dr. title

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

> >>>Also if you do not know you do not know that you dont know.

 

Well put.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

>>>>Well Ken there we go again. I will not ague that if one knows Chinese he has a much greater accesses to information, I never did. But I am still waiting to hear one example that shows me how knowing a brake down of a character actually allows me to have a deeper understanding then if I hear a good explanation of it (beside being independent). I do not now, or ever did buy the notion that when the Chinese "have always said that is how it should be done" then that is the best way.

 

I definitely understand your argument saying don't argue about benefits on a subject you do not understand. Well that would be my position often about what I do as well. However, I have spent time early in my education studies medical Chinese, just for the same arguments you have all mentioned, and eventually decided that it does not worth the time (for me). I much prefer to study clinical applications of the volumous materials I have gathered in school, preceptors and China.

Alon What I do feel is that Western medicine is far more established in terms of training, education, residency, research and funding. This leads to a certain amount of shoddiness in alternative medicine. Plus, that 'do-it-all' attitude that plagues alternative pursuits in general.You continue to miss the point about theimportance and status of the study ofChinese medical language relative to the study of Chinese medicine. If youdon't devote enough time toacquiring a thorough familiarity withthe form and function of the languageof Chinese medicine, all of the otherartifacts, theories, substances, methods,strategies, etc. that constitute thesubject remain beyond the veil ofunderstanding. Yes, it's possible topeer beyond this veil. Yes, it's possibleto acquire some of the clinical skillsof the subject without such study, andno, such study does not guarantee theclinical effectiveness of any individual.And if one's aim is to present oneself to the general public as a doctor ofChinese medicine, regardless of theinitials, titles, etc. employed torepresent that status, then one shouldpay heed to the consequences of suchrepresentations as suggest a deep andthorough understanding of a subjectexists where in fact there is onlyan understanding as deep as you'd expectin any subject that ignored its ownnomenclature.Consumers do not tend to trustsupposed professionals who cannotexplain what the words they use mean.You enormously underestimate what there isto be learned from the study of theChinese words and terms. It's a subjectthat the Chinese scholars place a highimportance on. If the venerated sourcesof the ongoing transmission aren't worthlistening to when it comes to what isimportant and what isn't important, thenwho is? That's why there is today in China aproject to compile, collate, and standardizethe terminology of traditional Chinese medicine.I gave a talk last week to the Systems ScienceForum at Beijing Normal University and spentmuch of the time talking with two or three dozenyoung Chinese scientists: physicists, economsists,computer scientists, psychologists, and so on.And you know what they really wanted to talkabout? They wanted to talk about what is qi4?They really wanted to know what I really knewabout the word as I had been so brash towrite a book about it. It led to an interestingcouple of hours spent exploring a range ofquestions related to the scientific investigationand understanding of traditional Chinese conceptssuch as qi4.You can certainly continue to brush it offas being not worth the benefit, but you shouldrecognize that knowing little of a subjectdoes not really qualify one to judge thatsubject's value or importance. As a scientistall you can state is that you do not knowwhat there is to be gained from the studyof Chinese medical language since you have,if I understood you on this, devoted ratherlittle if any time to such study havingdecided that your time is more well spentelsewhere.I have no real problem with that decisionbut with the statments that follow orare suggested and implied from your ongoingremarks on this subject. For anything thatyou say about the value of the study ofChinese medical language after recognizingthat you know relatively little about itis not based on a sound approach to developingdata and thinking about it. How can you profess to judge the value ofsomething that you do not know?As you well know, I am more than happy tocarry on in this vein, but if you have somesort of argument to present that actuallysubstantiates your repeated assertions thattime spent studying Chinese medical languageis more well spent studying other thingseven if and recognizing that the studyof the language is thereby excluded fromthe education of practitioners, then pleasedo so.This is something about the education ofChinese medical practitioners in this country that actually needs to change. Irecognize that there are strident voices,such as yours, that oppose this changethat more and more people are starting to demand and embrace, i.e. the inclusionof Chinese medical language among therequisites subjects constituting a propereducation of a doctor of Chinese medicine.But I wonder if there really are anycogent and well thought out argumentsout there. I can't for the life of meimagine one. The ones I've heard, so you don't have bother with them:-students won't buy it-this is America not China-there is no nomenclature, no language,nothing of importance there at all other than what a hand full of translatorstells us is importantand variations on these and probably otherthemesNone of them really impress me much.They just don't make sense once youaccept the consensus of people whodo know something about the subjectthat it is a substantial benefitin increasing the educability ofstudents of the subject, as Dan B.stated clearly.I'm not even interested in changingyour mind about your personal decisions.But I just don't feel comfortable lettingyour derogatory remarks about thevalue of the study Chinese medical languagego by unchallenged.No one seems to think that it's a badidea, but there just seems to be a greatinertia resisting such a change in playwith many individuals and organizationsinvolved. I'm really curious to find outmore about thisKen> Alon> - > > > Sunday, December 30, 2001 1:08 PM> Re: Re: dr. title> > > Medical Chinese is learning the characters that apply specifically to CM, rather than learning conversational Chinese. It makes it go much faster if the goal is to read and translate Chinese medical texts and journal articles.> > > On Sunday, December 30, 2001, at 09:30 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:> > > As far as political forces are concerned, I cannot understand that aspect of our profession that wants to cripple the doctorate (by excluding the medical Chinese requirement), divide the practice of herbal medicine and acupuncture arbitrarily (although I have no problem with an individual specializing in one or the other), and keep us down at the therapist level and under the wing of medical boards.> >>>Totally agree although, again, not with requiring Chinese, although I am not sure by what you mean by medical Chinese.> Alon

Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

 

-

jramholz

Monday, December 31, 2001 12:48 AM

Re: dr. title

I don't think it's "derogatory" to question the time/benefit ratio---personally or for the culture at large. There are a few dozen scholars already working on translations and commentary; as the field becomes more mainstream, that number will naturally increase. People who have the talent and initiative should translate. Everyone else should be required to read their translations.

>>>>>Exectly my sentiment

AlonKen Rose:> I'm not even interested in changing> your mind about your personal decisions.> But I just don't feel comfortable letting> your derogatory remarks about the> value of the study Chinese medical language> go by unchallenged.I don't think it's "derogatory" to question the time/benefit ratio---personally or for the culture at large. There are a few dozen scholars already working on translations and commentary; as the field becomes more mainstream, that number will naturally increase. People who have the talent and initiative should translate. Everyone else should be required to read their translations.Should the etymology of major terms and concepts be required in our study---of course. But that doesn't necessitate every practitioner *must* learn how to read Chinese. Language skills are different from those needed as a practitioner, and adequate knowledge---in English---should be a prerequisite to practice. Besides, practitioners will be long out of school before they have adequate skill in translating anything premodern in Chinese.Are Western MDs required to study Latin and Greek in order to practice?I suspect that if it can't be made clear in English, then the Chinese probably weren't clear about it anyway. Commentary by Shigehisa Kuriyama, Elisabeth Hsu, and Donald Harper---to name just three---should also be made mandatory reading (but who listens to me?). > No one seems to think that it's a bad> idea, but there just seems to be a great> inertia resisting such a change in play> with many individuals and organizations> involved.Not everyone shares the personal emotional value you place on it.Jim RamholzChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Rather the benefit is that by studying the language you grasp the structure of thought that in inherent in the medicine, and without that you don't fully 'get' the medicine. I think that is an interesting question to address.>>>>>That is were I have still a difficult time with this argument. And again, I believe that student first priority is to learn to be good clinicians. And that's were time is of essence.

Alon

 

 

 

-

Rory Kerr

Monday, December 31, 2001 7:10 AM

Re: dr. title

At 8:48 AM +0000 12/31/01, jramholz wrote:>Should the etymology of major terms and concepts be required in our>study---of course. But that doesn't necessitate every practitioner>*must* learn how to read Chinese.--Ken can answer for himself, but I think the thrust of his argument is not that the benefit of studying the language is that you end up translating (although that may be a side benefit for some). Rather the benefit is that by studying the language you grasp the structure of thought that in inherent in the medicine, and without that you don't fully 'get' the medicine. I think that is an interesting question to address.The time benefit counter argument does not address the question. No-one is asking Alon, or I to go back to school. We are trying to see what a good quality standard program should include now, for new students. Students now have far more hours in their program than back when we went through school, so whereas it may not have been a good use of our time then, now it may well be. These program hours have increased dramatically, yet the inclusion of more language study has not been. With the doctorate, the hours will increase even more, yet there is still resistance to the idea of language study. That suggests the resistance to language study is based on some other factor than time available.Rory-- Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

If the literature was still in Latin, it would be.

>>>>Again this is an argument for independent access to material not to be able to understand principles.

Alon

 

-

 

Monday, December 31, 2001 8:04 AM

Re: Re: dr. title

On Monday, December 31, 2001, at 12:48 AM, jramholz wrote:

Should the etymology of major terms and concepts be required in ourstudy---of course. But that doesn't necessitate every practitioner*must* learn how to read Chinese. Language skills are different fromthose needed as a practitioner, and adequate knowledge---in English---should be a prerequisite to practice. Besides, practitioners willbe long out of school before they have adequate skill in translatinganything premodern in Chinese.(Z'ev) Jim, as a teacher for many years now, I find that without at least basic knowledge of Chinese medical terminology, that the ability to think in terms of pattern differentiation is impossible.

