I’ve spent 22 years in the field of acupuncture technology, and over that time, I’ve seen lots of changes. For example, in the early days of AcuGraph one of the primary objections I encountered went something like this:
“Why should I use a MACHINE for diagnosis? It’s not part of the traditional medicine. What was good enough for them is good enough for me.”
Of course, a few moments’ thought will start to weaken this objection without much effort. The ancients also used needles made of stone, for instance. Why do we need stainless steel? And don’t even get me started on “sterile.”
Likewise, old-fashioned bonesetters took care of broken bones in the days before x-rays. Imagine objecting to advanced imaging now because “they” didn’t need it?
So you get my point. Technology makes things better.
In this post, I’ll share a few reasons you may not have considered why technology-driven diagnosis is not only better, but should be the standard of care in acupuncture.
- Super Vision: OK, that’s an over-the-top way to say it, but technology tools give you the ability to “see” things you can’t otherwise see, just like an X-ray. Whether it’s qi balance in the 12 channels, or microscopic ear points, electronic tools have sensitivity to things we can’t otherwise perceive.
- Objective Evidence: Though powerful and useful, the tradition diagnosis methods are also subjective. They can be more of an overall impression formed from lots of minor clues, rather than a definitive, repeatable measurement. Technology improves that overall patient picture by providing evidence through direct measurement of electrical parameters.
- Additional Information: The first two items on this list contribute directly to a more fulsome picture of the patient, and therefore a better diagnosis. You’re only as good as the information you have, so more information is better.
- Visual Proof: There’s simply no substitute for being able to SHOW the patient what’s wrong. Whether it’s an AcuGraph report or the light and tone of the point finder on a Pointoselect, the evidence makes the meridians “real” in ways that nothing else does. And patients who have proof are more willing to complete their treatment plans, and therefore more likely to get great results.
On the topic of Pointoselect, I was reminded over the weekend at EML13 that the points on the ear are incredibly small, and not readily located by tissue changes alone. With hundreds of individual points packed into a network in the ear, a precision finder is a must. As Dr. Steiner teaches, you need to treat “the center of the center of the center of the point.” That’s a lot of precision, but it really does matter.
If you’re still “bone setting without an X-ray” (speaking metaphorically of course!) then maybe it’s time to boost your practice and your results with tech tools for diagnosis.
If you aren’t using the Pointoselect Digital yet for this, it really is time to make that change today. Click here to visit Pointoselect.com to check out the best options right now!
In part 2 of this series, I’ll share some information about technology-driven treatment. In fact, it’s some new stuff I’ve never written about before. See you then!
