrants (google " AQAL " )? I don't think so. I do think it's

reasonable for applicants to have a general background in biology.

Bio, Biochem, a psych class.....just some general understanding. But

this should also be balanced with the humanities.

 

Having said all this......I'm realizing that the schools and classes

to really give a good background to an aspiring practitioner don't

exist. Maybe they wont exist. For this reason I think we should be

admitting a VERY broad range of people to the schools with diverse

backgrounds. I hate to say it but an inspired mime would probably be

as good a candidate, and as good a practitioner, as your average

person with 4 years of biosciences or Chinese history and language.

 

 

Who is teaching the courses anyway? Postmodern orange and green

memers! It might be another 100 years before the schools are giving

classes that I'd consider relevant to cultivating what it takes to

actually be a practitioner who creates a living/evolving medicine.

[Guest guest]

Hopefully, it won't be 100 years. Jeffrey Yuen (and probably others

I'm not aware of) are teaching compassion-based medicine. And doing

it without the color-tints of theories like 'spiral dynamics.' (Why

is it that these newer constructs, despite their claim to be more

evolved, always feel so dogmatic and rigid?)

 

roseanne

 

 

On Feb 9, 2009, at 10:21 AM, sppdestiny wrote:

 

> Who is teaching the courses anyway? Postmodern orange and green

> memers! It might be another 100 years before the schools are giving

> classes that I'd consider relevant to cultivating what it takes to

> actually be a practitioner who creates a living/evolving medicine.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Donald,

I do think that there needs to be more or at least better biomed education

taught at the colleges today.

The question is whether people should be required to have a pre-med

education going into TCM school.

Honestly, I don't think that's going to fly with any of the schools. They

would all close down due to lack of enrollment.

Most schools would shut down by even requiring a 4 year degree (losing more

than half of their students).

 

There are a few colleges in the country that may still be admitting only

those with bachelor degrees (OCOM?)

ACTCM, my alma mater changed their policy a few years ago, now allowing

non-bachelor degree students to enroll.

 

One of the biggest challenges is that the schools want to stay afloat by

getting students in the door (collecting tuition)

and most are barely getting by.

Also, if only premed background students are admitted to TCM schools, then

what would happen to some of the visionaries on this user group? I mean..

they're the ones who keep it interesting, you know.

 

Both CA and National committees are trying to get rid of the apprenticeship

format, which could bring in those who have the desire and the teacher, but

not necessarily wanting to go through the institution. In 2010, CA will

eliminate apprenticeship as a way to be able to sit for the state licensing

exam.

 

Fran told us his story about how he got into acupuncture in the 70s. At

that time, the practice was illegal in CA and most states in the country.

We have to give a lot of respect to all of those who paved the way for us,

even going to jail here in CA for practicing acupuncture (Jerry Brown signed

the bill in to make acupuncture legal in CA in the mid 70s).

 

However, that was a generation ago, and we need to keep adapting in order to

evolve the medicine. At that time, my teachers told me that they were

sterilizing needles with garlic cloves, boiling them in water and purifying

them in a flame. The Barefoot doctors manual was the major text until " The

web that has no weaver " arrived on the scene.

 

Today, we have different requirements and work in a different professional

environment.

I think that the entry level doctorate with a 4 year degree requirement

would best prepare the next generation for expanding our scope of practice

if needed and keep our professional degree from being seen as a technical or

spa degree.

Of course, biology, chemistry, anatomy, physiology with labs should be

included, along with humanities, but I think that requiring a pre-med

education will limit those who work on different value systems, although

they may be just as intelligent and maybe even more prepared for Asian

medicine as anyone with a premed background.

 

One reason to require a 4 year degree is to prepare the student for the

rigour of TCM school. The first 2 years of a bachelors degree is filled

with intro survey courses. The second 2 years (upper level) makes people

think more deeply (writing essays and doing research papers, not just taking

tests). These 2 years are critical in cultivating practitioners who are

deeper thinkers and deeper healers. I can say that I couldn't stand the

first 2 years of college and loved the second half.

 

Most TCM schools are an extension of those first 2 years (preparing people

to take licensing tests) and not thinking deeper, even though most students

crave the deeper aspects of the medicine and loathe constant test-taking.

The issue is that most are not trained in writing papers, doing close

readings, group research projects and independant study.

Z'ev has also stated this. Students can not evolve the medicine

academically without these tools. They will only be good at repeating

textbook material. That is the 20th century Beijing model, not the 21st

century Global one.

