CCM vs TCM education in the USA - is there a huge difference?

[Yasjua]

While I was living in Portland (Oregon) and looking into attending Chinese medicine school I discovered the National College of Natural Medicine (NCNM), founded(?) by Heiner Fruehauf, a major proponent of CCM (Classical Chinese Medicine). Heiner and others at the University purport to be expounding authentic pre-Mao-Ze-Dongian Chinese medicine. Ironically, the emphatically stated differences Heiner can't help but fart into every sentence he utters, between TCM and CCM, turned me off from attending the University. I'm still curious though, as I might reconsider going to graduate school later in life - - - are the differences between TCM and CCM education in the USA significant? Any graduates or masters here to attest to the contrast?

 

It's funny, because although I despise fundamentalism in every possible way, Heiner's words have stuck with me and kind of convinced me that TCM is a watered down allopathic counterfeit of authentic Chinese medicine.

[Slim]

Here's a link to a talk by Andrew Nugent-Head on the subject:

 

www.traditionalstudies.org/video-the-state-of-chinese-medicine-in-china-today/

 

I know a number of Mainland Chinese doctors who are also pretty into the whole Classical Chinese Medicine thing. There's definitely something to it.

[Formless Tao]

http://apricotforesthospital.com/

 

uote name="Yasjua" post="593311" timestamp="1416542799"]While I was living in Portland (Oregon) and looking into attending Chinese medicine school I discovered the National College of Natural Medicine (NCNM), founded(?) by Heiner Fruehauf, a major proponent of CCM (Classical Chinese Medicine). Heiner and others at the University purport to be expounding authentic pre-Mao-Ze-Dongian Chinese medicine. Ironically, the emphatically stated differences Heiner can't help but fart into every sentence he utters, between TCM and CCM, turned me off from attending the University. I'm still curious though, as I might reconsider going to graduate school later in life - - - are the differences between TCM and CCM education in the USA significant? Any graduates or masters here to attest to the contrast?

 

It's funny, because although I despise fundamentalism in every possible way, Heiner's words have stuck with me and kind of convinced me that TCM is a watered down allopathic counterfeit of authentic Chinese medicine.

 

Hi Yasjua.

 

Yes TCM is different to CCM.

 

The person on this forum who can answer your question is Grady. We have discussed the subject previously together.

 

Grady is a disciple of Jiang Feng.

 

Please see some more information on their website above

 

FT

Edited November 21, 2014 by Formless Tao

[Gerard]

Here's some background information about TCM and modern China

 

CCM vs TCM

 

The CR movement watered down and modernised following the Western model all aspects of Traditional Chinese Culture.

 

Authentic TCM, not the modern version, is a deep holistic art, like anything Taoist.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Gerard

[Dainin]

It's my understanding that for licensure examinations you will need to know the "modernized" TCM, even if your program focuses on classical, five elements, or other traditional methods.

[ChiDragon]

- - - are the differences between TCM and CCM education in the USA significant? Any graduates or masters here to attest to the contrast?

 

Based on what I had read from the inputs, here in English, every thing is almost like the exact words in Chinese. It is hard for me to say that there is a difference. Since the TCM is traditional, then why should it be any different than CCM. I wouldn't say that the TCM has changed any in the last couple thousand years. Since when did people came up with the term CCM....???

Edited November 26, 2014 by ChiDragon

[松永道]

TCM is not traditional. TCM was essentially invented as a crash course to train the barefoot doctors. What we call TCM should, in all accuracy, be renamed Modern Chinese Medicine.

 

Andrew and Heiner have already covered the distinction better than I care to here, so I'll just add weigh in on my experience studying Chinese medicine and observing doctors in China and in the West.

 

TCM doctors tend to rely on western medicine diagnostics and theories whereas CCM doctors are comfortable operating on pure Chinese medicine principles. Clinically speaking, practicioners who use pure Chinese medicine are more effective. However, they also tend to be much more dedicated to medical study and personal cultivation than their counterparts. Some of the good doctors I've met were initially educated in a TCM institution but later researched the classics as clinicians. Others trained from the beginning in a medical lineage. In common, the best doctors all live, eat, and breath Chinese medicine and Daoist philosophy. So ultimately, I think personal dedication plays the biggest part.

