Is there sufficient didactic pulse diagnosis training
in the core curriculums of the schools?

My understanding of DIDACTIC pulse diagnosis training
is that the training is delivered in a lecture format
as opposed to a practical, lab, or clinical training.
With this understanding, I have to say, yes, I have
received sufficient training in terms of material
covered and time spent in class in order to collect
use full information to help guide my treatment plans
in the clinic. I do not mean to imply that I have
mastered pulses, but only that I feel comfortable with
the basics. Each instructor from which I have learned
pulses in class has made it clear that, "Pulse is a
lifetime of study." That being said, didactic training
could be improved by establishing more consistent
terminology to describe the basic 28 pulses. Didactic
training alone, however is insufficient.

It is essential that we receive practical training as
well, which we do in the student clinic. However, too
often the pulses of our patients are discussed after
we(instructors & students) have already left the
treatment room. It would be extremely useful to
discuss the pulse while still in the room with the
patient.

When one is first learning to speak, it is not enough
to merely describe a dog as an animal with fur, four
legs, two ears, two eyes, and a tail. Eventually, the
child needs to be shown a dog in order to distinguish
it from a cat.



________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7