Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

John,

 

Yes they are different, in terms of their position on the plant for first and

secondly their functions . Therefore one is called Jiang huang, the other is

called Yujin, although some modern studies here show their chemical compositions

are more similar for same plant in one place than compared to the same

counterpart of the plant in other place.

 

I would disagree with the point on botany knowledge for following reasons:

To make a good Chinese herb medicine,  all of the following are necessary:

1. right species - but this is far enough - maybe it is enough for Botanist but

TCM.

2. plus right place to grow - so called " Dao Di area "

3. right process

to get good medicial treatment results, still plus

4. right use - together with other herbs/minerials...

 

Compared to adding botany knowledge, I'd rather recommend to learn some Chinese,

because there is enough info for  in Chinese already. If one can

understand Chinese, it is easy to know all of what one needs in their practice

in particular for Western practitioners at their stage.  And if one understands

Chinese, There is no ambiguities for such common herbs as jiang huang, yu jin,

and fuzi, because in Chinese they are all well specified, no ambiguities at

all(if any ambiguity, I should say that you should take acre of their Bias  -

same herb has different names). See attached links, if one understands Chinese,

one can easily know all of these things - like what is Yujin - where it grows -

what is the BEST place (Dao Di area) for Yujin - how many kind of Yujin - what

is jianghuang, and .........And the pictures show which part called jiang huang,

which part is called yujin.  IT IS HARD TO have ambiguities and get confused. I

think to

have the students learn from this database software for their TCM is much

easier and better than visiting the live plant gardern, the video not only shows

the plant, but also the well processed and finished medicine too.

 

BTW,  Pinyin definitely is not good way to learn/remember

names, because as many of you know, there are many quite different Chinese

characters pronouncing same. It is quite easy to get confused.  When our client

in Europe asked us to

express Chinese herbs to them, we always require them to specify the herb name

in chinese characters to avoid confusion unless before we ever sent the same.

Fortunately one person in our client side has high proficiency in reading

Chinese although not in speaking. That is enough.

http://www.56.com/u87/v_NDM3MjQ5ODg.html

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, <johnkokko wrote:

 

 

<johnkokko

Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Thursday, May 28, 2009, 9:38 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael,

 

In the 3rd edition MM:

 

Jiang huang =* rhizome* of Curcuma longa

Yu jin = *root* of Curcuma wenyujin / longa / kwangsiensis / phaeocaulis

 

Rhizomes are underground horizontal plant stems that can produce upward

shoots

and downward roots.

 

What's the difference in this case?

 

I do agree that botany would be a great addition to the curriculum.

For those living in the Bay area, there's an amazing Chinese herb garden

at the UC berkeley botanical gardens. You can see the herbs grow in

different seasons.

I've taken students there for field trips.

 

Einstein was asked if understanding how a flower goes through the

respiration cycle

makes it more or less beautiful.

 

K

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Take a look at this link to see a description of how and by whom botanical

nomenclature is decided .

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Code_of_Botanical_Nomenclature

 

 

 

Christopher Hobbs is doing his Ph.D. here in Berkeley and suggests that there

are vast amounts of changes happening in the field of botanical taxonomy based

on genetic studies. A lot of what has been understood for the past 200 years

based on flower structure relationships is now being furthur delineated, often

drastically, due to genomic decoding. Perhaps they'll figure it all out in time

for MM4.

 

 

 

Ben

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Hotmail® has a new way to see what's up with your friends.

http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/WhatsNew?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_W\

hatsNew1_052009

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Karen, Andrea Beth and All

 

Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Obviously your prior

training has greatly influenced and helped your learning of

Chinese medicine.

In reading and pondering the various postings on this thread it

is very clear that there are profound differences in the approach

of Western herbalists and Chinese medicine practitioners. As a

few have posted (including myself) wondering if a Chinese

medicine practitioner even needs to have this botanical

understanding...it leads me to pose this question to the group:

 

Is a Chinese medicine practitioner an " Herbalist " ? Or should we

be considered some other thing?

 

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

--

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

or over the web

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Stephen,

 

I already anwsered this question in my early posting to this group. I do not

know why it has not been published here so far.

