Raymond Huo presenting certificate to Rebecca Wood at the NZ College of TCM Graduation ceremony on May 12, 2011.
Attending the New Zealand College of Chinese Medicine graduation ceremony last week I was immediately struck by the diversity of graduates.
Showing that Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is becoming a wide-spread and accepted form of health care in New Zealand, graduating students came from Kiwi, Chinese, Korean and Iranian descent.
However it is unfortunate that New Zealand sits behind Australia who has implemented legislation to recognise TCM as a legitimate form of health care. While it seems on the outside that New Zealand has a strong awareness of Asia while Australia lags behind with its connection to Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party, this anomaly would suggest otherwise.
When you take into account the recent anti-Asian leaflet campaign by Kyle Chapman and his far-right group, I wonder if New Zealand really does sit ahead of Australia in regards to race-relations and awareness of other cultures.
So I put it to Red Alert readers out there, do you think legislation should be implemented in the field of Traditional Chinese Medicine and what would you like to see this legislation achieve?
I look forward to reading your feedback.
We need to be careful of the “because something is widespread, that means it must have value” argument.
You know what they call alternative medicine that has been shown to work?
Medicine.
There should be a strong evidential base for any form of medicine or therapy supported by the state, or legitimised through regulation.
So shall we take this post to mean that Labour intend on implementing magic and untested, unproven and unfalsifiable quackery as part of its healthcare policy?
What kind of legislation are we talking about here? If it’s something along the lines of medical practices that have no evidential basis being given the same official legitimacy as those that do, then no we don’t need any thanks.
And lots of evidence to show how bad it can go:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1172957/
Ill stick with proven medical trained people thank you.
Sorry Raymond, isn’t that your job to work out how and where to legislate?
Seems to me that things are working fine already – training is available; and those customers that desire traditional treatments are receiving them.
I have no idea about the effectiveness or value of TCM. Maybe the legislation should require registration and professional standards, and limiting to treatments that are actually scientifically proven and medically useful.
Does that seem a good idea to you, Raymond?
Thank you for your suggestion Baron. I understand the National Government is currently conducting a consultation process on this issue. If Labour were in Government I would be in favour of acting on the results of the consultation to ensure that the views and input of New Zealanders are taken into account when considering any legislation change in this area.
Yes. Magic and pseudo-science ought to be regulated out of the mainstream to the extent that it cannot be touted to innocent victims by pretending it has any therapeutic benefits. If you can get traditional Chinese medicine to prove it’s efficacy using proper double blind testing then, as another astute commenter said, it becomes medicine. Labour ought to be the one party arguing for ensuring working folk including people of all ethnicities have access to reliable effective health care.
I love chinese medicine, except that cruel tiger balm
, but chinese medicine is awesome! 
!
@The Baron – people should be able to have whatever they want!
It’s their bodies!
@Raymond – it would be a crying shame if people missed out on their alternative therapies because a bunch of people, who aren’t the ones taking it, want to interfere!
!!!
I’m busy tonight, will argue later!
Spud – I guess people do have the right to stick whatever into their bodies. But that’s not what is at stake here. This is about some people conning other people that thoroughly useless interventions have some benefit.
@OU – Groan, not you too! Look, people are entitled to personal choice and personal liberty. I believe that these do work and I would hate to see people miss out because of the cries of people who are trying to take away things that others value and wish to have access to!
Must go soon,
@OU – I didn’t see your comment before I wrote mine, your one was nice.
I believe that these therapies help an awful lot of people. I acknowledge that there are crooked people and substandard stuff out there. But there are also good quality practitioners. People need to get word of mouth and do their research etc before chosing who to go to.
Trolling. Banned. Clare
Does this include grinding up tigers, milking bears for bile, adding industrial chemicals to milk formula, counterfeit prescription drugs without the requisite active ingredients.
You can keep your barbaric fraudulant nonsense in your own country.
Let’s see what wikipedia tells us about TCM:
“TCM practices use different physiological and disease models than modern medicine, and make a number of assumptions that are inconsistent with or untestable under the principles of scientific methods, which complicates research on the efficacy of TCM medicinals and practices.”
Hmmm. Yes. I would not want TCM funded with tax dollars. If people want to get involved in hocus pocus, pseudo-science, quasi-mystical hobbies that masquerade as then that’s just great – good for them. I just don’t want to pay for it.
