Fwd: [rmhinet] Codex, supplements, and threats to health freedom

[Guest guest]

 

 

> rw3

>

> Thought this was of importance. Many people are still not aware of

> Codex Alimentarius, an international panel of mostly pharmaceutical

> representatives who are heavily arm-twisting, blackmailing, and

> threatening countries to sign trade treaties that would obligate them

> to regulate herbs and supplements as medicines.

>

>

>

> ==================================================

>

> " IAHF.COM "

> New Zealand's McIver Blows Lid of Cartel's Effort to CRUSH

> Health Freedom in New Zealand- Hear Radio Show Archive

>

> IAHF Webmaster: Breaking News, Whats New, What to Do, New Zealand,

> All Countries, Codex, EU FSD

>

>

> IAHF List:

>

> Please go to http://www.naturopathic-retreat.com/radio-show-

> archive.htm and listen to the archived June 1 show. Fast Forward to

> 17:24 and listen to the last half of the show when Dr.Taams

> interviewed Dr.Ken McIver from the New Zealand Charter of Alternative

> Health Practitioners.

>

> Vitamin consumers world wide must take NOTICE of the health freedom

> war raging in New Zealand, because this is a microcosm of what the

> whole WORLD faces due to CODEX, and it SHOULD serve as a WAKE UP CALL

> to spur more people in the USA especially to pay attention to IAHF's

> and ANH's message.

>

> THE RUMBLE DOWN UNDER

> HOW THE PHARMA CARTEL IS TRYING TO DESTROY HEALTH FREEDOM IN NEW

> ZEALAND

> ( & AROUND THE WORLD)

>

> Totally against the wishes of the New Zealand people, Health Minister

> Annette King signed the Joint Therapeutic Treaty (JTA) with Australia

> which would create a joint regulatory authority over dietary

> supplements in both countries.

>

> The New Zealand Parliament could vote on ratifying this TREATY at ANY

> TIME, and New Zealanders are buy sending emails, faxes, and letters

> in to MPs from the ruling Labor Party to let them know that if they

> vote to ratify JTA that they'll be VOTED OUT OF OFFICE.

>

> [New Zealanders: Utilize this ACTION PLAN to FIGHT BACK:

> http://www.healthcharter.org.nz/health_freedom_plan.doc

>

> THE AWFUL DETAILS

>

> Under JTA- Any substance, with any physiologic effect in the body

> would be regulated as a " medicine " (harmonizing New Zealand's liberal

> food based supplement regs with Australia's mindless regulatory

> regime.)

>

>

> During the first 9 years of the Australian TGA's existence- only 2

> new dietary supplement products were approved by the TGA for public

> consumption, and in the past 3 years, the TGA has only approved 6

> more products. Registration and Compliance fees can go as high as

> $50,000. per product.

>

> Under the JTA- most American supplement manufacturers would be shut

> completely out of the New Zealand market, and the only companies

> allowed to do business there would be the 6-10 companies currently

> registered with the Australian TGA.

>

> If ratified, the JTA Treaty will put 96,000 New Zealanders currently

> employed in the dietary supplement industry and as naturopaths out of

> business.

>

> It will cause 6,000 safe dietary supplement products to be BANNED.

>

> Under the terms of the Treaty, New Zealand would be obligated to pay

> 30% of the costs associated with the running of this Joint Regulatory

> Body (even though New Zealand has only 20% of the population of

> Australia.)

>

> When queried by Dr.Taams as to what this situation represents- McIver

> stated that it is a full scale ATTACK against the naturopathic

> profession, and against consumer rights to access the dietary

> supplement of their choice.

>

> When asked if he thinks the New Zealand situation should serve as a

> WAKE UP CALL to America and the rest of the world- McIver said " Most

> definitely " and stated that unless people pull their heads out of the

> sand regarding the CODEX issue, we're all going to have one very

> draconian set of supplement regulations emanating from the UN's Codex

> Alimentarius Commission.

>

> WHAT YOU CAN DO:

>

> Currently, over 50% of the traffic to the Alliance for Natural

> Health's website is Americans, but ANH has only received 2% of their

> total donations from America.

>

> This indicates to me that most Americans are either totally ASLEEP on

> this issue, or they're in DENIAL and are taking the view that whats

> happening in New Zealand and in Europe " couldn't happen here. "

>

> Not only is this FALSE, but the FDA has ALREADY SET US UP for

> harmonization to a MINDLESSLY RESTRICTIVE emerging global trade

> standard which the UN's Codex Alimentarius Commission could finalize

> this coming November.

>

> The Congressional Oversight hearing that I pushed for for 5 years was

> WHITEWASHED on March 20, 2001. I and my witnesses were not allowed to

> speak. The only person who WAS allowed to speak lied under oath and

> regurgitated what he was told to say Randy Dennin, an employee of

> Pfizer, who is adroitly leading the American supplement industry to

> the CLIFF via IADSA, a controlled opposition group. [ see

> http://www.iahf.com/iadsa

>

> This week I just sent an alert to hundreds of alternative

> practitioners belonging to ICIM, International Council of Integrative

> Medicine, but still have not heard back from their President and only

> 3 members of this organization have communicated with me wanting to

> help.

>

> This is indicative of how asleep the American people regarding the

> fact that the FDA has set us up to lose in a WTO Trade Dispute via

> which our supplement laws WILL be harmonized to an emerging Codex

> standard that threatens to be every bit as mindless as the hammer

> thats coming down on New Zealand.

>

> I need everyone on this list to actively download these two articles

> and to get them out to every health food store, alternative

> practitioner, and supplement manufacturer you can:

> http://www.thehealthcrusader.com/pgs/article-0104-ban.shtml

> http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2003/2003_preprint_eu_01.htm

>

> These articles will help more people connect the dots on this

> incremental stealth agenda.

