Herbal Pharmacology

[Guest guest]

SWEEEET! Thank you very much! That is AWESOME.

 

 

 

 

 

-

" Donald Snow " <don83407

<Chinese Traditional Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:05 PM

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

>

> Yes you can. Precision electronics out of Canada has a microstim unit

> that looks much like the original my-o-matic that I love so much. These

> are frequency programable and FDA approved.

>

>

>

> Never assume anything. If you are looking for it, it's probably out there

> and you just haven't found it yet.

>

>

>

> Sincerely,

>

>

>

> Dr. Don J. Snow

>

>

>

> Chinese Medicine

> magisterium_magnum

> Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:28:02 -0700

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

>

>

>

>

> You can adjust electro-acupuncture machines. But you can't tune in (or

> program) specific frequencies like you can on a Rife machine or an

> Electroherbalism machine.

> I'm not saying his wife was " the " real physicist. I have no idea about

> that. I'm saying that she was " a " real physicist.

> Einstein was a patent clerk who failed math. Everyone says, " He didn't do

> physics as well as anyone, but he just throught more creatively. " LOL.

> Please.

> http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/

> http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm

> Like I stated before. Einstein had alot of good things to say. But his

> theories weren't one of them. Nor were they orginal ideas.

[Guest guest]

These are great points Don, and it's SUCH a breath of fresh air to hear

them, but at the same time, I would also get an " alternative medicine "

license or something like that to use them. I think in my state, that's

like $100, and you don't need any training or required exam. Just to cover

my bases, it's something that I would do. Scenar may not be considered to

be in the scope of practice.

 

 

 

 

 

-

" Donald Snow " <don83407

<Chinese Traditional Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:02 PM

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

>

> You guys are on to something now!

>

>

>

> This has been my biggest complaint with the " purists. " These folks want

> to practice the medicine, unchanged, as it existed 4 or 500 or more years

> ago. That is so sad, and really cheats the patient. This is also

> unethical. Do you not think Hau Tuo or any of the other ancient masters

> would not have used the modern diagnostics and technology if they had had

> access to them? Of course they would. That's how the Wen Bing came

> about. Diseases changed so they adapted with the changes and they found

> medicine to adapt to those changes. Look at modern e'stim. I'll bet the

> " purists " that use this group also use e'stim. But of course, that's ok

> for some reason. Look at metal needles, would you go back to using stone

> or bone? Of course not.

>

>

>

> Now permit me to explain why I think the purists are " unintentianally "

> unethical.

>

>

>

> Let's say that a patient comes to your office with an incurable disease,

> say sarcoidosis. They have horrible lesions covering their body, their

> hair is falling out in clumps because the lesions are in their scalp

> (these lesions resemble raw hamburger), and they are on oxygen because

> these lesions have attacked their lungs. Now as an AOM practitioner you

> use herbal medicine, acupuncture, and any other traditional tools with no

> avail. The patient is getting worse and will probably die within the

> year.

>

>

>

> Now you (the practitioner) retired from the US military and you worked in

> Research and development for a few years. You remember something about a

> Russian scientist that came out with a medical device based on oriental

> medical theory that is being used successfully in their space program.

> Problem is, the technology was top secret and the US government has never

> been able to steel this tecnology. Now you hear that it is no longer top

> secret and can be bought on the open market since their lead scientist was

> able to obtain a patent.

>

>

>

> Now you buy this device at great expense. And you use it on this dying

> patient that has sarcoidosis. In two weeks that patient notices her hair

> growing back and the lesions going away (without a scar!). After 6 weeks

> that patient no longer needs oxygen. Three years later and the patient

> still has not had a relapse and two others have been treated with the same

> response.

>

>

>

> Now the " purists " don't want me to use this equipment, and the MD's sure

> wont use it. So I stop using it and patients begin to die. Am I not

> unethical for not using something I know would work because I want to keep

> my medicine " pure? "

>

>

>

> I tell you the truth, if that patient dies and I have the knowledge to

> save them and don't. I'm as guilty as if I had put a gun to their head

> and pulled the trigger.

>

>

>

> Our medicine is medicine and it is a living thing that changes and adapts

> to whatever works and whatever changes in disease. If we stay " pure " , we

> are killing this living medicine.

>

>

>

> Just my two cents,

>

>

>

> Don J. Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac.

>

>

>

> Chinese Medicine

> magisterium_magnum

> Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:39:24 -0700

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

>

>

>

>

> This is true. Do you think the ancients never innovated? Did they only do

> what was done thousands of years before.

> (I think some of the people are just mad at me for calling into question

> the

> nature of the 6 year Masters degree.)

[Guest guest]

That also might be part of the reason you are so successful from a business

standpoint as well. If I may be so bold as to say so.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

" Donald Snow " <don83407

<Chinese Traditional Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:29 PM

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

>

> Exactly Zev!

>

>

>

> Why do you think my results are so superb when I am using the same

> technology as the allopaths? I am utilizing western high technology, but

> combining it with AOM theory. That, sir, is true integration!

>

>

>

> Don

>

>

>

> Chinese Medicine

> zrosenbe

> Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:24:14 -0700

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

>

>

>

>

> Don,

> Chinese medicine is not about technology, needles, moxas or " Chinese

> herbs " . It is about a medical philosophy, specific principles that have

> been in force for 2000 years. If one is grounded in the principles of the

> medicine, one can use any therapeutic modality in which one has been

> trained. But my observation is that the grounding in principle is what is

> sorely lacking, and that the biomedical influence by and large seems to

> overwhelm that.

>

> Of course, growth change and innovation should occur, but not at the

> expense of the very principles we espouse and practice. .

>

>

[Guest guest]

You don't have any sincere or direct questions. And I've already answered

the ones below. Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

" Joe Messey " <joe.messey

<Chinese Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 3:53 PM

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

> Mercurius

>

> Instead of trying to analyze my state of mind (which you are proving to be

> inept at also)

> why not just answer very sincere and direct questions?

>

>

> why are you even in CM school if you want to do the things on this

> website?

> do you simply seek to use our license designation for your personal gain?

>

> Joe

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Reich conferenced with Einstein over the temperature differential

experiment. There is a publication of the affair, which can be ordered from

the Wilhelm Reich Museum. I do recommended it, but it's not high on the

list of introductory readings.

To reiterate (for the third or fourth time,) I think Einstein had many great

things to say. But his theories have NEVER been considered to be anything

more than " approximately accurate within certain parameters. " If you think

you can take anything Einstein said and make it into a Unified Field Theory,

please do so. You will become world famous instantaneously. Heck, if you

can make General Relativity compatible with Quantum Physics, you would

become world famous instantaneously.

I've never seen so may acupuncturists arguing against the concept of " qi. "

LOL.

 

 

 

 

-

" stephen woodley " <learntcm

<Chinese Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:20 PM

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

> Didn't Einstein try one of Reich's experiments and determined

> that Reich's great " discovery " was nothing other than normal

> temperature gradients in any room?

> I believe that Einstein advised Reich to learn to develop a more

> scientific and skeptical attitude to which Reich wrote a 25 page

> response and had it published (most say that this was against

> Einstein's wishes and without his permission)

>

> Perhaps this is why " Mercurius " attempts to de-fame A. Einstein

>

>

> Stephen Woodley LAc

>

> --

> http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

http://www.wilhelmreichmuseum.org/bookstore.html

This is the bookstore of the Wilhelm Reich Museum. The Einstein Affair is

available here in xerox format. What happened is that Reich demonstrated

the Temperature Differential experiment for Einstein. One of Einstein's

students came up with an alternative explanation for the temperature

differential, but Reich also had controls for that explanation. The whole

thing never really went any farther than that, although there was some

psychological analysis of Einstein's response, which was, " In physics, this

would be a bomb! " LOL. This was shortly after WW2.

The fact of the matter is that the Aether Theory is diametrically opposed to

" Quantum Theory. " Aether Theory suggests that energy is more primordial

than matter, whereas Quantum theory suggests that " things " are the ultimate

foundations of reality.

 

 

 

 

-

" stephen woodley " <learntcm

<Chinese Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:20 PM

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

> Didn't Einstein try one of Reich's experiments and determined

> that Reich's great " discovery " was nothing other than normal

> temperature gradients in any room?

> I believe that Einstein advised Reich to learn to develop a more

> scientific and skeptical attitude to which Reich wrote a 25 page

> response and had it published (most say that this was against

> Einstein's wishes and without his permission)

>

> Perhaps this is why " Mercurius " attempts to de-fame A. Einstein

>

>

> Stephen Woodley LAc

>

> --

> http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Do you have any contact info for this company? I'd love to check them out.

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

-

" Donald Snow " <don83407

<Chinese Traditional Medicine >

Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:05 PM

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

>

> Yes you can. Precision electronics out of Canada has a microstim unit

> that looks much like the original my-o-matic that I love so much. These

> are frequency programable and FDA approved.

>

>

>

> Never assume anything. If you are looking for it, it's probably out there

> and you just haven't found it yet.

>

>

>

> Sincerely,

>

>

>

> Dr. Don J. Snow

>

>

>

> Chinese Medicine

> magisterium_magnum

> Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:28:02 -0700

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

>

>

>

>

> You can adjust electro-acupuncture machines. But you can't tune in (or

> program) specific frequencies like you can on a Rife machine or an

> Electroherbalism machine.