Are Western MDs required to study Latin and Greek in order topractice?If the literature was still in Latin, it would be. German used to be required for M.D.'s when the bulk of the medical literature was in that language. Chinese students of WM are required to learn English. Have you ever seen a Chinese/English biomedical dictionary? The Chinese translation is very clumsy and difficult.I am reading a book, "Aristotle in China", about attempts to translate his works into Chinese. A very difficult undertaking, not unlike attempts to translate Chinese medical works into English.I don't think Ken expects all practitioners and students to be fluent in Chinese in a short period of time; but a little knowledge of Chinese, as you know, goes a long way in helping understand the necessary conceptual foundation of the medicine.

I suspect that if it can't be made clear in English, then theChinese probably weren't clear about it anyway. Commentary byShigehisa Kuriyama, Elisabeth Hsu, and Donald Harper---to name justthree---should also be made mandatory reading (but who listens tome?).The burden here is not on the Chinese, but on the translators. I would say until the last few years, in the writers you mention here, attempts by Chinese translators were very poor at best. Look at the New World Press SHL, for example, and compare it to the Mitchell/Wiseman/Feng SHL. The authors you mention are fluent in English, as far as I can tell.

 

[Guest guest]

If Chinese terms and concepts aren't adequately translated now into English, then it is a problem of the structure of the classes in English. There's no reason why the information that Ken and others feel compelled to include can't be discussed in English. If those ideas can't be translated and discussed, then the translators have already failed.>>>>And if they cant just stop making money on books and lets not learn CM in any other language

Alon

 

-

jramholz

Monday, December 31, 2001 8:42 AM

Re: dr. title

, Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...> wrote:> The time benefit counter argument does not address the question. The time/benefit *is* an important question, too. I think there are two seaparate questions mixed together. The first is whether Chinese language in some form should be included in study. Everyone agrees that it should be included in some form. The two best arguments for it (in my mind) are (1) like language study in regular college (in many cases acupuncture school will replace regulr college), it rounds out the person and their appreciation of how this system developed (those of us doing Korean and Japanese styles may still be unsatisfied); and (2) if the end product of acupuncture school is some clinical practice in China, then communication skills are useful and important. And reading modern texts for new acupuncture and herbal formulas is immensely rewarding in clinical terms.The issue of time/benefit at this stage of development in our profession is largely about the social and financial considerations. Are classes now adequate and sufficient to go the next step and spend extra time requiring language? Can schools do it and remain solvent? Are we are putting an extra burden on schools who often have small enrollments and limited financial resources? Will a language requirement discourage application to schools? The return on this investment hasn't been demonstrated yet. If there are now not enough competent teachers now for classes in English who can survey the published translations and commentaries, the burden on finding new teachers who know how to teach the language only compounds a school's problems. If Chinese terms and concepts aren't adequately translated now into English, then it is a problem of the structure of the classes in English. There's no reason why the information that Ken and others feel compelled to include can't be discussed in English. If those ideas can't be translated and discussed, then the translators have already failed.Then there is a third issue of paradigm change and innovation. Just as the Suwen represents an important transition from magical/religious perspectives, the collision of sensibilities of Western and Eastern medicines will make for interesting changes in this century.Jim RamholzChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

I think one of the issues raised by this subject is whether our present

education is complete enough to develop good clinicians who have a

strong foundation in Chinese medical theory and diagnostics. Because

one cannot be a good clinician without that grounding, in my opinion. I

have yet to find a student who adequately grasps good clinical practice

without grounding in theory, and those who are doing well are those who

have taken it upon themselves to carry around the Clinical Dictionary

and begin study on their own of medical Chinese.

 

 

On Monday, December 31, 2001, at 10:09 AM, ALON MARCUS wrote:

 

> Rather

> the benefit is that by studying the language you grasp the structure

> of thought that in inherent in the medicine, and without that you

> don't fully 'get' the medicine. I think that is an interesting

> question to address.

> >>>>>That is were I have still a difficult time with this argument. And

> again, I believe that student first priority is to learn to be good

> clinicians. And that's were time is of essence.

> Alon

>  

>  

[Guest guest]

Alon

>

> I definitely understand your argument saying don't argue about

benefits on a subject you do not understand. Well that would be my

position often about what I do as well. However, I have spent time

early in my education studies medical Chinese, just for the same

arguments you have all mentioned, and eventually decided that it does

not worth the time (for me).

 

How much time did you spend?

What level of skill did you achieve?

 

Would you say that you understand the

subject adequately to qualify as someone

whose opinions others ought to accept

in lieu of their own personal understanding?

 

I much prefer to study clinical applications of the volumous

materials I have gathered in school, preceptors and China.

