Abbreviated Courses In Acupuncture For Physicians Pose A Serious Problem
-
Sometimes, understanding one’s background can clarify their particular point of view. So in the spirit of “full disclosure” I would like to tell you a little about mine.
I began my medical career in 1979 when I received my MD degree from Albany Medical College. I trained in diagnostic radiology at George Washington University Hospital in Washington, DC. I entered private practice and spent 20 years doing full-service hospital radiology. It was at the end of these 20 years that changes occurred in my life, changes that made me look at my direction and commitments. It was at that time in my career when I discovered acupuncture, and the power this medicine has to heal. Please understand, I was awestruck at the conditions acupuncture could effectively treat —- conditions that from my previous medical training I knew were precisely those no one wanted to get stuck with because there was no effective treatment. I am a fellowship-trained interventional radiologist, and I have put needles into arteries, veins, solid organs, abscesses, tumors, pleural cavities, peritoneal cavities….you name it. But I had never felt the pull of Qi on a needle, I had never intentionally manipulated a needle to achieve a specific energetic effect, I had never contacted the energy of a meridian, nor used needles themselves, as instruments of healing. Here was a whole new science to learn. And the amazing thing is that it has a 3000 year history with millions upon millions of people undergoing clinical trial in China for 30 centuries!

So I enrolled in a course for physicians to learn “medical acupuncture”. I attended two weekend sessions, watched videotapes, and read one book. This course was based on the work of one physician. The book we read was his book – the videotapes we listened to were him talking, and he gave nearly all of the lectures at the 2 weekends of instruction. On the last day of training, I happened to be sitting next to a doctor from San Diego, and I overheard him say, “My wife knows so much more about acupuncture than I do.”
I subsequently found out this doctor’s wife was a licensed acupuncturist. One thing led to another, and before I knew it, I was enrolled at the National College of Natural Medicine in Portland, Oregon in a Master’s degree program in Classical Chinese Medicine. I will graduate from this same program in June. It is a 4-year program, and I have been able to complete it in 3 years by transferring credits from my medical school training. I feel very strongly that, in order to practice acupuncture at the level of competency which this medicine deserves, one must learn from many professors, observe with many clinical supervisors, and spend at least a few years to learn how to approach a patient in a holistic way with an entirely new set of diagnostic principles.
Remember, I am a scientist at heart, and this is the finest science that I have encountered. As a physician who has gone through Western medical training and now training in acupuncture and Oriental Medicine, I assure you that abbreviated courses in acupuncture for physicians pose a serious problem. That problem has to do with efficacy of treatment. Without a comprehensive education in the fundamentals of this science, and without appropriate hours spent in learning complex needling techniques, followed by supervised clinical application of all of this learning, it is not possible to effectively treat the list of diseases which the world now recognizes are amenable to acupuncture intervention.
The World Health Organization recognizes the ability of acupuncture to treat the following diseases: asthma, menstrual cramps, arthritis, sciatica, TMJ problems, allergies, anxiety, depression, bladder problems, kidney problems, childhood illness, colds, influenza, cough, bronchitis, constipation, diarrhea, dizziness, ear-nose & throat disorders, fatigue, gynecological disorders, genital herpes, herpetic neuralgia, heart palpitations, immune system deficiency, infertility, insomnia, numbness, poor circulation, PMS, sexual dysfunction, impotence, skin problems, stress-related illnesses, and weight gain or weight loss…and the list goes on.
Acupuncture is not a nice, short topic that can be covered during a seminar lasting for a few weekends. Suffice it to say, that it is not possible to treat the difficult diseases listed above after watching videotapes, reading one textbook, and attending two weekends of lecture with needling practice on a few other course participants.
I would like to give you a brief case presentation now, to try to illustrate in a nutshell why I am writing this letter. A 57 year old man presented 4 days earlier to the OHSU emergency room with sudden and complete blindness in his right eye. He was seen by an ophthalmologist, underwent carotid ultrasound, an MRI of his brain and MRI angiography , and was told that he had occlusion of his central retinal artery and would have permanent loss of vision in that eye. At the time of presentation his medications included lisinopril, metformin, and aspirin. Fortunately, the patient happened to have an appointment with his chiropractor, who heard the story of this man’s sudden blindness and grim prognosis, and referred the patient to the acupuncture practitioner who worked in the same building. The patient was seen daily for 7 consecutive days for acupuncture treatment. On the second day, he could see a small circle of light in the center of his vision in the blind eye. Day by day that circle of light enlarged, and became clearer. At the end of 7 treatments he had 20/40 vision in the previously blind eye.
