thirty years

[Guest guest]

At the Shanghai College of CM from 1982-86, students enrolled in one

>of three " colleges " or " divisions: " 1) acupuncture-tuina, 2) internal

>medicine, or 3) pharmacology. Students in divisions #1 and 2 only

>learned enough of each other's modality to make referrals, to speak

>knowledgably to each other, and to perform simple emergency

>treatments. Acupuncturists did not practice herbal medicine, and

>internal medical practitioners did not practice acupuncture.

>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That is what basic medical education is about, that is why we have electives

within basic education

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

The students are in two different colleges following two different

curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

 

Bob

 

, " "

<alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> At the Shanghai College of CM from 1982-86, students enrolled in one

> >of three " colleges " or " divisions: " 1) acupuncture-tuina, 2) internal

> >medicine, or 3) pharmacology. Students in divisions #1 and 2 only

> >learned enough of each other's modality to make referrals, to speak

> >knowledgably to each other, and to perform simple emergency

> >treatments. Acupuncturists did not practice herbal medicine, and

> >internal medical practitioners did not practice acupuncture.

> >

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

> That is what basic medical education is about, that is why we have

electives within basic education

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

My quote prior to this was taken out of

context. I was simply stating that in China they operate a system of

specialization much like that of WM. Our profession, in the states,

requires us to learn it all and hence my comment about integration. We

practice it all, they tend to specialize in one area.

>>>>Mike I did not mean you

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The students are in two different colleges following two different

curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

 

>>>>>>>You want to tell me that the acup education does not include herbs. At

our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell me they had no

training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the pharmacy. I have never said

that the education is not different but that it always included a rounded

education. I know they schools are different.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon -

 

I put the figures up on this list about a year ago. I do not have them to

hand right now but should be able to get them later tonight.

 

As I have said before, all students study " basic theory " if by that you

mean fundamental theory, diagnosis etc., and yes, Zhong Yao Xi students

study point location, some channel theory and needling technique, but they

do not receive the clinical training in school that students in the Zhen

Jiu Xi receive. In general the feeling is that the Zhong Yao Xi is harder

and more prestigious than the Zhen Jiu Xi and in most schools the Zhong Yao

Xi is much larger, starting anywhere from 1 - 5 first year classes (a class

stays together for all coursework throughout the 5 year training program).

Students in most schools of Chinese medicine have three opportunities for

clinical training while still in school: 1 - 3 weeks of observation at the

end of their first year, 1 - 3 months of observation in their 3rd year and

1 year of training after their 4th year. That year is the primary clinical

training - during the 5th year students are almost solely in the hospital,

with not much course work, and studying for their graduation exams.

 

I have recently received a copy of the most recent national curriculum for

the 2 programs and will try to get it translated soon. I believe Kim

Taylor included this at the back of her book but she did not translate it.

 

Marnae

 

At 02:55 PM 3/4/2005, you wrote:

 

>Zhong Yao Xi spend very little time studying acupuncture

> >>>What is very little time? Do they get basic theory, point location etc.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Marnae

Thanks, that is about what my understanding is, although i think that in

Guangzhou in the 80s they had overlap in classes, in fact i know people that

were class mate and only towards the end of training were separated.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I understand your point, and I do take it seriously. To reform the corruption

that is currently going on, it really helps to understand **how** the laws are

being manipulated, and what one's rights are and are not, at least in principle,

because if one does not have that as a starting point, any lying politician or

lobbyist or journalist can make people believe whatever he wants. You will not

get anywhere by simply calling people naive or ridiculous. You certainly won't

change my mind. On the other hand, if you spot any specific flaws in either the

legal background, the strategy, or facts, that is another matter. But that will

take some study do to that, not merely relying on majority opinion or wishful

thinking. I've repeatedly asked for anyone to spot any specific flaws in

anything I've presented. Not vague generalizations.

 

By the way, licensing and accreditation dramatically increases the bureaucratic

overhead in education. When I first learned TCM in a two-year program, it cost

me a total of $7,000 (1984-85). Even accounting for inflation, the current costs

are much greater. If students could save 60-70% of the costs of an education by

not having to subsidize paper-pushers, they might be able to better afford it

out of pocket as I originally did.

 

On a related issue, note the increasing number of states that are seriously

considering refusing federal aid for education. Many have noted that as federal

aid goes up, bureaucratic requirements increase, expenses increase, and quality

goes down. Same thing in TCM. Political hackery and bureaucracy have made a mess

of this profession.

 

I've said before, and I'll say it again - there is no need for divisiveness on

the issue of licensing - if only the acupuncturists as a body **recognize the

right of Chinese herbalists to practice as such** without a license. As long as

there is this recognition, and I do not remember seeing any posts on this list

actually opposed to this, there is no reason why we cannot all cooperate. My

goal is to create more recognition and certification options for people who

choose to specialize only in Chinese herbology. I have absolutely no interest in

interfering with acupuncture politics - however the acupuncturists wish to

regulate their profession is fine with me as it should not affect at all what I

do.

 

However, note carefully:

In 1994 (+- a year?) in Montana, the state acupuncture profession lobbied to

have their practice statute amended to say that they would have the

**exclusive** right to practice Chinese herbology in the state. A little birdy

whispered in my ear what their plans were. When I found out, I was outraged for

a number of reasons. At that time the vast majority of the local acupuncturists

had very little, if any, training in Chinese herbology. Some had actually

approached me to give them a few " quickie " weekend courses so that they could

claim they had received training; I refused pointing out that such would only be

enough to make them dangerous. I had heard rumors that many were using patents

from China with heavy metals and adulterants like pharmaceutical drugs. I

testified before the state senate committee on this matter, stating that I felt

it was an outrage and a disgrace that a profession would attempt to expand their

scope of practice without any training, and moreover, to expand it at the

expense of herbalists, licensed or non-licensed, with significantly more

training than they. The bill was forwarded to the Montana Supreme Court for

consultation, and their reply: you can't do that - change it. Several state

representatives thanked me for calling this to their attention, as many of them

are so busy that " little details " like this often slip by.