>

> The only way we can monkeywrench what is unfolding is to support the

> Alliance for Natural Health's lawsuit to overturn the EU Food

> Supplement Directive. The articles above fully explain why.

>

> We CAN win this battle. We MUST- if you read this report DEATH BY

> MEDICINE

> http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm you

> will see that the LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH in America today is the use

> of prescription drugs.

>

> We're up against a GENOCIDE AGENDA, and far too many people think

> that just because they can go into a health food store now and buy

> anything they want, that it will always be this way.

>

> People BETTER AWAKEN to the fact that the USA now belongs to the WTO,

> and the WTO has a new International Court called the Dispute

> Settlement Body which is a mickey mouse court which has ALREADY

> FORCED the US Congress to change our laws, under the threat of

> imposing massive trade sanctions against broad sectors of our society.

>

> In the articles above, you will see exactly HOW the FDA has set the

> USA up for the COMPLETE DESTRUCTION of our vitamin laws.

>

> You will see that my biggest opponents in bringing this information

> out has been the Pharma Dominated vitamin trade associations-

> especially IADSA, a controlled opposition group.

>

> This is a TRUE grass roots campaign. I need to know what YOU are

> doing to help, so please let me know. Let me KNOW if you have the EAR

> of any vitamin companies, health food stores, or alternative

> practitioners.

>

> I would be GLAD to do a conference call with you and anyone helpful

> that you can put me in touch with.

>

> If you appreciate this effort to awaken more people on this issue and

> would like to assist IAHF in this important work- please send a

> donation to:

>

> IAHF

> 556 Boundary Bay Rd.

> Point Roberts, WA 98281 USA

>

> or via PAYPAL at http://www.iahf.com

>

> Please encourage more people to make donations to ANH at

> http://www.alliance-natural-health.org and to sign on to the IAHF

> email distribution list at

> http://www.iahf.com

>

> Thank you- the Life you save COULD BE YOUR OWN!!

> For Health Freedom,

> John C. Hammell, President

> International Advocates for Health Freedom

> 556 Boundary Bay Road

> Point Roberts, WA 98281-8702 USA

> http://www.iahf.com

> jham

> 800-333-2553 N.America

> 360-945-0352 World

>

>

>

> ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

> contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact

> Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

> Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

>

>

>

>

>

> rmhinetwork guidelines, archives:

> http://www.rmhiherbal.org/ai/rmhinetwork.html

>

[Guest guest]

This is not the first time this post has done the rounds on mailing

lists and I really am tired of seeing it.

 

I practice TCM in australia, and the TGA is not this monster portrayed

here.

 

> > THE AWFUL DETAILS

> >

> > Under JTA- Any substance, with any physiologic effect in the body

> > would be regulated as a " medicine " (harmonizing New Zealand's

> liberal

> > food based supplement regs with Australia's mindless regulatory

> > regime.)

>

Australia dose not just regulate any substance that has a physiological

effect on the body.

There are two regulations the TGA imposes on substances sold as natural

medicines; L (licensed) and R (registered). The difference is due to

claims of efficacy for the product as advertised by the supplier; if it

claims to be effective for treating a certain disease......it must show

a acceptable degree of efficacy. Otherwise these products must be

proven " safe " . That is, they must be free of contaminants, regulated

substances under the poisons and prescribes medicines act etc.

 

> > During the first 9 years of the Australian TGA's existence- only 2

> > new dietary supplement products were approved by the TGA for public

> > consumption, and in the past 3 years, the TGA has only approved 6

> > more products. Registration and Compliance fees can go as high as

> > $50,000. per product.

>

 

As far as I know this is simply rubbish. 8 dietary supplements in 12

years? lol, I wonder how I manage to see a new product in the health

food store or supermarket almost weekly?

>

> > Under the JTA- most American supplement manufacturers would be shut

> > completely out of the New Zealand market, and the only companies

> > allowed to do business there would be the 6-10 companies currently

> > registered with the Australian TGA.

>

 

This would be news to the numerous (many more than 10) companies

registered with the TGA. This reeks of propaganda from international

companies that promote natural medicine unprofessionally and without

due diligence to the natural medical professions.....i.e. horny goad

weed, " natures viagra " ....cures impotence, last all night yadayada.

 

They are worried they will no longer be able to take the public for a

ride and destroy the public perception of the REAL value of natural

medicines.

 

> >

> > If ratified, the JTA Treaty will put 96,000 New Zealanders currently

> > employed in the dietary supplement industry and as naturopaths out

> of

> > business.

>

 

Crap

 

> >

> > It will cause 6,000 safe dietary supplement products to be BANNED.

> >

 

If they are safe, they are " safe " so to speak.

 

More drivel ad nauseam....................

 

I can't see any fact in this entire post and it does not seem to serve

any positive purpose for natural medicine practitioners OR consumers if

it is so inaccurate and simply paranoid alarmist propaganda.

 

Perhaps the fear of whoever perpetuates this rubbish is that the

practice of promoting " natural substances " for curing this or that

disease will have to show this to be true. It is more an issue of

ethical advertising that regulating natural substances.

 

The so-called Codex may be another issue entirely..............but this

post about the Australian TGA is so full of rubbish it can do nothing

but harm natural medicine.

 

A bit about the TGA and TCM here........

Most concentrated powders and raw herbs are not under the control of

the TGA at all. They are regulated under the Food Act, but this

situation is due to change somewhat. These changes are designed to

protect the public and TCM profession by ensuring quailty and safety of

imports.....ie. free from heavy metals, AA, and correct species ID etc.

This is already done by most concentrate suppliers, but will be

extended to raw herb importers.