> I'm not saying his wife was " the " real physicist. I have no idea about

> that. I'm saying that she was " a " real physicist.

> Einstein was a patent clerk who failed math. Everyone says, " He didn't do

> physics as well as anyone, but he just throught more creatively. " LOL.

> Please.

> http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/

> http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm

> Like I stated before. Einstein had alot of good things to say. But his

> theories weren't one of them. Nor were they orginal ideas.

>

> -

> " " <johnkokko

> <Chinese Medicine >

> Thursday, April 29, 2010 3:44 AM

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

>> Mercurius,

>>

>> ...they already have that. It's called electro-acupuncture machines.

>> There are also voll and vega test units.

>> and acu-pointers.

>>

>> I'm still perplexed about the Einstein comment.

>> Do you have evidence that his wife was the real physicist?

>> and that he was not the genius that the whole world has declared?

>> What't the name of the documentary you stated ?

>>

>>

>> K

>>

>>

>>

>> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Mercurius Trismegistus <

>> magisterium_magnum wrote:

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Joe: Irony detector on, please, or at least your sarcasm detector. I always

hope that context will clarify things; I am often wrong.

 

 Hope you understand now, sorry for the confusion,

 Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

Joe Messey <joe.messey

Chinese Medicine

Thu, 29 April, 2010 20:13:22

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Hugo said:

 

> That's great guys, without much research you just managed to re-enforce

> the status quo, in the process proving the materialist right and the

> vitalist wrong (we are vitalists, in case we've forgotten).

>

> Again, we practice , a pile of superstitions if ever there

> was one. I mean, come on, the invisible energy Qi? Yi is supposed to affect

> my patient? You mean if I just concentrate rilly rilly hard on my needle it

> makes a difference? Thank god there are physios who understand you just have

> to throw the damn thing in, and nothing more!

>

 

Joe sez:

that is very funny!!

you use a very materialistic point of view to accuse others of being

materialistic! !!

 

If you are being serious, I feel sad that you haven't seen or experienced

acupuncture from someone who has greatly cultivated their Qi

Do you also pooh-pooh medical qi gong?

Do you think that machines are superior to people?

Do we need them to get superior results, or can we develop skills?

The skills that Don and Mercurious are espousing are machine operating

skills that turn practitioners away from being healers and toward

technicians.

 

I stand by the quote even more!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Hugo

 

Joe sez:

Sorry if I was slow on the uptake

it's all good

 

It did seem strange, based on other postings I've read by you. Guess I

should have put 2 and 2 together

 

Joe Messey

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Hugo

I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not great.

Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers are in

agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

The reason I make the comment about some of the English websites is because

regardless of who the scholar is, they still need to be scrutinized, especially

when you are conveying knowledge that the majority of the target audience does

not have access to. I have a lot of respect for Hiner’s work and him as a

human being, but one thing that being in Taiwan for the past five years

‘Solid’, and being involved in the university system, as well as enrolled in

a PH.D program has thought me is that everyone is subject to scrutiny.  If you

attend my weekly Chinese medicine special topics classes, you will see every

speaker subjected to all kinds of critical inquiry the likes that would make

most seasoned professors in the west heave with intimidation, and I’m not even

exaggerating. 

Just to make a few points, a few month back there was a discussion on CHA

mentioning the (东医å®é‰´dongyibaojian) which some people commented that Xu

Jun was a great scholar and physician and he had made a great contribution or

something to the fact. I asked lonny if he could quote the source of the book

and after a week or two he send me the pin yin name that Hiner had given him,

with the additional comment that he himself does  not  read or write Chinese

therefore he could not write the Chinese characters.  I immediately went to the

library and checked out the book. The first thing I noticed was that in this

section (yiliaodoabing 以é“ç–—ç—…) said : “臞仙曰â€quxian said! So I was

a little surprised since it was Xu jun whom supposedly had wrote this so I spend

sometime examining the book, I notice the complete text is written in this

style, I then read the preface and found out that this book and Xu jun’s real

contribution was in the

compilation and arrangement of many books into one, following this format which

there are many Chinese books formatted in this way. A typical reading within

this book sounds like this: cough, and is followed by Sunsimiao said so and so,

or headache and in the yi xue ru men says so and so. Xu jun rarely interjects

his own thoughts, the whole book is written in this style. So naturally I asked

some of my teachers at the school and heard what they had to say, and they just

confirmed what I already had read. Going back and looking for the original

author of this work Qu xian:  lead me to another book,

“臞仙神奇秘譜åºThe Emaciated Immortal's Handbook of Spiritual and

Marvelous Mysteries†were I found out that qu xian was one of the names used

for Huandi's son, and most likely was not even written by him himself but by

many authors. 

 Another example why you should be critical of interpretations even from top

scholars. A few years ago there was a video on Zhang zhiwen a famous wenbing

scholar from the mainland and I watched it with some students ,one who was a

Taiwanese American. I will just say that we looked at each other struggling to

find the same words that were being translated from Dr.Zhang. And I’m not the

only one that thinks this. I’m not saying that Heiner is a bad translator or

communicator of this medicine, but I’m saying that sometimes biases taint our

interpretation of things. When you listen to the translator of Huang Huang, a

lady from Beijing, sorry I don’t recall her name it’s been a long time since

I watched the video, but she was right-on every time, you were getting exactly

what Dr.Huang was saying in Chinese with no elaborations. Translators have a big

responsibility in that they need to make it clear when they are elaborating and

interjecting their

own ideas and when they are not. This is why I’m critical of everyone. Too

many students in the west mostly the ones that don’t speak Chinese or spend

any significant amount of time in Asia tend to idolatrize their teachers, no

problem with that but I feel that it should not stop you from questioning their

logic or for this matter translations.

 

Best regards

Gabriel Fuentes

 

PS as far as Chinese medicine dying out, I will say that there are many problems

in the mainland, and even here in TW to a much lesser extent. It seems that

certain things here in Asia are done in ways to accommodate the status quo, but

just to give you an idea that Classical Chinese medicine is not dead, every

Sunday I ride my scooter up to the mountains near were I live and study for a

full day with about another hundred and sixty or more physicians packed like

sardines in a big room. We read literature by ancient SHL scholars, as well as

old bencao commentators, and get our teachers interpretation as well as clinical

experience. This class is nothing like anything I have studied in the states.

And yes I will also question my teacher’s comments when I feel something does

not jive. There are dozens of these types of teachers with their own specialties

spread around the island. This is why I can say that Chinese medicine is not

dead. At least not in

Taiwan.

And I’ve heard the same of places and people in the mainland; just have to

look for them.

 

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote:

 

 

Hugo Ramiro <subincor

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

Chinese Medicine

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 1:13 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Gabriel, I totally agree with your rejection of the insulting idea that rote

learning in asia leads to some kind of particularly asian stupidity. Rote

learning is an essential requiremen t for maintaining the integrity of our

medicine. One of the reasons we see so much (confused) mish- mash in Chinese

Medicine in western countries is because of our lack of rote (and therefore

solid and instantaneous recall in) memorisation.

 I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not

great. Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers

are in agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

 Hugo

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedici ne.wordpress. com

http://www.middleme dicine.org

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Gabriel Fuentes <fuentes120 >

 

Thu, 29 April, 2010 12:29:56

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Not only are they exposed to Classics in the classroom, but also in the

different Chinese medicine clubs. They have clubs for just about every topic and

they also invite great scholars to come and lecture. And yes these young kids

memorize and know by heart many chapters some even memorize complete books, and

I hope I don’t get this “pathetic†typical western reply that Chinese

students memorize but they can’t articulate or employ what they memorize. As

far as English Speaking websites that say that classics are dead in China, maybe

is true of China, well I would not put to much stock unless you have a very

broad perspective of the situation which I have to say not many westerners do.

My 2 centsGabriel Fuentes

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com> wrote:

 

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com>

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

traditional_ chinese_medicine

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 10:24 AM

 

 

 

John,

 

You mention that it is optional to take more in-depth courses in classics. So

how many Asian trained practitioners actually do this? From interviews posted on

Heiner Fruehauf's website, it appears that this is uncommon as well. Is China

not also having a crisis in CM education?

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:02:51 -0500

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

Jason,

 

I agree that what we learn in the states in the MS program is the " cliff

 

notes " addition of TCM

 

and from what I've heard from those who did the Masters or PhD programs in

 

China,

 

that one can choose to study the classics in depth, but this is not

 

obligatory there.

 

So, the potential is there in the institutional education in China, Korea or

 

Taiwan, but is not really available at the schools here in the US. We have

 

a few CEUs here in the US. that go deep into the classics, but very few in

 

between. In the US and what I've heard from those who studied in China as

 

well, most people only take one or two classes in the Nei jing, Nan jing,

 

SHZBL or Wen bing.

 

One or two classes in these classes can be considered the " cliff notes "

 

version of a whole system, as you described with the Wen bing. Even in the

 

DAOM programs, 3 days (24 hours) of class time for the SHL can be considered

 

the " cliff notes " version.

