Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 i wholeheartedly agree, clinical success and $ success are 2 entirely different things, and should not be confused with one another. i remember while at PCOM the teachers we most highly respected for their clinical/scholarly knowledge *generally* had smaller practices, and those with the busy practices we *generally* didn't want as clinic supervisors. (i'm not going to name names here). my point being that clinical success involves AOM knowledge and experience, $ success involves business acumen and experience. the 2 are totally separate issues. and may i say, since i'm on the subject, that i REALLY OBJECT to honora wolfe's 100K practice as the model for The Successful Practice. i find this concept VERY OFFENSIVE. to me, " the successful practice " is measured by clinical success rates, relationships with patients, quality of time and care provided, and so on in this vein. 100K has Nothing To Do With IT. it's solely a measure of materialism. don't misunderstand me, i don't mean to say that it's wrong to make $ practicing. of course a healthy practice is in the black. i'm saying the clinical goals should be first and foremost, the $ is the energy exchange that allows us to continue to do this important and worthy work that we all agree we are blessed to be able to do. i often say that one of the problems with western med is that they have gone from 'healthcare is our business' to 'our business is healthcare'. to me, the 100k practice goal is 'our business is healthcare' and i do not believe that is why any of us enrolled in acu college. my apologies for the rant. i have wanted to say this for a LONG time. kath On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Kim Blankenship <kuangguiyuwrote: > I agree with you both entirely about what it takes to be a good > practitioner > AND a successful one. A number of my fellow students were much more > concerned with memorizing information that was likely to be on the boards > than with the practice management class that some seemed to see as more of > an unnecessary intrusion into their schooling. I was most fortunate to hold > the position as assistant office manager and, ultimately, office manager of > a successful acupuncture clinic while I was in school. It was that > invaluable experience that has been most meaningful to me in attaining a > level of economic success in my practice. > Take care - > > Kim > > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. < > angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net>> wrote: > > > Mark, thanks for making an excellent point, practice success is > > contingent on many aspects, one's ability as a practitioner being only > one. > > When I taught I found that this was hard to accept for students, AND I > also > > found that most students were not very interested in business management > AND > > their expectations were often unrealistic in face of the economic > context. > > > > Regards, > > Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D. > > > > angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net> <angelapfa%40comcast.net > > > > > > www.InnerhealthSalem.com > > > > Phone: 503 364 3022 > > > > - > > zedbowls > > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > <Chinese Medicine%40> > > Monday, February 02, 2009 7:15 PM > > Re: Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung > > styles of acupuncture > > > > Hi Kim, > > > > While schooled, and perhaps enlightened, many/most on this forum are > > still human. > > > > Perhaps the explanation you seek is simply " envy " in one form or > > another. Envious of the income, or the physical surroundings, > > envious of the volume, or the patient-perceived results? > > > > Interesting too to read of conspiracy/secret society from one who > > uses the secret language of some other secret group (spiral dynamics). > > > > Chinese medicine works and it has for thousands of years when applied > > correctly (within a wide array of styles). Given enough time, those > > with concentration and aptitude can learn to be effective > > practitioners. > > > > Just being a good practitioner will not make one $ucce$$ful in > > busine$$. A hard pill to swallow for some. > > > > Mark Z > > > > --- In Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > <Chinese Medicine%40>, > > > Kim Blankenship > > <kuangguiyu wrote: > > > > > > Dear Group: > > > > > > I am very disheartened and dismayed at all of the derogatory > > remarks and > > > misinformation concerning Tan/Chen/Tung-style acupuncture being > > bandied > > > about on this group. Many of these attacks have not just singled > > out certain > > > styles of acupuncture, but have rather focused on the morals and > > ethics of > > > the many of us who have incorporated these styles into our various > > > practices. > > > > > > First I would like to address some of the misinformation and the > > stunning > > > lack of understanding of the basic principles of acupuncture and the > > > Classics displayed by some of the detractors: > > > > > > Angela Pfaffenberger stated that, " A striking feature of Tan's > > system is > > > that it takes so little time, the clients do not need to disrobe, > > and you > > > don't really need a diagnosis, you can do the whole thing is a bout > > 10 > > > minutes...Plus the underlying disorder is never remedied, > > consequently the > > > client has to