 

So, I vote for having a 4 year degree pre-requisite requirement, but not

necessarily a pre-med one.

There are valuable tools that are learned in the humanities, which can

cultivate a healer in other integral ways than solely derived from a pre-med

education.

Of course, we all want everyone else to be just like us (birds of the same

feather or the pink ape theory).

A hammer wants everything to be a nail, a poet wants others to learn how to

write stanzas and a PA wants others to be able to speak his language.

Nothing wrong with that. We just need to keep the door open for other value

systems. even though the thread that ties us together is the desire for the

highest quality in our profession.

 

K

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Donald Snow <don83407 wrote:

 

>

> It appears that your responses are very common today. Everything is a

> " value " system and there are no absolutes. Well, there are laws and

> absolutes whether we like them or not. There are laws of gravity; it is an

> absolute, laws of nature, etc. As far as treating a patient, my job is to

> give him relief whether or not we " believe " it is real. The thread that I

> was responding to was that AOM students don't appear to understand or learn

> medical and ortho-neuro exams, etc. Also that AOM practitioners are weak in

> A & P. A heavy science background would take care of that. Instead of putting

> our value systems/religions in our practice, we should treat the person;

> period.

>

> DJS, DAOM

>

>

> <Chinese_Medicine%40From>

> .

>

>

>

 

 

 

--

 

www.tcmreview.com

 

The Four Reliances:

Do not rely upon the individual, but rely upon the teaching.

As far as teachings go, do not rely upon the words alone, but rely upon the

meaning that underlies them.

Regarding the meaning, do not rely upon the provisional meaning alone, but

rely upon the definitive meaning.

And regarding the definitive meaning, do not rely upon ordinary

consciousness, but rely upon wisdom awareness.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I didn't mean to say that all should have pre-med degrees, but that they should

have their basic biomed courses done in conventional colleges before they enter

AOM. The biomed courses taught in AOM schools is almost laughable and many,

surprisingly, don't take credits from major universities. I believe they do

this just to squeeze more money out of the poor student. I know they made me

retake all of my biomed courses over because my old courses were not recent

enough. I hope what eventually will happen is that conventional colleges and

uneversities will start their own AOM programs. Of course, that would put the

private colleges out of business but I believe as our beautiful and effective

medicine becomes more popular the regular colleges will almost be forced to

offer it.

 

However, your point was well taken. Thanks.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

DJS

 

 

 

: johnkokko:

Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:51:39 -0800Re: Re: Response to the recent

thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung styles of acupuncture

 

 

 

