As with most of you, I had virtually no training in pulse diagnosis
while in school. At the same time, however, looking back I am not so
sure how valuable it would have been given that most schools teach
strict TCM and have faculty with barely any pulse training themselves.
Everything in the school clinic was slippery or wiry just as others
have alluded to in prior posts. To have attempted to learn pulse
diagnosis with no way of receiving adequate feedback and guidance from
faculty (as they were not trained in pulse) probably would have been
more frustrating than waiting to learn it after graduation. Studying
with Dr. Leon Hammer has been, and is, an eye-opening experience into
the subtleties of what can be revealed from the pulse. As a certified
teacher in this system, I have been on both sides of the dilemma of
teaching and learning pulse diagnosis. I feel that to properly teach
the pulse in a school setting, the system of education needs to some
degree revolve around the theoretical framework that the pulse
provides. Dr. Hammer's school, Dragon Rises, is an excellent model
for this. But to do it well, one needs to break out of the confining
mould of TCM and western-defined Chinese medicine.

Another issue is attracting enough practitioners with a strong desire
to learn the pulse. School models revolve around western disease
differentiation and don't value the pulse enough as a method of
diagnosis, relegating it to simply validate a pattern of imbalance.
Why spend years studying pulse for that? Many don't want to dedicate
years to this endeavor, favoring a quickly applied form of diagnosis.
Much of this stems from misinformation or lack thereof.

Hopefully, as enough practitioners with skill in pulse diagnosis
emerge (and teach), this interest will again rise in the student body.