Well, isn’t it nice to see so many open-minded believers here! (Yes, I’m being sarcastic.)
So many subjective comments about: “magic,hocus-pocus, pseudo-science, quasi-mystical, untested, unproven and unfalsifiable quackery”…etc. Even the odd border-line psuedo-racist (OMG! Did I just use the buzz-word??) comment of: “keep your barbaric fraudulant nonsense in your own country”. And then of course the good-old: “strong evidential base” and “proper double blind testing” thrown in to ensure a semblance of being ‘in-the-know’ on this subject. All this makes an entertaining read after a big meal when you need some kill-time that doesn’t require too much brain-activity.
Just out of interest; how many of you are of healthcare background, mainstream or otherwise? Perhaps a good idea to reflect on that before making a hasty comment in an unfamiliar domain, or oppose an idea simply for the sake of opposing it.
I am in the healthcare field (conventional), and have put in my reasonable share of time in the RCTs and the evidence-based practice…etc. I won’t pretend to be an expert in TCM; because I’m neither stupid nor arrogant enough to do so. But I will say this: a form of healthcare would unlikely remain in existence for thousands of years creating one of the biggest population on this planet, if it does not indeed have some practical value or is down-right ineffective. Australia is a “Western” country; Germany is a “Western” country; France is a “Western” country; United States is a “Western” country; yet all these countries, that arguably pride themselves as the developed and civilised worlds with their fair-skin and blue eyes, has legislations in one form or another on this so-called “hocus-pocus mystical quackery” that originated from the “barbaric yellow-complexioned” Far-East country. Funny that.
Due to the endoctrination of conventional medical science, most of the public fail to realise that Western Medical Science is simply that; a science. And science is far from being exact, but a theory that is more widely agreed upon during an era in human history. In the Middle Ages western medicine believed in bleeding people to expel the illness; good luck trying to get your physician registration with that kind of practice now! Most people are also unaware that pharmaceutical studies are rarely golden-standard RCTs, but are in fact heavily biased (and some even “bought-out”) to the company that’s championing the drug behind the scenes, set to make billions if successful. In fact, it is commonly recognised in the academia of conventional medical science that gold-standard RCTs are practically impossible to perform; although we still aspire to at least attempt to achieve it.
It is important to legislate any form of healthcare; both for the protection of the public and the practitioners. However, current “TCM” practitioners are not true TCM practitioner; but merely acupuncturists. It cannot be denied that standards in this country for acupuncturists has been “quite loose” in the past (to say the least); nor that there are lots of dodgy providers out there that should probably not be in practice (as with all fields of healthcare). But that should not make us simply choose to ignore or reject the benefits TCM may bring. If you have a terminal illness that conventional medicine has no cure for yet TCM may offer a last hope, would you want to be denied that right to make one last grasp at that straw that may just save your life? What we should be concerned about, is to prevent this moment of weakness being exploited, which can easily happen (as it currently is) without a robust legislation on TCM.
But now is not the right time. Within the TCM field itself there are too many conflicting interest parties, some with “checkered” history. If New Zealand is to set up legislation to formally recognise TCM, then I would suggest importing reliable experts from other “western” countries with established TCM legislations to draft up something that’s relevant for KiwiLand; rather than rely on the self-promoted “masters” that we currently see too many of on the playing field.
It is certainly not something to be rushed into and there are many difficulties to overcome. But if Australia can do it, I’m sure we Kiwis can do even better!
Keep an open mind. That’ll go a long way.
Uh, David, New Zealand is Raymond’s country. He’s a New Zealand MP, for crying out loud. You’re dangerously close to sounding like that blathering idiot who got bounced from TVNZ for impugning the Governor-General.
I’d like to add that I’d prefer my taxpayer money isn’t used for student loans and allowances that “qualify” people in pseudo-science. If I had health insurance, I also wouldn’t want my premium to be subsidising these things.
An interesting person to read on the subject of Chinese medicine, btw, is Yau-Man Chan – grew up with it but eschews it in favour of science. More impressively, he was on Survivor.
@David- hey don’t compare nice respectable and traditional chinese medicine with the bleepin criminal stuff that has gone down there such as melamine!
!
@mr man – not hocus pocus – natural medicine. Have you ever seen a cat eat grass? And later it feels better?
Cats know what is good for them and go out and get it. 
@Bea – acupuncture used to be rubbished and now doctors sometimes refer people to have it done!
