美國中醫專家田小明的資格疑雲 　　作者：王澄 　　克林頓總統於2000年3月7日設立了“補充和替代醫學政策白宮顧問小組” White House commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy， 主任是James S. Gordon, M.D，成員有19人，其中有田小明，田的英 文名是Xiaoming Tian 。 該顧問小組已於2002年3月7日解散the Commission was required to terminate。 　　官方網址http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/whccamp/index.html （以下簡 稱白宮顧問網站） 　　據這個白宮顧問網站介紹說，由於美國民眾要求使用非正統醫學的辦法來促 進健康和治療疾病的人越來越多，所以，克林頓總統建立了這樣一個顧問小組， 小組成立時就確定工作兩年（據另一個文章中說）。（不是新華網說的“政府換 屆了小組還予以保留”。） 　　About the Commission 　　A growing number of Americans are using alternative approaches to health promotion and medical treatment. People are looking to health care providers to treat the whole person, not only illness. Because of public interest in and use of unconventional health care, the President established the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy. Executive Order 13147 authorizing the Commission was issued on March 7, 2000. 　　白宮顧問網站介紹說，這個顧問小組的成員應當是具有雙重知識的，既有正 統醫學conventional medicine的知識，也有補充和替代醫學的知識。 　　The Commission, which is composed of individuals knowledgeable in both conventional and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), has been charged with addressing: 　　這樣一個顧問小組的工作內容是：研究補充和替代醫學的實踐和產品，補充 和替代醫學的公眾可及性， 與補充和替代醫學有關的可靠信息向醫務工作者和 大眾的傳播，補充和替代醫學工作者的恰當的執照制度，教育，和訓練。 　　Research on CAM practices and products 　　Delivery of and public access to CAM services 　　Dissemination of reliable information on CAM to health care providers and the general public 　　Appropriate licensing, education, and training of CAM health care practioners 　　顧問小組的主任是美國的physician。成員要求既通西醫又通補充和替代醫 學。由於knowledgeable是很強的詞，這樣，我就對田小明的資格產生了懷疑： 　　一．田小明什麼時候學的西醫？ 　　新華網在2008年介紹田小明的時候，說他已經“年逾花甲”，說他20歲的時 候轉到北京醫科大學學習西醫6年。假定田小明2008年是61歲，那麼，41年以前 也就是田小明20歲的時候是1967年。因為1966年到1970-71年全中國的全部學校 停課，所以，田小明很可能是1965年入的北京醫科大學。不算自己補學的，這些 人入校後只讀過一年基礎課，這樣的人的西醫知識是knowledgeable嗎？ 　　二．田小明什麼時候學的中醫？ 　　從未進過中醫學院。 　　三．田小明既沒有在中國也沒有在美國讀過Ph.D.，為什麼說自己是Ph.D. Research Fellow？（見下面白宮顧問網站的介紹） 　　我也做過Research Fellow，我不明白什麼是Ph.D. Research Fellow。只要 你在自己的國家有醫生執照（學位）或Ph.D.學位都可以做美國國家醫學研究課 題的PI (principal investigator課題負責人)，因為醫學博士（包括中國的醫 學學士）都相當於或高於西方的Ph.D. 學位（醫生學習的年頭比別人長），所以， 這些人畢業後幾年全職做研究都可以稱作“博士後研究”。但是，沒有外國的MD 和Ph.D.的研究人員不可以成為美國醫學研究的PI，只能成為普通人員。 　　作研究，田小明說自己是中國醫生就夠了，為什麼要把自己的博士後研究說 成是Ph.D. research fellow? 在這個白宮顧問網站上，田小明的頭銜是M.D., L.Ac，MD是（中國的）醫生，L.Ac 是Licensed Acupuncturist 執照針灸師。 　　四．田小明的科學研究能力。 　　田小明用NIH（美國國家醫學研究院）的錢研究中醫藥和針灸對關節炎，運 動傷和纖維肌痛症arthritis, sports injuries, and fibromyalgia 的作用。 現代醫學對這三種病的治療比中醫藥和針灸強得太多。田小明到美國之前，（和 我一樣）根本就不知道什麼是fibromyalgia。 　　我們看到的是，國內的中醫認為中醫藥和針灸治療這三種病是中醫里強項的 強項，我敢打賭，如果人人都知道了中醫藥治不了這三種病，那麼中醫就會沒臉 見人，去下田種地。我今天把Xiaoming Tian打入PubMed，結果是零。我只找到 作者是Tian X的 2005年的一篇文章，因為作者是University of Michigan的， 和華盛頓隔着很遠，所以不可能是Xiaoming Tian 或 Tian, XM。（該文章否定 了穴位的作用，所以我把它放在附錄里，也讓田小明認一認，這是不是他的文 章。） 　　田小明來美國27年，在NIH鬼混多年，“他已經完成了很多研究課題He has completed many research projects”，竟然沒有出過一篇文章，我不知道田小 明在美國拿什麼去鼓吹中醫藥？拿嘴？我也不知道為什麼田小明的科研能力這樣 糟糕而臨床針灸會那樣神奇？我還想問一個問題，田小明在美國NIH作研究的時 候到底做沒做過PI? 還是一直跟在別人的屁股後面給人跑腿？ 　　結論：田小明沒有接受過正規的西醫和中醫的大學教育，當然不會做研究了。 這種人怎麼能叫做knowledgeable？ 　　附錄1 　　白宮顧問網站介紹田小明 　　Dr. Xiaoming Tian, of Bethesda, Maryland, is Director of the Academy of Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine and Wildwood Acupuncture Center. Dr. Tian is currently conducting a National Institute of Health (NIH) supported clinical trial with Georgetown University Medical School to treat fibromyalgia patients using acupuncture. He has completed many research projects on the use of Chinese herbal medicine and dietary supplements to treat and prevent arthritis, sports injuries, and fibromyalgia, in collaboration with NIH and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Nutrition Center. In 1991, Dr. Tian was the first person to be appointed a Clinical Consultant of Acupuncture to the NIH medical staff. He is an Adjunct Assistant Professor of Preventive Medicine at the United States Uniformed Health Service. Dr. Tian is the President of the American Association of Chinese Medicine. He is also the Honorary Director of the China Association of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Vice President of The International Academy of Medical Qigong, both in Beijing, China. He currently serves as an advisor to World Health Organization and Pan-American Health Organization on traditional medicine. Dr. Tian received his Medical Degree from Beijing Medical University and was a Ph.D. Research Fellow at NIH. 　　Xiaoming Tian, M.D., L.Ac 　　Director, Wildwood Acupuncture Center 　　Director, Academy of Acupuncture & Chinese Medicine Wildwood Medical Center 　　10401 Old Georgetown Road, Suites 102/104 　　Bethesda, Maryland 20814 　　附錄2 　　Tian X否定針灸穴位的文章摘要： 　　1: Treatment of fibromyalgia with formula acupuncture: investigation of needle placement, needle stimulation, and treatment frequency. 　　Harris RE, Tian X, Williams DA, Tian TX, Cupps TR, Petzke F, Groner KH, Biswas P, Gracely RH, Clauw DJ. 　　J Altern Complement Med. 2005 Aug;11(4):663-71. 　　文章題目：針灸針的位置，針的刺激，和治療的次數對纖維肌痛症的作用。 結論是：儘管針灸可以對纖維肌痛症有止痛和症狀改善作用，但是穴位準確性和 刺激的改變並不是很重要。 　　Although needle insertion led to analgesia and improvement in other somatic symptoms, correct needle location and stimulation were not crucial. 　　Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106, USA. reharris@med.umich.edu 　　OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to investigate whether typical acupuncture methods such as needle placement, needle stimulation, and treatment frequency were important factors in fibromyalgia symptom improvement. DESIGN/SETTINGS/SUBJECTS: A single-site, single-blind, randomized trial of 114 participants diagnosed with fibromyalgia for at least 1 year was performed. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized to one of four treatment groups: (1) T/S needles placed in traditional sites with manual needle stimulation (n = 29): (2) T/0 traditional needle location without stimulation (n = 30); (3) N/S needles inserted in nontraditional locations that were not thought to be acupuncture sites, with stimulation (n = 28); and (4) N/0 nontraditional needle location without stimulation (n = 2 7). All groups received treatment once weekly, followed by twice weekly, and finally three times weekly, for a total of 18 treatments. Each increase in frequency was separated by a 2-week washout period. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain was assessed by a numerical rating scale, fatigue by the Multi-dimensional Fatigue Inventory, and physical function by the Short Form-36. RESULTS: Overall pain improvement was noted with 25%-35% of subjects having a clinically significant decrease in pain; however this was not dependent upon "correct" needle stimulation (t = 1.03; p = 0.307) or location (t = 0.76; p = 0.450). An overall dose effect of treatment was observed, with three sessions weekly providing more analgesia than sessions once weekly (t = 2.10; p = 0.039). Among treatment responders, improvements in pain, fatigue, and physical function were highly codependent (all p < or = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Although needle insertion led to analgesia and improvement in other somatic symptoms, correct needle location and stimulation were not crucial.