 

Arnaud Versluys teaches 9 weekends for the SHL and 5 weekends for the Jin

 

gui in his current program (135 hours for SHL), (75 hours for JGYL). This

 

is over 5 times the class hours of the DAOM program, yet it still feels like

 

a minimum of 4 solid years are required to really understand ZZJ's work.

 

Do you teach Wen Bing classes as CEUs?

 

I don't see that really taught anywhere here in the states (except for the

 

" cliff notes " class taught at some lucky schools).

 

K

 

2010/4/29 <@chineseme d icinedoc. com>

 

>

 

>

 

> K,

 

>

 

> Yes TCM starts out with the cliff notes, for example, in early classes (in

 

> TCM training) they give summaries of e.g. 6 stages for SHL. However in

 

> advanced classes, Chinese universities do full classes in classics e.g. SHL

 

> / JGYL. Actually don't many US classes also do this?

 

>

 

> Do we think that TCM doctors (in China) only get the cliff notes? Obviously

 

> some that only complete 4 years will not be as fully trained. We should not

 

> compare our limited ungrad educations with the full scope of TCM education

 

> in China, especially at the higher levels. For example if you look at the

 

> textbook Warm Disease Theory (wen bing xue, 温病学）by ren min wei sheng

 

> publisher you will notice that there are around 30 warm disease classic

 

> texts contained within it (such as wen bing tiao bian, shi re bing pian, fu

 

> xie xin shu, shang han wen yi tiao bian etc). We just don't have English

 

> versions of these texts.

 

>

 

> Therefore to think that TCM is just some simplified cliff note medicine is

 

> IMO to misunderstand what it is about and its real potential. So I don't

 

> understand what you mean by without the poetry. Maybe this is an English

 

> perception?

 

>

 

> -Jason

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> [Traditional _ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>]

 

> On Behalf Of john

 

> kokko

 

> Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:40 PM

 

> <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

>

 

> Jason,

 

> Yes... TCM is a summary of the classics, kind of like the " cliff notes "

 

> version,

 

> without the poetry but still informed by the classics.

 

>

 

> This points to a larger question... what's the difference between classical

 

> medicine

 

> and traditional medicine?

 

>

 

> K

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

--

 

 

 

""

 

www.turtleclinic. com

 

www.tcmreview. com

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Z’ev

This semester I’m much busier than what I’ve been in the past, with full

load of classes and my studies outside the school I just don’t have that much

time to participate in these discussions. As far as your question I can’t talk

for the mainland regarding this particular topic, but in Taiwan most researchers

and MS as well as PhD students are only given a few choices as to what Journals

they can publish in (SCI Journals).  They do great research that stands up to

any western medical criteria. That said if you want to graduate you have to

publish and design your research along certain guidelines which are considered

to be the standard across the western medical field. That’s why you won’t

see that many Yi Jing Yi sh medical classics and medical history papers coming

out of Taiwan, there still many but they are published in journals of medical

history or published in mainland or Taiwanese local journals that don’t offer

impact factor points

. How this translates to clinical practice, well it varies from practitioner to

practitioner some may incorporate the newly found evidence into their practice

and some will keep using what has been useful and consistent to them it all

depends, as far as memorization of æ¡æ–‡ or lines I would have to say that by

memorizing you have access to the information in a very intimate way that allows

you to compare it to other lines and play with it in your mind, which I have to

say is a necessity if you’re seeing the amount of patients that these guys do.

Best regards,

Gabriel Fuentes

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, <zrosenbe wrote:

 

 

<zrosenbe

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

Chinese Medicine

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 12:56 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gabe,

Always good to hear from you. ... as you've pointed out, there are rigorous

programs in the classics in Taiwan and China. I know, for example, Feng Ye, who

co-compiled the Practical Dictionary of CM with Nigel Wiseman, has basically

memorized the Shang Han Lun and Jin Gui Yao Lue and written great commentaries.

However, from your perspective, how has this translated out into clinical

practice on the mainland, especially acupuncture/ moxa? Much of what gets into

the Chinese journals or over here is rather formulaic.

 

We are just at the beginning of the Chinese medicine phenomenon in the West, and

I for one am concerned that we are able to keep the branches connected to the

trunk and roots of the tree, otherwise I fear we will become like osteopathy,

where only a minority actually practice according to the original principles of

that discipline, and basically practice biomedicine.

 

 

On Apr 29, 2010, at 9:29 AM, Gabriel Fuentes wrote:

 

> I would like to say a few things about the Chinese medicine program at CMU,

Taiwan. There are two tracts for students, one is the post baccalaureate program

and the other is the regular 7 year bachelors program, or 8 year combined

western and program. And yes you only get a bachelors degree

after 8 years! If you do a search on the internet for CMU’s curriculum you

will see that all the classics are covered and when I say classics I mean the

Huandi Neijing, SHL, JGYL, Wenbing. The classes are grueling, and the exams are

insane. I’m sure if the same requirements were implemented in US schools,

Students would revolt. My education was not anything compared to what these

students go thru.

> Not only are they exposed to Classics in the classroom, but also in the

different Chinese medicine clubs. They have clubs for just about every topic and

they also invite great scholars to come and lecture. And yes these young kids

memorize and know by heart many chapters some even memorize complete books, and

I hope I don’t get this “pathetic†typical western reply that Chinese

students memorize but they can’t articulate or employ what they memorize. As

far as English Speaking websites that say that classics are dead in China, maybe

is true of China, well I would not put to much stock unless you have a very

broad perspective of the situation which I have to say not many westerners do.

> My 2 centsGabriel Fuentes

>

> --- On Thu, 4/29/10, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com> wrote:

>

> mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com>

> RE: Herbal Pharmacology

> traditional_ chinese_medicine

> Thursday, April 29, 2010, 10:24 AM

>

>

>

> John,

>

> You mention that it is optional to take more in-depth courses in classics. So

how many Asian trained practitioners actually do this? From interviews posted on

Heiner Fruehauf's website, it appears that this is uncommon as well. Is China

not also having a crisis in CM education?

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

>

> johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com

> Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:02:51 -0500

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

> Jason,

>

> I agree that what we learn in the states in the MS program is the " cliff

>

> notes " addition of TCM

>

> and from what I've heard from those who did the Masters or PhD programs in

>

> China,

>

> that one can choose to study the classics in depth, but this is not

>

> obligatory there.

>

> So, the potential is there in the institutional education in China, Korea or

>

> Taiwan, but is not really available at the schools here in the US. We have

>

> a few CEUs here in the US. that go deep into the classics, but very few in

>

> between. In the US and what I've heard from those who studied in China as

>

> well, most people only take one or two classes in the Nei jing, Nan jing,

>

> SHZBL or Wen bing.

>

> One or two classes in these classes can be considered the " cliff notes "

>

> version of a whole system, as you described with the Wen bing. Even in the

>

> DAOM programs, 3 days (24 hours) of class time for the SHL can be considered

>

> the " cliff notes " version.

>

> Arnaud Versluys teaches 9 weekends for the SHL and 5 weekends for the Jin

>

> gui in his current program (135 hours for SHL), (75 hours for JGYL). This

>

> is over 5 times the class hours of the DAOM program, yet it still feels like

>

> a minimum of 4 solid years are required to really understand ZZJ's work.

>

> Do you teach Wen Bing classes as CEUs?

>

> I don't see that really taught anywhere here in the states (except for the

>

> " cliff notes " class taught at some lucky schools).

>

> K

>

> 2010/4/29 <@chineseme d icinedoc. com>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > K,

>

> >

>

> > Yes TCM starts out with the cliff notes, for example, in early classes (in

>

> > TCM training) they give summaries of e.g. 6 stages for SHL. However in

>

> > advanced classes, Chinese universities do full classes in classics e.g. SHL

>

> > / JGYL. Actually don't many US classes also do this?

>

> >

>

> > Do we think that TCM doctors (in China) only get the cliff notes? Obviously

>

> > some that only complete 4 years will not be as fully trained. We should not

>

> > compare our limited ungrad educations with the full scope of TCM education

>

> > in China, especially at the higher levels. For example if you look at the

>

> > textbook Warm Disease Theory (wen bing xue, 温病学）by ren min wei sheng

>

> > publisher you will notice that there are around 30 warm disease classic

>

> > texts contained within it (such as wen bing tiao bian, shi re bing pian, fu

>

> > xie xin shu, shang han wen yi tiao bian etc). We just don't have English

>

> > versions of these texts.

>

> >

>

> > Therefore to think that TCM is just some simplified cliff note medicine is

>

> > IMO to misunderstand what it is about and its real potential. So I don't

>

> > understand what you mean by without the poetry. Maybe this is an English

>

> > perception?

>

> >

>

> > -Jason

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

>

> > [Traditional _ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>]

>

> > On Behalf Of john

>

> > kokko

>

> > Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:40 PM

>

> > <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

>

> > Re: Herbal Pharmacology

>

> >

>

> > Jason,

>

> > Yes... TCM is a summary of the classics, kind of like the " cliff notes "

>

> > version,

>

> > without the poetry but still informed by the classics.

>

> >

>

> > This points to a larger question... what's the difference between classical

>

> > medicine

>

> > and traditional medicine?