This is the power of this medicine in the hands of a skilled practitioner. This is what can be accomplished in Oriental Medicine. Someone in Integrative Medicine has given me a definition of their subspecialty as the medicine that “fills in the gaps”. I think this is an apt definition, and there are many gaps in western medicine which need filling. Please give Oriental Medicine a chance by ensuring that practitioners who enter this field are adequately trained. Let’s up the ante, and see whether we can embrace this amazing alternative healing science with practitioners who have enough didactic hours of lecture from a variety of acupuncture faculty, and enough supervised hours of clinical practice so that they are familiar with treating patients with all sorts of maladies such as cancer, asthma, palpitations, constipation, allergies, menstrual disorders….to name just a few common problems.
The way forward has been paved by the state of Hawaii. Hawaii requires that medical doctors be trained and tested for competency prior to administering acupuncture to patients. The Attorney General for the state of Hawaii issued a statement on August 18, 2003, declaring that “medical acupuncture” as performed by physicians is not substantially different from any other type of acupuncture, and therefore, physicians performing “medical acupuncture” should be subject to the same laws of licensure and proof of competency as everyone else.
We in the acupuncture field are at a crossroads. We can condone physicians doing acupuncture under-trained, unsupervised, unevaluated in terms of competency, or we can strive to raise the standard. I feel strongly that this is a public health issue. I feel strongly that allowing medical doctors with minimal training & without oversight by a non-professional organization is a dangerous and foolhardy policy. I’d like to respectfully remind you that we are talking here about a healthcare profession; we are talking about peoples’ health & well-being; we cannot afford to have a double standard. The general public deserves parity in licensing so that competency can be maintained.
I therefore propose that the American Association of Medical Acupuncture evaluate their own training programs and consider complying with the World Health Organization’s recommendations of 1500 hours of training in acupuncture for physicians interested in pursuing this medicine. The WHO standards for physicians performing “medical acupuncture” include 1000 hours of didactic (including needling technique labs) and 500 hours of supervised clinical training, which ensures adequate training for entry level acupuncture. In addition, I feel that physicians should be required to pass the NCCAOM examinations to ensure their competency in acupuncture evaluation and treatment. If the AAMA is willing to adopt these standards of 1500 hours and NCCAOM testing, I believe the future of “medical acupuncture” in the United States would be shifted from a position of tenuous efficacy to one of competency and powerful healing.
Dr. Marilyn M. Walkey MD
www.flyingcraneacupuncture.com


























March 25th, 2010 at 7:32 am
This is one of the best articles on this subject I have ever read. Thanks Marilyn and keep up the great work – you are truly inspirational!
Reply
March 25th, 2010 at 8:30 am
Great article and thanks for sharing your process!
Reply
March 25th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
The position has merit and yet there is evidence to the contrary. The therapeutic effect of acupuncture is not dependent on a provider’s training. Risk of complications or side effects is associated with training…less training, more problems.
But the rather confounding notion that even a novice at acupuncture can produce a therapeutic effect…at least for problems such as head, neck, back and knee pain/conditions…is nevertheless, apparent in research for each of these conditions.
Training in East Asian medicine deepens interactive clinical skills and offers more to the patient from that archive of wisdom, for sure. But we must take into account that entry level providers can be able acupuncturists and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
Arya
Reply
Dr. Marilyn Walkey, MD, LAc Reply:
March 25th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Dear Arya,
I have one question….are you a licensed acupuncturist?
Do you have a PhD in Oriental Medicine. If not, I’m sorry, I don’t recognize you as an expert, despite how many peer-reviewed, double-blind, evidence-based studies you have read!
