Digest Number 1062

[Guest guest]

Jim Ramholz wrote:

>I don't mean to sound cynical but your arguments concern issues of

>competence, when this is really a political and social issue. The

>MDs and DCs have already established that around 300 is enough to

>learn anything.

 

It doesn't sound at all cynical. Although I often wonder what the reaction

would be to 300-hour courses qualifying acupuncturists in general surgery

or chiropractic manipulation. Hm, does that sound cynical? :-)

 

Henry McCann wrote:

>If you didn't read your last issue of the Diplomate closely (for NCCAOM

>diplomates), the NCCAOM is seeking public comment about the possibility

>of expanding eligibility for the Dipl. C.H. program. Currently

>applicants must graduate from a school of Oriental Medicine (with an

>acupuncture component) and finish at least 450 hrs. in herb specific

>material. The new requirement would also allow people who have not

>graduated from a school of OM to become a Dipl. C.H. with ONLY 450 hrs.

>of training.

 

This hardly seems acceptable. How could anyone imagine this to be

sufficient? I am continually amazed by the confused and arbitrary nature of

recent proposals.

 

Also of concern to all of us are the NCCAOM proposals for new

recertification requirements. I've had several lengthy exchanges with them

on this topic, and to my surprise, they actually implemented some of my

suggestions to improve the original draft, but the revised one is almost as

nonsensical as the original, and they are now only responding to comments

with a form letter.

 

Practical matters are at stake here. As I have written to the NCCAOM a

number of times now, I worry that we may eventually destroy our own

profession if we continue on this path. Professional medical certifications

must be grounded in practical knowledge and skills, and the current trend

at the NCCAOM is to discount this requirement rather severely. All else

being equal, if this trend continues, we stand to lose credibility with the

public and with other professionals, which is enough of a problem already.

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to suggest that one of the

surest ways to cede the practice of acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine

to medical doctors and chiropractors would be to dumb down our own

professional requirements.

 

Again, I would urge everyone here to investigate not only the new herb

requirements, but all new proposals, including recertification and the

" combination route " and to offer your (constructive) criticisms to the

NCCAOM.

 

--

Jeffrey Chapman