 

If the acupuncture profession ever attempts this type of trick again, be warned,

I'll bring out my dogs.

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

 

> " mike Bowser " <naturaldoc1

>Re: Re: thirty years

>

>Our profession is not large enough to sustain the kind of split you mention.

> Just think of the decrease in numbers of practitioners who might have

>benefitted from student loans that otherwise would not. As most seem to

>want to see herbs unlicensed and remain so then what happens to herbalists

>only. By the way, I have yet to meet one of these practitioners. Our

>profession lacks the kind of numbers needed to make education economically

>feasible. Separation worked for China. Integration worked for US

>practitioners. There are better things that we could be doing then tearing

>at the fabric of our own profession. Come on guys this is a ridiculous one.

>Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

Bob,

 

Thanks. Much appreciated. We iconoclasts need to stick together.

I'm sure you'll have some takers.

 

Roger

 

 

> " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001

>Re: thirty years

>

>

>Mike,

>

>While I agree with Todd and Roger that the integration of acupuncture

>and Chinese herbal medicine was an historical mistake, it do believe

>it is a fait accompli.

>

>That being said, I also have no problem with people who choose to take

>Roger's suggested path and only practice Chinese herbal medicine.

>Oops, I mean health consulting.

>

>In fact, I'm going to " put my money where my mouth is " and, as of

>today, any of Roger's graduates who want to take Blue Poppy Seminars

>Distance Learning courses will now be allowed to. Previously, we only

>allowed " licensed health care practitioners " to take our courses.

>

>Roger,

>

>You've finally convinced me to reverse our Blue Poppy position on your

>graduates.

>

>Bob

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might add,

is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of my

other acquaintances interned in.

 

My point here is that, perhaps you experience was somehow unique and

non-standard.

 

Bob

 

, " "

<alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> The students are in two different colleges following two different

> curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

> education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

>

> >>>>>>>You want to tell me that the acup education does not include

herbs. At our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell me

they had no training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the

pharmacy. I have never said that the education is not different but

that it always included a rounded education. I know they schools are

different.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China. I am

going to add my vote to what both Bob and Marnae have tried to explain

to you...........I was in Nanjing circa 2002 for internship and things

ARE separated in both education and practice.

 

I also agree that because a chinese practitioner practices both

acupuncture and herbology in the west (or in China for that matter)

does NOT mean they really are trained and educated sufficiently in

both.

 

Your experience is your experience; but it is certainly not the norm in

China. In fact, you are the only person who has ever had this

experience from the 100's of I have spoken to, both chinese and foreign

students, who have trained in China.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

 

 

On 05/03/2005, at 9:00 AM, Bob Flaws wrote:

 

>

>

> Alon,

>

> Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

> at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

> that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

> hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

> hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

> in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might add,

> is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of my

> other acquaintances interned in.

>

> My point here is that, perhaps you experience was somehow unique and

> non-standard.

>

> Bob

>

> , " "

> <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

>> The students are in two different colleges following two different

>> curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

>> education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

>>

>>>>>>>>> You want to tell me that the acup education does not include

> herbs. At our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell me

> they had no training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the

> pharmacy. I have never said that the education is not different but

> that it always included a rounded education. I know they schools are

> different.

>>

>>

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

Here are two posts regarding the issue of who is educated in what today

in China.....these were only posted 3 months ago under the thread

" identity crises " and all your concerns of who is trained in what in

China were previously covered there.

 

Once again, I respect what you experienced when in China; however it is

not the norm and is in fact a completely unique experience from the

100's I have spoken to trained in China.

 

On 17/12/2004, at 8:30 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

 

>

> Don't go to Dr. X for herbs, because in China, he never learned

> them, and only became familiar with them in the mid-90s when he had to

> in

> order to pass the Cal state board. "

>

>>>>>> In our acupuncture clinic in china the acupuncturist wrote herbal

>>>>>> rx all the time. They were nothing very fancy but to say they had

>>>>>> not training in herbs is bull. Some followed family traditions,

>>>>>> some used hospital formulas and some wrote individualized

>>>>>> formulas.

>

>

>

 

Alon,

 

A lot has obviously changed since 1985 in China and TCM education has

also changed a great deal there. My 2002 experience was very different

to your 1985 one in terms of who was trained in what and the amount of

education they had to work in a provincial hospital. Sure, acupuncture

majors learn a little about herbal medicine, but to say they are

" trained " herbalists is just living in the dark ages.

 

Of course, the older doctors will be different cases as they have been

in the system before the modern university structures and requirements

were initiated (TCM education has had a large overhaul since the late

80's in China). However, new graduates are a different kettle of

fish........they have training in one modality and often require a

masters to get a position in a large hospital (even outpatients).

 

One of my translators finally got 3 half days in the outpatient clinic

in the internal medicine department after he started his PhD and I

never saw a Bachelor graduate get any position in the hospital.

 

Basing what is the Chinese education of TCM practitioners on 1985 is

not going to provide an accurate synopsis of what is happening

today..........it is 2 decades ago, times change; and China times are

changing faster than most.

 

Best Wishes,

Steve

 

Hi Laura,

 

TCM training in China certainly is separated for acupuncture/tuina,

herbs and pharmacology. Each major does some study of the other, but

students only gain the full basic education in one and practice only

that modality in clinic. I posted a more detailed explanation via the

example of Shanghai Uni of TCM in the Masters in Australia thread. But

basically:-

 

TCM (Herbal medicine) = 5 years full time

Acupuncture or Tuina = 5 years full time

Pharmacology = 4 years full time

 

It is in light of these simple facts that irritates me when some think

3 or 4 years study is perfectly sufficient to cover all these is

modalities for practice.

