Ok, the title is a little tongue-in-cheek. Actually, it involves a lot of work to become a qualified acupuncturist - all my previous studies were a doddle in comparison. But my point is (no pun intended) that once qualified, it is relatively 'easy' to get decent results, regardless of which model of understanding is applied (TCM, 5 Element, Japanese Meridian, Dry Needling etc.) There are many sceptics that claim 'it doesn't matter where you put the needles', and I don't wish to add fuel to that fire, but at the same time I think it's important to be honest. The fact is, I got some very good results in the early days of my practice, despite having only a beginner's grasp of diagnosis, point location etc. There are many rather disappointing studies which compare 'real' acupuncture with needles placed in supposedly inactive areas, which show very little difference in results. Why is this? I believe it's because inserting needles almost anywhere does have a beneficial effect, whether you understand this in terms of hormone release, or increasing the flow of Qi.

However, I also strongly believe that these studies are misleading. Not only do they imply that the 'random' needling is inert, but they often don't explain the thinking behind the 'real' acupuncture. How were the points chosen? Was careful palpation applied? What technique was used to needle the points? I believe all these factors - and more - are important, and comprise the real challenge for those wishing to become truly skilled at this medicine.

I'm currently about 4 and a half years into my practice, and I feel as though I'm only beginning to scratch the surface. However, my results are gradually improving as I learn new techniques and approaches suitable for particular situations. It's easy to become an average acupuncturist - but much harder to become an excellent one.

This is one of the hardest questions I had to face during my acupuncture studies. Having quite a logical, sceptical disposition, I found some of the concepts of Chinese medicine hard to accept, despite having experienced good results myself from prior treatments. I tried hard to open my mind to it all, and even tried to 'feel' Qi as some claim to be able to do. But if I'm honest, I'm yet to experience anything yet which convinces me that I have such abilities. That's not to say that others don't have these skills (a subject for another post), but I don't feel I can base any of my treatment decisions on Qi in this sense.

Which is why I was so pleased to come across the writings of Dr Wang Ju Yi and Mark Seem. Both highly respected and experienced practitioners and teachers, they argue that acupuncturists should hone their palpation skills to understand and interpret the physical landscape of a patient's body. To my mind, this is still developing an awareness of Qi, but Qi in its more solid and readily accessible form. When I examine a patient and locate acupuncture points that I hope will lead to beneficial changes, a large part of what I am doing is feeling for areas of congestion and lack of clear flow, not in the sense of 'energy' in an ethereal sense, but in the sense of flesh and blood. This is absolutely in keeping with the traditional Chinese concepts of Qi, channel (meridian) flow, and restoring balance in order that the patient's system can function better.

One great benefit to this approach is that the patient become directly involved in the process - their feedback about tender spots forms a vital part of my choice of treatment. This is better, I think, than simply basing a diagnosis and treatment on things only the practitioner can feel or verify.