 

Patent medicine are regulated by the TGA as either L or R depending on

what claims the advertising on the bottle contains. There is no

shortage of these products here, and they are not going to suddenly

disappear either.

 

 

Best Wishes,

 

Dr. Steven J Slater

Practitioner and Acupuncturist

Mobile: 0418 343 545

chinese_medicine

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Steven,

 

In the U.S. it is difficult to get information on the real status of regulation,

including in other countries. For example, currently the FDA regulations

concerning ephedra are legally ambigious, and while the regulations themselves

are always justified based on reasonable-sounding criteria, to protect the

public from adulteration and unsafe products, etc., the real agenda may be very

different. Many in the TCM community here are rightly concerned that the recent

ephedra incident will be a " foot in the door " kind of precedent, that will

spread to remove other herbs from the market. I am all in favor of increased

quality control for herbs, checks for heavy metal content, etc., but there are

many ways to achieve this goal.

 

So until the media and government agencies here give up their hidden agendas, I

will continue to look to all sources for hints of what might be going on,

including Hammell. The Codex hidden agenda is real and has been documented by

other sources, and it has already had severe effects in countries such as Norway

-

 

See:

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-2.html#t-ito

 

If Hammell got his facts wrong about Australian regulation, that's unfortunate,

because it would detract from his warnings about Codex, which I believe are

valid. Not being familiar with Australian politics, I can only base my

experience on the American situation - there are a wide range of opinions on

what the FDA regulations " really mean " and what the " real " agenda is. On one end

of the spectrum, people believe that the FDA is merely trying to curb ephedra

abuse and has no intention of restricting traditional uses by TCM herbalists.

Those of us who have some experience with legal legerdemain and trickery, see

that an incredible amount of mischief may result from gray zones in the law, and

the pharmaceutical interests intend to push these gray zones to their benefit.

Who wins will depend on how vigorously this process is watched and how much the

public protests things not to their liking.

 

Hammell is prone to hyperbole, and I've learned to adjust for that when reading

his material, but I would not dismiss it completely. He has exposed an issue

that would otherwise have received very little international coverage.

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

 

>

>Message: 3

> Fri, 2 Jul 2004 06:58:47 +1000

> dragonslive

>Re: Fwd: [rmhinet] Codex, supplements, and threats to health freedom

>

>This is not the first time this post has done the rounds on mailing

>lists and I really am tired of seeing it.

>

>I practice TCM in australia, and the TGA is not this monster portrayed

>here.

>

>> > THE AWFUL DETAILS

>> >

>> > Under JTA- Any substance, with any physiologic effect in the body

>> > would be regulated as a " medicine " (harmonizing New Zealand's

>> liberal

>> > food based supplement regs with Australia's mindless regulatory

>> > regime.)

>>

>Australia dose not just regulate any substance that has a physiological

>effect on the body.

>There are two regulations the TGA imposes on substances sold as natural

>medicines; L (licensed) and R (registered). The difference is due to

>claims of efficacy for the product as advertised by the supplier; if it

>claims to be effective for treating a certain disease......it must show

>a acceptable degree of efficacy. Otherwise these products must be

>proven " safe " . That is, they must be free of contaminants, regulated

>substances under the poisons and prescribes medicines act etc.

>

>> > During the first 9 years of the Australian TGA's existence- only 2

>> > new dietary supplement products were approved by the TGA for public

>> > consumption, and in the past 3 years, the TGA has only approved 6

>> > more products. Registration and Compliance fees can go as high as

>> > $50,000. per product.

>>

>

>As far as I know this is simply rubbish. 8 dietary supplements in 12

>years? lol, I wonder how I manage to see a new product in the health

>food store or supermarket almost weekly?

>>

>> > Under the JTA- most American supplement manufacturers would be shut

>> > completely out of the New Zealand market, and the only companies

>> > allowed to do business there would be the 6-10 companies currently

>> > registered with the Australian TGA.

>>

>

>This would be news to the numerous (many more than 10) companies

>registered with the TGA. This reeks of propaganda from international

>companies that promote natural medicine unprofessionally and without

>due diligence to the natural medical professions.....i.e. horny goad

>weed, " natures viagra " ....cures impotence, last all night yadayada.

>

>They are worried they will no longer be able to take the public for a

>ride and destroy the public perception of the REAL value of natural

>medicines.

>

>> >

>> > If ratified, the JTA Treaty will put 96,000 New Zealanders currently

>> > employed in the dietary supplement industry and as naturopaths out

>> of

>> > business.

>>

>

>Crap

>

>> >

>> > It will cause 6,000 safe dietary supplement products to be BANNED.

>> >

>

>If they are safe, they are " safe " so to speak.

>

>More drivel ad nauseam....................

>

>I can't see any fact in this entire post and it does not seem to serve

>any positive purpose for natural medicine practitioners OR consumers if

>it is so inaccurate and simply paranoid alarmist propaganda.

>

>Perhaps the fear of whoever perpetuates this rubbish is that the

>practice of promoting " natural substances " for curing this or that

>disease will have to show this to be true. It is more an issue of

>ethical advertising that regulating natural substances.

>

>The so-called Codex may be another issue entirely..............but this

>post about the Australian TGA is so full of rubbish it can do nothing

>but harm natural medicine.

>

>A bit about the TGA and TCM here........

>Most concentrated powders and raw herbs are not under the control of

>the TGA at all. They are regulated under the Food Act, but this

>situation is due to change somewhat. These changes are designed to

>protect the public and TCM profession by ensuring quailty and safety of

>imports.....ie. free from heavy metals, AA, and correct species ID etc.

>This is already done by most concentrate suppliers, but will be

>extended to raw herb importers.