 

The other issue about teachers is important.......I too had many

teachers who taught all 3, but only qualified in one in China. This is

an issue for our education that is often overlooked. We often have

teachers who only really studied acupuncture in China lecturing on

herbal medicine............

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

 

On 15/12/2004, at 6:04 PM, heylaurag wrote:

 

>

>

> Hi Bob, I feel like I really should know the answer to this question,

> but are you saying that TCM practitioners from China either study

> acupuncture or Chinese herbs (or tuina), but not both? That's hard

> for me to believe because I had some Chinese teachers in school who

> taught both acupuncture and herbs. Can you explain? Thanks--

>

> Laura

[Guest guest]

This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China.

>>>>>>>>>>

Steven

The bottom line is i do not care what is going on in china, would never like to

see our medical system changed to copy theirs. I appreciate your experience, but

clearly it was different in 1985. Also, I thought the TCM die-hards are

complaining that the changes in TCM education are terrible.I have not said that

the accept were the best herbalist, shit they were not even that good in acup,

but still they gave Rx every day to over 150 patients. So do with it what ever

you like

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

On 05/03/2005, at 12:36 PM, wrote:

 

>

> This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

> that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China.

>>>>>>>>>>>

> Steven

> The bottom line is i do not care what is going on in china, would

> never like to see our medical system changed to copy theirs. I

> appreciate your experience, but clearly it was different in 1985.

> Also, I thought the TCM die-hards are complaining that the changes in

> TCM education are terrible.I have not said that the accept were the

> best herbalist, shit they were not even that good in acup, but still

> they gave Rx every day to over 150 patients. So do with it what ever

> you like

>

 

The point about the education in China today (and pre 1985 according to

Bob's experience) is that it is recognized that 5 years is not

sufficient to train a practitioner in all the 3 major modalities of

herbs, acupuncture and tuina to even a BASIC practitioner level.

 

I think we agree that TCM education in the west needs a lot of

restructuring and improvement both to produce quality practitioners and

practitioners who have education that better suits our environment.

However, not looking at how it is done in China when it doesn't suit

your position is a cop-out and ignores the source of our profession and

separates us completely from what we are actually supposed to be

practicing.

 

Doing 3 or 4 years study in TCM and believing one has the skills

necessary to practice all 3 modalities, PLUS have basic western

diagnostic abilities to a professional primary health practitioner

standard can only damage our profession. Where this belief even came

from which has led to the current scope of practice is the greatest

mystery of all.

 

The current approach has led to a generation of " jack of all trades "

who really can't do any modality to a standard approaching most of our

china trained peers. This is why so much improvement in our education

standards is necessary in the first place.

 

Some argue that any acceptance of a standard of education that even

approaches the Chinese standard will result in a lessoning in scope of

practice. This may be true, but it IMO it is necessary. To me,

arguments against increasing education standards that will require

higher levels of training and thus lesson the current scope of practice

for some are based on self-interest and not what is best for our

patients or profession.

 

I am not arguing for a reduction in scope per se, I am simply arguing

for education standards that truly justify the current scope. Unless we

actually have education standards to justify our scope it will result

in a declining respect for our profession and a much more serious loss

of scope.

 

In Australia, acupuncture, tuina and herbal medicine are now separated

in a similar way to those in China. It was not always like this but

educational standards have been set if one wants to join a professional

association or obtain registration as a a tuina practioner, an

acupuncturist and/or chinese herbal medicine practitioner.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

[Guest guest]

A hospital is a hospital and a school is a school. Is there any problem

with this?

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001

>

>

> Re: thirty years

>Fri, 04 Mar 2005 22:00:12 -0000

>

>

>Alon,

>

>Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

>at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

>that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

>hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

>hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

>in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might add,

>is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of my

>other acquaintances interned in.

>

>My point here is that, perhaps you experience was somehow unique and

>non-standard.

>

>Bob

>

> , " "

><alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> > The students are in two different colleges following two different

> > curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

> > education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

> >

> > >>>>>>>You want to tell me that the acup education does not include

>herbs. At our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell me

>they had no training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the

>pharmacy. I have never said that the education is not different but

>that it always included a rounded education. I know they schools are

>different.

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Steve,

This is simply not true as pointed out by others on this topic. The issue

of education is that both seem to be getting an understanding of each other

there is cross over in education, to what extent I do not know. Adequate

referrals would not happen if they did not know what each does and for what

types of conditions. Schools teach in order to educate their practitioners

and get them ready for the next step, which appears to be the internship in

hospitals. The hospitals seem to provide for a more clinical specialization

of focus of earlier studies. The way I read this argument is that the sky

is both blue and large. Splitting of hairs is also hair splitting. Next

issue.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

>Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>

>

>Re: Re: thirty years

>Sat, 5 Mar 2005 10:03:56 +1100

>

>Alon,

>

>This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

>that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China. I am

>going to add my vote to what both Bob and Marnae have tried to explain

>to you...........I was in Nanjing circa 2002 for internship and things

>ARE separated in both education and practice.

>

>I also agree that because a chinese practitioner practices both

>acupuncture and herbology in the west (or in China for that matter)

>does NOT mean they really are trained and educated sufficiently in

>both.

>

>Your experience is your experience; but it is certainly not the norm in

>China. In fact, you are the only person who has ever had this

>experience from the 100's of I have spoken to, both chinese and foreign

>students, who have trained in China.

>

>Best Wishes,

>

>Steve

>

>

>On 05/03/2005, at 9:00 AM, Bob Flaws wrote:

>

> >

> >

> > Alon,

> >

> > Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

> > at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

> > that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

> > hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

> > hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

> > in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might add,

> > is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of my

> > other acquaintances interned in.

> >

> > My point here is that, perhaps you experience was somehow unique and

> > non-standard.

> >

> > Bob

> >

> > , " "

> > <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> >> The students are in two different colleges following two different

> >> curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

> >> education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

> >>

> >>>>>>>>> You want to tell me that the acup education does not include

> > herbs. At our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell me

> > they had no training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the

> > pharmacy. I have never said that the education is not different but

> > that it always included a rounded education. I know they schools are

> > different.

> >>

> >>

>

[Guest guest]

Steve,

This is a contradiction in terms. The issue here is to what degree this

occurs as we all know there is some basic theory and knowledge of others

practices. I would hope we can all agree with this.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

>Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>

>

>Re: Re: thirty years

>Sat, 5 Mar 2005 10:25:56 +1100

>

>Alon,

>

>Here are two posts regarding the issue of who is educated in what today

>in China.....these were only posted 3 months ago under the thread

> " identity crises " and all your concerns of who is trained in what in

>China were previously covered there.

>

>Once again, I respect what you experienced when in China; however it is

>not the norm and is in fact a completely unique experience from the

>100's I have spoken to trained in China.

>

>On 17/12/2004, at 8:30 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>

> >

> > Don't go to Dr. X for herbs, because in China, he never learned

> > them, and only became familiar with them in the mid-90s when he had to

> > in

> > order to pass the Cal state board. "

> >

> >>>>>> In our acupuncture clinic in china the acupuncturist wrote herbal

> >>>>>> rx all the time. They were nothing very fancy but to say they had

> >>>>>> not training in herbs is bull. Some followed family traditions,

> >>>>>> some used hospital formulas and some wrote individualized

> >>>>>> formulas.

> >

> >

> >

>

>Alon,

>

>A lot has obviously changed since 1985 in China and TCM education has

>also changed a great deal there. My 2002 experience was very different

>to your 1985 one in terms of who was trained in what and the amount of

>education they had to work in a provincial hospital. Sure, acupuncture

>majors learn a little about herbal medicine, but to say they are

> " trained " herbalists is just living in the dark ages.

>

>Of course, the older doctors will be different cases as they have been

>in the system before the modern university structures and requirements

>were initiated (TCM education has had a large overhaul since the late

>80's in China). However, new graduates are a different kettle of

>fish........they have training in one modality and often require a

>masters to get a position in a large hospital (even outpatients).

>

>One of my translators finally got 3 half days in the outpatient clinic

>in the internal medicine department after he started his PhD and I

>never saw a Bachelor graduate get any position in the hospital.

>

>Basing what is the Chinese education of TCM practitioners on 1985 is

>not going to provide an accurate synopsis of what is happening

>today..........it is 2 decades ago, times change; and China times are

>changing faster than most.

>

>Best Wishes,

>Steve

>

>Hi Laura,

>

>TCM training in China certainly is separated for acupuncture/tuina,

>herbs and pharmacology. Each major does some study of the other, but

>students only gain the full basic education in one and practice only

>that modality in clinic. I posted a more detailed explanation via the

>example of Shanghai Uni of TCM in the Masters in Australia thread. But

>basically:-

>

>TCM (Herbal medicine) = 5 years full time

>Acupuncture or Tuina = 5 years full time

>Pharmacology = 4 years full time

>

>It is in light of these simple facts that irritates me when some think

>3 or 4 years study is perfectly sufficient to cover all these is

>modalities for practice.

>

>The other issue about teachers is important.......I too had many

>teachers who taught all 3, but only qualified in one in China. This is

>an issue for our education that is often overlooked. We often have

>teachers who only really studied acupuncture in China lecturing on

>herbal medicine............

>

>Best Wishes,

>

>Steve

>

>On 15/12/2004, at 6:04 PM, heylaurag wrote:

>

> >

> >

> > Hi Bob, I feel like I really should know the answer to this question,

> > but are you saying that TCM practitioners from China either study

> > acupuncture or Chinese herbs (or tuina), but not both? That's hard

> > for me to believe because I had some Chinese teachers in school who

> > taught both acupuncture and herbs. Can you explain? Thanks--

> >

> > Laura

>

[Guest guest]

In the end, it will be politics that will win. An American divsion of the

three modalities does somewhat exist at the level of licensure and

certification (acu and tui na massage) depending upon states reqs. This is

an issue that needs to be addressed state by state. One major opposition to

this comes from the earlier practitioners who want change but do not want to

go back to school themselves. This can be seen as an attempt to limit

competition and does not sit well with others.

 

I believe that an educational program can perform well enough to teach a

basic level of competancy in all three if it chooses. Basic competancy and

not mastery should be the goal. Our young profession has a lot of issues

related to ineffective instruction by under-educated instructors. Many of

our instructors lack a degree in education and some lack experience.

 

Post-grad residencies are much needed to continue with specialization and

greater mastery of knowledge. Most programs teach many hours of lecture at

the expense of manual dexterity development (tui na or acu). This is

important as there needs to be a balance of the two modes. Additionally, I

have found that my program tended to present info at a slow pace. More time

can be given to learning more info on more topics if students are pushed a

little harder and shown how to become more efffective learners.

 

I am currently in a DC program and can say that I am spending a great deal

more time in my studies, especially anat, biochem and histo. We can make

this a positive transitional time or not, that is our choice. I hope that

schools out there are listening as the students of today seem to want and

need more development. This is not the same as book knowledge.

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

>Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>

>

>Re: Re: thirty years

>Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:45:24 +1100

>

>

>On 05/03/2005, at 12:36 PM, wrote:

>

> >

> > This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

> > that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China.

> >>>>>>>>>>>

> > Steven

> > The bottom line is i do not care what is going on in china, would

> > never like to see our medical system changed to copy theirs. I

> > appreciate your experience, but clearly it was different in 1985.