 

In other words, I think it's not so important where you start. What matters is how much you invest. But know from the outset that all roads in Chinese medicine lead back to the classics. The classics are classics for a reason. Every great doctor thoughout history drew tremendous inspiration from them.

 

If you want to really do yourself a favor, learn to read them in ancient Chinese. The classics are multilayered, difficult and beautiful. They are tools designed to expand your mind. Sadly, translations render them dry and one dimensional (though reading multiple translations can give the reader a better taste).

Edited December 4, 2014 by 松永道

[henro]

TCM is not traditional. TCM was essentially invented as a crash course to train the barefoot doctors. What we call TCM should, in all accuracy, be renamed Modern Chinese Medicine.

 

Andrew and Heiner have already covered the distinction better than I care to here, so I'll just add weigh in on my experience studying Chinese medicine and observing doctors in China and in the West.

 

TCM doctors tend to rely on western medicine diagnostics and theories whereas CCM doctors are comfortable operating on pure Chinese medicine principles. Clinically speaking, practicioners who use pure Chinese medicine are more effective. However, they also tend to be much more dedicated to medical study and personal cultivation than their counterparts. Some of the good doctors I've met were initially educated in a TCM institution but later researched the classics as clinicians. Others trained from the beginning in a medical lineage. In common, the best doctors all live, eat, and breath Chinese medicine and Daoist philosophy. So ultimately, I think personal dedication plays the biggest part.

 

In other words, I think it's not so important where you start. What matters is how much you invest. But know from the outset that all roads in Chinese medicine lead back to the classics. The classics are classics for a reason. Every great doctor thoughout history drew tremendous inspiration from them.

 

If you want to really do yourself a favor, learn to read them in ancient Chinese. The classics are multilayered, difficult and beautiful. They are tools designed to expand your mind. Sadly, translations render them dry and one dimensional (though reading multiple translations can give the reader a better taste).

 

While much of what 松永道 says is true, my experience has been a bit different. I'm currently in the 4th year of my TCM program. We spent the first two years learning theory - points, diagnosis, herbs and formulas. Though the textbooks were all modern, they frequently reference the classics. Take a look at the Bensky and Deadman texts commonly used, and you will see a massive bibliography, and sources quoted. During those first 2 years, we also study western medicine - biology, chemistry, anatomy and physiology, and pathophysiology. There is rarely an attempt from either side to integrate the two sciences. In the third year we go deeper into all the subjects, and we start to see some integration. We have classes called TCM Internal Medicine in which we compare western diagnosis, and CM diagnosis, and look at treatment options. We also have specialty classes that do the same. In the third and fourth year we also have our clinic internship. While we have to adhere to Western medical standards when it comes to intake (i.e. blood pressure, pulse, and appropriate physical exams), and layer in the TCM approach (tongue, pulse, etc.), we approach all patients from a CM perspective, in fact in CA we are not allowed to offer a medical diagnosis. If we feel the patient needs further examination we must refer that patient to the appropriate western doctor. My teachers have mostly explained to us that we learn the western not to impose or supersede the CM diagnosis, but to be able to speak with western medical doctors, and use modern diagnosis methods where appropriate. This, in my opinion, does not water down the medicine. It simply gives us more tools to better serve the patient.

 

All of my Chinese teachers reference the classics, and all of them offer additional reading lists outside the California State TCM references.

 

Bob Flaws, a frequent translator of Chinese medicine classics, has basically called bullish*t on the whole TCM/CCM debate. Ming Liu, opposing Heiner and others, has stated that the link between Daoism and Chinese medicine isn't as strong as we are led to believe. Of course Sun Si Miao was a famous CM doctor and Daoist, but I believe he contends that Daoist medicine and Chinese medicine exist within their own paradigms, but frequently overlap and borrow from each other. Remember every lineage, every region, village, family all had their own versions of Chinese medicine. TCM was simply a modern standardization of those techniques. Of course stuff was lost or mistranslated, and is only now being rediscovered and examined. But it's not like CCM was a codified medicine replaced by TCM.

 

All of that being said, I'm moving forward with a doctorate and phd program with a heavy emphasis on the classic text and language as I believe you have to know the classics, build a foundation, before you can really move forward and excel in a subject.