 

Again, I'm not concerned about the matter

of your or anybody's preference. I'm concerned

about the matter of a community wide standard

that includes basic knowledge of the meanings

of the terms that comprise the knowledge base

of the subject.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

Z'ev, you want to tell me you have not seen anybody do well with theory if they do not carry a dictionary or study Chinese?

Alon

 

-

 

Monday, December 31, 2001 11:01 AM

Re: Re: dr. title

I think one of the issues raised by this subject is whether our present education is complete enough to develop good clinicians who have a strong foundation in Chinese medical theory and diagnostics. Because one cannot be a good clinician without that grounding, in my opinion. I have yet to find a student who adequately grasps good clinical practice without grounding in theory, and those who are doing well are those who have taken it upon themselves to carry around the Clinical Dictionary and begin study on their own of medical Chinese.On Monday, December 31, 2001, at 10:09 AM, ALON MARCUS wrote:

Ratherthe benefit is that by studying the language you grasp the structureof thought that in inherent in the medicine, and without that youdon't fully 'get' the medicine. I think that is an interestingquestion to address.>>>>>That is were I have still a difficult time with this argument. And again, I believe that student first priority is to learn to be good clinicians. And that's were time is of essence.Alon

[Guest guest]

How much time did you spend?What level of skill did you achieve?Would you say that you understand thesubject adequately to qualify as someonewhose opinions others ought to acceptin lieu of their own personal understanding?>>>>>no I have not achieved competency in Chinese. I spent about a year with about 1/2 to 1 hour per day. That was in 1985 and I remember very little from then. At the end of that year or so I decided the affront did not pay enough. How un-classical of me, shame shame

 

Again, I'm not concerned about the matterof your or anybody's preference. I'm concernedabout the matter of a community wide standardthat includes basic knowledge of the meaningsof the terms that comprise the knowledge baseof the subject

>>>>"We" are the community.

 

-

dragon90405

Monday, December 31, 2001 11:04 AM

Re: dr. title

Alon> > I definitely understand your argument saying don't argue about benefits on a subject you do not understand. Well that would be my position often about what I do as well. However, I have spent time early in my education studies medical Chinese, just for the same arguments you have all mentioned, and eventually decided that it does not worth the time (for me).How much time did you spend?What level of skill did you achieve?Would you say that you understand thesubject adequately to qualify as someonewhose opinions others ought to acceptin lieu of their own personal understanding?I much prefer to study clinical applications of the volumous materials I have gathered in school, preceptors and China.Again, I'm not concerned about the matterof your or anybody's preference. I'm concernedabout the matter of a community wide standardthat includes basic knowledge of the meaningsof the terms that comprise the knowledge baseof the subject.Ken Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

As for students at the present time, an affirmative YES.

 

I'll give you an example. In two 3 hour classes, I had to spend most of

the six hours teaching the students the difference between wei

qi/defense (protective) qi and ying qi/contruction (nutritive) qi as

used in standard Chinese medical theory, with wei qi ying xue bian

zheng/defense qi construction blood pattern differentiation (si fen/four

aspects). They couldn't grasp the use of the terms wei, qi, and ying in

different conceptual structures, i.e. warm disease theory or standard CM

theory.

 

Whereas those students who use the dictionary regularly and are

beginning medical Chinese study had little or no problem making the

contextual differentiation.

 

I will 'bet my beans' that within the next two to five years, that all

teachers of Chinese medicine will need to have at least a basic

knowledge of medical Chinese to keep up with the students. I figured

this out several years ago when the books I used couldn't come up with

all the answers for the students, and sometimes my clinical experience

didn't either. The tendency at times like these is to MSU (make stuff

up). It is quite misleading to students.

 

I have therefore put my support behind the development of a basic

medical Chinese course for all instructors of Chinese medical theory and

internal classes, at the very least. In the meantime, the use of the

Clinical Dictionary at least can give students and practitioners a base

for understanding the use of CM theory and concepts.

 

 

On Monday, December 31, 2001, at 12:15 PM, ALON MARCUS wrote:

 

> Z'ev, you want to tell me you have not seen anybody do well with theory

> if they do not carry a dictionary or study Chinese?

> Alon

>

[Guest guest]

Alon,

>

> Would you say that you understand the

> subject adequately to qualify as someone

> whose opinions others ought to accept

> in lieu of their own personal understanding?

> >>>>>no I have not achieved competency in Chinese. I spent about a

year with about 1/2 to 1 hour per day. That was in 1985 and I

remember very little from then. At the end of that year or so I

decided the affront did not pay enough. How un-classical of me, shame

shame

 

I certainly am not trying to shame you

or anybody, and the pose is unnecessary

I think. You have made it very clear

what your priorities are, and I appreciate

that fact and I appreciate your priorities

as well. I think that for an individual to

devote themselves to clinical medicine is

a great act of goodwill towards one's fellow

human beings.