Maybe some science is behind. 
I think it’s great that people have a choice. Just like being able to choose between different hair dyes. 
Or types of drink. 
Keep an Open Mind really made me laugh.
People who reject TCM are know-nothing racists that probably don’t work in the health sector.
You must feel pretty amazing working in the health care sector and being so open minded.
You’ve completely convinced me that TCM isn’t quackery – I’ve just thrown out all my elderly Mother’s heart and blood pressure medication and have replaced it with ginseng.
I especially liked your comment “…most of the public fail to realise that Western Medical Science is simply that; a science. And science is far from being exact…”
Yes Western Medical Science really has let the team down – probably why people are living longer than ever right now and infant mortality is much better than in the middle ages.
In the Middle Ages western medicine believed in bleeding people to expel the illness; good luck trying to get your physician registration with that kind of practice now!
An excellent example of why adopting an evidence-based approach to medicine is better than sticking with your culture’s traditional medical practices because it’s traditional.
@mr man – ginseng will rev up the blood pressure?
Don’t worry, people with half a brain will know that if they are on pills for something like heart or blood pressure that they ought to be extremely careful
@PM – The medicine lasted so long because it works. And the example of blood letting or whatever it is – isn’t what we’re talking about, it’s chinese medicine!
Being the open-minded soul that you all know I am, I tried TCM for several conditions here in Hong Kong. I have to say that I found several treatments pretty good, and others absolute rubbish. However I have had similar success rates with western medicine.
Like anything there are good practitioners and bad ones. Qualified ones and ones who really make you wonder if they got the qualifications off the back of a weetbix packet.
Thing is, my private insurance policy here covers such treatment for TCM. I think people have the right to choose what they wish, question is how much the public health system should and shouldn’t fund it. Medicine is literally a black hole you could pour the nations entire GDP into each year and it would never satisfy the needs of everyone.
@Spud
Some it does, some of it doesn’t. Hell, even the drug companies are now looking to traditional medicine to pick out the plants that have medicinal value (and then patenting the plant as if they designed it – bastards) but that doesn’t mean that we should just accept it without question. What we should be doing is taking that traditional knowledge and putting it to rigorous scientific testing. Find out what does what and why and at what dosage. One of the biggest problems with traditional medicines is the change of dosage because a plant grew in different soil meaning that a dosage that may have worked if it had used a different plant didn’t or, even worse, a dose became too strong causing side effects like death.
So, I’m all for using TCM but can we please test it first?
@Keep An Open Mind
Yeah, pretty much everything you said became irrelevant after you said but a theory that is more widely agreed upon during an era in human history. The Scientific Method is fairly rigorous and does produce reliable results.
@CK –
@Draco – I have nothing against testing, but I don’t think that TCM should be restricted just because science hasn’t caught up with all of it yet.
Yes, they do rip off bleepin plants!
@prickly one obviously doesn’t work for balance problems.
“If it’s something along the lines of medical practices that have no evidential basis being given the same official legitimacy…”
These arguments and similar apply even more so to religion, any move to remove its influence on innocent people?
Pharamceutical companies are very powerful and we ought no underestimate their manipulation of science/research and mainly opinion and legislative proccesses.
For my part I consider that organisations liek the Cancer society and their ilk, takiing million and millions for “cancer research: over the decades have little to show for it.
My mother died from cancer in 1989. My mother-in-law was diagnosed in 2004 and died later that year. I dont blame anyone for it, it happens BUT the treatment offered to the person in 2004 was exactly the same as 1989. The ONLY change, for the good, was the level of at home care offered in 2004 that was not offered in 1989.
DRaco, problem is most research money in this field is sourced from Pharmas who are not interested in proving that taking ground apricot kernaes each day (no more than a certain number) helps with certain ailments because we might all do something outrageous like plant apricot trees or buy the fruit…
Or foot in mouth, Trevor
Keep an open mind and supd (as always) made me laugh.
Perhaps if they read more they might have a better understanding of the issues: From my link that they obv didnt look at.
Last week the Committee on Safety of Medicines said that random tests were still finding banned substances such as mercury and arsenic in traditional Chinese medicines sold in the United Kingdom, despite previous warnings. Some medicines also contained steroids, even though the label did not declare it.
Banned products containing the herb aristolochia, which has been associated with two cases of kidney disease in the United Kingdom in 1999, are also still being offered for sale. Other Chinese medicines that the committee examined contained parts from endangered animal species.