>

> >

>

> > K

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> --

>

>

>

> ""

>

> www.turtleclinic. com

>

> www.tcmreview. com

>

>

[Guest guest]

Stephen,

yes... if Wen bing is not considered 'classical' Chinese medicine, but

pre-modern,

would it be included in a " classical Chinese medicine " teaching curriculum?

Since, many people consider Wen bing one of the major schools,

it seems like it should be, but I'm wondering what others think about this?

 

I like what Jeffrey Yuen does in his 2 year herbal history program,

where he teaches formulas based on the era and author.

I think that Jason B. said he also took a class like this in China.

It's important to know the context of the dynasty, culture and philosophy at

the time

that the formulas were written.

 

That's why I'm enjoying just focusing on Zhang Zhong Jing's formulas at this

time.

Taking Arnaud's classes have been very helpful in focusing my mind on one

school

and in my book, the most important in Chinese medicine, although not the

only one that should be considered

in every single circumstance. Huang Huang's books are also immensely

helpful in this regard.

 

It is helpful to have a central axis to connect the spokes for all of the

schools.

Since all of the schools reflect back on the SHZBL as the source

(debatable?),

we could spend most of our time understanding ZZJ's mind as the foundation

and then fractal-ing off from this point.

 

What becomes problematic in our TCM training (in the US anyway), is that

we're thrown into 2000 years of formulas,

without the context and concentration of one line of thought :

(ie. ZZJ = Han dynasty representation

Sun Si miao = Tang dynasty

4 great masters = Jin / Yuan

Li Shi Zhen / Zhang Jing Yue.. = Ming

Wen bing / Wang Qing Ren ... = Qing

TCM = modern PRC / Taiwan-Korea-Japan/ Global expansion era ?

 

Is there a good book on how communism has shaped TCM in the past 60 years ?

Unschuld? Volker Scheid?

 

K

 

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:18 PM, stephen woodley <learntcmwrote:

 

>

>

> Kokko

> good point!

>

> Maybe we could go back to the thread you tried to start and discuss the

> differences between Classical Chinese medicine and " traditional " CM

> I think that the transitional time would be around the Jin Yuan dynasty

> - didn't you want to include Wen Bing as classical? Although I find Wen

> Bing fascinating and with some brilliant formula architecture, I

> personally don't consider it to be " classical "

>

> also - what do you think are the most important steps to training in

> Classical CM?

>

>

> Stephen Woodley LAc

> www.shanghanlunseminars.com

>

> --

> http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class

>

>

>

 

 

 

--

 

 

""

 

 

www.tcmreview.com

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hey Kokko

 

Kokko

if Wen bing is not considered 'classical' Chinese medicine, but

pre-modern, would it be included in a " classical Chinese medicine "

teaching curriculum?

 

Stephen

Even though the time period is not " classical " (IMO) I don't think a

complete program could ignore Wen Bing Xue.

I would love to see schools move formulas studies onto a time-line

structure

Han

Song

Jin-Yuan

Ming/Qing

 

or something like that as you have suggested

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

www.shanghanlunseminars.com

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software

or over the web

[Guest guest]

 Hi Gabriel,

 

 1. I am glad to hear of the burgeoning (I hope) CCM profession inTaiwan, but

my concern is China + the west. I am not concerned about Taiwan, Korea and

Japan, except for the possibility that Taiwan will be annexed by China.

Anyway, Taiwan in particular is known for being where China's heart

moved to. China, on the other hand, has had a terrible time of it for the

last 100 years, and you should well know the amount of writings lost, doctors

murdered or having committed suicide due to the various revolutions. There were

many good reasons for so many " traditionalists " to move to Taiwan.

 

 2. I do not base my p.o.v. on my own readings since my Chinese is low level.

I base my p.o.v. on two things a) my Chinese-national teachers who are fluent,

well-connected and well-read, and b) my knowledge of larger historical events

and their patterns and resultant effects on a people and their culture. And it

is unlikely that you are going to convince me that China is healthy. There is

corruption at every level, including the impulses toward westernisation. There

are too many large factors pointing towards a death of the traditional culture.

That we have a seen a resurgence of traditionalism in the last 20 years or so is

very encouraging, and I actually believe that China will pull herself out of

this successfully. I just wonder how deep we will get before we actually

reverse directions.

 

 3. I have as much sklepticism as you do regarding teachers, if not more. I

simply point to Fruehauf as a legitimate Scholar-Physician who has a certain

p.o.v. Again, he is not the only one. My lineage teacher has a similar opinion -

things are very bad in China, we'll get out of it, but we're not sure how much

deeper we'll have to get first.

 

 4. I'm not sure your points on translation are relevant to this discussion. I

am well aware of how difficult it is to translate, and how much can be lost in

translation (and often is). My teacher speaks english well and makes himself

understood very well. <shrug>

 

 The one, singular, point I would like to hear you address is the following:

 

 China has been in a dangerously unstable state for about a century. There are

many problems with politics, economics and the environment to name a few. Some

seem to be getting better, some I am not sure when they are going to explode

(environment). Traditional culture, which is based on family and lineages

(Taoist, Buddhist, Confucian, collective pluralism), is being replaced by 1. the

western version of the family, and 2. western values of culture (money, power,

progress, singular individual). Without our root how can we ensure our... well,

root? To put a fine point on it, what is the ratio of Chinese medical doctors to

real doctors in Taiwan? Which group has the resources, respect and legislation

backing them? In a culture (China) which is still avowedly communist, how can

religious (Taoist, Buddhist, Confucian) freedom be enacted? How can a Taoist

make it into any form of influential government office? Who holds government

offices and what do they

do there? Protect ? The reading of classics?? Even in Taiwan,

which is far more Chinese than China is, this doesn't happen. It's all western

politics now.

 

 That is my question.

 

 I have two others, which I would be interested in your thoughts on as well:

 

 1. Right now China has a huge influence on the one planetary health

organisation which will define future healthcare: the WHO. While some of the

WHO's legislation regarding indigenous medicines is very good, when we look at

the WHO's executive, we only find western degrees and paternalistic viewpoints.

In the end, indigenous medicine is a small part of the actual process (see 550

TCM hospitals in China versus 2310 western hospitals and 41,000 TCM personnel

versus a half a million western medicine personnel in these same hospitals). If

we review the actual practices in place in areas away from the hospitals, we

find a generally low quality, watered down version of CM being used as the

" Indigenous Medicine Strategy " . In many ways these areas are more poorly served

than areas in the west served by CM doctors.

 

 2. what are your thoughts (and your teacher's) on the annexation of Taiwan by

China?

 

 Thanks Gabriel,

 Hugo

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

Gabriel Fuentes <fuentes120

Chinese Medicine

Fri, 30 April, 2010 4:25:03

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Hello Hugo

I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not great.

Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers are in

agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

The reason I make the comment about some of the English websites is because

regardless of who the scholar is, they still need to be scrutinized, especially

when you are conveying knowledge that the majority of the target audience does

not have access to. I have a lot of respect for Hiner’s work and him as a

human being, but one thing that being in Taiwan for the past five years

‘Solid’, and being involved in the university system, as well as enrolled in

a PH.D program has thought me is that everyone is subject to scrutiny.  If you

attend my weekly Chinese medicine special topics classes, you will see every

speaker subjected to all kinds of critical inquiry the likes that would make

most seasoned professors in the west heave with intimidation, and I’m not even

exaggerating. 

Just to make a few points, a few month back there was a discussion on CHA

mentioning the (东医å®é‰´dongyibaojian) which some people commented that Xu

Jun was a great scholar and physician and he had made a great contribution or

something to the fact. I asked lonny if he could quote the source of the book

and after a week or two he send me the pin yin name that Hiner had given him,

with the additional comment that he himself does  not  read or write Chinese

therefore he could not write the Chinese characters.  I immediately went to the

library and checked out the book. The first thing I noticed was that in this

section (yiliaodoabing 以é“ç–—ç—…) said : “臞仙曰â€quxian said! So I was

a little surprised since it was Xu jun whom supposedly had wrote this so I spend

sometime examining the book, I notice the complete text is written in this

style, I then read the preface and found out that this book and Xu jun’s real

contribution was in the

compilation and arrangement of many books into one, following this format which

there are many Chinese books formatted in this way. A typical reading within

this book sounds like this: cough, and is followed by Sunsimiao said so and so,

or headache and in the yi xue ru men says so and so. Xu jun rarely interjects

his own thoughts, the whole book is written in this style. So naturally I asked

some of my teachers at the school and heard what they had to say, and they just

confirmed what I already had read. Going back and looking for the original

author of this work Qu xian:  lead me to another book,

“臞仙神奇秘譜åºThe Emaciated Immortal's Handbook of Spiritual and

Marvelous Mysteries†were I found out that qu xian was one of the names used

for Huandi's son, and most likely was not even written by him himself but by

many authors. 