 

My point, as it has been all along, has

simply to do with the subject of traditional

Chinese medicine and to the labelling of

publically-promoted goods and services

with this term. It means something. It

has meant something for a very long time,

and I don't believe that it is in anybody's

long-term interests to ignore, devalue,

or attempt to unknowingly redefine this

meaning. Either you know what this

meaning is or you don't. Neither condition

can be causally related to the emergence

of clinical skills or expertise.

 

Certainly it takes more than just long

hours of study to become an expert clinician.

It takes years of dedicated practice during

which one learns to put theory to work and

to deal with the very real individual cases

that present in the clinic. And there is

no shame in any of this.

 

The only shame I can see you run the risk

of, in my eyes at least, is if you now

continue to preach that the study of

the medical language is unnecessary or

not a good return on one's investment

of time after having clearly stated that

you never achieved competency in the language

and are therefore not qualified to make

such an evaluation.

 

For you see, Alon, virtually everyone who

has achieved even the most basic competency

in Chinese medical language, at least all

those that I know or know of, report it

to be of tremendous value. Why on earth

do you think that anybody would take

the time to promote such an idea if it

were not so?

 

Do you imagine that I'm getting rich

saying these things?

 

Please don't get me wrong here. I'm not

at all interested in shutting you up

on the subject. I truly enjoy our

discussions. I just wanted to nail

down the actual facts here so that

those who are following along can

keep things straight in their minds.

 

I think your opinions are clearly

put and I, for one understand them.

 

>

> Again, I'm not concerned about the matter

> of your or anybody's preference. I'm concerned

> about the matter of a community wide standard

> that includes basic knowledge of the meanings

> of the terms that comprise the knowledge base

> of the subject

> >>>> " We " are the community.

 

 

Yes, indeed, we are.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

, " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

the problem is more in the laws then anything else. If we are to change

herbs to other than foods, then in US we will be under FDA drug rules.

 

Alon

 

Current law allows labeling that was illegal before 1994. I think the

DSHEA should just be ammended to delete the labeling allowance and I

would be happy. And states should enforce their medical practice acts

and not allow laypeople to basically prescribe herbs and supplements

for serious illnesses. All I have to do is stand in my local

healthfood store supplement dept. for more than five minutes and I will

basically see patients being " treated " for diseases like heart

disease, autoimmune disorders, AIDS,etc. However, the current powers

of the FDA should not be broadened. I think if the labels and medical

advice are eliminated, much of the problem would be solved. I think the

only medical advice on the bottle should be warnings for specific known

risks like ma-huang. And probably a general warning that if serious

symptoms persist, one should see a doctor.

 

I definitely don't think herbs should be regulated like drugs, because

the lack of a profit motive will make most of them unavailable under

that scenario. This way, the herbs are out there for those who do

their homework or are willing to take an educated risk, instead of just

those being sold a bill of goods through the advertising of suspect

health claims. There really have been very few problems with herbs in

the past 7 years and that risk will be lessened further if more people

get herbs from trained professionals instead of healthfood stores. I

do believe there is pressure in Congress to regulate herbs as drugs

right now. And much of this alarm centers around the health claims

issues. I think it shows our responsibility as a profession to side

with the protection of the public, not the unfettered marketing of

large corporations. State law allows us to prescribe herbs in some

states, but not even most, as Dave Molony has noted. So our

battlegound is the with the feds. We may need to reconsider our support

of the current law and side with something just a tad more restictive -

- just a tweak. And I don't really feel we are giving anything away by

doing this,anyhow, except perhaps for tacit support of a largely

corrupt industry.

 

[Guest guest]

, " dragon90405 " <yulong@m...> wrote:

> Now, do you feel compelled to argue against it?

 

 

On the larger perspective of including Chinese medicine, I think I

was not arguing against inlcuding language. We're pretty much in

agreement---or at least not at odds.

 

Having differing opinions in regard to how we view the context and

implimention doesn't make me less passionate or you more concerned.

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

Jim,

 

> On the larger perspective of including Chinese medicine, I think I

> was not arguing against inlcuding language. We're pretty much in

> agreement---or at least not at odds.

 

OK.

>

> Having differing opinions in regard to how we view the context and

> implimention doesn't make me less passionate or you more concerned.

 

I don't believe I said that it does.

I certainly don't think any such thing

and if I implied that, then let me now

correct it.

 

What do you mean by " context and implimentation. "

I believe we disagree about something here

and since you say it's not about whether

or not language should be included in the

education of Chinese medical students,

it must lie in this phrase " context and

implimentation. "

 

Can you help me out here?

