Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Differences between Original Chinese Medicine and Traditional Chinese Medicine

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Differences between Original Chinese Medicine and Traditional Chinese Medicine

    Dear all,

    I would like to invite everybody to share their thoughts and knowledge on the core differences between Original Chinese Medicine and Traditional Chinese Medicine (what we usually refer to as TCM). As I have open this thread, I will first share my views on this subject, based on limited knowledge.

    TCM is part of Original Chinese Medicine, although Original Chinese Medicine may not be TCM. In others words, all that is found in TCM is found in Original Chinese Medicine, but Original Chinese Medicine owns some specific ‘areas’ lacking in TCM. Well, those supplemental areas are making the difference between the two. Please everybody share your thoughts. To start, here are a few points, classified only for convenience of this post:


    1. USE OF THE DEEPER AND PROFOUND CLASSICAL KNOWLEDGE

    Teachers who trace their lineage back to Original (often ‘familial’) Chinese Medicine are direct in their teachings, though they may use concepts and paradigms that have been removed and therefore are lacking in TCM teachings (or briefly tackled). Those are profound concepts involving the Five Ancestral Spirits and the use of emotional interplay to cure diseases (for example). Ancient teachings have been passed down in classics, such as the Inner Classic of Yellow Emperor. Although those classics are quoted in TCM teachings, their deeper aspects are rarely used. Physicians of the old days could (can) use practically those concepts both in their diagnosis and treatments. For example, most TCM manuals give detailed explanations on the Five Elemental Processes (mistranslated as ‘five elements’), but they won’t give practical use of this processes both on diagnostic or treatment.

    2. TIME SCHEDULE

    TCM is usually taught within 4 to 6 years. Some importance is usually given to Western diagnosis (use of western illness terms, with the risk of getting to the point of symptomatic treatment versus holistic treatment). It may require a much more longer period to equip someone with the appropriate classical skills and understanding of Original Chinese Medicine, simply because this system is complete and huge.

    3. CHI KUNG

    It is obvious, especially for us students of Sifu, that high level Chi Kung must have been (and still is!) used in high level ancient Chinese Medicine, yet the modern one lacks its use (in curing illness at least, nevertheless it is commonly said that its preventive benefits are obvious –anyway what is usually practiced is low level Chi Kung-).

    4. TREATMENT DIFFERENCES

    Treatments may differ, because of difference of understanding (of the deeper and profound concepts hidden in the Classics, that may lead to select other ways of treatment than the usual one) and skill (high level Chi Kung, manipulation of needles and selection of acupuncture points, etc…).
    As the concepts of TCM are a ‘lighter’ version of Original Chinese Medicine, TCM uses symptomatic treatments (acupuncture points are selected for their symptomatic value, not their intrinsic value). In other words, symptomatic diagnosis versus Chinese (holistic) diagnostic. In Original Chinese Medicine, one must treat both the cause and the symptom.

    5. DIAGNOSIS

    A main difference lies on Chinese diagnostic. Using the 4 stages of diagnostic, the 8 methods, the pulse diagnosis (extremely important), the tongue analysis, palpation and interrogatory. This last point is also very significant of Original Chinese Medicine. Interrogatory can reveal hidden factors, and sometimes it is necessary to forget about some ‘evident’ proofs to concentrate on finer and more subtle symptoms.


    More on the way...

    Maxime.

    Maxime Citerne, Chinese Medicine, Qigong Healing & Internal Arts

    Frankfurt - Paris - Alsace


    France: www.institut-anicca.com

    Germany: www.anicca-institute.com

  • #2
    TCM and OCM

    TCM is a more modern version but the benefits are not necessarily better. Like qigong and other arts, it is the individual that makes the difference.
    Pre TCM in many circles lacked the anatomy and physiology background because many who practiced were street peddlers (the multitude) with unsanitary conditions and lack of preceptorship.

    The minority (the few) who had the scholarly background served as doctors to the emperor and staff.
    TCM can be taught in 3-6 years and like being a Western MD the skills take time to become intuition. A recently graduated MD, like an recently graduated TCM student goes under the wing of a seasoned professional to get the real world skill!