Reply
Arya Nielsen, PhD Reply:
March 25th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Hello,
I am a licensed acupuncturist in practice for 34 years. I have an academic research PhD in Philosophies of Medicine with a specialization in Integrative Clinical Science and Health Care.
I practice at a medical teaching hospital and direct a Fellowship program in acupuncture for inpatient care. I am published and I teach in NY and internationally. And while I agree that physicians would benefit from more training for safety reasons one cannot refute at least the trials and data from existing studies that they can elicit a therapeutic response. Moreover, at least in NY State, the regulation is not likely to change to increase training for physicians. Not sure it will anywhere. But am also not so sure it is as dangerous as the article states…but/and it does not mean the current standard is great.
Arya
Reply
Hugo Ramiro Reply:
May 7th, 2010 at 12:58 pm
Hi Maralyn and Arya: Arya, the issue has little to do with whether a needle elicits therapeutic response – of course it does, this isn’t placebo. However, operator skill is a major factor in terms of where the therapeutic ceiling is. Furthermore, an incompetent acupuncturist can insert needles wrongly, and damage the patient either energetically or organically. In Chinese Medicine we know that an improperly applied needle can harm, often in very subtle ways – this is just one of many reasons that it must be recognised that the only people who do acupuncture correctly are those trained in Chinese Medicine.
My education is in classical Chinese medicine via a lineage tradition.
March 25th, 2010 at 8:28 pm
Woohoo! This is a sensitive subject. And both have valid points. (Arya, thank you, I love that you respond in a non-adversarial way)
I am a Nurse practitioner in OBGYN for the past 11 years. I am now in my third (of 4) year at the Oregon College of Oriental Medicine (my original path, at last) and can hardly contain myself with the excitement I have for being able to add this powerful, holistic medicine to my healer’s tool belt. As I still work in clinic weekly, I listen even more intently to my patients and am able to see the individually unique, broad patterns of imbalance my women patients have, that account for not just her one complaint of migraines, PMS, postpartum depression, or her dysmenorrhea, etc, but all the other symptoms that frustrate her and adversely effect her quality of life, yet she’s not identifying these until I ask her about them.
I am optimistic that Chinese medicine is finally being integrated (albeit, painfully slowly) into our mainstream healthcare, and am fortunate to have caught this amazing wave. I work with a MD who was trained through a (6-month) Medical Doctor program. In talking with this doctor (on many occasions) about my excitement in applying Chinese medicine to women’s health care I came to understand that this doctor did not have the theoretical foundational understanding of TCM and 5-Element, etc. that is essential to providing holistic care for the patient. Her scope of healing is dramatically narrowed, to treating one symptom, in very much the way Western Medicine tends to be when approaching a patient’s condition (surprise-surprise). She noticed this as well as we spoke and I relayed all these patterns I see. As a result she is interested in learning more about TCM, 5-E. Yes, she does help her patients with her skills, but she could do much more.
Yes, western science/medicine and the NIH are trying to reduce TCM to fit the simplified western medicine/science mold and this is scary, frustrating, and inappropriate, and wow! I hope they wise up.
It is important to open and maintain a colleagial dialogue with MDs showing an interest in this medicine so all can understand its’ power/benefit in so many realms.
Reply
Hugo Ramiro Reply:
May 7th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
Hi Kimo; I enjoyed your story and am glad you can add this to your “toolbox”. I run a primary care practice and have only one tool in my toolbox – Chinese Medicine. I hope you work in a hospital, otherwise it means that you don’t understand the depth of Chinese Medicine, perhaps due to incomplete training. My clue is that you talk of integration in mainstream healthcare, when this is likely the worst thing for Chinese medicine, and one of the reasons that this website exists. It can also be said that true integration is not even possible!
I maintain collegial relationships with the many MDs that I work with, and I am also firm in the boundary I set – Chinese medicine is nto to be pillaged, co=opted or absorbed by western medicine. It must and will stand on its own. Collaboration, NOT Integration.
Thanks,
Hugo
Reply
Arya Nielsen, PhD Reply:
May 7th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Hugo: Guess what? The adaptation of Chinese medicine and acupuncture is the very reason it exists outside of China. For this system to be integrated into hospitals and conventional settings does not mean it is being ‘pillaged’ or ‘absorbed’. It means patients are having access to something that helps them.