>

>Patent medicine are regulated by the TGA as either L or R depending on

>what claims the advertising on the bottle contains. There is no

>shortage of these products here, and they are not going to suddenly

>disappear either.

>

>

>Best Wishes,

>

>Dr. Steven J Slater

> Practitioner and Acupuncturist

>Mobile: 0418 343 545

>chinese_medicine

>

>

 

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

, dragonslive@h... wrote:

> This is not the first time this post has done the rounds on mailing

> lists and I really am tired of seeing it.

 

 

I don't recall seeing it here before. I would think the opportunity it gave you

for rebuttal

was worth the trouble. If this circulates w/o rebuttal (which it willdo), then

the problem

will be far worse. bring the half-truths to the light of day and they will

wither in the

sunlight. My main concern is the codex, for which the threat is indeed real. I

knew

nothing about TGA before these posts.

 

[Guest guest]

Roger,

 

I understand and share you concerns for the Codex, its possible results

and the dangers of the large pharmaceutical companies intentions with

natural medicine products. I was only, and I mean only, referring to

the information regarding the Australian TGA. He is " way out there "

regarding this; and as I said, and you obviously understand, this

inaccuracy and scare-mongering only detracts from our REAL concerns and

where we should be aiming our arrows.

 

In my opinion, the Australian TGA is doing mostly good for natural

medicine and TCM by ensuring product safety AND protecting the public

(and OUR professional reputation) by holding suppliers and distributers

of herbal substances and natural medicines to their advertised claims.

 

Certainly, Australia would be considered far more conservative with its

allowances for the advertising and distribution of herbal or dietary

supplements in general when compared to the USA and perhaps Europe. For

example, ephedra has been banned from over-the-counter sale for as long

as I can remember. BUT, and this is a BIG but, we are now almost at the

completion of re-introducing Ma Huang for prescription for registered

and fully qualified TCM practitioners ( along with many other

previously banned AND obviously potentially dangerous herbs).

 

Australia is following an agenda of allowing access of dangerous

substances only through qualified channels. This does NOT mean western

MD's, but professionally trained and fully qualified TCM or natural

medicine practitioners. But, yes, this does mean the public can not

walk into the 7/11 and buy it........and this is good to my eyes.

 

Best wishes,

 

Steve

 

 

On 03/07/2004, at 1:17 AM, rw2 wrote:

 

> Steven,

>

> In the U.S. it is difficult to get information on the real status of

> regulation, including in other countries. For example, currently the

> FDA regulations concerning ephedra are legally ambigious, and while

> the regulations themselves are always justified based on

> reasonable-sounding criteria, to protect the public from adulteration

> and unsafe products, etc., the real agenda may be very different. Many

> in the TCM community here are rightly concerned that the recent

> ephedra incident will be a " foot in the door " kind of precedent, that

> will spread to remove other herbs from the market. I am all in favor

> of increased quality control for herbs, checks for heavy metal

> content, etc., but there are many ways to achieve this goal.

>

> So until the media and government agencies here give up their hidden

> agendas, I will continue to look to all sources for hints of what

> might be going on, including Hammell. The Codex hidden agenda is real

> and has been documented by other sources, and it has already had

> severe effects in countries such as Norway -

>

> See:

>         http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-2.html#t-ito

>

> If Hammell got his facts wrong about Australian regulation, that's

> unfortunate, because it would detract from his warnings about Codex,

> which I believe are valid. Not being familiar with Australian

> politics, I can only base my experience on the American situation -

> there are a wide range of opinions on what the FDA regulations " really

> mean " and what the " real " agenda is. On one end of the spectrum,

> people believe that the FDA is merely trying to curb ephedra abuse and

> has no intention of restricting traditional uses by TCM herbalists.

> Those of us who have some experience with legal legerdemain and

> trickery, see that an incredible amount of mischief may result from

> gray zones in the law, and the pharmaceutical interests intend to push

> these gray zones to their benefit. Who wins will depend on how

> vigorously this process is watched and how much the public protests

> things not to their liking.

>

> Hammell is prone to hyperbole, and I've learned to adjust for that

> when reading his material, but I would not dismiss it completely. He

> has exposed an issue that would otherwise have received very little

> international coverage.

>

>

> ---Roger Wicke, PhD,  TCM Clinical Herbalist

> contact:   www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

> Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

> Clinical herbology training programs -   www.rmhiherbal.org

>

>

>

> >

> >Message: 3

> >   Fri, 2 Jul 2004 06:58:47 +1000

> >   dragonslive

> >Re: Fwd: [rmhinet] Codex, supplements, and threats to

> health freedom

> >

> >This is not the first time this post has done the rounds on mailing

> >lists and I really am tired of seeing it.

> >

> >I practice TCM in australia, and the TGA is not this monster

> portrayed

> >here.

> >

> >>  > THE AWFUL DETAILS

> >>  >

> >>  > Under JTA- Any substance, with any physiologic effect in the

> body

> >>  > would be regulated as a " medicine " (harmonizing New Zealand's

> >> liberal

> >>  > food based supplement regs with Australia's mindless regulatory

> >>  > regime.)

> >>

> >Australia dose not just regulate any substance that has a

> physiological

> >effect on the body.

> >There are two regulations the TGA imposes on substances sold as

> natural

> >medicines; L (licensed) and R (registered). The difference is due to

> >claims of efficacy for the product as advertised by the supplier; if

> it

> >claims to be effective for treating a certain disease......it must

> show

> >a acceptable degree of efficacy. Otherwise these products must be

> >proven " safe " . That is, they must be free of contaminants, regulated

> >substances under the poisons and prescribes medicines act etc.