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

They couldn't grasp the use of the terms wei, qi, and ying in different conceptual structures, i.e. warm disease theory or standard CM theory. >>>>I can not understand why. But then again I am not teaching it. To me it is obvious. Its only about allowing for more information, and excepting that terms in CM medicine are contextual

Alon

 

 

-

 

Monday, December 31, 2001 2:49 PM

Re: Re: dr. title

As for students at the present time, an affirmative YES.I'll give you an example. In two 3 hour classes, I had to spend most of the six hours teaching the students the difference between wei qi/defense (protective) qi and ying qi/contruction (nutritive) qi as used in standard Chinese medical theory, with wei qi ying xue bian zheng/defense qi construction blood pattern differentiation (si fen/four aspects). They couldn't grasp the use of the terms wei, qi, and ying in different conceptual structures, i.e. warm disease theory or standard CM theory. Whereas those students who use the dictionary regularly and are beginning medical Chinese study had little or no problem making the contextual differentiation.I will 'bet my beans' that within the next two to five years, that all teachers of Chinese medicine will need to have at least a basic knowledge of medical Chinese to keep up with the students. I figured this out several years ago when the books I used couldn't come up with all the answers for the students, and sometimes my clinical experience didn't either. The tendency at times like these is to MSU (make stuff up). It is quite misleading to students. I have therefore put my support behind the development of a basic medical Chinese course for all instructors of Chinese medical theory and internal classes, at the very least. In the meantime, the use of the Clinical Dictionary at least can give students and practitioners a base for understanding the use of CM theory and concepts.On Monday, December 31, 2001, at 12:15 PM, ALON MARCUS wrote:

Z'ev, you want to tell me you have not seen anybody do well with theory if they do not carry a dictionary or study Chinese?Alon

[Guest guest]

The only shame I can see you run the riskof, in my eyes at least, is if you nowcontinue to preach that the study ofthe medical language is unnecessary ornot a good return on one's investmentof time after having clearly stated thatyou never achieved competency in the languageand are therefore not qualified to makesuch an evaluation. For you see, Alon, virtually everyone whohas achieved even the most basic competencyin Chinese medical language, at least allthose that I know or know of, report itto be of tremendous value. Why on earthdo you think that anybody would takethe time to promote such an idea if itwere not so?<<<<Ken,

I am not taking any of this personally so do not worry. I can only speak from my experience as you. Obviously we had a different ones. I am very interested in what you guys are saying as, believe it or not, I am open minded on the issue. I am just trying to get you guys, that are knowledgeable in Chinese, to share the benefits in a more concrete ways. As I just wrote to Z've, his example to me was more about having to learn that TCM is not a hard science and that everything within it is contextual. Obviously if one can read one has much more excess to information (worthy or not). Since Dan is not going to answer my question as to the concepts of moving movement etc. Can you take it up and explain to me how knowing the character changes one's understanding beyond what one can get by having the concepts explained to him

Thanks Alon

 

-

dragon90405

Monday, December 31, 2001 5:49 PM

Re: dr. title

Alon,> > Would you say that you understand the> subject adequately to qualify as someone> whose opinions others ought to accept> in lieu of their own personal understanding?> >>>>>no I have not achieved competency in Chinese. I spent about a year with about 1/2 to 1 hour per day. That was in 1985 and I remember very little from then. At the end of that year or so I decided the affront did not pay enough. How un-classical of me, shame shameI certainly am not trying to shame youor anybody, and the pose is unnecessaryI think. You have made it very clearwhat your priorities are, and I appreciatethat fact and I appreciate your prioritiesas well. I think that for an individual todevote themselves to clinical medicine isa great act of goodwill towards one's fellowhuman beings.My point, as it has been all along, hassimply to do with the subject of traditionalChinese medicine and to the labelling ofpublically-promoted goods and serviceswith this term. It means something. Ithas meant something for a very long time,and I don't believe that it is in anybody'slong-term interests to ignore, devalue,or attempt to unknowingly redefine thismeaning. Either you know what thismeaning is or you don't. Neither conditioncan be causally related to the emergenceof clinical skills or expertise. Certainly it takes more than just longhours of study to become an expert clinician.It takes years of dedicated practice duringwhich one learns to put theory to work andto deal with the very real individual casesthat present in the clinic. And there isno shame in any of this.The only shame I can see you run the riskof, in my eyes at least, is if you nowcontinue to preach that the study ofthe medical language is unnecessary ornot a good return on one's investmentof time after having clearly stated thatyou never achieved competency in the languageand are therefore not qualified to makesuch an evaluation. For you see, Alon, virtually everyone whohas achieved even the most basic competencyin Chinese medical language, at least allthose that I know or know of, report itto be of tremendous value. Why on earthdo you think that anybody would takethe time to promote such an idea if itwere not so?Do you imagine that I'm getting richsaying these things?Please don't get me wrong here. I'm notat all interested in shutting you upon the subject. I truly enjoy ourdiscussions. I just wanted to naildown the actual facts here so thatthose who are following along cankeep things straight in their minds.I think your opinions are clearlyput and I, for one understand them.> > Again, I'm not concerned about the matter> of your or anybody's preference. I'm concerned> about the matter of a community wide standard> that includes basic knowledge of the meanings> of the terms that comprise the knowledge base> of the subject> >>>>"We" are the community. Yes, indeed, we are.KenChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Current law allows labeling that was illegal before 1994. I think the DSHEA should just be ammended to delete the labeling allowance and I would be happy. And states should enforce their medical practice acts and not allow laypeople to basically prescribe herbs and supplements for serious illnesses. All I have to do is stand in my local healthfood store supplement dept.

\>>>>

i agree with you. All I am saying is that its a difficult legal question. There are issues with free speech etc. I thing the new law only allows labels to talk about functions and not about diseases.I do have questions about professionalism and power, as some small part of me is a libertarian.And even though I think an FDA is a good thing, I hate the power that organizations such as the FDA and AMA and licensure gives

Alon

 

-

1

Monday, December 31, 2001 6:25 PM

Re: dr. title

, "Alon Marcus" <alonmarcus@w...> wrote: the problem is more in the laws then anything else. If we are to change herbs to other than foods, then in US we will be under FDA drug rules. AlonCurrent law allows labeling that was illegal before 1994. I think the DSHEA should just be ammended to delete the labeling allowance and I would be happy. And states should enforce their medical practice acts and not allow laypeople to basically prescribe herbs and supplements for serious illnesses. All I have to do is stand in my local healthfood store supplement dept. for more than five minutes and I will basically see patients being "treated" for diseases like heart disease, autoimmune disorders, AIDS,etc. However, the current powers of the FDA should not be broadened. I think if the labels and medical advice are eliminated, much of the problem would be solved. I think the only medical advice on the bottle should be warnings for specific known risks like ma-huang. And probably a general warning that if serious symptoms persist, one should see a doctor. I definitely don't think herbs should be regulated like drugs, because the lack of a profit motive will make most of them unavailable under that scenario. This way, the herbs are out there for those who do their homework or are willing to take an educated risk, instead of just those being sold a bill of goods through the advertising of suspect health claims. There really have been very few problems with herbs in the past 7 years and that risk will be lessened further if more people get herbs from trained professionals instead of healthfood stores. I do believe there is pressure in Congress to regulate herbs as drugs right now. And much of this alarm centers around the health claims issues. I think it shows our responsibility as a profession to side with the protection of the public, not the unfettered marketing of large corporations. State law allows us to prescribe herbs in some states, but not even most, as Dave Molony has noted. So our battlegound is the with the feds. We may need to reconsider our support of the current law and side with something just a tad more restictive -- just a tweak. And I don't really feel we are giving anything away by doing this,anyhow, except perhaps for tacit support of a largely corrupt industry.Todd Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Having differing opinions in regard to how we view the context and implimention doesn't make me less passionate or you more concerned.>>>True

 

-

jramholz

Monday, December 31, 2001 6:52 PM

Re: dr. title

, "dragon90405" <yulong@m...> wrote:> Now, do you feel compelled to argue against it?On the larger perspective of including Chinese medicine, I think I was not arguing against inlcuding language. We're pretty much in agreement---or at least not at odds.Having differing opinions in regard to how we view the context and implimention doesn't make me less passionate or you more concerned.Jim RamholzChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Z'ev: Jim, as a teacher for many years now, I find that without at

least basic knowledge of Chinese medical terminology, that the

ability to think in terms of pattern differentiation is impossible.

 

Jim: Are we talking about two different things? Perhaps this is

where we are crossing wires. My remarks were made about studying

Chinese with the aim to read and speak it in whole; so as to be able

to read and translate modern clinical studies. Of course, students

should be---must be---required to learn most Chinese medical

concepts and their history. Reading herb names and acupuncture

points should also be included in the required list----even I can do

that on most good days.

 

 

 

Z'ev: I am reading a book, " Aristotle in China " , about attempts to

translate his works into Chinese. A very difficult undertaking, not

unlike attempts to translate Chinese medical works into English.

 

Jim: Chinese into English wasn't hard enough for you? Now you want

to translate Greek into Chinese?

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

> I am not taking any of this personally so do not worry. I can only

speak from my experience as you. Obviously we had a different ones. I

am very interested in what you guys are saying as, believe it or not,

I am open minded on the issue. I am just trying to get you guys, that

are knowledgeable in Chinese, to share the benefits in a more

concrete ways. As I just wrote to Z've, his example to me was more

about having to learn that TCM is not a hard science and that

everything within it is contextual. Obviously if one can read one has

much more excess to information (worthy or not). Since Dan is not

going to answer my question as to the concepts of moving movement

etc. Can you take it up and explain to me how knowing the character

changes one's understanding beyond what one can get by having the

concepts explained to him

 

I've explained this in some detail both here

and in the two books that I've written with

my wife, both of which address the various

issues involved in answering your question

quite directly.

 

I cannot and therefore will not try to

summarize it all in one brief response.

 

The Chinese written language is a model

of complex patterns of interrelationships

between data. It serves as a fundamental

organizing aspect of traditional Chinese

thought, of which traditional Chinese

medicine is one manifestation.

 

In order to understand something like

yin1 yang2 theory or five phases one

has to have a grasp of how the Chinese

have organized the data that comprise

such theories. It's not at all the same

as the way that data is organized in

other languages.

 

Honestly, I've not been able to boil

down an answer that is shorter than

what's contained in the seven chapters

of Who Can Ride the Dragon? That's

what that book is all about? There

is a wealth of information that is

encoded in the language of Chinese

medicine, and it has always been the

job of those who study and practice

it to discover this information and

to adapt it to the present circumstances

that face them. Even this process of

adaptation is implicit in the language

itself, and a rudimentary study of

the language begins to reveal the

robustness and adaptive character

of the language and of the various

artifacts, such as traditional medical

theory, that have been constructed by

means of the language.

 

The rendering of these complex patterns

into English always, always, always,

leaves a great deal unsaid. This is

part of the point that we're hoping

to make with the publication of A Brief

History of Qi.

 

These are not quick and easy things

that can be summed up and spit out

in bite size bits. They are big and

long and drawn out and take a good

deal of time and attention to get

one's wits around properly.

 

I suggest you have a look at the books

we've prepared precisely to pose and

suggest some initial answers to more

or less the exact question you're asking

now: what difference does it make when

you spend a little time to investigate

the integral meanings of certain Chinese

words and terms?

 

It is a very good question and deserves

to be answered in some detail.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

I will

Alon

 

-

dragon90405

Tuesday, January 01, 2002 12:34 AM

Re: dr. title

Alon,> I am not taking any of this personally so do not worry. I can only speak from my experience as you. Obviously we had a different ones. I am very interested in what you guys are saying as, believe it or not, I am open minded on the issue. I am just trying to get you guys, that are knowledgeable in Chinese, to share the benefits in a more concrete ways. As I just wrote to Z've, his example to me was more about having to learn that TCM is not a hard science and that everything within it is contextual. Obviously if one can read one has much more excess to information (worthy or not). Since Dan is not going to answer my question as to the concepts of moving movement etc. Can you take it up and explain to me how knowing the character changes one's understanding beyond what one can get by having the concepts explained to himI've explained this in some detail both hereand in the two books that I've written withmy wife, both of which address the variousissues involved in answering your questionquite directly.I cannot and therefore will not try tosummarize it all in one brief response.The Chinese written language is a modelof complex patterns of interrelationshipsbetween data. It serves as a fundamentalorganizing aspect of traditional Chinesethought, of which traditional Chinesemedicine is one manifestation.In order to understand something likeyin1 yang2 theory or five phases onehas to have a grasp of how the Chinesehave organized the data that comprisesuch theories. It's not at all the sameas the way that data is organized inother languages.Honestly, I've not been able to boildown an answer that is shorter thanwhat's contained in the seven chaptersof Who Can Ride the Dragon? That'swhat that book is all about? Thereis a wealth of information that isencoded in the language of Chinesemedicine, and it has always been thejob of those who study and practice it to discover this information andto adapt it to the present circumstancesthat face them. Even this process ofadaptation is implicit in the languageitself, and a rudimentary study ofthe language begins to reveal therobustness and adaptive characterof the language and of the variousartifacts, such as traditional medicaltheory, that have been constructed bymeans of the language.The rendering of these complex patternsinto English always, always, always, leaves a great deal unsaid. This ispart of the point that we're hopingto make with the publication of A BriefHistory of Qi. These are not quick and easy thingsthat can be summed up and spit outin bite size bits. They are big andlong and drawn out and take a good deal of time and attention to getone's wits around properly. I suggest you have a look at the bookswe've prepared precisely to pose andsuggest some initial answers to moreor less the exact question you're askingnow: what difference does it make whenyou spend a little time to investigatethe integral meanings of certain Chinesewords and terms?It is a very good question and deservesto be answered in some detail.KenChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.