Donald,I do think that there needs to be more or at least better biomed

educationtaught at the colleges today.The question is whether people should be

required to have a pre-mededucation going into TCM school.Honestly, I don't

think that's going to fly with any of the schools. Theywould all close down due

to lack of enrollment.Most schools would shut down by even requiring a 4 year

degree (losing morethan half of their students).There are a few colleges in the

country that may still be admitting onlythose with bachelor degrees

(OCOM?)ACTCM, my alma mater changed their policy a few years ago, now

allowingnon-bachelor degree students to enroll.One of the biggest challenges is

that the schools want to stay afloat bygetting students in the door (collecting

tuition)and most are barely getting by.Also, if only premed background students

are admitted to TCM schools, thenwhat would happen to some of the visionaries on

this user group? I mean..they're the ones who keep it interesting, you know.Both

CA and National committees are trying to get rid of the apprenticeshipformat,

which could bring in those who have the desire and the teacher, butnot

necessarily wanting to go through the institution. In 2010, CA willeliminate

apprenticeship as a way to be able to sit for the state licensingexam.Fran told

us his story about how he got into acupuncture in the 70s. Atthat time, the

practice was illegal in CA and most states in the country.We have to give a lot

of respect to all of those who paved the way for us,even going to jail here in

CA for practicing acupuncture (Jerry Brown signedthe bill in to make acupuncture

legal in CA in the mid 70s).However, that was a generation ago, and we need to

keep adapting in order toevolve the medicine. At that time, my teachers told me

that they weresterilizing needles with garlic cloves, boiling them in water and

purifyingthem in a flame. The Barefoot doctors manual was the major text until

" Theweb that has no weaver " arrived on the scene.Today, we have different

requirements and work in a different professionalenvironment.I think that the

entry level doctorate with a 4 year degree requirementwould best prepare the

next generation for expanding our scope of practiceif needed and keep our

professional degree from being seen as a technical orspa degree.Of course,

biology, chemistry, anatomy, physiology with labs should beincluded, along with

humanities, but I think that requiring a pre-mededucation will limit those who

work on different value systems, althoughthey may be just as intelligent and

maybe even more prepared for Asianmedicine as anyone with a premed

background.One reason to require a 4 year degree is to prepare the student for

therigour of TCM school. The first 2 years of a bachelors degree is filledwith

intro survey courses. The second 2 years (upper level) makes peoplethink more

deeply (writing essays and doing research papers, not just takingtests). These 2

years are critical in cultivating practitioners who aredeeper thinkers and

deeper healers. I can say that I couldn't stand thefirst 2 years of college and

loved the second half.Most TCM schools are an extension of those first 2 years

(preparing peopleto take licensing tests) and not thinking deeper, even though

most studentscrave the deeper aspects of the medicine and loathe constant

test-taking.The issue is that most are not trained in writing papers, doing

closereadings, group research projects and independant study.Z'ev has also

stated this. Students can not evolve the medicineacademically without these

tools. They will only be good at repeatingtextbook material. That is the 20th

century Beijing model, not the 21stcentury Global one.So, I vote for having a 4

year degree pre-requisite requirement, but notnecessarily a pre-med one.There

are valuable tools that are learned in the humanities, which cancultivate a

healer in other integral ways than solely derived from a pre-mededucation.Of

course, we all want everyone else to be just like us (birds of the samefeather

or the pink ape theory).A hammer wants everything to be a nail, a poet wants

others to learn how towrite stanzas and a PA wants others to be able to speak

his language.Nothing wrong with that. We just need to keep the door open for

other valuesystems. even though the thread that ties us together is the desire

for thehighest quality in our profession.KOn Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Donald

Snow <don83407 wrote:>> It appears that your responses are very common

today. Everything is a> " value " system and there are no absolutes. Well, there

are laws and> absolutes whether we like them or not. There are laws of gravity;

it is an> absolute, laws of nature, etc. As far as treating a patient, my job is

to> give him relief whether or not we " believe " it is real. The thread that I>

was responding to was that AOM students don't appear to understand or learn>

medical and ortho-neuro exams, etc. Also that AOM practitioners are weak in>

A & P. A heavy science background would take care of that. Instead of putting> our

value systems/religions in our practice, we should treat the person;> period.>>

DJS, DAOM>>> <Chinese_Medicine%40From>> .>> >-- ,

L.Acwww.tcmreview.comThe Four Reliances:Do not rely upon the individual, but

rely upon the teaching.As far as teachings go, do not rely upon the words alone,

but rely upon themeaning that underlies them.Regarding the meaning, do not rely

upon the provisional meaning alone, butrely upon the definitive meaning.And

regarding the definitive meaning, do not rely upon ordinaryconsciousness, but

rely upon wisdom awareness.

[Guest guest]

Donald,

 

What is your defintion of " treating the person, period " ? Your answer

will be influenced by your values;)

 

Futher, when you have dinner with a loved one, is all that you see

the food (relief)? What about the communication, exchange, emotion,

the love? Not to be too woo woo with you, but this example is to show

there is lot more to treating a person than simply getting them

releif. Maybe relief is a good starting point, but what else can be

addressed?

 

As far as absolute truths...its not a matter of if gravity exists or

not (thats to clunky and black/white) ..its a matter of your

relationship to it...which is quite differnt than a birds, a pilots,

or an astranauts. Gravity is not a given that is just out there...it

has relationship. For a further look at Absolute truths you should

check out the Madyamaka system of analysis

 

I am very interested in your views of treating the person, though. Is

there anyhting beyond relief?

 

Sincerely,

David Vitello

 

 

Chinese Medicine , Donald Snow

<don83407 wrote:

>

>

> It appears that your responses are very common today. Everything

is a " value " system and there are no absolutes. Well, there are laws

and absolutes whether we like them or not. There are laws of

gravity; it is an absolute, laws of nature, etc. As far as treating

a patient, my job is to give him relief whether or not we " believe "

it is real. The thread that I was responding to was that AOM

students don't appear to understand or learn medical and ortho-neuro

exams, etc. Also that AOM practitioners are weak in A & P. A heavy

science background would take care of that. Instead of putting our

value systems/religions in our practice, we should treat the person;

period.

>

> DJS, DAOM

>

>

>

> Chinese_Medicine: Revolution: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 03:01:25

+0000Re: Response to the recent thread regarding

Tan/Chen/Tung styles of acupuncture

>

>

>

> The problem is that for which the patient complains, it is not

whateither younor I think, but the patient's complaint. Lonny:

Google " orange meme " . What you are conveying is a VALUE SYSTEMnot a

fixed reality. And it happens to be one that emerged in the1800's. It

also, is wholly consistent with your notion thatpractitioners of CM

should have a " premed " background. Both are " ORANGE meme " values.