> >

> >>  > During the first 9 years of the Australian TGA's existence-

> only 2

> >>  > new dietary supplement products were approved by the TGA for

> public

> >>  > consumption, and in the past 3 years, the TGA has only approved

> 6

> >>  > more products. Registration and Compliance fees can go as high

> as

> >>  > $50,000. per product.

> >>

> >

> >As far as I know this is simply rubbish. 8 dietary supplements in 12

> >years? lol, I wonder how I manage to see a new product in the health

> >food store or supermarket almost weekly?

> >>

> >>  > Under the JTA- most American supplement manufacturers would be

> shut

> >>  > completely out of the New Zealand market, and the only companies

> >>  > allowed to do business there would be the 6-10 companies

> currently

> >>  > registered with the Australian TGA.

> >>

> >

> >This would be news to the numerous (many more than 10) companies

> >registered with the TGA. This reeks of propaganda from international

> >companies that promote natural medicine unprofessionally and without

> >due diligence to the natural medical professions.....i.e. horny goad

> >weed, " natures viagra " ....cures impotence, last all night yadayada.

> >

> >They are worried they will no longer be able to take the public for a

> >ride and destroy the public perception of the REAL value of natural

> >medicines.

> >

> >>  >

> >>  > If ratified, the JTA Treaty will put 96,000 New Zealanders

> currently

> >>  > employed in the dietary supplement industry and as naturopaths

> out

> >> of

> >>  > business.

> >>

> >

> >Crap

> >

> >>  >

> >>  > It will cause 6,000 safe dietary supplement products to be

> BANNED.

> >>  >

> >

> >If they are safe, they are " safe " so to speak.

> >

> >More drivel ad nauseam....................

> >

> >I can't see any fact in this entire post and it does not seem to

> serve

> >any positive purpose for natural medicine practitioners OR consumers

> if

> >it is so inaccurate and simply paranoid alarmist propaganda.

> >

> >Perhaps the fear of whoever perpetuates this rubbish is that the

> >practice of promoting " natural substances " for curing this or that

> >disease will have to show this to be true. It is more an issue of

> >ethical advertising that regulating natural substances.

> >

> >The so-called Codex may be another issue entirely..............but

> this

> >post about the Australian TGA is so full of rubbish it can do nothing

> >but harm natural medicine.

> >

> >A bit about the TGA and TCM here........

> >Most concentrated powders and raw herbs are not under the control of

> >the TGA at all. They are regulated under the Food Act, but this

> >situation is due to change somewhat. These changes are designed to

> >protect the public and TCM profession by ensuring quailty and safety

> of

> >imports.....ie. free from heavy metals, AA, and correct species ID

> etc.

> >This is already done by most concentrate suppliers, but will be

> >extended to raw herb importers.

> >

> >Patent medicine are regulated by the TGA as either L or R depending

> on

> >what claims the advertising on the bottle contains. There is no

> >shortage of these products here, and they are not going to suddenly

> >disappear either.

> >

> >

> >Best Wishes,

> >

> >Dr. Steven J Slater

> > Practitioner and Acupuncturist

> >Mobile: 0418 343 545

> >chinese_medicine

> >

> >

>

>

>

> ---Roger Wicke, PhD,  TCM Clinical Herbalist

> contact:   www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

> Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

> Clinical herbology training programs -   www.rmhiherbal.org

>

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

 

It was not this list, but your direct competition;-) and one or two

others.

 

I am also concerned about the so-called " Codex " .......but I am yet to

get a real and reliable impression of it. If you could enlighten me I

would be very interested.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

 

 

On 03/07/2004, at 1:25 AM, wrote:

 

> , dragonslive@h... wrote:

> > This is not the first time this post has done the rounds on mailing

> > lists and I really am tired of seeing it.

>

>

> I don't recall seeing it here before.  I would think the opportunity

> it gave you for rebuttal

> was worth the trouble.  If this circulates w/o rebuttal (which it

> willdo), then the problem

> will be far worse.  bring the half-truths to the light of day and

> they will wither in the

> sunlight.  My main concern is the codex, for which the threat is

> indeed real.  I knew

> nothing about TGA before these posts. 

>

> Todd

Dr. Steven J Slater

Practitioner and Acupuncturist

Mobile: 0418 343 545

chinese_medicine

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, dragonslive@h... wrote:

 

>

> Australia is following an agenda of allowing access of dangerous

> substances only through qualified channels. This does NOT mean western

> MD's, but professionally trained and fully qualified TCM or natural

> medicine practitioners. But, yes, this does mean the public can not

> walk into the 7/11 and buy it........and this is good to my eyes.

>

 

 

Steve

 

I wonder who would qualify to precribe ma huang if the same approach was used in

the

US. would it only be licensed acupuncturists? there are many herbalist in the

US who are

not L.Ac. and many of them are far more skilled than many L.Ac. would there be

a

mechanism for certification of herbalists other than becoming a licensed

acupuncturist.

Roger has proposed an international herbal certification. The NCCAOM, our

national

examination agency originally introduced their herbal certification with a

specific

statement that it would be available to even those who had not completed an

acupuncture

program in recognition of the independent profression of herbalism that has

existed in

china for thousands of years. They have since reneged on this due to political

pressure

from those want to consolidate all power over this practice in the profession of

acupuncture. the same kind of folks who had the term " chinese herbal medicine "

reserved

only for acupuncturists in a recent law in CA.