No one owns this system; you do not own this system. Like language, it will morph and be adapted in different settings. The very notion that yours is the ‘correct’ way to practice does not appreciate the thousands of years of practitioners, some more adept than others, who used and passed on a variation of practice. Chinese medicine is syncretic by nature. It absorbs whatever is useful…and adapts to serve patients. It has remained viable because it is adaptable…and would not have done so if any one group at any point was able to monopolize it as you suggest it needs.
Reply
Hugo Ramiro Reply:
May 7th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
Arya; guess what? Your points of view are outdated. The latest in the literature shows that a process of co-optation and eventual dissolution of the absorbed system is the standard outcome unless the profession is able to defend its boundaries. The process of integration for Chinese Medicine in China, 60 years in, has failed. A similar experiment has led to similar results in India. This is evidence that you are ignoring.
Your statement that no one owns the system is provably false, as international law is demonstrating. Please see “International law and Indigenous Knowledge” for a primer in this area.
Your claim that Chinese Medicine is no more than a language is facile, and does not attest to the fact that specialist training is a requirement, and that the people who have that specialist training are the owners, and that the specialist training itself requires Yin-Yang philosophy. These are unavoidable roots(and I doubt that your Yin Yang philosophy is of a very high level as is attested to by your posts – only internal cultivation, as you *should* know, leads to a grasp of the fundaments of Chinese medicine).
The very notion that you would condescend to a lineage practitioner and attempt to educate them on the history of Chinese Medicine also shows your ignorance regarding the importance of oral tradition and direct transmission.
Your attempt to paint me as a monopoliser is laughable, since I subscribe to the (Chinese Medical) notion that Chinese Medicine is “plural and heterogeneous” as lead members of our field have stated.
Once again, the point is that the absorption of Chinese Medicine *into* biomedicine will not work, because biomedicine is not itself a coherent process, whereas Chinese medicine is. There is no room for Chinese medicine in a fragmental worldview, obviously.
Finally, some of the literature that you have been missing-
The old stuff:
Black Skin, White Masks (Fanon 1968)
Orientalism (Said 1978)
The Dynamics of Colonial violence (Kabwegyere 1972)
The Newer stuff:
Which Medicine? Whose Standard? Critical Reflections on medical integration in China (Fan, Holliday 2008)
Sushi Science and Hamburger Science (Motokawa 1989)
Deconstructing the evidence-based discourse in health sciences: truth, power and fascism (Holmes, Murray, Perron, Rail 2006)
Integration or Collaboration? (Ramiro, forthcoming)
Of course there are many more; I have cabinets full.
I think your western degrees cause you to be overconfident and overstep yourself. It is a common result of the western mindset. Your degree itself is an exposition of your bias, apparently. I really recommend you get your hands on International Law and Indigenous Knowledge (Oguamanan 2006).
Please ensure that you read the brief reply that follows this one where I will include two quotation from leaders in the field to facilitate your encounter with your limitations.
Now if you would care to speak to me with a little respect rather than as the western coloniser to the mere lineage holder, I would continue this discussion, but otherwise, you have a responsibility to catch up with your research.
Hugo (no PhD thank god)
March 27th, 2010 at 12:29 am
To Dr. Walkey
I wanted to let you know, just how much I like your post! Thank you for your dedication to our profession and the patients we serve. I have always respected medical doctors. I hope that medical doctors will take your advise. It really is awesome to see a medical doctor who decides to study TCM and takes it to heart, by doing the full schooling needed to really learn this beautiful medicine.
I hope that in the future, more medical doctors will do the same and hope to see more acupuncturists working along side them. I really enjoyed learning western medicine from the MD’s in school. You guys have so much to offer in knowledge to our profession and we can also offer so much to yours.
I always hoped that MD’s would speak about this subject. A lot of acupuncturists look up to you guys. Many acupuncturists get sad after seeing other professions practice with little or no training, in what took us so long to learn. Even then, this is a life time of learning.
I salute you, and hope you will decide to get involved in our national organizations. You would have my vote.