A spokesman for the committee said that a 58 year old woman went into a hypoglycaemic coma after she took an oral hypoglycaemic agent containing glibenclamide, a drug that is normally available only on prescription.
Last week the Medicines Control Agency published guidance on these potentially harmful medicines. Professor Alastair Breckenridge, the chairman of the Committee on Safety of Medicines, which advises the agency, said: “We have informed ministers that we can provide no assurance that traditional Chinese medicines on the UK market are safe.”
sounds like the kind of poison I want legislated into NZ: yeah right!
Isnt the use of ‘medical’ a restricted word that can only used in context of genuine medical practitioner?
The same way that a nurse cant call himself a doctor and a draftsman cant call himself a architect. I think university is also another restricted word
@chris – if contaminants are in particular products then a name’n’shame compaign against those companies would be a great thing (and make the good ones look better
).
People who are trained properly and use decent products won’t hurt people. And people can do their own research as well.
@Ghost – I am a university and you can’t tell me that I’m not!
The voices in my head told me so! 
Keep an open mind – there’s a subtle but important difference between having an open-mind and having an empty-head. If, as you say, you’re in healthcare (which was, I suspect a reasonably feeble example of the fallacy of ‘argument from authority’), you ought to understand that the scientific method is, at its heart, open-minded. If you can prove something is effective beyond mere placebo and that result is independently repeatable and understandable – then it’s got potential – as an intervention. Like anyone truly supportive of the scientific method, I’d be happy to slug back ginseng or have needles plugged into me – if they proved themselves to be effective. Unfortunately beyond anecdotalism, these things have consistently failed to demonstrate efficacy. What irks me are the special pleadings from supporters of these non-scientific modalities. Somehow having to prove (in a scientific sense) the effectiveness of these ‘therapies’ is somehow unfair and prejudicial. How so?
As Spud argues, people ought to be entitled to stick whatever they want into their bodies. But no one should be able to try and hawk ineffective, potentially harmful treatments to unwary consumers. That’s fradulent and harmful. And while it’s your choice to indulge some alternative treatment, you ought to be informed about its lack of efficacy and its potential dangers. It’s also legitimate for anyone in positions of influence and authority, like Raymond, to be encouraging people to use effective properly tested and safely administered treatments deliveres by registered and regulated providers. As an MP, Raymond should be imploring people to avoid the dangerous and ineffective ‘traditional’ treatments and, instead use our excellent health system.
Cactus – yes, people ought to be able to chose for themselves, of course. But that choice ought to be funded privately and preferably not unknowingly subsidised by others including other insured parties. You want to pay a witch $500 to cast a wellness spell on you and your cat at midnight on the summer solstace – go for it. Just don’t get some other sap – be it a taxpayer or insured party to subsidise this nonsense. In most cases – it’s the ‘worried well’ who use these therapies -so things may not go too pear-shaped. But there is real danger where a genuinely sick person defers proper treatment in favour of some spurious rubbish and, as a result, enters into the health system later (when said rubbish fails to treat the problem) with more complicated and potentially costly problems than had they simply sought proper treatment earlier and missed out wasting time and money on baloney. Because, in the end, sick people deferring proper treatment is likely to cost me, as a taxpayer, more money and, by tying up more medical resources might displace some other person who requires treatment. That’s where personal choices can become selfish.
@ou – yeah, but what about those things that were once wives tales that finally got proven through scientific stuff? There is so much antedotal evidence because it does work, maybe the scientists are testing in the wrong way using the wrong kind of science?
And OU – people shouldn’t be limited to only those products which meet the narrow critera of some people who hate poor chinese medicine
If you don’t like it then don’t take it, but don’t make it harder for the others 
What about the poories who want chinese medicine?
I remember that dude with cancer who was going to die and his family had to fight the morons at the hospital who wouldn’t let them try the high doses of vitamin c. They saved his life, not the people who wouldn’t listen!
Spud – what?! Poor folks ought to have ineffective treatments rather than effective medicine? Seriously? I am not advocating that people should be denied access to it. I’ve repeatedly said that people can and should be able to do what they want. But they should be warned of ineffective and potentially dangerous interventions and people wanting to sell this stuff ought not make or even imply any therapeutic effect. Finally, I think people like Raymond ought to be actively persuading people to use proven/effective treatments rather than indulge spurious nonsense.
Raymond – please don’t pigeonhole all New Zealanders because of the actions of a few halfwit nutjobs distributing offensive leaflets, especially not when 10% of our country is “Asian” and when our ancestors fought in a bitter war against the beliefs that the Right Wing Resistance promotes (which also involved an “Asian” country trying to invade us and treat us with abhorrent cruelty). I am putting “Asian” in inverted commas because I don’t think it’s fair to lump all “Asians” as a homogeneous group any more than it is fair to compare all Pakeha to Kyle Chapman.
If you want to talk about “Asian” race relations, why not mention the Chinese Government’s treatment of Uighurs and Tibetans?
My fear is that some people in the political spectrum are trying to use the actions of a tiny and reviled minority to stoke fear in the “Asian” community and make out that NZers are not aware of or accepting of “Asia” in order to promote their own political agenda. That is where I think you are going with your post, otherwise what’s the need to mention the Right Wing Resistance and to draw a parallel between their actions and the lack of legislation regarding TCM?
Get a grip mate.
“Do you think legislation should be implemented in the field of Traditional Chinese Medicine and what would you like to see this legislation achieve?”
– I’d like to see TCM and other so-called “alternative medicines” (or “SCAMs”) come under regulations which forces them to prove evidence they achieve what they claim
– I’d like this evidence to be in the form of double-blind, peer-reviewed tests against placebo by professional or academic testers.
– I’d like all medicines to plainly state — in English – their contents and country of origin (deer penises, anyone? what’s happened to the rest of the deer?).
– I’d like these tests available for the public to read for free.
– I’d like a complaints process to allow consumers to easily complain about SCAMs
– I’d like producers of medicines — SCAM or otherwise — to be liable for any death or illness as a result of consumers taking their product.
– I’d also like all of the above for medical services like chiropractic, osteopathy, acupuncture and homeopathy.
– I’d also like all of the above for real medicine — you know, the kind which works — as well. Some of it already is.
– I’d like somebody to explain why, if TCM is so awesome and powerful, traditional Western hospitals are still being built in China.
– I do not want any government or public service — regardless of party in power — funding medicine of any sort which fails to perform better than placebo. That should be the base line which all medicine funding starts from.
If you think I’m approaching this from a prejudicial stand point, well done you. Have a Happy Meal. This is because real medicine has kept me and my family alive and well, whereas all TCM has done nothing but make other people richer.
You say dangerous and ineffective as if all of the treatments are the same. Some crims might be peddling crap, but the is plenty of decent stuff out there that shouldn’t be tarred with the same brush.!
Spud – if taking a bogus therapy discourages you from seeking medical treatment (in the misguided belief that the non-standard therapy will work) then even homeopathic treatments – which have NO active ingredient at all – are potentially dangerous. But I was more thinking about the unregulated side of ingredients. Often the controls on ingredients, preservatives and processing hygene are lax and people unwittingly fall prey to this laxity. There are examples where bad dosage levels or harmful ingredients have been included in these alternative therapies that have seriously hurt people. In the real pharmaceutical industry great care is taken to ensure ingredients are pure, clearly measured and contaminents eliminated or minimised. The same cannot be said of a lot of alternative modalities. Chinese herbalism is one of the worst offenders.
Some very funny posts on offer here, some intentionally, some unintentionally.
I’d like a final response from Mr Huo.
There’s an easy solution to that – fund our universities to do the research and then make the information publicly available. If we develop any new medicines from the research then we patent them and sell them for a profit.
@OU – no – pharma has also been known to make mistakes, such as cross contaminating different drugs that should never have been processed together. Something in India comes to mind but memory hazy – been a long day.
Now I don’t go around making derogatory remarks (Great, now I sound like my Ma
) about pharma products just because some places are dodgy. 
There are plenty of legitimate and non bogus traditional chinese therapies out there and I don’t think they should all be slammed just because of a few crooks out there! 
I agree that good standards of purity and hygiene are a must, and there are plenty of good clean products out there, not just dirty ones
I’m sure some people have been hurt by CM, people get hurt by prescribed drugs too!
Sad 
But chinese medicine has helped many
Thank you all for your comments. To a lesser or greater extent I’m enlightened. I understand there is a bill which the Government is considering and is currently in the consultation process. I hope the general public get the oppurtunity to let their opinion known.