 

The second issue is what constitutes a harmful substance? what obligation do

people

have to inform themselves before they take strange substances? what role does

the

government have in stopping people from injuring themselves if, fully infomed,

they so

choose? Ma huang killed 15 people in the US last year. tobacco killed 450,000.

everyone

knows tobacco kills, yet they still smoke away. Ma huang clearly is quite safe

even when

used for stupid things like losing weight. By any standard, ma haung is far

safer than

most OTC drugs. this is all smoke and mirrors. It is a simple matter to

educate people

about the dangers of ma haung and even require sellers to provide explicit

verbal

warnings like my pharmacist is required to do whenever I need painkillers. Now

if a fully

informed person decides to abuse ma huang, that's their choice and their

problem. It

does not affect us in any way unless we allow hysteria to lead to insane

regulation. I think

it is important that laypersons have access to the full range of nature's

substances for

whatever personal use they deem worthy.

 

It is easy to tout the importance of regulation when one is already part of the

elite group.

but many of us would never have learned herbs if they had not been freely

available for

our experimentation in decades past. We may deprive future generations of the

best

herbalists if we restrict the tools they need to learn. It is unfair to have

have kicked down

a door only to slam it back shut in the faces of those who lined up behind us.

I think this

matter is better handled by the FTC than the FDA. Prosecute store owners who do

not

protect the public with proper warnings. but given such warnings, let people

kill

themselves as they please. People will always find a way to kill themselves, so

lets stop

trying to legislate a fundamental human flaw. Maybe so many people wouldn't

want to kill

themselves if they lived in a world where every little thing was NOT

scrutinized, legislated,

and finally " corrected " by some big brother. We might have to consider that

possibility.

:-)

 

[Guest guest]

Hi

 

You make some good points worth considering. However I believe TCM is a

Profession and is potentially dangerous when used by those not

qualified to do so. The public having free access to whatever they like

is one thing; having a poorly educated individual prescribing these

substances in therapeutic quantities and accepting money for this

service is another.

The questionable advertising practices of some suppliers is also a

serious issue to me.

 

As you replied to another recent post....

 

"

bachelor of medicine is the entry level degree to practice western

medicine in most of the

rest of the world.  PRC has adopted this same designation for their

TCM programs. "

 

This is true, and only sensible in my opinion. The level of education

here (Australia) is also Bachelor level based upon (and accepted by)

the SATCM in china.

 

I don't understand the USA and its education standards....in many ways

they are like a 3rd world in this regard. A Doctorate in TCM that is

not a PhD? What on earth is that? It is not internationally acceptable

that is for sure.

 

If I want to do a doctorate in Australia (or China), I must complete 4

or 5 years study at bachelor level, a further 2 years at masters, and

then 3 years for a doctorate. That is at least 9 years tertiary study.

 

IMHO, the US needs some serious shake up with it's TCM education. Only

then will these other issues be dealt with.

 

What about those who make a living already without formal education?

.......

 

Australia had a 2 year " Grand-parenting " policy for such individuals to

apply for exemption of the formal education requirements for

registration if they could document a history of safe practice and

education. After this time, only formally educated graduates from

endorsed Universities would be accepted.

 

No policy is perfect for everyone, but you need to start

somewhere..........the recent US TCM doctorate is a disturbing joke to

me; and to the rest of the TCM world. Why not start with a REAL

bachelor degree basic education and endorse these graduates while also

considering a grand-parenting process for the existing practitioners?

 

Impossible probably due to the in-fighting between associations and

those who control these that may not be qualified themselves. I do not

envy those of you who are serious, objective and have years of TCM

study and practice behind you and who must suffer these fools who

destroy the credibility of our global profession.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve

 

 

On 03/07/2004, at 12:06 PM, wrote:

 

> , dragonslive@h... wrote:

>

> >

> > Australia is following an agenda of allowing access of dangerous

> > substances only through qualified channels. This does NOT mean

> western

> > MD's, but professionally trained and fully qualified TCM or natural

> > medicine practitioners. But, yes, this does mean the public can not

> > walk into the 7/11 and buy it........and this is good to my eyes.

> >

>

>

> Steve

>

> I wonder who would qualify to precribe ma huang if the same approach

> was used in the

> US.  would it only be licensed acupuncturists?  there are many

> herbalist in the US who are

> not L.Ac. and many of them are far more skilled than many L.Ac. 

> would there be a

> mechanism for certification of herbalists other than becoming a

> licensed acupuncturist. 

> Roger has proposed an international herbal certification.  The

> NCCAOM, our national

> examination agency originally introduced their herbal certification

> with a specific

> statement that it would be available to even those who had not

> completed an acupuncture

> program in recognition of the independent profression of herbalism

> that has existed in

> china for thousands of years.  They have since reneged on this due to

> political pressure

> from those want to consolidate all power over this practice in the

> profession of

> acupuncture.  the same kind of folks who had the term " chinese herbal

> medicine " reserved

> only for acupuncturists in a recent law in CA.

>

> The second issue is what constitutes a harmful substance?  what

> obligation do people

> have to inform themselves before they take strange substances?  what

> role does the

> government have in stopping people from injuring themselves if, fully

> infomed, they so

> choose?  Ma huang killed 15 people in the US last year.  tobacco

> killed 450,000.  everyone

> knows tobacco kills, yet they still smoke away.  Ma huang clearly is

> quite safe even when

> used for stupid things like losing weight.  By any standard, ma haung

> is far safer than

> most OTC drugs.  this is all smoke and mirrors.  It is a simple

> matter to educate people

> about the dangers of ma haung and even require sellers to provide

> explicit verbal

> warnings like my pharmacist is required to do whenever I need

> painkillers.  Now if a fully

> informed person decides to abuse ma huang, that's their choice and

> their problem.  It

> does not affect us in any way unless we allow hysteria to lead to

> insane regulation.  I think

> it is important that laypersons have access to the full range of

> nature's substances for

> whatever personal use they deem worthy. 

>

> It is easy to tout the importance of regulation when one is already

> part of the elite group. 