>

 

[Guest guest]

Yes,but I don't spend my time endlessly philosophizing about it. I leave that

to philosophers. I am a Doctor and I interact with my patients. Most (90+) of

the eventually get permanent relief. That is the success we should all be

trying to get. They refer, I have a bustling practice and I am in the process

of hiring another practitioner here. I do not do " Foo, foo " medicine. I also

do not want to be involved in this endless and pointless debate.

 

Sincerely,

 

Don J. Snow, DAOM, MPH

 

 

 

: dmvitello:

Mon, 9 Feb 2009 18:48:00 +0000Re: Response to the recent thread

regarding Tan/Chen/Tung styles of acupuncture

 

 

 

Donald,What is your defintion of " treating the person, period " ? Your answer will

be influenced by your values;)Futher, when you have dinner with a loved one, is

all that you see the food (relief)? What about the communication, exchange,

emotion, the love? Not to be too woo woo with you, but this example is to show

there is lot more to treating a person than simply getting them releif. Maybe

relief is a good starting point, but what else can be addressed?As far as

absolute truths...its not a matter of if gravity exists or not (thats to clunky

and black/white) ..its a matter of your relationship to it...which is quite

differnt than a birds, a pilots, or an astranauts. Gravity is not a given that

is just out there...it has relationship. For a further look at Absolute truths

you should check out the Madyamaka system of analysisI am very interested in

your views of treating the person, though. Is there anyhting beyond

relief?Sincerely,David Vitello--- In

Chinese Medicine , Donald Snow <don83407

wrote:>> > It appears that your responses are very common today. Everything is a

" value " system and there are no absolutes. Well, there are laws and absolutes

whether we like them or not. There are laws of gravity; it is an absolute, laws

of nature, etc. As far as treating a patient, my job is to give him relief

whether or not we " believe " it is real. The thread that I was responding to was

that AOM students don't appear to understand or learn medical and ortho-neuro

exams, etc. Also that AOM practitioners are weak in A & P. A heavy science

background would take care of that. Instead of putting our value

systems/religions in our practice, we should treat the person; period. > > DJS,

DAOM> > > > Chinese_Medicine: Revolution: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 03:01:25

+0000Re: Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung

styles of acupuncture> > > > The problem is that for which the patient

complains, it is not whateither younor I think, but the patient's complaint.

Lonny: Google " orange meme " . What you are conveying is a VALUE SYSTEMnot a fixed

reality. And it happens to be one that emerged in the1800's. It also, is wholly

consistent with your notion thatpractitioners of CM should have a " premed "

background. Both are " ORANGE meme " values. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of

this message have been removed]>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine ,

<johnkokko wrote:The issue is that most are not trained in

writing papers, doing close readings, group research projects and

independant study. Z'ev has also stated this. Students can not evolve

the medicine academically without these tools. They will only be good

at repeating textbook material. That is the 20th century Beijing

model, not the 21st century Global one.

 

I agree times have changed quickly, and the pace of change is

increasing. More rounded and deeper education is desired, but not

cookie cutter kind, esp. if it limits the mental flexibility. Inherent

talent or ability is best but can be educated out of students too.

I know when I start talking, I don't know when to shut up sometimes.

I was advised to; get a degree in electicity/electronics, divinity,

and get far in the military. Master Liang worked a wheelbarrow when he

came to the states, his family practiced CM since the manchus took

over. He educated himself and worked also as an electrical engineer in

Hughes satellite division. The military was not for me, but I should

have followed the teachers' wish. He was extraordinary, I'm not sure

what he was seeing there.

When somebody like Emmanuel describe HGH I can see what an

integrative genius he is. On top of it. Now bad old nitric oxide is

established as a essential metabolic molecule. Amazing. Medical and

life sciences are evolving and specialist theoretics overlapping.

Ephemeral molecular transformations, and energy fields are being

noticed, and in a while we'll need a term like 'qi' to ascribe to the

integrity of the motive force(s) they'll observe (we work with).

Things are way different, no more taking watch mainsprings to a

jeweler to make needles, or examining and sharpening them under a

microscope, and autoclaving them.

A medical system like CM is complete in itself, but it is important

for us as a group to have cohesion, to communicate, cooperate and

infiltrate effectively with other larger health delivery giants. Some

will be more able and inclined than others at that.