> > Also, I thought the TCM die-hards are complaining that the changes in

> > TCM education are terrible.I have not said that the accept were the

> > best herbalist, shit they were not even that good in acup, but still

> > they gave Rx every day to over 150 patients. So do with it what ever

> > you like

> >

>

>The point about the education in China today (and pre 1985 according to

>Bob's experience) is that it is recognized that 5 years is not

>sufficient to train a practitioner in all the 3 major modalities of

>herbs, acupuncture and tuina to even a BASIC practitioner level.

>

>I think we agree that TCM education in the west needs a lot of

>restructuring and improvement both to produce quality practitioners and

>practitioners who have education that better suits our environment.

>However, not looking at how it is done in China when it doesn't suit

>your position is a cop-out and ignores the source of our profession and

>separates us completely from what we are actually supposed to be

>practicing.

>

>Doing 3 or 4 years study in TCM and believing one has the skills

>necessary to practice all 3 modalities, PLUS have basic western

>diagnostic abilities to a professional primary health practitioner

>standard can only damage our profession. Where this belief even came

>from which has led to the current scope of practice is the greatest

>mystery of all.

>

>The current approach has led to a generation of " jack of all trades "

>who really can't do any modality to a standard approaching most of our

>china trained peers. This is why so much improvement in our education

>standards is necessary in the first place.

>

>Some argue that any acceptance of a standard of education that even

>approaches the Chinese standard will result in a lessoning in scope of

>practice. This may be true, but it IMO it is necessary. To me,

>arguments against increasing education standards that will require

>higher levels of training and thus lesson the current scope of practice

>for some are based on self-interest and not what is best for our

>patients or profession.

>

>I am not arguing for a reduction in scope per se, I am simply arguing

>for education standards that truly justify the current scope. Unless we

>actually have education standards to justify our scope it will result

>in a declining respect for our profession and a much more serious loss

>of scope.

>

>In Australia, acupuncture, tuina and herbal medicine are now separated

>in a similar way to those in China. It was not always like this but

>educational standards have been set if one wants to join a professional

>association or obtain registration as a a tuina practioner, an

>acupuncturist and/or chinese herbal medicine practitioner.

>

>Best Wishes,

>

>Steve

>

[Guest guest]

Mike,

 

What is not true? Only one person has had a different experience to

what I have suggested so I don't know where you you pull your opening

sentence from.

 

I never said that someone studying acupuncture in china did not get

some basic knowledge of what herbal medicine treats in China or vice

versa. What I said is that they do not practice both and are not fully

educated in both to a practitioner level.

 

This IS how it is in China now. If you ever go there you will see for

yourself and won't have to assume and infer all your opinions on the

matter. By the way, the internship in the hospital is part of the

degree, not after it.........so it is part of the basic training, not

specialization after it.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

 

On 06/03/2005, at 1:08 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

>

> Steve,

> This is simply not true as pointed out by others on this topic. The

> issue

> of education is that both seem to be getting an understanding of each

> other

> there is cross over in education, to what extent I do not know.

> Adequate

> referrals would not happen if they did not know what each does and for

> what

> types of conditions. Schools teach in order to educate their

> practitioners

> and get them ready for the next step, which appears to be the

> internship in

> hospitals. The hospitals seem to provide for a more clinical

> specialization

> of focus of earlier studies. The way I read this argument is that the

> sky

> is both blue and large. Splitting of hairs is also hair splitting.

> Next

> issue.

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>> Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>>

>>

>> Re: Re: thirty years

>> Sat, 5 Mar 2005 10:03:56 +1100

>>

>> Alon,

>>

>> This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

>> that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China. I am

>> going to add my vote to what both Bob and Marnae have tried to explain

>> to you...........I was in Nanjing circa 2002 for internship and things

>> ARE separated in both education and practice.

>>

>> I also agree that because a chinese practitioner practices both

>> acupuncture and herbology in the west (or in China for that matter)

>> does NOT mean they really are trained and educated sufficiently in

>> both.

>>

>> Your experience is your experience; but it is certainly not the norm

>> in

>> China. In fact, you are the only person who has ever had this

>> experience from the 100's of I have spoken to, both chinese and

>> foreign

>> students, who have trained in China.

>>

>> Best Wishes,

>>

>> Steve

>>

>>

>> On 05/03/2005, at 9:00 AM, Bob Flaws wrote:

>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Alon,

>>>

>>> Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

>>> at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

>>> that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

>>> hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

>>> hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

>>> in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might

>>> add,

>>> is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of

>>> my

>>> other acquaintances interned in.

>>>

>>> My point here is that, perhaps you experience was somehow unique and

>>> non-standard.

>>>

>>> Bob

>>>

>>> , " "

>>> <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

>>>> The students are in two different colleges following two different

>>>> curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

>>>> education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> You want to tell me that the acup education does not include

>>> herbs. At our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell

>>> me

>>> they had no training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the

>>> pharmacy. I have never said that the education is not different but

>>> that it always included a rounded education. I know they schools are

>>> different.

>>>>

>>>>

>Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

MIke,

 

Sure, we can agree on this. However, we also learn basic theory of

western medicine in TCM....the point is that we do not practice it on

our patients.

 

Steve

 

On 06/03/2005, at 1:10 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

>

> Steve,

> This is a contradiction in terms. The issue here is to what degree

> this

> occurs as we all know there is some basic theory and knowledge of

> others

> practices. I would hope we can all agree with this.

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>> Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>>

>>

>> Re: Re: thirty years

>> Sat, 5 Mar 2005 10:25:56 +1100

>>

>> Alon,

>>

>> Here are two posts regarding the issue of who is educated in what

>> today

>> in China.....these were only posted 3 months ago under the thread

>> " identity crises " and all your concerns of who is trained in what in

>> China were previously covered there.

>>

>> Once again, I respect what you experienced when in China; however it

>> is

>> not the norm and is in fact a completely unique experience from the

>> 100's I have spoken to trained in China.

>>

>> On 17/12/2004, at 8:30 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

>>

>>>

>>> Don't go to Dr. X for herbs, because in China, he never learned

>>> them, and only became familiar with them in the mid-90s when he had

>>> to

>>> in

>>> order to pass the Cal state board. "

>>>

>>>>>>>> In our acupuncture clinic in china the acupuncturist wrote

>>>>>>>> herbal

>>>>>>>> rx all the time. They were nothing very fancy but to say they

>>>>>>>> had

>>>>>>>> not training in herbs is bull. Some followed family traditions,

>>>>>>>> some used hospital formulas and some wrote individualized

>>>>>>>> formulas.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> Alon,

>>

>> A lot has obviously changed since 1985 in China and TCM education has

>> also changed a great deal there. My 2002 experience was very different

>> to your 1985 one in terms of who was trained in what and the amount of

>> education they had to work in a provincial hospital. Sure, acupuncture

>> majors learn a little about herbal medicine, but to say they are

>> " trained " herbalists is just living in the dark ages.

>>

>> Of course, the older doctors will be different cases as they have been

>> in the system before the modern university structures and requirements

>> were initiated (TCM education has had a large overhaul since the late

>> 80's in China). However, new graduates are a different kettle of

>> fish........they have training in one modality and often require a

>> masters to get a position in a large hospital (even outpatients).

>>

>> One of my translators finally got 3 half days in the outpatient clinic

>> in the internal medicine department after he started his PhD and I

>> never saw a Bachelor graduate get any position in the hospital.

>>

>> Basing what is the Chinese education of TCM practitioners on 1985 is

>> not going to provide an accurate synopsis of what is happening

>> today..........it is 2 decades ago, times change; and China times are

>> changing faster than most.

>>

>> Best Wishes,

>> Steve

>>

>> Hi Laura,

>>

>> TCM training in China certainly is separated for acupuncture/tuina,

>> herbs and pharmacology. Each major does some study of the other, but

>> students only gain the full basic education in one and practice only

>> that modality in clinic. I posted a more detailed explanation via the

>> example of Shanghai Uni of TCM in the Masters in Australia thread. But

>> basically:-

>>

>> TCM (Herbal medicine) = 5 years full time

>> Acupuncture or Tuina = 5 years full time

>> Pharmacology = 4 years full time

>>

>> It is in light of these simple facts that irritates me when some think

>> 3 or 4 years study is perfectly sufficient to cover all these is

>> modalities for practice.

>>

>> The other issue about teachers is important.......I too had many

>> teachers who taught all 3, but only qualified in one in China. This is

>> an issue for our education that is often overlooked. We often have

>> teachers who only really studied acupuncture in China lecturing on

>> herbal medicine............

>>

>> Best Wishes,

>>

>> Steve

>>

>> On 15/12/2004, at 6:04 PM, heylaurag wrote:

>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Hi Bob, I feel like I really should know the answer to this question,

>>> but are you saying that TCM practitioners from China either study

>>> acupuncture or Chinese herbs (or tuina), but not both? That's hard

>>> for me to believe because I had some Chinese teachers in school who

>>> taught both acupuncture and herbs. Can you explain? Thanks--

>>>

>>> Laura

>Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

>at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

>that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

>hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

>hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

>in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might add,

>is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of my

>other acquaintances interned in.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You want to tell me that none of the acup in these hospitals wrote herbal Rx.

That is like your wife stating that Miriam Lee did not do herbs while she sold

more herbs than most of the herbalists on this list. I think people see what

they want to see.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

To me,

arguments against increasing education standards that will require

higher levels of training and thus lesson the current scope of practice

for some are based on self-interest and not what is best for our

patients or profession.

>>>>>>>>>You will find no argument about the need to increase training, i have

been carrying this battle cry for over 15 years and have written on this. I

guess many of us will always have differing visions of what is important for

good clinical education, what kind of practices we would like to see, etc.

Personally i like the Korean model much more than the Chinese. But the need for

radical changes has been my position for many years even most that share the

need would disagree with me of what is important

..

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Remind me again what TCM is. A quick look at any of the commonly used texts

we find medical conditions. TCM is a combination of WM and CCM. We get

tested and mimic this on our patients each of every day. How many times on

this site do we see western conditions discussed as for treatments? The

answer is many. We are deluding ourselves into thinking that we are not

practicing some form of integrative medicine. Unless you practice CCM.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

>Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>

>

>Re: Re: thirty years

>Sun, 6 Mar 2005 07:27:04 +1100

>

>MIke,

>

>Sure, we can agree on this. However, we also learn basic theory of

>western medicine in TCM....the point is that we do not practice it on

>our patients.

>

>Steve

>

>On 06/03/2005, at 1:10 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> >

> > Steve,

> > This is a contradiction in terms. The issue here is to what degree

> > this

> > occurs as we all know there is some basic theory and knowledge of

> > others

> > practices. I would hope we can all agree with this.

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

> >> Steven Slater <laozhongyi

> >>

> >>

> >> Re: Re: thirty years

> >> Sat, 5 Mar 2005 10:25:56 +1100

> >>

> >> Alon,

> >>

> >> Here are two posts regarding the issue of who is educated in what

> >> today

> >> in China.....these were only posted 3 months ago under the thread

> >> " identity crises " and all your concerns of who is trained in what in

> >> China were previously covered there.

> >>

> >> Once again, I respect what you experienced when in China; however it

> >> is

> >> not the norm and is in fact a completely unique experience from the

> >> 100's I have spoken to trained in China.

> >>

> >> On 17/12/2004, at 8:30 PM, Alon Marcus wrote:

> >>

> >>>

> >>> Don't go to Dr. X for herbs, because in China, he never learned

> >>> them, and only became familiar with them in the mid-90s when he had

> >>> to

> >>> in

> >>> order to pass the Cal state board. "

> >>>

> >>>>>>>> In our acupuncture clinic in china the acupuncturist wrote

> >>>>>>>> herbal

> >>>>>>>> rx all the time. They were nothing very fancy but to say they

> >>>>>>>> had

> >>>>>>>> not training in herbs is bull. Some followed family traditions,

> >>>>>>>> some used hospital formulas and some wrote individualized

> >>>>>>>> formulas.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>

> >> Alon,

> >>

> >> A lot has obviously changed since 1985 in China and TCM education has

> >> also changed a great deal there. My 2002 experience was very different

> >> to your 1985 one in terms of who was trained in what and the amount of

> >> education they had to work in a provincial hospital. Sure, acupuncture

> >> majors learn a little about herbal medicine, but to say they are

> >> " trained " herbalists is just living in the dark ages.

> >>

> >> Of course, the older doctors will be different cases as they have been

> >> in the system before the modern university structures and requirements

> >> were initiated (TCM education has had a large overhaul since the late

> >> 80's in China). However, new graduates are a different kettle of

> >> fish........they have training in one modality and often require a

> >> masters to get a position in a large hospital (even outpatients).

> >>

> >> One of my translators finally got 3 half days in the outpatient clinic

> >> in the internal medicine department after he started his PhD and I

> >> never saw a Bachelor graduate get any position in the hospital.

> >>

> >> Basing what is the Chinese education of TCM practitioners on 1985 is

> >> not going to provide an accurate synopsis of what is happening

> >> today..........it is 2 decades ago, times change; and China times are

> >> changing faster than most.

> >>

> >> Best Wishes,

> >> Steve

> >>

> >> Hi Laura,

> >>

> >> TCM training in China certainly is separated for acupuncture/tuina,

> >> herbs and pharmacology. Each major does some study of the other, but

> >> students only gain the full basic education in one and practice only

> >> that modality in clinic. I posted a more detailed explanation via the

> >> example of Shanghai Uni of TCM in the Masters in Australia thread. But

> >> basically:-

> >>

> >> TCM (Herbal medicine) = 5 years full time

> >> Acupuncture or Tuina = 5 years full time

> >> Pharmacology = 4 years full time

> >>

> >> It is in light of these simple facts that irritates me when some think

> >> 3 or 4 years study is perfectly sufficient to cover all these is

> >> modalities for practice.

> >>

> >> The other issue about teachers is important.......I too had many

> >> teachers who taught all 3, but only qualified in one in China. This is

> >> an issue for our education that is often overlooked. We often have

> >> teachers who only really studied acupuncture in China lecturing on

> >> herbal medicine............

> >>

> >> Best Wishes,

> >>

> >> Steve

> >>

> >> On 15/12/2004, at 6:04 PM, heylaurag wrote:

> >>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Hi Bob, I feel like I really should know the answer to this question,

> >>> but are you saying that TCM practitioners from China either study

> >>> acupuncture or Chinese herbs (or tuina), but not both? That's hard

> >>> for me to believe because I had some Chinese teachers in school who

> >>> taught both acupuncture and herbs. Can you explain? Thanks--

> >>>

> >>> Laura

> >>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> > including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> > conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

there has been a lot of air being blown around on this, but my points

remain unrefuted:

 

> There were no restrictions on the raw herbs then as now.

 

> Licensing has also not resulted in insurance coverage for herbs (and

> never will without research that will never get done. MDs are

> hysterical about chinese herbs and generally distrusting of formulas.

> my recent experience at Scripps plus Ted Kapchuk's daily experience at

> Harvard confirm this)

 

> It has not resulted in educating the public that TCM is an internal

> medicine. (it is the rare patient who comes to the PCOM clinic knowing

> there is more to TCM than acupuncture being used for pain)

 

> In fact, since chinese herbalists can practice in ANY state without a

> license, but only 16 states with one (an no state that has added

> licensing in recent years has included herbs and it is unlikely any

> others will, plus we will have some of our rights rolled back in CA

> later this year)

 

and for whoever thinks the disparity between the cost of going to PCOM

or doing an apprenticeship has anything to do with normal inflation

over time better go back to economics 101. I have friends who spent

15,000 to do a 2000 hour program at OCOM in the late eighties. Most of

these folks are as good herbalists than most who do 3500 hours today.

The increased costs of education are clearly linked to padding of the

curriculum with unnecessary classes (keep in mind all the anatomy,

point location, techniques and clinical training in needling are not

necessary to practice herbology and that was the topic of this post)

and regulatory, political and institutional costs. A herbalist could

most definitely be trained without all this extra stuff and also be

trained in a private office. If you don't think this would decrease

costs by 80-90%, you have either never seen a university budget or you

can't do math or both. Again, not talking about acupuncture.

 

 

>

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Please go back and review the other posts on this site. The simple fact

that practitioners trained in China come to the states and competently

practice is a strong argument against this theory. Examples of these

practitioners are numerous. These people were trained to some degree in

both as there is some commonality in theory. The issue seems to be changing

with whoever responds and ranges from Chinese practitioners that do not

receive any complimentary training and practice to those that do are not

fully educated. Quite confusing. I think we all agree to some extent that

practitioners in the Chinese system do not perform across specialities much

like in the states. On the other hand, in this country we see practitioner

performing both with quality. I think our egos and judgement is clouded

here. While I think you have some idea about certain issuses related to

their professional training it seems that you may not have read this closely

enough. Try reading a little closer and note that splitting hairs is not

hair splitting.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

>Steven Slater <laozhongyi

>

>

>Re: Re: thirty years

>Sun, 6 Mar 2005 07:25:23 +1100

>

>Mike,

>

>What is not true? Only one person has had a different experience to

>what I have suggested so I don't know where you you pull your opening

>sentence from.

>

>I never said that someone studying acupuncture in china did not get

>some basic knowledge of what herbal medicine treats in China or vice

>versa. What I said is that they do not practice both and are not fully

>educated in both to a practitioner level.