    The concepts of TCM are not a lighter version of OCM. It may be better to look at the skill of the individual student. Even state requirements are different. In Florida (USA), one position as an OMD may be better that one from Wisconsin!

    Comment


    • #3
      Great thread, Maxime.

      1. USE OF THE DEEPER AND PROFOUND CLASSICAL KNOWLEDGE
      It's interesting that you bring this up. Actually, one of the biggest differences between TCM and OCM (I'll reluctantly use this for Original Chinese Medicine) is that OCM uses information that is NOT in the classics! For example, when my teacher, Dr. Hammer, was learning from his teacher, Dr. Shen, he would often see things that contradicted what was written in the books.

      Dr. Shen's answer: "Book wrong."

      This gets complicated, but suffice it to say that OCM is based more on a heart-to-heart transmission through the generations than ancient book learning. It is solidly rooted in clinical experience. Whatever works was kept and further developed. What didn't work was discarded.

      This is particularly true regarding the Pulse Diagnosis classics. Much of what is written in those classics is not accurate, for whatever reason. But if we consider just how subtle the art of Pulse Diagnosis is, then it's easier to see how such subtleties could get lost in words. This is where a heart-to-heart transmission is essential.

      In my experience, Dr. Hammer's book on Pulse Diagnosis is more accurate than many of the classics, but unless you learn directly from him (i.e. heart-to-heart transmission), the information in the book may not be meaningful to you. It's also worth mentioning that he's constantly updating and revising the information in the book based on his and his students' clinical experience.

      This is not to say that OCM didn't or doesn't use the classics. It does. But some of these classics were written 2000 years ago, and Chinese medicine has evolved a great deal over that time.

      As the concepts of TCM are a ‘lighter’ version of Original Chinese Medicine, TCM uses symptomatic treatments (acupuncture points are selected for their symptomatic value, not their intrinsic value).
      This is a huge difference. This diagnostic and treatment modality you describe is Western, not Chinese. On this basis alone, it could be argued that TCM is not Chinese Medicine.

      A main difference lies on Chinese diagnostic. Using the 4 stages of diagnostic, the 8 methods, the pulse diagnosis (extremely important), the tongue analysis, palpation and interrogatory.
      As far as I know, TCM uses 6 Levels, 4 Stages, 8 Principles, tongue, pulse, etc. The question is -- how much depth do they learn? As I said in another thread, my school requires us to do 450 hours of classes in diagnosis. Most schools require about 70 hours.

      And let me just say that those 450 hours are just an introduction. Even Dr. Hammer's protege, who has been studying with him for about 10 years, says that he feels like an advanced beginner in pulse diagnosis.
      Sifu Anthony Korahais
      www.FlowingZen.com
      (Click here to learn more about me.)

      Comment


      • #4
        Dr. Shen's answer: "Book wrong."
        I should mention that Dr. Hammer teaches us not to believe anything we are told, even by him. He encourages us to test everything. And this is exactly what he did with everything he learned from Dr. Shen.

        In roughly 30 years of testing what he learned from Dr. Shen, Dr. Hammer has found that he was right. The books were wrong.
        Sifu Anthony Korahais
        www.FlowingZen.com
        (Click here to learn more about me.)

        Comment


        • #5
          Dear Anthony Sihing,

          I was sure you couldn’t help but adding a few words . Thanks for your reply. You raised some interesting points.

          There may be some differences between:

          1.information which is not in the Classics

          Meaning that information in the Classics is also almost accurate, but some is missing. Nevertheless some invaluable Classics have been written long after the Inner Classic, I guess they should have benefited from the longer experience of practical treatments (and correcting of errors and misinterpretation) as you have mentioned (‘Chinese Medicine has evolved a great deal over that time’).

          For example, classical texts we may consider as historically modern such as Bin Hu Mai Xue (Theory and practice of pulse diagnosis, 1564), Yi Lin Gai Cuo (Reformation and correction of numerous aspects of the Chinese medicine, 1830), or Yi Zong Jin Jian (‘Golden Mirror of Medicine’, written on imperial decree, review and correction of former classical texts) have undoubtedly benefited from such experience.

          2. information which is wrong (contradictory)

          Meaning that the Classics are sometimes wrong. This last point is particularly interesting, we shall investigate further.

          My personal opinion (a logical one?) is that both possibilities are true.

          Quote:
          ‘As far as I know, TCM uses 6 Levels, 4 Stages, 8 Principles, tongue, pulse, etc. The question is -- how much depth do they learn?’

          I agree with you. The skill level of a practitioner may reveal his reaching in the Original Chinese Medicine. Maybe that level depend both of a deep (very deep) understanding of them, AND a transmission ‘out of the Classics’.

          One of my teacher always interrupt his teachings with a ‘oh now I’m going to do some kind of digression, what I am about to teach you is not found in the books’. And adding with a smile ‘gift from my master to his disciple’.
          All my teacher’s digression seems to be out of context (if we are only referring to our school books), and deals with the finer aspects of Human Being (Shen, Tao, and others aspects). Interestingly, most of my classmates find it irrelevant, some find it boring (!), in all cases difficult to ‘feel’. Personally, I find this fascinating.

          I am looking to my personal notes and will try to translate a few examples in English.

          Thanks again, Anthony Sihing, for your reply.

          Maxime.
          Last edited by Maxime; 16 September 2005, 07:09 PM.

          Maxime Citerne, Chinese Medicine, Qigong Healing & Internal Arts

          Frankfurt - Paris - Alsace


          France: www.institut-anicca.com

          Germany: www.anicca-institute.com

          Comment


          • #6
            Original Chinese Medicine

            First, I would like to say I think this forum is great. I have been reading it for about a month now. I haven't posted before because I haven't had a chance to study qigong from anybody. I have ready a good many books on the subject though.

            I have, however, had the good fortune to be able to study acupuncture from some one. My teacher is trained in the Dong Han system of acupuncture, which comes out of Korea. It was brought to Korea by Daoist missionaries.

            What differentiates this system from what is commonly taught in America is the importance of pulse diagnosis. Basically, it is all that is used. The other methods do not provide the information in a realtime fashion like pulse diagnosis. My teacher takes a pulse reading, inserts the needles, then rechecks the pulses to verify the treatment is correct.

            Asking questions is not necessary and the tongue only shows chronic conditions. The underlying theories are similar, but this system seems to understand them at a deeper level. Which I believe is how they were understood in the past.

            Comment


            • #7
              Antonious,

              Thank you.

              That is the best way as you stated "I should mention that Dr. Hammer teaches us not to believe anything we are told, even by him. He encourages us to test everything. And this is exactly what he did with everything he learned from Dr. Shen". My teachers said the same thing and I teach my students the same. Test what I say, then be satisfied so that people do not make a fool out of one's foolish beliefs and inclanations!

              Comment


              • #8
                Nothing like the real thing!

                TCM is one of many great examples of how the PRC Government has edited, abridged, modified and dilluted aspects of Classical pre-Mao Chinese Culture...and then presented the resulting product to China and the world as a substitute for the 'real thing'. And of course...all the while claiming the 'watered down' substitute to be the Authentic Ancient Art.

                Given the weak track record of TCM...compared to the older Classical Style...in treating the vast majority of health conditions presented by the typical variety of patients in the clinic every day...it oftentimes seems as if they 'threw the baby out with the bathwater'! But what better way to discredit something than to hold out a poor substitute as the 'Standard of Excellence' in replacing it? The Old Texas Proverb comes to mind again....."If it ain't broke...don't fix it!"

                Accept no substitutes, y'all! Ain't nuthin' like the real thang, Baby!
                http://www.shenmentao.com/forum/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Dear Sifu Stier,

                  thank you for joining this discussion. As a beginner I truly need advices from advanced practitioners and masters. So thank you again.

                  I am humbly searching for answers, since Anthony Sihing raised the difference between Original CM and TCM.

                  I was wondering why diagnosis methods such as tongue analysis and interrogatory were described in the Classics, yet it seems that they are not especially useful in Original Chinese Medicine (though I understand that a real advanced practitioner could get a lot of information from the pulses).

                  The 8 methods and 4 steps were devised by great masters of the ancient times, yet they are also present in TCM. Is the depth of understanding and/or missing information in the classics the key factors?

                  Symptomatic use of herb (pre-written) formulas and acupuncture points are certainly a proof of the watered down version, nevertheless TCM seems also to emphasize holistic treatment. Quite confusing.

                  Please, wouldn't you mind to elaborate from your vast experience in this field?

                  I hope I don't bother anyone with all my questions , I am only trying to add another stone on the Great Wall of Original and Ancestral Chinese Medicine Art.

                  Maxime.
                  Last edited by Maxime; 17 September 2005, 02:50 PM.

                  Maxime Citerne, Chinese Medicine, Qigong Healing & Internal Arts

                  Frankfurt - Paris - Alsace


                  France: www.institut-anicca.com

                  Germany: www.anicca-institute.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not especially useful?

                    Dear Maxime:

                    I don't know how you came to the conclusion that diagnostic techniques such as Pulse Diagnosis are not considered useful in Classical Oriental Medicine....or what is being referred to here as Original Chinese Medicine...but that simply is not true!

                    The Classical Methods of Diagnosis are Observation, Questioning, Listening, and Manual Examination. Each category includes a number of techniques which add to the overall assessment of a patient's inner environment...both physiologically and energetically.

                    Of these, Pulse Diagnosis...which falls into the Manual Examination Category...has traditionally held the greatest importance since it is capable of directly monitoring all 6 major bilateral, paired energy circuits...i.e. the 12 Regular Organ Channels and their Collateral Branches (Ching-Luo)...as well as all 8 Extra Channels. Thus, a direct reading of the entire internal system can be obtained through skilled Pulse Diagnosis. No other individual diagnostic method has the same potential to gather maximum information in case taking.

                    Although the examination of the Tongue, Skin and Hair, Nails and Cuticles, Eyes, Navel, and Physiognomy...along with additional information gathered through specific Observation and Questioning of the patient can be helpful in seeing the 'Big Picture'...these tools pale in comparison to expertise in Pulse Diagnosis! More specialty books have been devoted exclusively to the Pulse Method than to any other single diagnostic method.

                    For the sake of the patient's rapid recovery, I would prefer to spend 45 minutes in diagnosing and only 15 minutes in actual treatment modality rather than the other way around. Time and effort dilligently spent acquiring solid diagnostic skills...especially Pulse Diagnosis...and time spent applying them in the clinic guarantees more permanent healing in a much shorter period of time regardless of the age, gender, or racial markers of the patient...or whatever their health problems or diseases may be.
                    http://www.shenmentao.com/forum/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sifu Stier
                      I would prefer to spend 45 minutes in diagnosing and only 15 minutes in actual treatment modality rather than the other way around.
                      Amen.

                      This is what Dr. Hammer teaches us. The initial patient intake session lasts 2 hours. The first 45 minutes are dedicated entirely to pulse diagnosis. After that, there is a lengthy asking portion, followed by tongue, face, body, and voice diagnosis.

                      So what about treatment? Some patients do not get an actual treatment on their first visit. But rest assured that the lengthy diagnosis will pay off in their subsequent treatments.

                      Experienced physicians like Sifu Stier can shorten the initial diagnostic time (and it's often necessary when patients are lining up in your clinic). But all genuine Chinese physicians will still spend a good amount of time on diagnosis.
                      Sifu Anthony Korahais
                      www.FlowingZen.com
                      (Click here to learn more about me.)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SifuStier
                        Accept no substitutes, y'all! Ain't nuthin' like the real thang, Baby!
                        Very eloquently stated Sifu Stier!
                        Namo Ami Tuo Fo
                        Phil

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Dear Sifu Stier,

                          I am extremely grateful for your lightning, direct and effectice answer. Thanks for making things easier.

                          Originally posted by SifuStier
                          I don't know how you came to the conclusion that diagnostic techniques such as Pulse Diagnosis are not considered useful in Classical Oriental Medicine....or what is being referred to here as Original Chinese Medicine...but that simply is not true!
                          Sorry, this might be my damn lack of skill in English writting and elaborating. I did not underestimate the importance of pulse analysis, nevertheless I was confused at how important were the other 'stuff'. But your post was very clever and illuminating.
                          Originally posted by SifuStier
                          these tools pale in comparison to expertise in Pulse Diagnosis! (...) No other individual diagnostic method has the same potential to gather maximum information in case taking.
                          Seems the same opinion as Anthony Sihing's teacher. The pulses are releaving more accurately what is going on in the body (holistically speaking). I would like to thank you and also to thank my Sihing Anthony for bringing this to light on such an important tone. I will definitely make my best to deepen that field of research. Of course, without neglecting others aspects of diagnostic, classical gems of ancient wisdom.

                          Originally posted by SifuStier
                          The Classical Methods of Diagnosis are Observation, Questioning, Listening, and Manual Examination. Each category includes a number of techniques which add to the overall assessment of a patient's inner environment...both physiologically and energetically.
                          Far less confusing for me now. Those are 'Classical Methods' as you mentioned. To resume, the depth of skill in each of these methods may reveal the skill of the practitioner. Nevertheless, pulse diagnosis is the core technique, the main way.


                          dear Anthony Sihing,
                          Originally posted by Anthony
                          The first 45 minutes are dedicated entirely to pulse diagnosis. (...) But all genuine Chinese physicians will still spend a good amount of time on diagnosis.
                          Things cannot be more simply said

                          As far as missing information is concerned, I was wondering what kind of material was missing.

                          For example:

                          When learning the Yin/Yang harmony related to emotions and internal organs, it is commonly said that Anger is related to the Liver, Joy/Heart, etc... But a factor is to be taken into account, that is the Yin/Yang level of the organs themselves.

                          If the Heart has excess of Yang, it may be more fragile (weak) when confronted to an excess of Yang from the Liver: it will add more Yang to the Yang of the Heart already in excess. Thus the spirit may suffer, and perturbations of the Shen may occur.

                          In other words, the level of Yin/Yang of each organ may or may not protect this one against an unbalanced Yin/Yang level of the others organs. Thus, emotional inadequacies from one internal organ may be more dangerous, more threatening to another one regarding their respective Yin/Yang level.

                          Maybe, a skilled diagnosis may reveal this to the practitioner. Is that some kind of information missing in the Classics?

                          As far as emotions are concerned, the Heart is always the most important organ; if the Heart is very strong (Yin/Yang harmony), naturally restoring emotional balance related to the others organs will be easier.

                          Maxime.
                          Last edited by Maxime; 18 September 2005, 09:12 AM.

                          Maxime Citerne, Chinese Medicine, Qigong Healing & Internal Arts

                          Frankfurt - Paris - Alsace


                          France: www.institut-anicca.com

                          Germany: www.anicca-institute.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            though effective

                            Maxime,

                            Pulse diagnosis today cannot stand up to scrutiny except in the most highly trained, which is a rarity. Enough criteria has been tested that when 10 people who claim to have learned pulse diagnosis, they have all up with 10 different classification of diagnoses. Despite that, the patients recovered from their malady without problems! I have no idea what that means (actually I do but will not venture further).

                            I am aware that even though pulse work is done, very oftern western diagnostic tools are used to verify (further) the extent especially if TCM/OCM does not work and vice versa.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Classical vs. TCM Pulse Diagnosis

                              Pulse Diagnosis cannot stand up under scrutiny among most practitioners today because the overwhelming majority practice TCM methods in which only 5 of 20 Classical Energy Meridian Channels are monitored through Pulse Diagnosis. With an 80% deficit...even the most gifted student or graduate practitioner is certain to encounter difficulty diagnosing ANYTHING other than what the patients report when presenting themselves in the clinic!

                              This is why so much importance is placed instead on trying to fit the sum total of the patient's presenting symptomology into the most similar 'Disease Syndrome Category'. In so doing...'cookbook recipe' acupuncture prescriptions and herbal formulas which are specific to that Syndrome may be selected as taught...and applied with little or no consideration for the age, gender, or other personal characteristcs which set the patient apart from the larger syndrome group. Thus...for want of Classical Pulse Diagnosis Technique...a mostly 'one size fits all 'disease syndrome' treatment plan is employed instead.
                              Last edited by Sifu Stier; 19 September 2005, 06:00 AM.
                              http://www.shenmentao.com/forum/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X