 Another example why you should be critical of interpretations even from top

scholars. A few years ago there was a video on Zhang zhiwen a famous wenbing

scholar from the mainland and I watched it with some students ,one who was a

Taiwanese American. I will just say that we looked at each other struggling to

find the same words that were being translated from Dr.Zhang. And I’m not the

only one that thinks this. I’m not saying that Heiner is a bad translator or

communicator of this medicine, but I’m saying that sometimes biases taint our

interpretation of things. When you listen to the translator of Huang Huang, a

lady from Beijing, sorry I don’t recall her name it’s been a long time since

I watched the video, but she was right-on every time, you were getting exactly

what Dr.Huang was saying in Chinese with no elaborations. Translators have a big

responsibility in that they need to make it clear when they are elaborating and

interjecting their

own ideas and when they are not. This is why I’m critical of everyone. Too

many students in the west mostly the ones that don’t speak Chinese or spend

any significant amount of time in Asia tend to idolatrize their teachers, no

problem with that but I feel that it should not stop you from questioning their

logic or for this matter translations.

 

Best regards

Gabriel Fuentes

 

PS as far as Chinese medicine dying out, I will say that there are many problems

in the mainland, and even here in TW to a much lesser extent. It seems that

certain things here in Asia are done in ways to accommodate the status quo, but

just to give you an idea that Classical Chinese medicine is not dead, every

Sunday I ride my scooter up to the mountains near were I live and study for a

full day with about another hundred and sixty or more physicians packed like

sardines in a big room. We read literature by ancient SHL scholars, as well as

old bencao commentators, and get our teachers interpretation as well as clinical

experience. This class is nothing like anything I have studied in the states.

And yes I will also question my teacher’s comments when I feel something does

not jive. There are dozens of these types of teachers with their own specialties

spread around the island. This is why I can say that Chinese medicine is not

dead. At least not in

Taiwan.

And I’ve heard the same of places and people in the mainland; just have to

look for them.

 

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, Hugo Ramiro <subincor > wrote:

 

Hugo Ramiro <subincor >

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 1:13 PM

 

 

 

Hi Gabriel, I totally agree with your rejection of the insulting idea that rote

learning in asia leads to some kind of particularly asian stupidity. Rote

learning is an essential requiremen t for maintaining the integrity of our

medicine. One of the reasons we see so much (confused) mish- mash in Chinese

Medicine in western countries is because of our lack of rote (and therefore

solid and instantaneous recall in) memorisation.

 I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not

great. Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers

are in agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

 Hugo

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedici ne.wordpress. com

http://www.middleme dicine.org

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Gabriel Fuentes <fuentes120>

 

Thu, 29 April, 2010 12:29:56

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Not only are they exposed to Classics in the classroom, but also in the

different Chinese medicine clubs. They have clubs for just about every topic and

they also invite great scholars to come and lecture. And yes these young kids

memorize and know by heart many chapters some even memorize complete books, and

I hope I don’t get this “pathetic†typical western reply that Chinese

students memorize but they can’t articulate or employ what they memorize. As

far as English Speaking websites that say that classics are dead in China, maybe

is true of China, well I would not put to much stock unless you have a very

broad perspective of the situation which I have to say not many westerners do.

My 2 centsGabriel Fuentes

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com> wrote:

 

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com>

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

traditional_ chinese_medicine

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 10:24 AM

 

 

 

John,

 

You mention that it is optional to take more in-depth courses in classics. So

how many Asian trained practitioners actually do this? From interviews posted on

Heiner Fruehauf's website, it appears that this is uncommon as well. Is China

not also having a crisis in CM education?

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:02:51 -0500

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

Jason,

 

I agree that what we learn in the states in the MS program is the " cliff

 

notes " addition of TCM

 

and from what I've heard from those who did the Masters or PhD programs in

 

China,

 

that one can choose to study the classics in depth, but this is not

 

obligatory there.

 

So, the potential is there in the institutional education in China, Korea or

 

Taiwan, but is not really available at the schools here in the US. We have

 

a few CEUs here in the US. that go deep into the classics, but very few in

 

between. In the US and what I've heard from those who studied in China as

 

well, most people only take one or two classes in the Nei jing, Nan jing,

 

SHZBL or Wen bing.

 

One or two classes in these classes can be considered the " cliff notes "

 

version of a whole system, as you described with the Wen bing. Even in the

 

DAOM programs, 3 days (24 hours) of class time for the SHL can be considered

 

the " cliff notes " version.

 

Arnaud Versluys teaches 9 weekends for the SHL and 5 weekends for the Jin

 

gui in his current program (135 hours for SHL), (75 hours for JGYL). This

 

is over 5 times the class hours of the DAOM program, yet it still feels like

 

a minimum of 4 solid years are required to really understand ZZJ's work.

 

Do you teach Wen Bing classes as CEUs?

 

I don't see that really taught anywhere here in the states (except for the

 

" cliff notes " class taught at some lucky schools).

 

K

 

2010/4/29 <@chineseme d icinedoc. com>

 

>

 

>

 

> K,

 

>

 

> Yes TCM starts out with the cliff notes, for example, in early classes (in

 

> TCM training) they give summaries of e.g. 6 stages for SHL. However in

 

> advanced classes, Chinese universities do full classes in classics e.g. SHL

 

> / JGYL. Actually don't many US classes also do this?

 

>

 

> Do we think that TCM doctors (in China) only get the cliff notes? Obviously

 

> some that only complete 4 years will not be as fully trained. We should not

 

> compare our limited ungrad educations with the full scope of TCM education

 

> in China, especially at the higher levels. For example if you look at the

 

> textbook Warm Disease Theory (wen bing xue, 温病学）by ren min wei sheng

 

> publisher you will notice that there are around 30 warm disease classic

 

> texts contained within it (such as wen bing tiao bian, shi re bing pian, fu

 

> xie xin shu, shang han wen yi tiao bian etc). We just don't have English

 

> versions of these texts.

 

>

 

> Therefore to think that TCM is just some simplified cliff note medicine is

 

> IMO to misunderstand what it is about and its real potential. So I don't

 

> understand what you mean by without the poetry. Maybe this is an English

 

> perception?

 

>

 

> -Jason

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> [Traditional _ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>]

 

> On Behalf Of john

 

> kokko

 

> Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:40 PM

 

> <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

>

 

> Jason,

 

> Yes... TCM is a summary of the classics, kind of like the " cliff notes "

 

> version,

 

> without the poetry but still informed by the classics.

 

>

 

> This points to a larger question... what's the difference between classical

 

> medicine

 

> and traditional medicine?

 

>

 

> K

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

--

 

 

 

""

 

www.turtleclinic. com

 

www.tcmreview. com

 

 

[Guest guest]

while i agree with anyone that can take the basic tenants of OM and

develop them to adapt to modern time, as this is what OM has done for

its entire history the question only becomes on proof and historical

use. i must have missed any real explanation of Don's " machine " and

how it is based on OM principles. All i have seen is a statement

saying it is based on CM, how do we know that? how do we check this "

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Gabriel can u tell me what u mean by that the core health of classical

CM is not great.

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Do what I do when I want to know something, research! For the development of

SCENAR simply type into your search engine " EX 735 SCENAR " or ACUSCEN, or

SCENAR, LET medical, etc. There you will find that Dr. Alexander Karasev was

the lead scientist for the Russian SCENAR program and what he based his

technology on. I ask that no one ever take my word for anything, because I

never take anyone elses without doing due diligence research on my own.

 

 

 

If only our collegues would do this instead of trying to get the answers to

questions the easy way. I always try to find the source. That's how I practice

medicine and that's what I do for every patient I get that doesn't respond to a

treatment. I stay up at night and do research until I find something that might

help the patient, then I try it. If it works, it is mine, and if not I throw it

away as garbage.

 

 

 

For me to use any piece of equipment in my clinics, it must equal or exceed the

efficacy of a needle. That's why I seldom use laser. There are only one or two

situations where I use that, but I think moxa is better than laser for most

things. But that's another story.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, LAc

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

alonmarcus

Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:57:40 -0700

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

 

 

 

while i agree with anyone that can take the basic tenants of OM and

develop them to adapt to modern time, as this is what OM has done for

its entire history the question only becomes on proof and historical

use. i must have missed any real explanation of Don's " machine " and

how it is based on OM principles. All i have seen is a statement

saying it is based on CM, how do we know that? how do we check this "

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

[Guest guest]

 Hi Donald,

 

-Donald--

For me to use any piece of equipment in my clinics, it must equal or exceed the

efficacy of a needle.  That's why I seldom use laser.  There are only one or two

situations where I use that, but I think moxa is better than laser for most

things.  But that's another story.  

---

 

 That's a very interestign statement. So out of curiosity what is one thing that

laser would be good for?

 

 Hugo

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hugo

First of all, I’m not a politician and I don’t live in the mainland, and

honestly don’t care about some of the political issues that are going on

there. My intent in coming to this country was to learn the language and improve

my Chinese medical skills so I could ultimately better help my patients.  That

said, I am fully aware about the corruption that goes on in the mainland, I’m

also aware of the many westerners and thousands of Chinese that have paid for

their degrees with red envelopes, and many are in the west teaching classes and

some are even school owners. I would dare to say that very few people in this

list know anything about this; actually I would also dare to say that many just

don’t want to know. It’s heart braking! I also did not say that Chinese

medicine is healthy in China, but there is still people practicing Classical

medicine you just have to look for them. I would suggest you take a little

extended trip over the pond and

find these things out for yourself, don’t take second hand information.