I think it was in the 'Mayo Clinic Auotbiography/History', where a

surgeon was saying, 'In the operating room, you wouldn't believe how

many clumsy, incompetant people are working. Just because their

fathers or uncles got them into med school, they end up where they

don't belong. I wish we could train mechanics or other people with

dexterity to perform some of these operations. " Paraphrased.

I am still praying for the wedding day of east and west, old and

new, in the service of the commonwealth.

[Guest guest]

John, I more or less agree with you. That is to say that I support

some basic science and a much broader education than a premed degree

would ever allow. My point was that education in general has not

caught up with the implications of holistic/integral theory. The bio

courses are being taught from an orange meme perspective and the

psych, social sciences, philosohpy and even the religion classes are

mostly all being taught in the context of green meme, postmodern,

value structures. But, all things being considered, I like your

solution of a broad 4 year degree with a bit of bio/science in it.

[Guest guest]

Don: It appears that your responses are very common today. Everything

is a " value " system and there are no absolutes.

 

Lon: Relativism is hardly my value system. Certainly there are

absolutes. Two of them in fact, emptiness and evolution. Since there

is nothing to say in the void and since we are here what we say is

influenced by our values and these occur on a hierarchy from fairly

unevolved to newly emergent. The value sphere involving Western

science, " hard facts " , data, the physical body, pain relief, income,

insurance reimbursement in an ORANGE MEME value system. It's not

irrelevant but it isn't the whole picture and shouldn't be the bottom

line in defining the medicine, medical education, or clinical practice.

 

Don: Well, there are laws and absolutes whether we like them or not.

There are laws of gravity; it is an absolute, laws of nature, etc. As

far as treating a patient, my job is to give him relief whether or not

we " believe " it is real.

 

Lonny: Sure, all we are talking about is what we consider to be actual

" relief " .

 

 

 

 

DON: The thread that I was responding to was that AOM students don't

appear to understand or learn medical and ortho-neuro exams, etc. Also

that AOM practitioners are weak in A & P. A heavy science

backgroundwould take care of that.

 

 

Lonny: I'd rather have them actually learn CM and let the

neurologists, anatomists, and physiologists practice their own

medicine. Integral doesn't mean we all have to master everything.

 

DON: Instead of putting our value systems/religions in our

practice, we should treat the person; period.

 

 

Lonny: Your value system is always in your practice and life. The only

issue is whether you are interested in seeing it or not.

[Guest guest]

I think bagua systems are cool, but I don't think you can get as rapid

as result treating things like slipped discs and out of alignment

vertebrae without doing local points too, tui na or sotai or something

to correct alignment...Over time distal needling only may cure these

conditions but the result will be slow...

 

 

actually, i haven't done a TCM style tx since prior to labor day, i'm now

doing 100% Tan. i find it's more interesting and mental, less labor

intensive, and i'm getting superior and faster results with fewer needles.

this includes disc issues. i had a serious lumbar/sacral injury several

years ago involving the discs. i had been tx with tcm style. it's

improved, but Slowly. distal needling has offered amazing improvement.

 

kath

 

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:32 AM, jasonwcom <jasonwcom wrote:

 

> --- In

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>,

> Robert Chu

> <chusauli wrote:

> >

> > Again, the diagnosis of acupuncture is through the channels. Find

> out what

> > channel is out of balance and insert points into the affected channel.

> > Acupuncture does not have dioagnosis like Liver Qi Stagnation or Sp Qi

> > Deficiency - those are examples of herbal diagnosis. As for the

> needling Ah

> > Shi, that is done in the Ling Shu and other older texts - getting

> channels

> > palpated to see affected channels.

>

> This isn't true there is plenty in lingshu about which pulse, which

> needle technique, which points to use...

>

> I think bagua systems are cool, but I don't think you can get as rapid

> as result treating things like slipped discs and out of alignment

> vertebrae without doing local points too, tui na or sotai or something

> to correct alignment...Over time distal needling only may cure these

> conditions but the result will be slow...

>

> " Jingqi pulse diagnosis " as practiced by " community acupuncture "

> centers is based on faulty theory from misunderstood readers of the

> lingshu I am writing an article on it right now, I'll upload to the

> group when its done...