Edited December 8, 2014 by henro

[Trunk]

... TCM is a watered down allopathic counterfeit of authentic Chinese medicine.

 

I think it's becoming more popular for US practioners to get their TCM degree then study Jeffrey Yuan and/or Kiiko Matsumoto's work. Or various other deep heavies that are lesser known.

 

I've seen quite a number of Drs of oriental medicine over the years. A couple of yrs ago I found a local dr who uses Kiiko's methods. O.M.G!!! 5-10x more effective. Just amazing. Rapid excellent results.

[松永道]

You know, the more things change, the more they stay the same..

 

In a way, the TCM vs CCM debate is a modern reframing of a discussion that has been going on within chinese medicine for at least a few hundred years. In China the sides were Jingfangjia 经方家, classical formula physicians, vs Shifangjia 时方家, the contemporary forumula physicians. The Jingfangjia closely researched and applied principles from the classics and Shifangjia used popular formulas, either from their lineage or from an amalgam of different sources.

 

However, the distinction between Classical formulas and contemporary formulas was also somewhat artificial because every great Shifangjia closely studied the classics. Li Dongyuan, Zhu Danxi, Liu Wansu, Ye Tianshi, etc all knew the classics backwards and forwards. They not only quoted the classics (as every teacher can here in China - it's not a yardstick to measure quality), but they used them as key to see into their epidemiological reality. Then they made some new formulas to suit their place in time (ie the geographic, economic, political, cultural, etc conditions that influenced the instance of certain disease patterns in their society).

 

I reckon criticism of both groups should fall more on the individual doctors than the particular schools of thought. Jingfangjia can inflexible and ignorant of how to modify their methods to suit different groups of patients (for example, they have a bad reputation in the Xinjiang province in western China because many classical formulas are warm, acrid and bitter - a combo that is rarely suited for disease in a dry, desert climate). Then, on the other hand, physicians who just use contemporary formulas often end up writing formulas that either lack precision, lack power, or overall lack understanding (because they never really studied the classics).

 

Interestingly enough, Japanese styles are mostly Jingfang, and Korean styles are mostly Shifang. China was a mix prior to the cultural revolution, then TCM educated the new generation Shifang style, but now Jingfang is regaining popularity.

 

Now back to TCM vs CCM.

 

@henro, you write, "every lineage, every region, village, family all had their own versions of Chinese medicine. TCM was simply a modern standardization of those techniques." I wish this was true. Unfortunately, what TCM has done is more akin to cutting a branch or two off different species of trees, then bundling them together, planting them in a pot and calling it a bush. I think this metaphor is a good one because some of the branches may root and grow. But many will die. That's what I see happening in TCM. Some techniques are growing but others are withering away because they've been cut from their roots.

 

@Trunk mentions the effectiveness of lineages like Kiiko's. I haven't met anyone from her branch but from the sounds of it, her work has roots.

 

Back @henro, there is absolutely nothing about learning western medicine that detracts from Chinese medicine (aside from the time investment). It sounds like you're moving in a good direction. But be on guard, Chinese theory must be your fundamental operating system if you are to actually call yourself a Chinese medicine physician. You can translate any or all of it into biomedical terms for your patients or MDs but the moment you start thinking in terms like allergies, antibacterials, antivirals, inflammation, etc before thinking yin and yang, heat and cold, rising and falling - then you are on the slope to mediocrity in this field.

 

There's a great book written right after the Qing dynasty collapsed titled 医学衷中参西录 (Yixue Zhong Zhong Can Xi Lu), it roughly translates as "Chinese Medical Impressions of Western Research". In it, the author Zhang Xichun describes turn of the century Western treatments like antibiotics and aspirin in Chinese medical terms. It's fascinating. And it's what we need to be doing more. Seeing biomedicine in our terms and not the other way around. Ed Neal comes to mind as a contemporary role model in this regard.

 

Now, as for Ming Liu's comment that Chinese medicine is separate from Daoist philosophy, I heartily disagree. But it is definitely separate from Daoist religion. The Neijing is a core Daoist book compiled under the Daoist Han dynasty regime. In subsequent centuries CM authors were mostly Confucian (because they had the money and means to write) but that doesn't change the fact that CM philosophy is based in yin-yang, 5 phase, Yijing thought. Daoist medicine should encompasses Chinese medicine and also include other therapies from the spiritual and/or Qi cultivation side of Daoist practice. But these days, people confuse Daoist medicine with religious ritual, exorcisms and talismans. That's Daoist religion, not Daoist medicine.

 

*edited for some typos

Edited December 22, 2014 by 松永道

[Yasjua]

In other words, I think it's not so important where you start. What matters is how much you invest. But know from the outset that all roads in Chinese medicine lead back to the classics. The classics are classics for a reason. Every great doctor thoughout history drew tremendous inspiration from them.

 

If you want to really do yourself a favor, learn to read them in ancient Chinese. The classics are multilayered, difficult and beautiful. They are tools designed to expand your mind. Sadly, translations render them dry and one dimensional (though reading multiple translations can give the reader a better taste).

 

My research so far has yielded three universities in the states that root themselves in the classics.

 

NCNM (Portland, OR) seems to have the most comprehensive program, due to their heavy emphasis not only on classical texts, but on lineage apprenticeship and sinology (the actual etiology of Chinese characters, and symbols, and their relationship to genuine Chinese medical thinking). They also have elective courses in I Ching, heavily emphasize their Qi Gong for all four years, go on multiple mountain and oceanside retreats, and include group meditations on all the herbs as part of their herbal medicine component (you touch, smell, brew, taste, and ingest different herbs and formulas and sit in meditation as they take effect). Unfortunately, it's also the most expensive program in the states, coming in at a whopping $88,000 of loans.

 

Daoist Traditions (Asheville, NC) seems to also heavily root in the classics. Jeffrey Yuen, a Daoist priest, is the lineage holder here. This seems to be a pretty small-scale operation, and there really isn't that much information available on the website about the school's philosophy or ethos. Asheville is not a big town, so I understand there are probably going to be fewer students, residents, and patients here than in other cities. This program costs about $67,000 for four years.

 

Texas Health and Science University (Austin, TX) is the third I've found. Their catalog begins by emphasizing that their University is one of the few in the West that so heavily draws on the classics. All of their core faculty were trained in Chinese universities. Their program also uniquely offers concurrent degrees in Chinese medicine in the United States and from Zhejiang Chinese Medical University in China. They also offer a dual major in Chinese medicine and MBA in Healthcare Administration. I find this highly practical as the chief complaint of many graduates of Chinese medicine programs in the U.S. is that there really aren't "jobs" for acupuncturists, and people who go into these kinds of fields generally lack a strong business sense, hence the abysmally high attrition rate of trained acupuncturists away from professional practice in their field. All that said, THSU still claims to teach TCM*, not CCM*. They also lack the strong Qi Gong program that the other two schools seem to have. This program costs about $52,000 over 3 1/2 years, or $62,000 for a concurrent MBA/dual-degree in China (one or the other; not both).

 

**At the risk of compromising my objectivity so far, I want to add here that I think "CCM" is a form of branding that, while significant in what it represents, by no means monopolizes the teachings and pedagogical form of pre-modern chinese medicine.

 

NCNM's course catalog can be found here: 

http://www.ncnm.edu/images/Publications/coursecatalog/2014-15_NCNM_CourseCatalog.pdf - CCM starts on page 55

 

THSU's courage catalog can be found here:

http://thsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/MS-in-AOM-Tuition.pdf

 

Now for some more subjective stuff.

 

I'm leaning toward THSU for several reasons. The program is more affordable, seems to be pretty down to Earth in its approach to training successful pracititoners, respects the classics (although it may lack the comprehensive and pedagogical character of the other two schools), and significantly, for me at least, offers a concurrent MBA-H - I know damn well how incompetent and ignorant I am regarding the business and financial side of life, and I feel that this will help balance and round out my pragmatist sensibilities, which I find highly valuable, but sadly underdeveloped in this life.

 

NCNM is my second choice, but frankly, I despise the city of Portland for its 9 months continual rain and for the totally ungrounded, etheric, vapid and impractical population of 'spiritual people' it attracts to itself. I have no doubt it's among the best programs in the states, but I didn't much like their facilities (an old unkempt elementary school), or the fact that they're charging an exorbitant amount of money to learn fringe medicine. I also hear their business classes teach very little in regards to opening and running a successful clinic. 

 

Daoist Traditions is not even really on my map. I didn't like Asheville enough to live there.

 

Edited - Typing error

Edited February 23, 2015 by Yasjua

[liminal_luke]

I despise the city of Portland for its 9 months continual rain and for the totally ungrounded, etheric, vapid and impractical population of "spiritual people" it attracts to itself.

 

Yasjua

 

 

I lived in Portland for several decades and none of my friends are anything like you describe.  Well, maybe a few.  Portland´s not exactly a metrópolis, but it´s population is too big to fit neatly into the popular stereotype; rest assured, plenty of grounded practical people live in Portland.  You are right about the rain though.

 

Liminal

Edited February 23, 2015 by liminal_luke

[Aetherous]

You're probably going to be wanting to fill in the gaps in qigong and other "cultivation" training regardless of what school it is.

 

The tuition difference between schools isn't a huge deal if you know about income based repayment.

The sinology aspect of the Portland school seems great, because understanding Chinese characters and language makes for a very deep understanding of the medicine. Also cool that they taste all of the herbs and experience them!

The dual degree option at Texas seems great, as well...because something like 1 in 4 CM grads aren't practicing after 5 years, due to the fact that the medicine isn't well accepted in this country, and because they mostly need to build their own practice from scratch.

Tough choice between those two schools. Maybe you can visit and see what the schools are like in person.

[Yasjua]

I lived in Portland for several decades and none of my friends are anything like you describe.  Well, maybe a few.  Portland´s not exactly a metrópolis, but it´s population is too big to fit neatly into the popular stereotype; rest assured, plenty of grounded practical people live in Portland.  You are right about the rain though.

 

Liminal

I'd say you lived in a different Portland than I did, lim. I'm not even three decades old, so that accounts for some major differences in our experiences, and your peer groups have probably had more time to get their heads on straight. Also, the fact that you made it through 30 years of that weather tells me we're just not wired the same biologically. I can't live under a cloud for that long. It really gets to me.

 

Don't get me wrong, I fell in love with Portland, and I fell in love in Portland several times, and I met, by far, my most interesting and beautiful friends there. But, the general energy of the place started to bother me last year. Most recently, gentrification and the booming tech industry there have changed the city's ethos quite noticeably. It's no longer a Pureland for weirdos, which is sad, but I don't really care. It wouldn't suit me there anymore anyway. In my experience, the people in their 20's and early 30's there are lost souls with kinked belief systems that haven't quite found resonance with reality yet. 

 

It can be great there, but I think it has a hard time attaining and maintaining a cultural balance that works for it. Its infrastructure is terribly wonky, capitalist principles are on the rise there, and unfortunately the show Portlandia branded the damn city, basically sealing its destiny as an eternal parody of itself. Now Austin... there's a nice city. Plenty of weirdness, but people are genuinely grounded, and ridiculously friendly.

 

This is all subjective bullshit. What it comes down to the individual bio-programming and everyone's going to have a different experience.

[Yasjua]

You're probably going to be wanting to fill in the gaps in qigong and other "cultivation" training regardless of what school it is.

 

The tuition difference between schools isn't a huge deal if you know about income based repayment.

 

The sinology aspect of the Portland school seems great, because understanding Chinese characters and language makes for a very deep understanding of the medicine. Also cool that they taste all of the herbs and experience them!

 

The dual degree option at Texas seems great, as well...because something like 1 in 4 CM grads aren't practicing after 5 years, due to the fact that the medicine isn't well accepted in this country, and because they mostly need to build their own practice from scratch.

 

Tough choice between those two schools. Maybe you can visit and see what the schools are like in person.

 

IBR is convenient, but I think it's wishful thinking to say that the different between 52,000 and 88,000 is not a big deal. $34,000 is a lot of money, and the reality is that the larger your debt, the bigger and faster and more aggressively your interest accrues. Plus, if you end up doing well for yourself, you won't necessarily qualify for IBR anymore, and your $1200 monthly payments might start to hurt. That's all speculative. Like I said, I'm a moron when it comes to finances.

[liminal_luke]

Yes, everybodies experience is different.  I thought maybe you were basing your thoughts on just a visit or two, but if you´ve lived there you know what´s it´s like for you.

 

Liminal

[Yasjua]

 

 

Here's a link to a talk by Andrew Nugent-Head on the subject:

 

www.traditionalstudies.org/video-the-state-of-chinese-medicine-in-china-today/

 

I know a number of Mainland Chinese doctors who are also pretty into the whole Classical Chinese Medicine thing. There's definitely something to it. 

 

 

I don't know how I missed this in November when you posted it. Thank you for sharing this incredible lecture.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Yasjua

[sean]

Well, if you move to Asheville your school is a few blocks from my house. 

 

(FWIW I recently moved to Asheville from LA. Was in Berkeley before that. Funny enough, top three choices of where to go next were Portland, Austin or Asheville. Happy with the choice so far. Sunnier and way less rain than Portland. Milder, less brutal summers than Austin. Way cheaper than both. It is very small but also packs a punch above it's weight class.)

 

Sean

[Yasjua]

Thanks Sean! Guess where I am right now?

 

Berkeley! LOL

[sean]

Haha. Nice. I love Berkeley. Spent a decent chunk of my life roaming the East Bay.

 

BTW, Andrew Nugent-Head recently relocated Association for Traditional Studies to Asheville. 

 

Sean

[Orion]

I learned modern TCM in school and then converted to CCM later, through extensive self-study and mentorship.

 

Modern TCM as it is taught in schools was invented by the Communists. The spiritual aspects were sanitized, and standard models were created. It's ironically very similar to western medicine in its proscriptive approaches... for instance, if someone has XYZ syndromes, you use one acupoint prescription every time. They also do way too much deep needling, which depletes the yuan qi in the patient.

 

My classic studies into the zhouyu school have yielded way better results in the clinic. I now do a combo of approaches. IMO if you're going to study TCM you should do it somewhere like Taiwan, or even take up acupuncture in Japan. They haven't been corrupted by the Communists.

[Slim]

IMO if you're going to study TCM you should do it somewhere like Taiwan, or even take up acupuncture in Japan. They haven't been corrupted by the Communists.

 

Or even Korea; apparently the training for traditional and Western medicine is keep quite separate there as well. 

Edited February 23, 2015 by Slim

[Yasjua]

For Orion: Where did you learn TCM? Would you have done it differently, knowing what you know? How long did it take you to absorb CCM and synthesize it into your practice style?

Edited February 23, 2015 by Yasjua

[Yasjua]

From Andrew:
 

Where should I go to Chinese Medicine school? Which is the best school?

November 14, 2013 By Andrew Nugent-Head

Questions I receive with a great deal of frequency are “Where should I go to Chinese medicine school?”, “What is the best Chinese Medicine School?” and “Can you recommend a Chinese medicine school?”

I personally believe that the education required and subsequent license earned are cover charges that must be paid before one can go more deeply into the medicine. Becoming licensed is absolutely imperative, and the foundation knowledge gained in even the least inspired program is critical when finally finding an opportunity for real learning. Contrary to popular belief, no experienced practitioner wants to take on a student who is a blank slate. A blank slate means there is no proof of commitment and no guarantee the student will remain in this medicine. Experienced practitioners simply do not have the time to gamble on someone who claims they want to practice this medicine but disdains the current paradigm. However, if someone has gone through the effort of obtaining a degree; made great efforts to educate themselves during their program and after being licensed through reading, seminars and private internships; and through all of this remained positive and not cynical despite what everyone who has gone through the system is aware of is worth considering as a student. This is known as 孺子可教 ‘Ru Zi Ke Jiao’ in Chinese, which refers to a story of a young man who remains helpful despite repeated attempts to bring out his frustration or anger.

School in the current paradigm of Chinese medicine in the United States, Europe or China is often a frustrating and anger creating experience. The quality of the education of Chinese medicine in the United States is greatly affected by those who came to it thirty years ago and the priorities of those people over these past thirty years. Some have made great attempts to create a unique educational experience but are hampered by the course requirements they are forced to include to be a licensed institution; others are focused on the very lucrative income a school which offers student financial aid can make. The former also often have difficulty finding gifted teachers at the prices they can afford to pay; the latter actively seek to hire faculty who are only to happy for these wages due to the lack of patients in their own clinical practice. Both of these situations have been shaped by governing bodies and regulatory commissions more concerned with how the outside public views and accepts Chinese medicine than the actual training given inside the field.

Studying in China is a more and more common choice for dedicated students. Having lived in China my entire adult life and watched westerners come and go, I cannot say that an education had here is any better than an education in the west. A student who continues actively striving to immerse themselves in the medicine here despite the physical and emotional trials life in China bring will certainly be further ahead than their contemporaries back home; but most either do not show that initiative or have it ground out of them by the difficulties here, leaving with less than they may have found at home despite having a better resume on paper. But if a student can remain positive, sidestep the western medical brainwashing that is part of the medicine here, avoid being arrogant for having been in China, and made a concerted effort to learn to read, write and speak Chinese fluently, the higher cover charge this country requires does equate to a better learning platform down the road. But that degree earned still only represents the right to begin learning, not proof of skill already obtained. East or West, the sooner this is realized and accepted, the closer one is to孺子可教 ‘Ru Zi Ke Jiao’ when the time does come or the opportunity presents itself.

With that said, I would first weigh whether any school I was considering was for profit or not for profit, and then weigh that with the following: does the college have well respected faculty members on permanent staff? Do they go to efforts to bring in and host the influential practitioners of our time? How busy is their student clinic? To enroll in a school without having gone to many treatments in their clinic to see the style of practice while chatting up the students on how they like the program shows little commitment by the individual in question. Should none of these turn up an obvious location, then I would paradoxically choose the least rigorous or least expensive college, using the extra-curricular time and extra income afforded to create a self education outside of the school. As I first said, there is no perfect school, so it is up to the individual to weigh the pros and cons, think out of the box and create the best possible learning experience during those 3-4 student years while remaining positive about what they are learning in class. Sadly, many students seem passive about their learning, thinking they deserve to be fed knowledge sitting in a classroom instead of actively striving to immerse themselves in the medicine through all means possible.

All of this is of course just my personal opinion. It is not based on any research done, nor do I care to do that research and learn about every institution currently licensed. But as a life long student of this medicine, I have experienced a bit of everything I have just mentioned–I learned in mentor relationships with old practitioners, spending years proving I was worth teaching before actually being taught real substance. I flew back and forth between China and a college in the United States for 3 years to obtain my MSOM and licensure and created an irreplaceable educational experience for myself despite having been in the field longer than every faculty member there but one. I have interned in the most famous hospitals in Beijing not for months but for years, seeing the course this medicine has officially taken that is so different from the education I obtained in the very same city. I am currently finishing a full time 3 year doctoral program in Hangzhou, creating a wonderful experience while those around me complain of the education offered. As a seminar organizer and presenter, I have visited no small amount of schools over the past 20 years, interfacing with their administrations, teachers, graduates and students. So while it is only opinion, it is based on quite a bit of exposure.

And there are and always will be exceptions. Of all the colleges I have visited and administrations I have met, one president does truly stand out as remaining dedicated to her students, their education and the field itself. Dr. Cissy Majebe of Daoist Traditions is obviously not just committed to teaching and practicing good medicine, but also to ensuring her graduates understand that they are now in service to the greater good. As a not for profit, that is something ATS feels is critical to the growth and success of our field as a clinically authentic medicine. This is not a vocation to be chosen at a Career Fair based on projected income, but a calling to help the sick and care for the suffering.

Andrew Nugent-Head
November 12th, 2013
Hangzhou

[Tactile]

While we're on the topic of CM education, one really good resource worth mentioning here is elotus.org . They have a lot of video material online on a variety of topics - shorter (1h) free clips and longer seminars which are not free. Acupuncture systems which are widely discussed are Tung's acupuncture and dr Tan's imaging system. I just started learning them as they are supposed to be really good for pain, which is one area you have to be really good at if you want to make it as an acupuncturist as many people are coming to you for pain relief. Their gold pass (1300$ yearly) is really a no brainer for any US based acupuncturist as you get a gift certificate for herbs for the whole amount. I'm even considering as a European even though I don't benefit so much from the herbal stuff due to custom fees and import regulations for herbals (and the live seminars end something like 4AM for me )