 

I clearly tell that No. The Practitioners in China do not need

such knowledge at all(even knowing it may not be a bad thing). The practioners

care about correct diagnosis for first and then how to choose the medicine

items(of course they should know the item's property) and make a formula to

achieve the best treatment. If saying to know the herb property is necessary for

practitioners, but more than that to know how to grow and classify the plant

means nothing.

 

When I studied in Boston area, I never heard of any MD friends in Ivy leagues to

learn how to make a medicine althought it is necessary to know what are the

available choices of medicine. Similarly practitioners do not

have to know how to make Chinese medicine not mention how to grow the plant from

which to make the herb.

 

--- On Fri, 5/29/09, stephen woodley <learntcm wrote:

 

 

stephen woodley <learntcm

Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Friday, May 29, 2009, 10:25 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Karen, Andrea Beth and All

 

Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Obviously your prior

training has greatly influenced and helped your learning of

Chinese medicine.

In reading and pondering the various postings on this thread it

is very clear that there are profound differences in the approach

of Western herbalists and Chinese medicine practitioners. As a

few have posted (including myself) wondering if a Chinese

medicine practitioner even needs to have this botanical

understanding. ..it leads me to pose this question to the group:

 

Is a Chinese medicine practitioner an " Herbalist " ? Or should we

be considered some other thing?

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

--

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

or over the web

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Odd question, Stephen.  I have a few answers.

 

One:  Of course, we are herbalists.  We use herbs as medicine.

 

Two:  We are more than herbalists, because our medicinal pharmacy also includes

animal and mineral substances.

 

Three:  If we use acupuncture and allied therapies too, we are more than

providers of " natural substance medicine " .

 

Four:  Not all acupuncturists practice the prescriptive part of Chinese

medicine, so they should be called acupuncturists, and not herbalists nor

practitioners of Chinese medicine.

 

These, of course, are my opinions only.  But I sense your question is a leading

one, and I wonder what your thoughts are...

 

Andrea Beth

 

Traditional Oriental Medicine

Happy Hours in the CALM Center

635 S. 10th St.

Cottonwood, AZ  86326

(928) 274-1373

 

 

--- On Fri, 5/29/09, stephen woodley <learntcm wrote:

 

stephen woodley <learntcm

Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Friday, May 29, 2009, 10:25 AM

 

Hi Karen, Andrea Beth and All

 

Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Obviously your prior

training has greatly influenced and helped your learning of

Chinese medicine.

In reading and pondering the various postings on this thread it

is very clear that there are profound differences in the approach

of Western herbalists and Chinese medicine practitioners. As a

few have posted (including myself) wondering if a Chinese

medicine practitioner even needs to have this botanical

understanding...it leads me to pose this question to the group:

 

Is a Chinese medicine practitioner an " Herbalist " ? Or should we

be considered some other thing?

 

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

--

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

                          or over the web

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Stephen et al,

 

Stephen said:

I think to have the students learn from this database software for

their TCM is much easier and better than visiting the live plant gardern,

the video not only shows the plant, but also the well processed and

finished medicine too.

 

Stephen, when I was in Nan Ning last spring I met a group of first year

students at the botanical garden of the CM school there. They were studying

for a botany exam. They were thrilled to see and feel and smell the plants,

creating a connection that you can not get through video media. Although

your above statement may be " easier " it most certainly, IMHO, is not a

" better " method.

 

It would seem to me that there should be layers of learning and the first

layer of understanding plants is to actually understand them, something that

touching, smelling, tasting, etc. can only do. You simply can't get that

kind of learning/knowledge from a book or video.

 

BTW: We were talking about teaching Westerners, weren't we? And that

would/does require a different curriculum or style, doesn't it?

 

And, do you completely dismiss my statements that learning to see patterns

in plants is good first step to seeing patterns in people?

 

Isn't this fun?!?!

Thomas

 

 

Beijing, China

Author of " Western Herbs According to Traditional : A

Practitioners Guide "

Check out my blog: www.sourcepointherbs.blogspot.com

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Thomas,

 

I think learning to see patterns is a valuable skill, be it in plants, people,

or in large-scale trends.  And yes, I think it is great fun!

 

Andrea Beth

 

 

Traditional Oriental Medicine

Happy Hours in the CALM Center

635 S. 10th St.

Cottonwood, AZ  86326

(928) 274-1373

 

 

--- On Fri, 5/29/09, wrote:

 

 

Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Friday, May 29, 2009, 4:00 PM

 

Stephen et al,

 

Stephen said:

I think to have the students learn from this database software for

their TCM is much easier and better than visiting the live plant gardern,

the video not only shows the plant, but also the well processed and

finished medicine too.

 

Stephen, when I was in Nan Ning last spring I met a group of first year

students at the botanical garden of the CM school there. They were studying

for a botany exam. They were thrilled to see and feel and smell the plants,

creating a connection that you can not get through video media. Although

your above statement may be " easier " it most certainly, IMHO, is not a

" better " method.

 

It would seem to me that there should be layers of learning and the first

layer of understanding plants is to actually understand them, something that

touching, smelling, tasting, etc. can only do. You simply can't get that

kind of learning/knowledge from a book or video.

 

BTW: We were talking about teaching Westerners, weren't we? And that

would/does require a different curriculum or style, doesn't it?

 

And, do you completely dismiss my statements that learning to see patterns

in plants is good first step to seeing patterns in people?

 

Isn't this fun?!?!

Thomas

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I think that a botany class would be more useful in TCM schools than physics

as a pre-requisite.

 

Botany is like the anatomy and physiology of herbology.

 

Now, if Fritjof Capra was teaching physics for Chinese medical

practitioners,

that would be another story.

 

K

 

 

 

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM, <wrote:

 

>

>

> Thomas,

>

> I think learning to see patterns is a valuable skill, be it in plants,

> people, or in large-scale trends. And yes, I think it is great fun!

>

>

> Andrea Beth

>

>

> Traditional Oriental Medicine

> Happy Hours in the CALM Center

> 635 S. 10th St.

> Cottonwood, AZ 86326

> (928) 274-1373

>

> --- On Fri, 5/29/09,

<tag.plantgeek<tag.plantgeek%40gmail.com>>

> wrote:

>

> <tag.plantgeek <tag.plantgeek%40gmail.com>>

> Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

> <%40>

> Friday, May 29, 2009, 4:00 PM

>

> Stephen et al,

>

> Stephen said:

> I think to have the students learn from this database software for

> their TCM is much easier and better than visiting the live plant gardern,

> the video not only shows the plant, but also the well processed and

> finished medicine too.

>

> Stephen, when I was in Nan Ning last spring I met a group of first year

> students at the botanical garden of the CM school there. They were studying

> for a botany exam. They were thrilled to see and feel and smell the plants,

> creating a connection that you can not get through video media. Although

> your above statement may be " easier " it most certainly, IMHO, is not a

> " better " method.

>

> It would seem to me that there should be layers of learning and the first

> layer of understanding plants is to actually understand them, something

> that

> touching, smelling, tasting, etc. can only do. You simply can't get that

> kind of learning/knowledge from a book or video.

>

> BTW: We were talking about teaching Westerners, weren't we? And that

> would/does require a different curriculum or style, doesn't it?

>

> And, do you completely dismiss my statements that learning to see patterns

> in plants is good first step to seeing patterns in people?

>

> Isn't this fun?!?!

> Thomas

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Respectfully Stephen,

Even Bensky's materia medica describes many external medicine that are

made and topically applied. There's a plethora of Chinese herb books that

describe making medicines for patient's -- as I see it, its one of the

more fun parts of an herbalists job.

 

Michael

 

 

Stephen,

>  

> I already anwsered this question in my early posting to this group. I do

> not know why it has not been published here so far.

>  

> I clearly tell that No. The Practitioners in China do not

> need such knowledge at all(even knowing it may not be a bad thing). The

> practioners care about correct diagnosis for first and then how to choose

> the medicine items(of course they should know the item's property) and

> make a formula to achieve the best treatment. If saying to know the herb

> property is necessary for practitioners, but more than that to know how to

> grow and classify the plant means nothing.

>  

> When I studied in Boston area, I never heard of any MD friends in

> Ivy leagues to learn how to make a medicine althought it is necessary to

> know what are the available choices of medicine. Similarly Chinese

> Medicine practitioners do not have to know how to make Chinese medicine

> not mention how to grow the plant from which to make the herb.

>

> --- On Fri, 5/29/09, stephen woodley <learntcm wrote:

>

>

> stephen woodley <learntcm

> Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

>

> Friday, May 29, 2009, 10:25 AM

>

>

Hi Karen, Andrea Beth and All

>

> Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Obviously your prior

> training has greatly influenced and helped your learning of

> Chinese medicine.

> In reading and pondering the various postings on this thread it

> is very clear that there are profound differences in the approach

> of Western herbalists and Chinese medicine practitioners. As a

> few have posted (including myself) wondering if a Chinese

> medicine practitioner even needs to have this botanical

> understanding. ..it leads me to pose this question to the group:

>

> Is a Chinese medicine practitioner an " Herbalist " ? Or should we

> be considered some other thing?

>

> Stephen Woodley LAc

>

> --

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

> or over the web

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Thomas, Steve Qi, Andrea Beth,

It is my experience, and that of the students that I've taken on

herb walks and to herb gardens, that having the visceral experience of

working with live herbs, especially in the wild or if not in gardens,

expands the knowledge base of students, and increases their enthusiasm

for the subject exponentially. Indeed, it gives an entirely new

dimension to learning beyond the books, allowing them to retain their

book learning more efficiently. .

 

 

On May 29, 2009, at 4:11 PM, wrote:

 

>

>

> Thomas,

>

> I think learning to see patterns is a valuable skill, be it in

> plants, people, or in large-scale trends. And yes, I think it is

> great fun!

>

> Andrea Beth

>

>

> Traditional Oriental Medicine

> Happy Hours in the CALM Center

> 635 S. 10th St.

> Cottonwood, AZ 86326

> (928) 274-1373

>

> --- On Fri, 5/29/09, wrote:

>

>

> Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

>

> Friday, May 29, 2009, 4:00 PM

>

> Stephen et al,

>

> Stephen said:

> I think to have the students learn from this database software for

> their TCM is much easier and better than visiting the live plant

> gardern,

> the video not only shows the plant, but also the well processed and

> finished medicine too.

>

> Stephen, when I was in Nan Ning last spring I met a group of first

> year

> students at the botanical garden of the CM school there. They were

> studying

> for a botany exam. They were thrilled to see and feel and smell the

> plants,

> creating a connection that you can not get through video media.

> Although

> your above statement may be " easier " it most certainly, IMHO, is not a

> " better " method.

>

> It would seem to me that there should be layers of learning and the

> first

> layer of understanding plants is to actually understand them,

> something that

> touching, smelling, tasting, etc. can only do. You simply can't get

> that

> kind of learning/knowledge from a book or video.

>

> BTW: We were talking about teaching Westerners, weren't we? And that

> would/does require a different curriculum or style, doesn't it?

>

> And, do you completely dismiss my statements that learning to see

> patterns

> in plants is good first step to seeing patterns in people?

>

> Isn't this fun?!?!

> Thomas

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

One of my favorite books " Forgotten Traditions of Ancient Chinese

Medicine " by Xu Da-chun, translated by Paul Unschuld, has a chapter

that states that physicians of Chinese medicine should prepare their

own medicines, and if they haven't picked the raw material themselves,

they should be familiar where and when it was picked.

 

 

On May 30, 2009, at 8:40 AM, mtierra wrote:

 

>

>

> Respectfully Stephen,

> Even Bensky's materia medica describes many external medicine that are

> made and topically applied. There's a plethora of Chinese herb books

> that

> describe making medicines for patient's -- as I see it, its one of the

> more fun parts of an herbalists job.

>

> Michael

>

> Stephen,

> >

> > I already anwsered this question in my early posting to this

> group. I do

> > not know why it has not been published here so far.

> >

> > I clearly tell that No. The Practitioners in

> China do not

> > need such knowledge at all(even knowing it may not be a bad

> thing). The

> > practioners care about correct diagnosis for first and then how to

> choose

> > the medicine items(of course they should know the item's property)

> and

> > make a formula to achieve the best treatment. If saying to know

> the herb

> > property is necessary for practitioners, but more than that to

> know how to

> > grow and classify the plant means nothing.

> >

> > When I studied in Boston area, I never heard of any MD friends in

> > Ivy leagues to learn how to make a medicine althought it is

> necessary to

> > know what are the available choices of medicine. Similarly Chinese

> > Medicine practitioners do not have to know how to make Chinese

> medicine

> > not mention how to grow the plant from which to make the herb.

> >

> > --- On Fri, 5/29/09, stephen woodley <learntcm wrote:

> >

> >

> > stephen woodley <learntcm

> > Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

> >

> > Friday, May 29, 2009, 10:25 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Hi Karen, Andrea Beth and All

> >

> > Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Obviously your prior

> > training has greatly influenced and helped your learning of

> > Chinese medicine.

> > In reading and pondering the various postings on this thread it

> > is very clear that there are profound differences in the approach

> > of Western herbalists and Chinese medicine practitioners. As a

> > few have posted (including myself) wondering if a Chinese

> > medicine practitioner even needs to have this botanical

> > understanding. ..it leads me to pose this question to the group:

> >

> > Is a Chinese medicine practitioner an " Herbalist " ? Or should we

> > be considered some other thing?

> >

> > Stephen Woodley LAc

> >

> > --

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

> > or over the web

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

hello and Michael,

 

Both old time and now days, Some physicians of Chinese medicine do prepare their

own medicines at this sense - making some ball (wan ji) or powder(san ji) or

what is so called nostrums.

 

In what I stated - the practitioners of Chinese medicine do not need to make

Chinese medicine, I mean,  at present time, most practitioners do not need to

process herbs. It is true that in old time physicians of Chinese medicine

prepare or process the Herbs, because they had to do this(I guess). But at

present time, processing herbs has been a specific field which is finished by

skilled technitians trained at schools. The TCM practitioners do not have to do

that themselves. Of course,  I can not rule out someone in far country side or a

city has such a liking or peculiarity to process the herb by self. But usually

they do not have to and most practitioners do not. Convetional Medicine doctors

in West do not need to know how to make the medicine- the chemical or biology

processes, right?  My former American roomate spent eight years for a MD from

Medical school and a Ph.D. in biological Engineering. He liked it and thought it

would help in some

way. Similarly some TCM Practitioners do the same.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Arnaud Verluys talks about the two traditions of herbalism and formulaism

in the history of Chinese medicine.

 

Zhang Zhong Jing was a formulaist. I'm not sure if he knew all about the

growing

and harvesting of each herb... at least he didn't write about that... did

he?

 

Li Shi Zhen was an herbalist foremost... spending half of his life traveling

around

the countryside documenting and categorizing the herbs geographically and

seasonally.

 

Fung Fung, the cantonese herbalist and author of " Sixty years in search of

cures " ,

writes about how he spent many years working the herb gardens in the

beginning of his training.

He lived to past 90, practicing with plants and people for 70 years

in a deep course of intimate communion with nature.

 

K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

This makes complete sense to me, Z'ev!

 

Andrea Beth

 

 

Traditional Oriental Medicine

Happy Hours in the CALM Center

635 S. 10th St.

Cottonwood, AZ  86326

(928) 274-1373

 

 

--- On Sat, 5/30/09, <zrosenbe wrote:

 

<zrosenbe

Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Saturday, May 30, 2009, 9:02 PM

 

Thomas, Steve Qi, Andrea Beth,

     It is my experience, and that of the students that I've taken on 

herb walks and to herb gardens, that having the visceral experience of 

working with live herbs, especially in the wild or if not in gardens, 

expands the knowledge base of students, and increases their enthusiasm 

for the subject exponentially.  Indeed, it gives an entirely new 

dimension to learning beyond the books, allowing them to retain their 

book learning more efficiently. .

 

 

On May 29, 2009, at 4:11 PM, wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Steve,

Convenience doesn't necessarily translate into 'better'. The

skill to recognize medicinals and prepare them can only be a positive

experience that puts the physician more in touch with the medicine he

or she practices.

 

 

On May 31, 2009, at 7:52 AM, Steve Qi wrote:

 

>

>

> hello and Michael,

>

> Both old time and now days, Some physicians of Chinese medicine do

> prepare their own medicines at this sense - making some ball (wan

> ji) or powder(san ji) or what is so called nostrums.

>

> In what I stated - the practitioners of Chinese medicine do not need

> to make Chinese medicine, I mean, at present time, most

> practitioners do not need to process herbs. It is true that in old

> time physicians of Chinese medicine prepare or process the Herbs,

> because they had to do this(I guess). But at present time,

> processing herbs has been a specific field which is finished by

> skilled technitians trained at schools. The TCM practitioners do not

> have to do that themselves. Of course, I can not rule out someone

> in far country side or a city has such a liking or peculiarity to

> process the herb by self. But usually they do not have to and most

> practitioners do not. Convetional Medicine doctors in West do not

> need to know how to make the medicine- the chemical or biology

> processes, right? My former American roomate spent eight years for

> a MD from Medical school and a Ph.D. in biological Engineering. He

> liked it and thought it would help in some

> way. Similarly some TCM Practitioners do the same.

>

>

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Z'ev,

 

As always,  Good to know, if you have 4 years or at least some time to spend.

However to me, I'd rather to pick up what are prepared by the well trained

people through 4 year long studies and with experience plus  in their well

equipped shop.

 

 

Steve

 

 

--- On Sun, 5/31/09, <zrosenbe wrote:

 

 

<zrosenbe

Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

 

Sunday, May 31, 2009, 11:51 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Steve,

Convenience doesn't necessarily translate into 'better'. The

skill to recognize medicinals and prepare them can only be a positive

experience that puts the physician more in touch with the medicine he

or she practices.

 

 

On May 31, 2009, at 7:52 AM, Steve Qi wrote:

 

>

>

> hello and Michael,

>

> Both old time and now days, Some physicians of Chinese medicine do

> prepare their own medicines at this sense - making some ball (wan

> ji) or powder(san ji) or what is so called nostrums.

>

> In what I stated - the practitioners of Chinese medicine do not need

> to make Chinese medicine, I mean, at present time, most

> practitioners do not need to process herbs. It is true that in old

> time physicians of Chinese medicine prepare or process the Herbs,

> because they had to do this(I guess). But at present time,

> processing herbs has been a specific field which is finished by

> skilled technitians trained at schools. The TCM practitioners do not

> have to do that themselves. Of course, I can not rule out someone

> in far country side or a city has such a liking or peculiarity to

> process the herb by self. But usually they do not have to and most

> practitioners do not. Convetional Medicine doctors in West do not

> need to know how to make the medicine- the chemical or biology

> processes, right? My former American roomate spent eight years for

> a MD from Medical school and a Ph.D. in biological Engineering. He

> liked it and thought it would help in some

> way. Similarly some TCM Practitioners do the same.

>

>

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Steve,

In my earliest years of study (my mid-20's), I did field work and

plant medicine preparation as part of my training at a naturopathic

school in Santa Fe. It's a bit late in my career for that now, but I

am thankful for that early experience.

 

 

On May 31, 2009, at 9:28 PM, Steve Qi wrote:

 

>

>

> Z'ev,

>

> As always, Good to know, if you have 4 years or at least some time

> to spend. However to me, I'd rather to pick up what are prepared by

> the well trained people through 4 year long studies and with

> experience plus in their well equipped shop.

>

>

> Steve

>

>

> --- On Sun, 5/31/09, <zrosenbe wrote:

>

> <zrosenbe

> Re: Re: fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

>

> Sunday, May 31, 2009, 11:51 AM

>

> Steve,

> Convenience doesn't necessarily translate into 'better'. The

> skill to recognize medicinals and prepare them can only be a positive

> experience that puts the physician more in touch with the medicine he

> or she practices.

>

>

> On May 31, 2009, at 7:52 AM, Steve Qi wrote:

>

> >

> >

> > hello and Michael,

> >

> > Both old time and now days, Some physicians of Chinese medicine do

> > prepare their own medicines at this sense - making some ball (wan

> > ji) or powder(san ji) or what is so called nostrums.

> >

> > In what I stated - the practitioners of Chinese medicine do not need

> > to make Chinese medicine, I mean, at present time, most

> > practitioners do not need to process herbs. It is true that in old

> > time physicians of Chinese medicine prepare or process the Herbs,

> > because they had to do this(I guess). But at present time,

> > processing herbs has been a specific field which is finished by

> > skilled technitians trained at schools. The TCM practitioners do not

> > have to do that themselves. Of course, I can not rule out someone

> > in far country side or a city has such a liking or peculiarity to

> > process the herb by self. But usually they do not have to and most

> > practitioners do not. Convetional Medicine doctors in West do not

> > need to know how to make the medicine- the chemical or biology

> > processes, right? My former American roomate spent eight years for

> > a MD from Medical school and a Ph.D. in biological Engineering. He

> > liked it and thought it would help in some

> > way. Similarly some TCM Practitioners do the same.

> >

> >

>

>

> Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

> Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

> San Diego, Ca. 92122

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi All

Nerd that I am, I think this is an interesting topic

 

Ben said:

 

I think that while being trained in botany doesn't make one a

better clinician, it can offer a possibility for being a more

versatile herbalist, being able to adapt to limitations of herbal

availability.

 

Thomas said:

 

Students in China learn botany. It is a required course.

 

 

 

Kokko said:

 

I think that a botany class would be more useful in TCM schools

than physics as a pre-requisite.

I agree that this would be a beneficial course...and Kokko's idea

is great. Although any " science " will help people learn about

patterns in many ways....it's questionable how useful studying

the torque on a cantilever is versus the structure and

categorization of plants. Ben raises an interesting point that

might be the difference between an " herbalist " and a Chinese

medicine practitioner (or " purist " ?). To me, being able to

recognize native Ephedra in California wouldn't serve as a

substitute for Ma Huang...interested in others opinions

 

 

 

Thomas said:

 

BTW: We were talking about teaching Westerners, weren't we? And

that would/does require a different curriculum or style, doesn't

it?

And, do you completely dismiss my statements that learning to see

patterns in plants is good first step to seeing patterns in

people?

 

 

 

I agree that teaching Westerner's is fundamentally different and

we need a model for Westerner's and that might well include

Botany.

 

No, I don't completely dismiss it....but other paths help

cultivate seeing patterns

 

 

 

Michael said:

 

TCM, at least as it is taught has little concept of the role of

detoxification. Most of TCM is framed around a pathological model

and that is indeed both one of its strengths and weaknesses.

I have yet to here of students gradating from TCM schools

learning about various methods of general detoxification,

fasting, etc.

 

 

 

We should keep in mind that " de-toxing " and fasting are

antithetical to Chinese medicine view of health. I wouldn't agree

that we should learn or practice this as it's not part of the

model.

 

Treatment is always based on patterns....so, we don't have/need

de-tox

 

Can't remember the chapter...but we all remember from our early

studies the line about " 1/2 a day without food... " missing out on

food is bad for you.

 

So, this isn't a deficiency of schools...it's just not part of

the model

 

 

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - Access all of your messages and folders

wherever you are

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Stephen,

 

For the record I don't think that some botany skills creates any line

between real herbalists and TCM practitioners. I believe that an herbalist is

someone who uses plants to benefit health and alleviate suffering and should

remain open for use by all who might identify with the term and with plants.

 

I don't see any of us going down this particular drain, but in the Western

herb world there has been a lot of division around who gets to be an herbalist

especially once you link it with another word - " clinical " .

 

 

 

In regards to Botany being a curriculum requirement, when I did a tutorial

in Ca. in the last millenium, botany was still one of the prerequisites and I

believe at the time there was still a 15hr. botany training going on in some

schools.

 

Thanks again Stephen for pushing this one a bit.

 

Ben

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits.

http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_St\

orage1_052009

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Ben

 

Ben said:

I believe that an herbalist is someone who uses plants to benefit

health and alleviate suffering and should remain open for use by all

who might identify

with the term and with plants.

 

Stephen:

Thanks for your response...I was hoping that some people would give

their ideas/beliefs on this.

I came to it thinking that unless a practitioner can define what they

do, it will be very difficult to pursue improvement -

then came the observation that some call themselves " Herbalist " and

others (me included) do not. So, the ruminating began and I thought I'd

give the group a query.

 

I like your definition! it has a universal appeal

 

Clearly there are big differences between Western Herbalism versus

- so, I've been chewing on this idea for a while

Kokko cited Arnaud's discussion that is " formula-ism "

and not " herbalism " ...an opinion I've shared for a long time and you are

well aware from your own studies with Arnaud.

Still curious what others think

 

 

PS - I've heard really positive things about your " Herb walks "

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...