source of income

[Guest guest]

CM is going to change whether any of us like it or not simply because

change is inevitable. I believe that the future will be the

integration of CM and WM, if for no other reason than that is what is

being promoted in the PRC, the home of the vaste majority of CM

practitioners. However, I believe that there are forces at work even

in the West that are moving us in this direction. It is my experience

that the majority of patients themselves want such an integration.

They may not be totally satisfied with their WM care, but most are not

willing to abandon it entirely. If given the option of straight WM,

straight CM practiced by non-MDs, or some sort of integration, I think

most people in North America would opt for the combination therapy. I

say that because studies suggest that a huge percentage of patients

are already making use of such a combined medicine on their own,

including myself. Further, many, many, many published studies show

that the combination of the two works better than either one alone in

many, many situations.

 

Bob

 

, " "

<zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> Are you saying we all have hairy feet?

>

> How will CM be changed, and who will do the changing? Don't expect

it

> will be us that does the changing. Is the only 'progress' to be a

> subset of biomedicine?

>

> Just asking.

>

>

> On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 11:01 PM, Simon King wrote:

>

> > If CM is going to get anywhere (albeit in a changed form)it has to

> > get past this hobbity backwater.

> >

> > Simon

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/22/03 12:51:12 PM, writes:

 

 

It would seem that

political changes that benefit the schools in terms of increased numbers

of students and higher salaries would influence myself and other educators,

  while changes that resulted in increased professional status and less

economic competition would be of more interest to practitioners.  However

if these goals are competing with each other, than one will surely have to

choose.  For instance, if supporting an entry level DAOM results in many

schools closing, where does a teacher side?  I like to think my actual

motivation is what's best for students and the public and the profession

in the long run.  I assume others feel the same way about their own

positions. 

 

It is my posit (not position) that if we raised educational levels with an entry level DOM in many or most states(I still believe that acupuncture is part of Oriental Medicine) over the next decade, possibly with an acu-only program available for those who do not want to commit to learning a full field of medicine, that our schools might get more serious and treat our professors more seriously with better pay, tenure and etc, sort of like REAL colleges. This vocational school mentality of pounding a lot of students out to make money is our only experience right now, so some schools are under the impression it is the best thing (safety and effectiveness are different, yes?). We might also think instead of providing a thorough education, which is better for both the profession and the professors. Some schools will want to remain vocational and some will want to become true colleges, but I suspect that most will attempt to become colleges, because that is what serious students want. Perhaps schools that only teach acu will ally themselves with colleges so their students can continue training later without having to repeat too many classes becasue those classes did not meet colege standards. Think community college vs ivy league to get a picture. Colleges that work hard and reinvest in teachers and physical plant will be rewarded with better students, as I think we are already seeing.

It is a win / win situation, with both the profession and the professors winning. This is my present opinion, but I'm flexible if data changes.

David Molony

[Guest guest]

Mr. ,

 

I am new to this group and would like to simply say how much I agree with your points of view. I have been practicing and studying the Traditional Chinese Way of medicine, lifestyle {a Sifu of Kung Fu, Tai Chi and Qi Gong} for over 30 years. My wife and I have a TCM practice in Seattle, WA [strictly herbalist] in which we spend loads of time working on traditional, herbal formulas and their modifications. It is extremely complicated and not simplified to 20 patent rx. as I see so many local acu/om students have succumbed to. There seems to be a missing link not being taught in the schools...maybe you just can't teach it! That being an internal connection with your pt. and the herbs, linking both on a, some would say, mystical journey. I most likely won't do much writing and may drop off ht list, but wanted to make at least one connection. I also have had a 15 year background as a paramedic and know quite well the wm side of the issue, from the inside out. For me...years and years of study and personal discipline [living the correct lifestyle] will always be the only way to TCM enlightenment. There are no shortcuts.

 

Sincerely,

 

David Akrish

 

 

 

 

-

 

 

Friday, July 25, 2003 6:27 AM

Re: source of income

, "Emmanuel Segmen" <susegmen@i...> wrote:> Jason,> > I would disagree that the CM practitioners of merit in China and Taiwan embrace WM evidence models on behalf of CM.Maybe I am unclear what you are saying here, but I have met plenty of amazing TCM practitioners that embraced WM... I have never said abandon TCM for WM, I am just for integration…> The practitioners of merit that I know have an ethos like Alon's. They want to see clearly in both paradigms and also practice in both paradigms. this is precisely my point... they see in both paradigms.. this is (in my mind) `embracing WM'....> But they are the ones who've guided the views that I presented to you this day. It's for this reason that I hope you'll consider this issue. Dr. Chiang of Min Tong Herbs and Dr. Kang, former chief of Shanghai Hospital #1 are the ones who made me face this issue of growth and development. That's Taiwan and China. I believe that facing this issue is necessary for modern growth in CM. Paradigms tend to eat each other. Can you elaborate I am unclear what you are getting at here...> Based on your post below, you may already believe that you are practicing a form of Western medicine but simply using CM tools. This is so far from the truth... I actually practice a more classically based CM. WM actually rarely enters my mind once I rule out red flags, etc… But many herbs that I add will come from this modern era (research).. I.e. – You have just finished writing a Rx (of course based on the pattern) for a p with peripheral nerve degeneration… You want to add 1 more blood tonic, which do you pick? Well you might say hey he is a little on the warm side and has a tendency for yang rising, and needs his liver softened I will pick baishao… (but you might say, I know that heshouwu can regenerate nerves, so I pick that, my root Rx should already cover the pattern.) this is integration, and this is not practicing WM, IMO. And how would we know this w/o research? – It might not be correct, but that is a whole other question…-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.