OCOM is a great college for CCM. I would invite you to also explore the teaching of Dr. Leon Hammer, who is also a MD and one of the best acupuncturists in this country. Dr. Hammers Contemporary Chinese Pulse Diagnosis is one the best books I have ever read. Really nice to see our medicine through the eyes of a MD, as is the case of Dr. Hammer and his long time work with Dr. Shen.
Best of luck to you sir
Reply
April 11th, 2010 at 7:40 pm
I went through naturopathic school and acupuncture school concurrently and in naturopathic school students would get incredibly limited training in acupuncture and then graduate and (at least in Connecticut where I trained) be able to practice acupuncture. I imagine the abbreviated medical acupuncture courses are equally limited. I can’t say I think that it’s putting patients in any particular danger, because acupuncture is relatively safe. But I do think there is a serious difference in efficacy, practitioners with limited training seem to rely on a protocol for a condition, rather than individualizing the treatment based on pattern. There also seems to be more of a focus on local points – sticking a needle in the problem – which (at least in my experience) tends to be less effective than distal points.
Reply
April 12th, 2010 at 10:18 am
Those of us who are considered FMGs (trained outside the USA) cannot but think that such recommendations even though valid, might be and can be interpreted as to have the intention to monopolize the field by some of those who are part of the medical profession/system.
The use of Acupuncture for healing has been in place and with good results for thousands of years by people who probably never had a professional degree or letters behind their names (i.e., MD, DO, PhD, etc.).
Clearly, this might represent a “move over (“those of you who do not have our degrees”) and let us (“those with them”) take over.” The “we know better” attitude.
This begs the question, is this really good for the “safety” of all of the people or only for some (specifically those involved in the process of establishing registration/certification/licensure taxes and/or other fees)?
Reply
Hugo Ramiro Reply:
May 7th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
Just to clarify Garcia’s points, because it is possible that he/she has not been fully clear: Chinese Medicine should and will regulate itself, as Western Medicine regulates itself. Makes sense, doesn’t it.
Reply
May 7th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
The two quotations Arya:
International Law and Indigenous Knowledge, p 82:
“Perhaps the most important provision of the Draft Declaration on the subject of Indigenous Knowledge is article 29: ‘Indigenous peoples are entitled to the recognition of the full ownership, control and protection of their cultural and intellectual property. They have the right to special measures to control, develop and protect their sciences, technologies and cultural manifestations [...].’”
Note the word OWNERSHIP.
Now a message for you from Li Shi Zhen (do you know who this is?) in his book Study on the Eight Extra Meridians:
“Inner channels and scenery can only be viewed through the inward reflection in deep meditation”.
I hope you will be going back to the drawing board.
Hugo
Reply
May 8th, 2010 at 11:59 am
Hugo,
We have responsibilities in practice, like our responsibilities to our children and to the earth. But it does not mean we own our children or the earth…or Chinese medicine. While Chinese medicine is a traditional indigenous system, it has been widely adapted outside of China. Your practice of Chinese medicine does not make you an ‘indigenous person’, or a ‘lineage holder’. You learned a system of medicine that you love…good. That no one group can own it is just a statement of fact, an observation. Consider that Chinese medicine would not have survived for you to learn if it were not the case. We all learned it because someone gave it, not because they ‘owned it’.
Finally, what lineage is it that teaches when someone does not agree with you they are ’shallow in the yin~yang’?
Reply
Hugo Ramiro Reply:
May 10th, 2010 at 11:55 pm
Arya – Indigenous peoples around the world disagree with you (this Indigenous person as well). Please see the references to international laws and treaties that I have provided, otherwise you are providing your personal opinion only – a personal opinion not in line with the standards set by the international community (or our own, see this website, for example). Culture, science and technology *is* owned. If you wrote a book, then you own it, and if someone plagiarised the book, it would be wrong, and *you* would feel wronged – just like I felt wronged when I first learned of the “Graston technique”. Please inform yourself before continuing on with your repetitive and demonstrably false opinions – again, I have provided references.
Your grasp of Yin Yang theory is weak as is evidenced by your posts. It is BASIC Yin Yang theory that there are boundaries which *must* be maintained in order for health to exist, whether these boundaries are between persons, or between professions – identity itself derives from these boundaries, one of which is the dividing flux between the white and black halves of the yin yang symbol. As a practitioner of Chinese medicine I am absolutely allowed, and even required, to point out your failure. Yin Yang theory is not some little thing we pay lip service to, it is the foundation of our medicine, and it is a DAOIST principle. Your (very insulting) brush-off of my lineage shows me that you do not have one, do not know what is involved in one, and have not grasped what Yin Yang theory itself blooms from. I doubt you are able to follow at this point, so I will move on.
Chinese medicine is not some corpse to be dismembered, dissected or picked apart. It is to remain whole and growing. And how will it achieve that? By maintaining its own boundaries, just as a healthy individual does. Just as an individual owns themselves and their actions, so does Chinese Medicine. Again, see the international law references which I have provided which expound these principles *in depth*. You are out of *your* depth here, Arya.
Your concept of “ownership” is naive and surprising, honestly. If I walked into a dentist’s office, got into the dentist’s chair and tried to perform oral surgery on a patient, I would get into very big trouble. Why? Because dentistry OWNS dentistry. If I drive without a license, same problem. If I prescribed anti-biotics, HRT therapy or vaccination, I would also get into grave trouble. Why? Because I have no ownership of these methods, professions, skills or technologies. Why is it that biomedicine can assert it boundaries, but Chinese medicine belongs to anyone who wants to take a strip off? It is a terrible double-standard that I am devoting my life to help resolve.
Lu Bingkui, former director of the PRC’s Minitry of TCM, 1991:
`Underneath the bright and cheap glitter at the
surface, the essence and the characteristics of
Chinese medicine are being metamorphosed and
annihilated at a most perturbing rate. The primary
expression of this crisis is the Westernisation of all
guiding principles and methodologies of Chinese
medicine.`
A repeat from my post no 8, above, which you must have missed:
‘Indigenous peoples are entitled to the recognition of the full ownership, control and protection of their cultural and intellectual property. They have the right to special measures to control, develop and protect their sciences, technologies and cultural manifestations [...].’
Thanks,
Hugo
Reply
May 11th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Marilyn,
Thank you so much for putting this article out there. I am a liscenced acupuncturist, practicing since 2002, and an 18 year practitioner of qigong. Over the years, I have heard many a story from my patients about inneffective acupuncture treatments given by MD’s and chiropractors.
It would be fantastic if we all stuck to what we do best. I don’t attempt surgery after a weekend course, but given a PDR I could probably write a decent prescription…this doesn’t mean I should, and I’m sure everyone is glad I’m not allowed to by law!
I know it’s harder to hurt someone with Chinese medicine, but inneffective treatments hurt everyone- those who are competent professionals, the general public who could benefit, and the patient who has to continue to endure their condition with less hope for relief.
Thanks Again!
David Bent L.Ac.
Reply
July 13th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
I propose here that we translate Ba Qi Mai – called the “Eight Extra Meridians” in this post – differently.
Ba translates as eight. Easy enough!
Qi translates as strange or curious, odd even. “Extra”? Is it a bonus that we have these? Add ons? No, in fact they are primordial, our conduits for yuan qi, relate with our autonomic nervous system, cyclical phenomena in the body, and DNA.
Mai translates better as channels or vessels – they’re like underground rivers. “Meridian”, meanwhile, is a cartographic term – it refers to imaginary lines on a map. Hugo, from your posts, I hardly believe that you’d think the acupuncture channels are imaginary.
So, how about The Eight Curious Vessels? The Eight Odd Conduits? The Eight Strange Channels? Anything but “The Eight Extra Meridians”!
Language is important, otherwise our ideas are discordant, and we’re not quite expressing our ideas as they should be
.
Reply
Hugo Ramiro Reply:
July 14th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Patrick, interestingly enough, I agree with all your points and think of the Ba Qi Mai in the exact way you do. I debated briefly whether I should write “Eight Extra Meridians” as my source text did, or write “Eight Extraordinary Vessels” as I would prefer to.
Thank you for pointing this out. I still don’t know whether I should modify the source (english) text or not when I reference it.
Cheers,
Hugo
Reply