Best regards

Gabriel

PS: as far as what the Taiwanese think about annexation, why don’t you ask one

of them! there are many in Canada. I’m an American of Puerto Rican background;

I don’t think we as westerners should have an opinion of what these people

think.

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/30/10, Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote:

 

 

Hugo Ramiro <subincor

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

Chinese Medicine

Friday, April 30, 2010, 10:04 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Hi Gabriel,

 

 1. I am glad to hear of the burgeoning (I hope) CCM profession inTaiwan, but

my concern is China + the west. I am not concerned about Taiwan, Korea and

Japan, except for the possibility that Taiwan will be annexed by China.

Anyway, Taiwan in particular is known for being where China's heart

moved to. China, on the other hand, has had a terrible time of it for the

last 100 years, and you should well know the amount of writings lost, doctors

murdered or having committed suicide due to the various revolutions. There were

many good reasons for so many " traditionalists " to move to Taiwan.

 

 2. I do not base my p.o.v. on my own readings since my Chinese is low level.

I base my p.o.v. on two things a) my Chinese-national teachers who are fluent,

well-connected and well-read, and b) my knowledge of larger historical events

and their patterns and resultant effects on a people and their culture. And it

is unlikely that you are going to convince me that China is healthy. There is

corruption at every level, including the impulses toward westernisatio n.

There are too many large factors pointing towards a death of the traditional

culture. That we have a seen a resurgence of traditionalism in the last 20 years

or so is very encouraging, and I actually believe that China will pull herself

out of this successfully. I just wonder how deep we will get before we

actually reverse directions.

 

 3. I have as much sklepticism as you do regarding teachers, if not more. I

simply point to Fruehauf as a legitimate Scholar-Physician who has a certain

p.o.v. Again, he is not the only one. My lineage teacher has a similar opinion -

things are very bad in China, we'll get out of it, but we're not sure how much

deeper we'll have to get first.

 

 4. I'm not sure your points on translation are relevant to this discussion. I

am well aware of how difficult it is to translate, and how much can be lost in

translation (and often is). My teacher speaks english well and makes himself

understood very well. <shrug>

 

 The one, singular, point I would like to hear you address is the following:

 

 China has been in a dangerously unstable state for about a century. There are

many problems with politics, economics and the environment to name a few. Some

seem to be getting better, some I am not sure when they are going to explode

(environment) . Traditional culture, which is based on family and lineages

(Taoist, Buddhist, Confucian, collective pluralism), is being replaced by 1. the

western version of the family, and 2. western values of culture (money, power,

progress, singular individual). Without our root how can we ensure our... well,

root? To put a fine point on it, what is the ratio of Chinese medical doctors to

real doctors in Taiwan? Which group has the resources, respect and legislation

backing them? In a culture (China) which is still avowedly communist, how can

religious (Taoist, Buddhist, Confucian) freedom be enacted? How can a Taoist

make it into any form of influential government office? Who holds government

offices and what do they

do there? Protect ? The reading of classics?? Even in Taiwan,

which is far more Chinese than China is, this doesn't happen. It's all western

politics now.

 

 That is my question.

 

 I have two others, which I would be interested in your thoughts on as well:

 

 1. Right now China has a huge influence on the one planetary health

organisation which will define future healthcare: the WHO. While some of the

WHO's legislation regarding indigenous medicines is very good, when we look at

the WHO's executive, we only find western degrees and paternalistic viewpoints.

In the end, indigenous medicine is a small part of the actual process (see 550

TCM hospitals in China versus 2310 western hospitals and 41,000 TCM personnel

versus a half a million western medicine personnel in these same hospitals). If

we review the actual practices in place in areas away from the hospitals, we

find a generally low quality, watered down version of CM being used as the

" Indigenous Medicine Strategy " . In many ways these areas are more poorly served

than areas in the west served by CM doctors.

 

 2. what are your thoughts (and your teacher's) on the annexation of Taiwan by

China?

 

 Thanks Gabriel,

 Hugo

____________ _________ _________ __

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedici ne.wordpress. com

http://www.middleme dicine.org

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Gabriel Fuentes <fuentes120 >

 

Fri, 30 April, 2010 4:25:03

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Hello Hugo

I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not great.

Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers are in

agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

The reason I make the comment about some of the English websites is because

regardless of who the scholar is, they still need to be scrutinized, especially

when you are conveying knowledge that the majority of the target audience does

not have access to. I have a lot of respect for Hiner’s work and him as a

human being, but one thing that being in Taiwan for the past five years

‘Solid’, and being involved in the university system, as well as enrolled in

a PH.D program has thought me is that everyone is subject to scrutiny.  If you

attend my weekly Chinese medicine special topics classes, you will see every

speaker subjected to all kinds of critical inquiry the likes that would make

most seasoned professors in the west heave with intimidation, and I’m not even

exaggerating. 

Just to make a few points, a few month back there was a discussion on CHA

mentioning the (东医å®é‰´dongyibaojian) which some people commented that Xu

Jun was a great scholar and physician and he had made a great contribution or

something to the fact. I asked lonny if he could quote the source of the book

and after a week or two he send me the pin yin name that Hiner had given him,

with the additional comment that he himself does  not  read or write Chinese

therefore he could not write the Chinese characters.  I immediately went to the

library and checked out the book. The first thing I noticed was that in this

section (yiliaodoabing 以é“ç–—ç—…) said : “臞仙曰â€quxian said! So I was

a little surprised since it was Xu jun whom supposedly had wrote this so I spend

sometime examining the book, I notice the complete text is written in this

style, I then read the preface and found out that this book and Xu jun’s real

contribution was in the

compilation and arrangement of many books into one, following this format which

there are many Chinese books formatted in this way. A typical reading within

this book sounds like this: cough, and is followed by Sunsimiao said so and so,

or headache and in the yi xue ru men says so and so. Xu jun rarely interjects

his own thoughts, the whole book is written in this style. So naturally I asked

some of my teachers at the school and heard what they had to say, and they just

confirmed what I already had read. Going back and looking for the original

author of this work Qu xian:  lead me to another book,

“臞仙神奇秘譜åºThe Emaciated Immortal's Handbook of Spiritual and

Marvelous Mysteries†were I found out that qu xian was one of the names used

for Huandi's son, and most likely was not even written by him himself but by

many authors. 

 Another example why you should be critical of interpretations even from top

scholars. A few years ago there was a video on Zhang zhiwen a famous wenbing

scholar from the mainland and I watched it with some students ,one who was a

Taiwanese American. I will just say that we looked at each other struggling to

find the same words that were being translated from Dr.Zhang. And I’m not the

only one that thinks this. I’m not saying that Heiner is a bad translator or

communicator of this medicine, but I’m saying that sometimes biases taint our

interpretation of things. When you listen to the translator of Huang Huang, a

lady from Beijing, sorry I don’t recall her name it’s been a long time since

I watched the video, but she was right-on every time, you were getting exactly

what Dr.Huang was saying in Chinese with no elaborations. Translators have a big

responsibility in that they need to make it clear when they are elaborating and

interjecting their

own ideas and when they are not. This is why I’m critical of everyone. Too

many students in the west mostly the ones that don’t speak Chinese or spend

any significant amount of time in Asia tend to idolatrize their teachers, no

problem with that but I feel that it should not stop you from questioning their

logic or for this matter translations.

 

Best regards

Gabriel Fuentes

 

PS as far as Chinese medicine dying out, I will say that there are many problems

in the mainland, and even here in TW to a much lesser extent. It seems that

certain things here in Asia are done in ways to accommodate the status quo, but

just to give you an idea that Classical Chinese medicine is not dead, every

Sunday I ride my scooter up to the mountains near were I live and study for a

full day with about another hundred and sixty or more physicians packed like

sardines in a big room. We read literature by ancient SHL scholars, as well as

old bencao commentators, and get our teachers interpretation as well as clinical

experience. This class is nothing like anything I have studied in the states.

And yes I will also question my teacher’s comments when I feel something does

not jive. There are dozens of these types of teachers with their own specialties

spread around the island. This is why I can say that Chinese medicine is not

dead. At least not in

Taiwan.

And I’ve heard the same of places and people in the mainland; just have to

look for them.

 

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, Hugo Ramiro <subincor > wrote:

 

Hugo Ramiro <subincor >

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 1:13 PM

 

 

 

Hi Gabriel, I totally agree with your rejection of the insulting idea that rote

learning in asia leads to some kind of particularly asian stupidity. Rote

learning is an essential requiremen t for maintaining the integrity of our

medicine. One of the reasons we see so much (confused) mish- mash in Chinese

Medicine in western countries is because of our lack of rote (and therefore

solid and instantaneous recall in) memorisation.

 I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not

great. Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers

are in agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

 Hugo

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedici ne.wordpress. com

http://www.middleme dicine.org

 

____________ _________ _________ __

Gabriel Fuentes <fuentes120>

 

Thu, 29 April, 2010 12:29:56

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Not only are they exposed to Classics in the classroom, but also in the

different Chinese medicine clubs. They have clubs for just about every topic and

they also invite great scholars to come and lecture. And yes these young kids

memorize and know by heart many chapters some even memorize complete books, and

I hope I don’t get this “pathetic†typical western reply that Chinese

students memorize but they can’t articulate or employ what they memorize. As

far as English Speaking websites that say that classics are dead in China, maybe

is true of China, well I would not put to much stock unless you have a very

broad perspective of the situation which I have to say not many westerners do.