return and Tan also recommends frequent treatments... " > > > > > > First, of course there is a necessary diagnosis - to suggest > > otherwise is > > > ridiculous. And the comment that " the underlying disorder is never > > > remedied " is also nonsense. Meridian-style acupuncture/Balance > > Method > > > focuses on diagnosing the " sick " meridian(s) which indicates the > > location of > > > physical pain as well as an underlying internal problem. This type > > of > > > treatment addresses root and branch and I am astounded that any > > experienced > > > practitioner could think for a second that bringing balance to a > > patient's > > > meridian system would only suffice to alleviate physical pain. And > > I don't > > > see any downside to being able to spend less time with each patient > > and see > > > more per hour as long as you are giving effective treatments. > > Don't we all > > > hope that clients return? I do, and I have personally had more > > patients > > > return to address other issues following a rather quick resolution > > of their > > > initial complaint. My results have been faster using this type of > > treatment > > > rather than the herbalized TCM style I was taught in school. And > > frequent > > > treatments - which happen to be the norm in China - can make a huge > > > difference in results with stubborn, chronic conditions. > > > > > > Someone made the comment: > > > " Many practitioners are claiming how once they switched to Dr Tan's > > style, > > > they saw much better results. " > > > > > > To which Lonny Jarrett replied: > > > " Lonny: This would depend on one's value system regarding what > > > constitutes " a better result " . " > > > > > > This seems a terribly arrogant and negative assessment of Tan > > practitioners' > > > value systems. But we'll probably never know for sure because > > Lonny deigned > > > not to lower himself and " expound a bit " on what he was > > enigmatically > > > putting forth. attempted to translate: > > > > > > " Lonny has a good point here...What Lonny is speaking about here is > > very > > > profound. He is asking > > > whether the relief of symptomatic pain is the goal of the patient > > and > > > practitioner, or something deeper, which in my approach to Chinese > > > medicine would be alleviation of disharmonious patterns. Lonny may > > be > > > looking at more spiritual issues as well, including lifestyle, > > > emotions, outlook . . . " > > > > > > I am not sure how he managed to divine all of that from Lonny's > > cryptic > > > one-liner. Of course, once again, meridian-style treatments do > > much more > > > than simply alleviate symptomatic pain. As far as Lonny possibly > > looking at > > > more spiritual issues, that's nice - especially if that is the > > patient's > > > goal - but why is it necessary to comment on other practitioners' > > value > > > systems at all? What's profound about that? > > > > > > David Vitello responded to Lonny as well: > > > > > > " Lonny, > > > > > > Good point. I think there is a large influence Orange in Dr Tan > > > practitioners. There are quite few big name Dr Tan'rs practitioners > > > in WA -where I practice- and resonating with Angelina, they seem to > > > me to be interested in fast paced busy practices with little care > > for > > > deeper healing. The Orange values of $bling are definetly apparent > > > with these guys. There is this whole Scientology-Singer-Dr Tan-Jimmy > > > Chang- Lotus seminar-collaboration monster that is really a bit > > scary > > > to me...To not understand the effectiveness of local needling for > > some > > > disorders is > > > baffling. " > > > > > > Well, to begin with, linking Tan/Chen/Tung practitioners in general > > with > > > Scientology, David Singer and colors (?) is preposterous. I had to > > google > > > Singer to even find out what the heck is being referenced. Here > > again we > > > also have the inaccurate slam on " little care for deeper healing " . > > And " The > > > Orange values of $bling are definetly apparent with these guys " > > also sounds > > > like a slam, but it's pointless to refute gibberish so I'm not even > > going to > > > attempt that. And yes, local needling can be effective but, in my > > > experience, meridian-style treatments provide quicker and deeper > > results so > > > I am really confused how you could interpret a stronger, quicker > > response as > > > being somehow sub-par. By the way, what color value is assigned to > > cheap > > > shots? > > > > > > Sorry to have gone on so long with this post, but I am deeply > > disturbed to > > > see learned practitioners dissing an effective, Classically-derived > > modality > > > and, even more, showing such disrespect for their colleagues. I am > > also > > > very curious as to what can possibly motivate such a response. I'm > > afraid > > > that it is just this sort of thinking that is at the core of why we > > are such > > > a fractured, divided profession. And this is no time to be further > > > promulgating this sort of division. > > > > > > With all due respect, > > > > > > Kim Blankenship, L.Ac. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 One must not forget that to have clinical success one must have patients. In my clinic, patients would not come for long if they did not have extremely good, immediate results; although for most permanent resolution it does take 9 to 15 visits. If your results are good, more and more patients will come and your practice will grow. If you are only seeing a small pool of patients, somebody is not referring. If people are not referring, perhaps the clinical results aren't quite as good as one might want to believe. Dr. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. : acukath: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 22:01:56 -0500Re: Re: $ and 'the successful practice': was response to recent thread - TCT i wholeheartedly agree, clinical success and $ success are 2 entirelydifferent things, and should not be confused with one another. i rememberwhile at PCOM the teachers we most highly respected for theirclinical/scholarly knowledge *generally* had smaller practices, and thosewith the busy practices we *generally* didn't want as clinic supervisors.(i'm not going to name names here).my point being that clinical success involves AOM knowledge and experience,$ success involves business acumen and experience. the 2 are totallyseparate issues.and may i say, since i'm on the subject, that i REALLY OBJECT to honorawolfe's 100K practice as the model for The Successful Practice. i find thisconcept VERY OFFENSIVE. to me, " the successful practice " is measured byclinical success rates, relationships with patients, quality of time andcare provided, and so on in this vein. 100K has Nothing To Do With IT.it's solely a measure of materialism. don't misunderstand me, i don't meanto say that it's wrong to make $ practicing. of course a healthy practiceis in the black. i'm saying the clinical goals should be first andforemost, the $ is the energy exchange that allows us to continue to do thisimportant and worthy work that we all agree we are blessed to be able to do.i often say that one of the problems with western med is that they have gonefrom 'healthcare is our business' to 'our business is healthcare'. to me,the 100k practice goal is 'our business is healthcare' and i do not believethat is why any of us enrolled in acu college.my apologies for the rant. i have wanted to say this for a LONG time.kathOn Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Kim Blankenship <kuangguiyuwrote:> I agree with you both entirely about what it takes to be a good> practitioner> AND a successful one. A number of my fellow students were much more> concerned with memorizing information that was likely to be on the boards> than with the practice management class that some seemed to see as more of> an unnecessary intrusion into their schooling. I was most fortunate to hold> the position as assistant office manager and, ultimately, office manager of> a successful acupuncture clinic while I was in school. It was that> invaluable experience that has been most meaningful to me in attaining a> level of economic success in my practice.> Take care ->> Kim>>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Angela Pfaffenberger, PH.D. <> angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net>> wrote:>> > Mark, thanks for making an excellent point, practice success is> > contingent on many aspects, one's ability as a practitioner being only> one.> > When I taught I found that this was hard to accept for students, AND I> also> > found that most students were not very interested in business management> AND> > their expectations were often unrealistic in face of the economic> context.> >> > Regards,> > Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D.> >> > angelapfa <angelapfa%40comcast.net> <angelapfa%40comcast.net> >> >> > www.InnerhealthSalem.com> >> > Phone: 503 364 3022> >> > ----- Original Message -----> > zedbowls> > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com>> <Chinese Medicine%40>> > Monday, February 02, 2009 7:15 PM> > Re: Response to the recent thread regarding Tan/Chen/Tung> > styles of acupuncture> >> > Hi Kim,> >> > While schooled, and perhaps enlightened, many/most on this forum are> > still human.> >> > Perhaps the explanation you seek is simply " envy " in one form or> > another. Envious of the income, or the physical surroundings,> > envious of the volume, or the patient-perceived results?> >> > Interesting too to read of conspiracy/secret society from one who> > uses the secret language of some other secret group (spiral dynamics).> >> > Chinese medicine works and it has for thousands of years when applied> > correctly (within a wide array of styles). Given enough time, those> > with concentration and aptitude can learn to be effective> > practitioners.> >> > Just being a good practitioner will not make one $ucce$$ful in> > busine$$. A hard pill to swallow for some.> >> > Mark Z> >> > --- In Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com>> <Chinese Medicine%40>,>> > Kim Blankenship> > <kuangguiyu wrote:> > >> > > Dear Group:> > >> > > I am very disheartened and dismayed at all of the derogatory> > remarks and> > > misinformation concerning Tan/Chen/Tung-style acupuncture being> > bandied> > > about on this group. Many of these attacks have not just singled> > out certain> > > styles of acupuncture, but have rather focused on the morals and> > ethics of> > > the many of us who have incorporated these styles into our various> > > practices.> > >> > > First I would like to address some of the misinformation and the> > stunning> > > lack of understanding of the basic principles of acupuncture and the> > > Classics displayed by some of the detractors:> > >> > > Angela Pfaffenberger stated that, " A striking feature of Tan's> > system is> > > that it takes so little time, the clients do not need to disrobe,> > and you> > > don't really need a diagnosis, you can do the whole thing is a bout> > 10> > > minutes...Plus the underlying disorder is never remedied,> > consequently the> > > client has to return and Tan also recommends frequent treatments... " > > >> > > First, of course there is a necessary diagnosis - to suggest> > otherwise is> > > ridiculous. And the comment that " the underlying disorder is never> > > remedied " is also nonsense. Meridian-style acupuncture/Balance> > Method> > > focuses on diagnosing the " sick " meridian(s) which indicates the> > location of> > > physical pain as well as an underlying internal problem. This type> > of> > > treatment addresses root and branch and I am astounded that any> > experienced> > > practitioner could think for a second that bringing balance to a> > patient's> > > meridian system would only suffice to alleviate physical pain. And> > I don't> > > see any downside to being able to spend less time with each patient> > and see> > > more per hour as long as you are giving effective treatments.> > Don't we all> > > hope that clients return? I do, and I have personally had more> > patients> > > return to address other issues following a rather quick resolution> > of their> > > initial complaint. My results have been faster using this type of> > treatment> > > rather than the herbalized TCM style I was taught in school. And> > frequent> > > treatments - which happen to be the norm in China - can make a huge> > > difference in results with stubborn, chronic conditions.> > >> > > Someone made the comment:> > > " Many practitioners are claiming how once they switched to Dr Tan's> > style,> > > they saw much better results. " > > >> > > To which Lonny Jarrett replied:> > > " Lonny: This would depend on one's value system regarding what> > > constitutes " a better result " . " > > >> > > This seems a terribly arrogant and negative assessment of Tan> > practitioners'> > > value systems. But we'll probably never know for sure because> > Lonny deigned> > > not to lower himself and " expound a bit " on what he was> > enigmatically> > > putting forth. attempted to translate:> > >> > > " Lonny has a good point here...What Lonny is speaking about here is> > very> > > profound. He is asking> > > whether the relief of symptomatic pain is the goal of the patient> > and> > > practitioner, or something deeper, which in my approach to Chinese> > > medicine would be alleviation of disharmonious patterns. Lonny may> > be> > > looking at more spiritual issues as well, including lifestyle,> > > emotions, outlook . . . " > > >> > > I am not sure how he managed to divine all of that from Lonny's> > cryptic> > > one-liner. Of course, once again, meridian-style treatments do> > much more> > > than simply alleviate symptomatic pain. As far as Lonny possibly> > looking at> > > more spiritual issues, that's nice - especially if that is the> > patient's> > > goal - but why is it necessary to comment on other practitioners'> > value> > > systems at all? What's profound about that?> > >> > > David Vitello responded to Lonny as well:> > >> > > " Lonny,> > >> > > Good point. I think there is a large influence Orange in Dr Tan> > > practitioners. There are quite few big name Dr Tan'rs practitioners> > > in WA -where I practice- and resonating with Angelina, they seem to> > > me to be interested in fast paced busy practices with little care> > for> > > deeper healing. The Orange values of $bling are definetly apparent> > > with these guys. There is this whole Scientology-Singer-Dr Tan-Jimmy> > > Chang- Lotus seminar-collaboration monster that is really a bit> > scary> > > to me...To not understand the effectiveness of local needling for> > some> > > disorders is> > > baffling. " > > >> > > Well, to begin with, linking Tan/Chen/Tung practitioners in general> > with> > > Scientology, David Singer and colors (?) is preposterous. I had to> > google> > > Singer to even find out what the heck is being referenced. Here> > again we> > > also have the inaccurate slam on " little care for deeper healing " .> > And " The> > > Orange values of $bling are definetly apparent with these guys " > > also sounds> > > like a slam, but it's pointless to refute gibberish so I'm not even> > going to> > > attempt that. And yes, local needling can be effective but, in my> > > experience, meridian-style treatments provide quicker and deeper> > results so> > > I am really confused how you could interpret a stronger, quicker> > response as> > > being somehow sub-par. By the way, what color value is assigned to> > cheap> > > shots?> > >> > > Sorry to have gone on so long with this post, but I am deeply> > disturbed to> > > see learned practitioners dissing an effective, Classically-derived> > modality> > > and, even more, showing such disrespect for their colleagues. I am> > also> > > very curious as to what can possibly motivate such a response. I'm> > afraid> > > that it is just this sort of thinking that is at the core of why we> > are such> > > a fractured, divided profession. And this is no time to be further> > > promulgating this sort of division.> > >> > > With all due respect,> > >> > > Kim Blankenship, L.Ac.> > >> > >> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> > >> >> > 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.