>

>This IS how it is in China now. If you ever go there you will see for

>yourself and won't have to assume and infer all your opinions on the

>matter. By the way, the internship in the hospital is part of the

>degree, not after it.........so it is part of the basic training, not

>specialization after it.

>

>Best Wishes,

>

>Steve

>

>On 06/03/2005, at 1:08 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

> >

> > Steve,

> > This is simply not true as pointed out by others on this topic. The

> > issue

> > of education is that both seem to be getting an understanding of each

> > other

> > there is cross over in education, to what extent I do not know.

> > Adequate

> > referrals would not happen if they did not know what each does and for

> > what

> > types of conditions. Schools teach in order to educate their

> > practitioners

> > and get them ready for the next step, which appears to be the

> > internship in

> > hospitals. The hospitals seem to provide for a more clinical

> > specialization

> > of focus of earlier studies. The way I read this argument is that the

> > sky

> > is both blue and large. Splitting of hairs is also hair splitting.

> > Next

> > issue.

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

> >> Steven Slater <laozhongyi

> >>

> >>

> >> Re: Re: thirty years

> >> Sat, 5 Mar 2005 10:03:56 +1100

> >>

> >> Alon,

> >>

> >> This has been explained to you several times before and you still hold

> >> that your 1985 experience is the way things are done in China. I am

> >> going to add my vote to what both Bob and Marnae have tried to explain

> >> to you...........I was in Nanjing circa 2002 for internship and things

> >> ARE separated in both education and practice.

> >>

> >> I also agree that because a chinese practitioner practices both

> >> acupuncture and herbology in the west (or in China for that matter)

> >> does NOT mean they really are trained and educated sufficiently in

> >> both.

> >>

> >> Your experience is your experience; but it is certainly not the norm

> >> in

> >> China. In fact, you are the only person who has ever had this

> >> experience from the 100's of I have spoken to, both chinese and

> >> foreign

> >> students, who have trained in China.

> >>

> >> Best Wishes,

> >>

> >> Steve

> >>

> >>

> >> On 05/03/2005, at 9:00 AM, Bob Flaws wrote:

> >>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Alon,

> >>>

> >>> Experience is experience and that's bedrock. If that's what happened

> >>> at the school you went to, that's what happened. I don't argue with

> >>> that. However, that is not what happened at any of the several

> >>> hospitals I interned at in Shanghai from 1982-86, nor in any of the

> >>> hospital I visted from Shanghai to Nanjing. Nor is this what happened

> >>> in any of the several hospitals my wife interned in. Nor, I might

> >>> add,

> >>> is it what I have heard was the norm in any of the hospitals any of

> >>> my

> >>> other acquaintances interned in.

> >>>

> >>> My point here is that, perhaps you experience was somehow unique and

> >>> non-standard.

> >>>

> >>> Bob

> >>>

> >>> , " "

> >>> <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> >>>> The students are in two different colleges following two different

> >>>> curricula. They are categorically not receiving the same basic

> >>>> education plus electives. They come out with two different diplomas.

> >>>>

> >>>>>>>>>>> You want to tell me that the acup education does not include

> >>> herbs. At our hospital all the acup Dr used herbs. You want to tell

> >>> me

> >>> they had no training? They wrote Rx and got them filled at the

> >>> pharmacy. I have never said that the education is not different but

> >>> that it always included a rounded education. I know they schools are

> >>> different.

> >>>>

> >>>>

> >>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> > including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> > conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

 

Good points with the following additions:

 

" There were no restrictions on the raw herbs then as now. "

 

Raw herbs are coming under the same confiscation as prepared herbals. I

think this was mentioned in a past issue of Acupuncture Today and the FDA

list of unacceptables is growing.

While it is unknown whether or not raw herbs actually caused one to come, it

is more likely they came in for a problem (internal or not) that did not

improve with WM. They may have received herbs and got better. Even in the

conservative midwest more people are taking a look at herbs and supplements

for a variety of conditions.

Economics is a concern but most do not go to learn only herbs, they are

interested in acupuncture w/ the other TCM modalities.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

> <

>

>cha

> Fwd: thirty years

>Sun, 6 Mar 2005 10:06:23 -0800

>

>there has been a lot of air being blown around on this, but my points

>remain unrefuted:

>

> > There were no restrictions on the raw herbs then as now.

>

> > Licensing has also not resulted in insurance coverage for herbs (and

> > never will without research that will never get done. MDs are

> > hysterical about chinese herbs and generally distrusting of formulas.

> > my recent experience at Scripps plus Ted Kapchuk's daily experience at

> > Harvard confirm this)

>

> > It has not resulted in educating the public that TCM is an internal

> > medicine. (it is the rare patient who comes to the PCOM clinic knowing

> > there is more to TCM than acupuncture being used for pain)

>

> > In fact, since chinese herbalists can practice in ANY state without a

> > license, but only 16 states with one (an no state that has added

> > licensing in recent years has included herbs and it is unlikely any

> > others will, plus we will have some of our rights rolled back in CA

> > later this year)

>

>and for whoever thinks the disparity between the cost of going to PCOM

>or doing an apprenticeship has anything to do with normal inflation

>over time better go back to economics 101. I have friends who spent

>15,000 to do a 2000 hour program at OCOM in the late eighties. Most of

>these folks are as good herbalists than most who do 3500 hours today.

>The increased costs of education are clearly linked to padding of the

>curriculum with unnecessary classes (keep in mind all the anatomy,

>point location, techniques and clinical training in needling are not

>necessary to practice herbology and that was the topic of this post)

>and regulatory, political and institutional costs. A herbalist could

>most definitely be trained without all this extra stuff and also be

>trained in a private office. If you don't think this would decrease

>costs by 80-90%, you have either never seen a university budget or you

>can't do math or both. Again, not talking about acupuncture.

>

>

> >

>

>Chinese Herbs

>

>

>

>

>

>

>