My 2 centsGabriel Fuentes

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com> wrote:

 

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com>

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

traditional_ chinese_medicine

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 10:24 AM

 

 

 

John,

 

You mention that it is optional to take more in-depth courses in classics. So

how many Asian trained practitioners actually do this? From interviews posted on

Heiner Fruehauf's website, it appears that this is uncommon as well. Is China

not also having a crisis in CM education?

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:02:51 -0500

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

Jason,

 

I agree that what we learn in the states in the MS program is the " cliff

 

notes " addition of TCM

 

and from what I've heard from those who did the Masters or PhD programs in

 

China,

 

that one can choose to study the classics in depth, but this is not

 

obligatory there.

 

So, the potential is there in the institutional education in China, Korea or

 

Taiwan, but is not really available at the schools here in the US. We have

 

a few CEUs here in the US. that go deep into the classics, but very few in

 

between. In the US and what I've heard from those who studied in China as

 

well, most people only take one or two classes in the Nei jing, Nan jing,

 

SHZBL or Wen bing.

 

One or two classes in these classes can be considered the " cliff notes "

 

version of a whole system, as you described with the Wen bing. Even in the

 

DAOM programs, 3 days (24 hours) of class time for the SHL can be considered

 

the " cliff notes " version.

 

Arnaud Versluys teaches 9 weekends for the SHL and 5 weekends for the Jin

 

gui in his current program (135 hours for SHL), (75 hours for JGYL). This

 

is over 5 times the class hours of the DAOM program, yet it still feels like

 

a minimum of 4 solid years are required to really understand ZZJ's work.

 

Do you teach Wen Bing classes as CEUs?

 

I don't see that really taught anywhere here in the states (except for the

 

" cliff notes " class taught at some lucky schools).

 

K

 

2010/4/29 <@chineseme d icinedoc. com>

 

>

 

>

 

> K,

 

>

 

> Yes TCM starts out with the cliff notes, for example, in early classes (in

 

> TCM training) they give summaries of e.g. 6 stages for SHL. However in

 

> advanced classes, Chinese universities do full classes in classics e.g. SHL

 

> / JGYL. Actually don't many US classes also do this?

 

>

 

> Do we think that TCM doctors (in China) only get the cliff notes? Obviously

 

> some that only complete 4 years will not be as fully trained. We should not

 

> compare our limited ungrad educations with the full scope of TCM education

 

> in China, especially at the higher levels. For example if you look at the

 

> textbook Warm Disease Theory (wen bing xue, 温病学）by ren min wei sheng

 

> publisher you will notice that there are around 30 warm disease classic

 

> texts contained within it (such as wen bing tiao bian, shi re bing pian, fu

 

> xie xin shu, shang han wen yi tiao bian etc). We just don't have English

 

> versions of these texts.

 

>

 

> Therefore to think that TCM is just some simplified cliff note medicine is

 

> IMO to misunderstand what it is about and its real potential. So I don't

 

> understand what you mean by without the poetry. Maybe this is an English

 

> perception?

 

>

 

> -Jason

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> [Traditional _ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>]

 

> On Behalf Of john

 

> kokko

 

> Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:40 PM

 

> <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

>

 

> Jason,

 

> Yes... TCM is a summary of the classics, kind of like the " cliff notes "

 

> version,

 

> without the poetry but still informed by the classics.

 

>

 

> This points to a larger question... what's the difference between classical

 

> medicine

 

> and traditional medicine?

 

>

 

> K

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

--

 

 

 

""

 

www.turtleclinic. com

 

www.tcmreview. com

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon

I have no idea what you’re talking about, could you cut and paste my

statement.

Gabriel Fuentes

 

--- On Fri, 4/30/10, alon marcus <alonmarcus wrote:

 

 

alon marcus <alonmarcus

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

Chinese Medicine

Friday, April 30, 2010, 11:09 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gabriel can u tell me what u mean by that the core health of classical

CM is not great.

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

www.integrativeheal thmedicine. com

alonmarcus (AT) wans (DOT) net

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sorry Alon

This statement  was made by Hugo: I think I may disagree with your comment

about english speaking websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an

example, is a fully fledged scholar physician who claims that the core health of

classical CM is not great. Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as

well. Both my teachers are in agreement about this as well.

 While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 Your thoughts?

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/30/10, alon marcus <alonmarcus wrote:

 

 

alon marcus <alonmarcus

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

Chinese Medicine

Friday, April 30, 2010, 11:09 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gabriel can u tell me what u mean by that the core health of classical

CM is not great.

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

www.integrativeheal thmedicine. com

alonmarcus (AT) wans (DOT) net

 

 

[Guest guest]

Gabe,

 

Was there anything wrong with the video interviews that Heiner posted from

various Chinese?

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

fuentes120

Fri, 30 Apr 2010 01:25:03 -0700

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hello Hugo

 

I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not great.

Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers are in

agreement about this as well.

 

While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 

Your thoughts?

 

 

 

The reason I make the comment about some of the English websites is because

regardless of who the scholar is, they still need to be scrutinized, especially

when you are conveying knowledge that the majority of the target audience does

not have access to. I have a lot of respect for Hiner’s work and him as a

human being, but one thing that being in Taiwan for the past five years

‘Solid’, and being involved in the university system, as well as enrolled in

a PH.D program has thought me is that everyone is subject to scrutiny. If you

attend my weekly Chinese medicine special topics classes, you will see every

speaker subjected to all kinds of critical inquiry the likes that would make

most seasoned professors in the west heave with intimidation, and I’m not even

exaggerating.

 

Just to make a few points, a few month back there was a discussion on CHA

mentioning the (东医å®é‰´dongyibaojian) which some people commented that Xu

Jun was a great scholar and physician and he had made a great contribution or

something to the fact. I asked lonny if he could quote the source of the book

and after a week or two he send me the pin yin name that Hiner had given him,

with the additional comment that he himself does not read or write Chinese

therefore he could not write the Chinese characters. I immediately went to the

library and checked out the book. The first thing I noticed was that in this

section (yiliaodoabing 以é“ç–—ç—…) said : “臞仙曰â€quxian said! So I was

a little surprised since it was Xu jun whom supposedly had wrote this so I spend

sometime examining the book, I notice the complete text is written in this

style, I then read the preface and found out that this book and Xu jun’s real

contribution was in the

 

compilation and arrangement of many books into one, following this format which

there are many Chinese books formatted in this way. A typical reading within

this book sounds like this: cough, and is followed by Sunsimiao said so and so,

or headache and in the yi xue ru men says so and so. Xu jun rarely interjects

his own thoughts, the whole book is written in this style. So naturally I asked

some of my teachers at the school and heard what they had to say, and they just

confirmed what I already had read. Going back and looking for the original

author of this work Qu xian: lead me to another book,

“臞仙神奇秘譜åºThe Emaciated Immortal's Handbook of Spiritual and

Marvelous Mysteries†were I found out that qu xian was one of the names used

for Huandi's son, and most likely was not even written by him himself but by

many authors.

 

Another example why you should be critical of interpretations even from top

scholars. A few years ago there was a video on Zhang zhiwen a famous wenbing

scholar from the mainland and I watched it with some students ,one who was a

Taiwanese American. I will just say that we looked at each other struggling to

find the same words that were being translated from Dr.Zhang. And I’m not the

only one that thinks this. I’m not saying that Heiner is a bad translator or

communicator of this medicine, but I’m saying that sometimes biases taint our

interpretation of things. When you listen to the translator of Huang Huang, a

lady from Beijing, sorry I don’t recall her name it’s been a long time since

I watched the video, but she was right-on every time, you were getting exactly

what Dr.Huang was saying in Chinese with no elaborations. Translators have a big

responsibility in that they need to make it clear when they are elaborating and

interjecting their

 

own ideas and when they are not. This is why I’m critical of everyone. Too

many students in the west mostly the ones that don’t speak Chinese or spend

any significant amount of time in Asia tend to idolatrize their teachers, no

problem with that but I feel that it should not stop you from questioning their

logic or for this matter translations.

 

 

 

Best regards

 

Gabriel Fuentes

 

 

 

PS as far as Chinese medicine dying out, I will say that there are many problems

in the mainland, and even here in TW to a much lesser extent. It seems that

certain things here in Asia are done in ways to accommodate the status quo, but

just to give you an idea that Classical Chinese medicine is not dead, every

Sunday I ride my scooter up to the mountains near were I live and study for a

full day with about another hundred and sixty or more physicians packed like

sardines in a big room. We read literature by ancient SHL scholars, as well as

old bencao commentators, and get our teachers interpretation as well as clinical

experience. This class is nothing like anything I have studied in the states.

And yes I will also question my teacher’s comments when I feel something does

not jive. There are dozens of these types of teachers with their own specialties

spread around the island. This is why I can say that Chinese medicine is not

dead. At least not in

 

Taiwan.