> Morant, van Nghi, Jeff Yuen those guys practice real classic Chinese

> acupuncture, what's on nccaom and Cali exams is a joke, same goes for

> standard " tcm " acupuncture which is taught in most schools its a

> fragment of the Chinese system in ling shu, nan jing etc, da cheng

> etc...- why teach luo points, reunion points, 5 shu system, mu/shu

> points then never use it correctly, just teach it haphazardly then

> guess what points to use, I am so embarrassed by the treatments some

> of my esteemed colleagues are giving patients, the egos that go along

> with them are worse...

>

> >

> > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:13 PM, mystir <ykcul_ritsym wrote:

> >

> > > From what little I know about it, I agree Robert. I just wanted

> to make

> > > that clearer.

> > >

> > > --- On Tue, 2/3/09, Robert Chu <chusauli <chusauli%40gmail.com>>

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > On the surface, it would seem that the Tan, Chen and Tung systems

> are in

> > >

> > > opposition with TCM, but this is not the case.

>

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Well its obivous that " tcm " acupuncture gets less results than any

other type, but if you get in there needle jia ji pts, extra points 1

cun outside jia ji, both those with e-stim on rapid, then boost the

kidney yin and yang strongly(kidney builds discs), treat the

liver/gallbladder/tendon system, do tui na, or sotai and stretch the

vertebrae and push slipped discs and bones back into line- you can

cure the pain, straighten the spine so its brand new and regenerate

the discs, not just " improve the condition " I mean fix it

permanently...With nerve pain I get 100% improvement from 1 treatment

a lot of times, but the pain will come back if the root is not

addressed, treating the root(ie rebuilding discs, straightening the

vertebrae) is more difficult and takes a long time...

-JB

 

Chinese Medicine , " Kath Bartlett,

MS, LAc " wrote:

>

> I think bagua systems are cool, but I don't think you can get as rapid

> as result treating things like slipped discs and out of alignment

> vertebrae without doing local points too, tui na or sotai or something

> to correct alignment...Over time distal needling only may cure these

> conditions but the result will be slow...

>

>

> actually, i haven't done a TCM style tx since prior to labor day,

i'm now

> doing 100% Tan. i find it's more interesting and mental, less labor

> intensive, and i'm getting superior and faster results with fewer

needles.

> this includes disc issues. i had a serious lumbar/sacral injury several

> years ago involving the discs. i had been tx with tcm style. it's

> improved, but Slowly. distal needling has offered amazing improvement.

>

> kath

>

> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:32 AM, jasonwcom <jasonwcom wrote:

>

> > --- In

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>,

> > Robert Chu

> > <chusauli@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Again, the diagnosis of acupuncture is through the channels. Find

> > out what

> > > channel is out of balance and insert points into the affected

channel.

> > > Acupuncture does not have dioagnosis like Liver Qi Stagnation or

Sp Qi

> > > Deficiency - those are examples of herbal diagnosis. As for the

> > needling Ah

> > > Shi, that is done in the Ling Shu and other older texts - getting

> > channels

> > > palpated to see affected channels.

> >

> > This isn't true there is plenty in lingshu about which pulse, which

> > needle technique, which points to use...

> >

> > I think bagua systems are cool, but I don't think you can get as rapid

> > as result treating things like slipped discs and out of alignment

> > vertebrae without doing local points too, tui na or sotai or something

> > to correct alignment...Over time distal needling only may cure these

> > conditions but the result will be slow...

> >

> > " Jingqi pulse diagnosis " as practiced by " community acupuncture "

> > centers is based on faulty theory from misunderstood readers of the

> > lingshu I am writing an article on it right now, I'll upload to the

> > group when its done...

> > Morant, van Nghi, Jeff Yuen those guys practice real classic Chinese

> > acupuncture, what's on nccaom and Cali exams is a joke, same goes for

> > standard " tcm " acupuncture which is taught in most schools its a

> > fragment of the Chinese system in ling shu, nan jing etc, da cheng

> > etc...- why teach luo points, reunion points, 5 shu system, mu/shu

> > points then never use it correctly, just teach it haphazardly then

> > guess what points to use, I am so embarrassed by the treatments some

> > of my esteemed colleagues are giving patients, the egos that go along

> > with them are worse...

> >

> > >

> > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:13 PM, mystir <ykcul_ritsym@> wrote:

> > >

> > > > From what little I know about it, I agree Robert. I just wanted

> > to make

> > > > that clearer.

> > > >

> > > > --- On Tue, 2/3/09, Robert Chu <chusauli@ <chusauli%40gmail.com>>

> > > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > On the surface, it would seem that the Tan, Chen and Tung systems

> > are in

> > > >

> > > > opposition with TCM, but this is not the case.

> >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >