On 2/22/01, Anna Lee<[log in to unmask]> writes:
<<As I said in a previous posting on 19 & 21.2.01, which do not appear to
have been circulated, this rose is known by any other name in any other
country. Many terms/names make it a little confusing and
perhaps we need to standardise internationally......
The term Occupational Overuse Syndrome (OOS) was adopted in Australia
following consultative public forums co-ordinated by the National
Occupational Health and Safety Commission, a tripartite body established by
the Commonwealth Government to develop, facilitate and implement a national
occupational health and safety strategy.
The forums were open to all professionals (and public) interested (not just
physios) and included ergonomists, doctors, physiologists, psychologists,
occupational therapists, chiropractors etc etc. They involved long, in depth
discussions and were held at major cities and regional areas. >>
***This is all beginning to sound like something out of "Alice in
Wonderland", namely something like "It
means just what I say it should mean; nothing more, nothing less!", applied
with just the right hint of authoritarianism and impatience! Most relevant
that those words should have been penned by Hodgson (Carroll etc), a
mathematician and definition specialist, by trade. How interesting that
above Oz comment was - with its insistence on precision of definition, it
still failed to use the correct Latin plural form of forum, namely "fora".
Ah well, just another case of more theory than practice - but that, of
course, is one of the sad truths about a great deal of many therapies today,
anyway :)
Dr Mel C Siff
Denver, USA
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/
|