 

And I’ve heard the same of places and people in the mainland; just have to

look for them.

 

 

 

 

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote:

 

 

 

Hugo Ramiro <subincor

 

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

Chinese Medicine

 

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 1:13 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Gabriel, I totally agree with your rejection of the insulting idea that rote

learning in asia leads to some kind of particularly asian stupidity. Rote

learning is an essential requiremen t for maintaining the integrity of our

medicine. One of the reasons we see so much (confused) mish- mash in Chinese

Medicine in western countries is because of our lack of rote (and therefore

solid and instantaneous recall in) memorisation.

 

I think I may disagree with your comment about english speaking

websites/classical CM dying: Heiner Fruehauf, as an example, is a fully fledged

scholar physician who claims that the core health of classical CM is not great.

Certain highly placed Chinese nationals agree as well. Both my teachers are in

agreement about this as well.

 

While I am always encouraged to hear that programs such as the one you mention

are so rigorous, we need more than that to preserve the health of our medicine.

 

Your thoughts?

 

 

 

Hugo

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Hugo Ramiro

 

http://middlemedici ne.wordpress. com

 

http://www.middleme dicine.org

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Gabriel Fuentes <fuentes120 >

 

 

 

Thu, 29 April, 2010 12:29:56

 

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

 

 

 

Not only are they exposed to Classics in the classroom, but also in the

different Chinese medicine clubs. They have clubs for just about every topic and

they also invite great scholars to come and lecture. And yes these young kids

memorize and know by heart many chapters some even memorize complete books, and

I hope I don’t get this “pathetic†typical western reply that Chinese

students memorize but they can’t articulate or employ what they memorize. As

far as English Speaking websites that say that classics are dead in China, maybe

is true of China, well I would not put to much stock unless you have a very

broad perspective of the situation which I have to say not many westerners do.

 

My 2 centsGabriel Fuentes

 

 

 

--- On Thu, 4/29/10, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com> wrote:

 

 

 

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1@ hotmail.com>

 

RE: Herbal Pharmacology

 

traditional_ chinese_medicine

 

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 10:24 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John,

 

 

 

You mention that it is optional to take more in-depth courses in classics. So

how many Asian trained practitioners actually do this? From interviews posted on

Heiner Fruehauf's website, it appears that this is uncommon as well. Is China

not also having a crisis in CM education?

 

 

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

 

 

johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com

 

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:02:51 -0500

 

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

 

Jason,

 

 

 

I agree that what we learn in the states in the MS program is the " cliff

 

 

 

notes " addition of TCM

 

 

 

and from what I've heard from those who did the Masters or PhD programs in

 

 

 

China,

 

 

 

that one can choose to study the classics in depth, but this is not

 

 

 

obligatory there.

 

 

 

So, the potential is there in the institutional education in China, Korea or

 

 

 

Taiwan, but is not really available at the schools here in the US. We have

 

 

 

a few CEUs here in the US. that go deep into the classics, but very few in

 

 

 

between. In the US and what I've heard from those who studied in China as

 

 

 

well, most people only take one or two classes in the Nei jing, Nan jing,

 

 

 

SHZBL or Wen bing.

 

 

 

One or two classes in these classes can be considered the " cliff notes "

 

 

 

version of a whole system, as you described with the Wen bing. Even in the

 

 

 

DAOM programs, 3 days (24 hours) of class time for the SHL can be considered

 

 

 

the " cliff notes " version.

 

 

 

Arnaud Versluys teaches 9 weekends for the SHL and 5 weekends for the Jin

 

 

 

gui in his current program (135 hours for SHL), (75 hours for JGYL). This

 

 

 

is over 5 times the class hours of the DAOM program, yet it still feels like

 

 

 

a minimum of 4 solid years are required to really understand ZZJ's work.

 

 

 

Do you teach Wen Bing classes as CEUs?

 

 

 

I don't see that really taught anywhere here in the states (except for the

 

 

 

" cliff notes " class taught at some lucky schools).

 

 

 

K

 

 

 

2010/4/29 <@chineseme d icinedoc. com>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> K,

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Yes TCM starts out with the cliff notes, for example, in early classes (in

 

 

 

> TCM training) they give summaries of e.g. 6 stages for SHL. However in

 

 

 

> advanced classes, Chinese universities do full classes in classics e.g. SHL

 

 

 

> / JGYL. Actually don't many US classes also do this?

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Do we think that TCM doctors (in China) only get the cliff notes? Obviously

 

 

 

> some that only complete 4 years will not be as fully trained. We should not

 

 

 

> compare our limited ungrad educations with the full scope of TCM education

 

 

 

> in China, especially at the higher levels. For example if you look at the

 

 

 

> textbook Warm Disease Theory (wen bing xue, 温病学）by ren min wei sheng

 

 

 

> publisher you will notice that there are around 30 warm disease classic

 

 

 

> texts contained within it (such as wen bing tiao bian, shi re bing pian, fu

 

 

 

> xie xin shu, shang han wen yi tiao bian etc). We just don't have English

 

 

 

> versions of these texts.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Therefore to think that TCM is just some simplified cliff note medicine is

 

 

 

> IMO to misunderstand what it is about and its real potential. So I don't

 

 

 

> understand what you mean by without the poetry. Maybe this is an English

 

 

 

> perception?

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> -Jason

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

 

 

> [Traditional _ Chinese_Medicine <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>]

 

 

 

> On Behalf Of john

 

 

 

> kokko

 

 

 

> Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:40 PM

 

 

 

> <Traditional_

Chinese_Medicine %40. com>

 

 

 

> Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Jason,

 

 

 

> Yes... TCM is a summary of the classics, kind of like the " cliff notes "

 

 

 

> version,

 

 

 

> without the poetry but still informed by the classics.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> This points to a larger question... what's the difference between classical

 

 

 

> medicine

 

 

 

> and traditional medicine?

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> K

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

--

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

""

 

 

 

www.turtleclinic. com

 

 

 

www.tcmreview. com

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Gabriel i did. Its from the first paragraph of your statement

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Stephen and Kokko,

    I am glad you are discussing this constructively as it is becoming

obvious to me over the past few days that there is a deep schism in our

profession... deeper than what i thought.

    I am convinced that this division has its roots in the lack of

sufficient classical education in schools. This isn't likely to get better as

the percentage of herb questions diminishes on the state board exam.

 

    Studying in chronological order is a very interesting pedagogical

suggestion. It is how all material is taught in Waldorf schools; Rudolf Steiner

thought that learning should mimick history in order to make cohesive sense.

This approach is slower in the beginning, but accelerates rapidly as the mind is

growing in the same fashion as the historical tree of ideas - that is,

algorithmically.

    Being fairly new in my studies, it has often come to my mind that i

lacked historical perspective when analysing formulae. I also see many students

who, when they get to study SHL or JGYL, struggle to convert these thoughts into

'TCM language' - which ultimately limits us. A historical approach from the get

go would eliminate this problem.

    In order to achieve this we way we are taught single herbs would also

probably have to be re-visited (SNBCJ etc...) so that classical formulae can be

understood in their context.

 

    In defense of TCM (...NOT! as Arnaud would say), there would probably

need to be some kind of 'horizontal learning' (historical being vertical in my

mind at this moment) classes, where we would compare the different approaches

for a given presentation... but i think that should come at the end.

    Probably it would take longer studies to do it that way... but for such a

better result!

 

    Another problem is the State Board... the license exam would need to be

remodeled to mirror this (that would take a revolution!), or else TCM

descriptions of formulae would need to be taught (maybe at the end, with the

comparative class?)

 

    I am deeply shocked by the lack of identity of our professional body, and

me that can only mean that our education as a whole must not give us a strong

treillis for our minds. Think of the fanciful growth of a vine: with no treillis

it does not thrive; it is the rigidity of the treillis that gives it the

opportunity and the leisure to wander and curl within the allowance of natural

conditions, for its own delight and that of those who look upon it.

 

Genevieve.

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

stephen woodley <learntcm

Chinese Medicine

Fri, April 30, 2010 6:53:17 AM

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

Hey Kokko

 

Kokko

if Wen bing is not considered 'classical' Chinese medicine, but

pre-modern, would it be included in a " classical Chinese medicine "

teaching curriculum?

 

Stephen

Even though the time period is not " classical " (IMO) I don't think a

complete program could ignore Wen Bing Xue.

I would love to see schools move formulas studies onto a time-line

structure

Han

Song

Jin-Yuan

Ming/Qing

 

or something like that as you have suggested

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

www.shanghanlunsemi nars.com

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software

or over the web

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

With all due respect, you need to dig deeper. I've done the research, now you

need to if you are serious.

 

 

 

Don Snow

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

alonmarcus

Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:27:14 -0700

Re: Herbal Pharmacology

 

 

 

 

 

Don I have read the article the history of scanner at. I dont see

enough to support a statement that says it is based on chinese medicine

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:019cl-kUHtUJ:www.jpastar.co\

m/DENS_TRAINING_101.pdf+Alexander+Karasev+chinese+medicine & cd=1 & hl=en & ct=clnk & gl\

=us & client=firefox-a

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419y o

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus