fu zi and other TCM ambiguities

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

Stephen,

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

Thomas

Beijing, China

Author of " Western Herbs According to Traditional : A

Practitioners Guide "

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

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

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

May 29, 2009

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

>

May 30, 2009

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

>

May 30, 2009

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

>

May 30, 2009

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

> >

May 31, 2009

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.

May 31, 2009

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

May 31, 2009

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:

May 31, 2009

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

May 31, 2009

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