> but many of us would never have learned herbs if they had not been

> freely available for

> our experimentation in decades past.  We may deprive future

> generations of the best

> herbalists if we restrict the tools they need to learn.  It is unfair

> to have have kicked down

> a door only to slam it back shut in the faces of those who lined up

> behind us.  I think this

> matter is better handled by the FTC than the FDA.  Prosecute store

> owners who do not

> protect the public with proper warnings.  but given such warnings,

> let people kill

> themselves as they please.  People will always find a way to kill

> themselves, so lets stop

> trying to legislate a fundamental human flaw.  Maybe so many people

> wouldn't want to kill

> themselves if they lived in a world where every little thing was NOT

> scrutinized, legislated, 

> and finally " corrected " by some big brother.  We might have to

> consider that possibility. 

> :-)

>

> Todd

>

Dr. Steven J Slater

Practitioner and Acupuncturist

Mobile: 0418 343 545

chinese_medicine

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Steve,

 

I agree with all of your assessments below, regarding the TCM Doctorate programs

in the U.S. being a joke. Just as I am not aware of Australian herbal politics

and must rely on 3rd parties for such, foreigners may not be aware of just how

pathological the entire U.S. educational system has become. Several years, ago I

attended a workshop by a local author; at the end he put in a plug for a several

hour video that he had produced, informing us that we could actually get credit

toward a Master's degree in Education, merely by buying the video and watching

it! I know of graduate degree programs, especially in various types of

alternative health and psychology, where one can effectively get a degree by

paying the tuition (often outrageous) and parking one's behind in a chair for a

specified number of hours.

 

I am director of a small school of TCM herbology. We are not accredited by any

TCM organization or regional college accrediting body - this is expensive and

requires one to become enmeshed in nasty politics. We do not have a staff of

paid administrative bureaucrats or a multi-million dollar endowment. I teach out

of my home, as does Dr. Cheung, who also teaches classes for our students, many

of whom are physicians. We are not registered with any state educational

bureaucracy, but operate solely as a matter of 1st Amendment rights. Some of our

students go on to study at accredited acupuncture colleges, and they frequently

complain that they know more than the teachers about herbology.

 

Our graduates have never had any problems obtaining all of the herbs in the TCM

materia medica, because Chinese herb companies that are aware of our program

know it prepares our graduates better than at most TCM colleges.

 

Because of the pathologies in the American educational system, I have made every

effort to make sure that I have no legal ties to it in any form. Radical

problems require radical solutions. In most other countries, the system of

higher education has not yet become as dysfunctional as in the U.S. But ask

yourself the following question: if national regulations, combined with the

Codex Alimentarius treaty regulations, specified that only graduates of

accredited graduate health programs could prescribe herbs, and your national

educational system were as dysfunctional as that in the USA, would you still be

comfortable with the Australian-style regulations??? The tyranny of Codex can

only be fully appreciated when it is understood in the context of national and

local regulations, because they could interact in such a way as to create an

intolerable situation.

 

Re: The Dumbing Down of American Education - see my article:

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-4.html

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

 

> Sat, 3 Jul 2004 15:56:44 +1000

> dragonslive

>Re: Re: Fwd: [rmhinet] Codex, supplements, and threats to health

freedom

>

>Hi

>

>You make some good points worth considering. However I believe TCM is a

>Profession and is potentially dangerous when used by those not

>qualified to do so. The public having free access to whatever they like

>is one thing; having a poorly educated individual prescribing these

>substances in therapeutic quantities and accepting money for this

>service is another.

>The questionable advertising practices of some suppliers is also a

>serious issue to me.

>

>As you replied to another recent post....

>

> "

> bachelor of medicine is the entry level degree to practice western

>medicine in most of the

> rest of the world.Ý PRC has adopted this same designation for their

>TCM programs. "

>

>This is true, and only sensible in my opinion. The level of education

>here (Australia) is also Bachelor level based upon (and accepted by)

>the SATCM in china.

>

>I don't understand the USA and its education standards....in many ways

>they are like a 3rd world in this regard. A Doctorate in TCM that is

>not a PhD? What on earth is that? It is not internationally acceptable

>that is for sure.

>

>If I want to do a doctorate in Australia (or China), I must complete 4

>or 5 years study at bachelor level, a further 2 years at masters, and

>then 3 years for a doctorate. That is at least 9 years tertiary study.

>

>IMHO, the US needs some serious shake up with it's TCM education. Only

>then will these other issues be dealt with.

>

>What about those who make a living already without formal education?

>......

>

>Australia had a 2 year " Grand-parenting " policy for such individuals to

>apply for exemption of the formal education requirements for

>registration if they could document a history of safe practice and

>education. After this time, only formally educated graduates from

>endorsed Universities would be accepted.

>

>No policy is perfect for everyone, but you need to start

>somewhere..........the recent US TCM doctorate is a disturbing joke to

>me; and to the rest of the TCM world. Why not start with a REAL

>bachelor degree basic education and endorse these graduates while also

>considering a grand-parenting process for the existing practitioners?

>

>Impossible probably due to the in-fighting between associations and

>those who control these that may not be qualified themselves. I do not

>envy those of you who are serious, objective and have years of TCM

>study and practice behind you and who must suffer these fools who

>destroy the credibility of our global profession.

>

>Best Wishes,

>

>Steve

>

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

On Jul 2, 2004, at 10:06 PM, wrote:

 

> Roger has proposed an international herbal certification.  The

> NCCAOM, our national

> examination agency originally introduced their herbal certification

> with a specific

> statement that it would be available to even those who had not

> completed an acupuncture

> program in recognition of the independent profression of herbalism

> that has existed in

> china for thousands of years.  They have since reneged on this due to

> political pressure

> from those want to consolidate all power over this practice in the

> profession of

> acupuncture.  the same kind of folks who had the term " chinese herbal

> medicine " reserved

> only for acupuncturists in a recent law in CA.

--

 

 

" The same kind of folks. " Please...this type of ad hominem produces

only heat, not light.

 

Although I don't know who these folks are who you refer to, they

probably have good reasons for their position. No doubt there are good

arguments for both sides of the issue. However, Chinese medicine does

not exist in a cultural vacuum, either here or in China, and in the end

it IS a political decision who gets to do what. A great deal of effort

has gone into setting up legitimating systems for acupuncture and

oriental medicine in the context of health care in the USA, and there

is no reason those who have made that effort should not have a big say

in who gets to play in their sandbox.

 

So, NCCAOM was probably right to concede to the pressure, at least for

the time being until there are accredited TCM herbal training programs

that meet the same standards as those accredited by ACAOM. It is not

NCCAOM's job to evaluate and approve programs. They rely on independent

accrediting agencies to do that, and accept applicants from approved

institutions. On the other hand, NCCAOM is not tied to ACAOM, should

some other legitimate accrediting agency appear. If the schools who

offer herbal only training want in, then they have to the work of

creating an equivalent system to ensure quality of training. Even if

they claim their training is of higher quality, they should still have

to subject themselves to independent evaluation, and to do that there

has to be an agency to do it.

 

As for use of the term " Chinese herbal medicine " , that should hardly be

a concern for people who aren't licensed, as they cannot legally claim

to be doing any sort of medicine anyway. They are free to use " Chinese

herbology " , or something similar to that. With respect to those already

licensed in other healthcare fields, such a law will help protect

against exploitation, and should not prevent say, MD physicians, who

use Chinese herbs, from doing what they want to do.

 

Rory

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Perhaps a hypothetical clinical example will illustrate some of my concerns

about the status quo:

 

An elderly physician is examined by hospital staff, many of who

are his former students. He complains of a painful knee that was

injured in a recent fall, but the attending doctors all note

that he walks with a tremor and frequently stumbles. When asked

about his symptoms, he abruptly insists he feels fine and is

perfectly healthy. The head doctor recommends a CAT scan and the

results reveal marble-sized holes spread throughout his brain.

His colleagues reveal that he has made promises to people, and

then angrily denied that he made them, suffers from memory loss,

and erratic behavior. When confronted with the situation, the

elderly physician angrily denounces individual doctors on staff

of incompetence. Instead of seeking help for his deteriorating

condition, he pulls influence with his cronies in the state

governor's office to convince the medical school dean to allow

him to continue in his position. The staff becomes terrified of

him, for fear that his mental deterioration will lead to

political vendettas.

 

Over a 15-year period, I've written a number of articles documenting the decline

of TCM education, the role accrediting agencies have played in this, as well as

a general decline in American educational institutions. When Todd refers to

these " same kind of folks " , I believe he is reflecting my own frustration that

the people who head these professional a and accrediting bodies feel that they

are above having to explain their positions publicly. It is not acceptable to

simply assume that " they have their reasons " - are these reasons secret? Are

they shameful? Are they self-serving, and would they be embarrassing if exposed

publicly? If not, then why not speak up and let us know what these reasons are?

I have gone on record with articles and academic conference proceedings stating

my position. Here are the articles:

 

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-4.html

The Dumbing Down of American Education: Implications for Herbal

Education

 

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2004-2.html

Why TCM Herbology needs to become an independent profession, separate

from acupuncture

 

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-2.html

Orwellian schemes for maximizing health-care industry profits

- How these endanger the practice of herbal medicine

(Tactics used by modern megacorporations to inhibit the delivery of

effective health care: deceptive marketing, product design to maximize side

effects, influence over educational bureaucracies, legislators, regulatory

agencies, and international trade organizations.)

 

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/a/f.ahr4.regul.html

Dilemmas in regulating Chinese herbology

 

http://www.rmhiherbal.org/a/f.ahr2.educ.html

Modest proposals for improving traditional Chinese herbology education

 

If people on TCM accrediting committees can rebut any of my alleged facts and

conclusions, fine. Let them do so. I look forward to having my arguments

sharpened. So far the silence has been deafening. Until these people answer up

publicly, identify themselves, and respond to these criticisms, we are justified

in referring to them as these " same kind of folks " . How is this an ad hominem

attack, if we cannot even identify any of these people by name, only as faceless

committees? Questioning the validity of groups that make public policy and

demanding explanations do not qualify as ad hominem attacks.

 

 

John Taylor Gatto, a former teacher who won the New York State " Teacher of the

Year " award, has written a book documenting the decline of American education

and the ***active role school accreditation*** has played in this process:

* Gatto, John T.; The Underground History of American Education;

Oxford Village Press, New York, c2001.

Gatto concludes that the American educational experiment has been a calculated

success in creating numerous " dependent children who grow up to be whining,

treacherous, terrified, dependent adults, passive and timid in the face of new

challenges. " He believes the system is so broken that the only viable

alternative is to walk away from it and to create alternatives. Also, see:

* Iserbyt, Charlotte Thomson; The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America;

3D Research Co; c1999.

(Iserbyt is a former Senior Policy Advisor in the US Department of Education.)

 

 

By the way, several Chinese herb distributors have asked to see our course

materials and have carefully questioned some of our graduates on making their

first orders. I've sent these people copies of our course materials and

curriculum. However, I will not pay tens of thousands of dollars, or more, to

have the very agencies whose inadequacies I have documented evaluate my school.

(Years ago I came to conclusions very similar to ones that independent and

expensive accrediting consultants have come to - the need for more case-study

based teaching, less rote memorization, homework based on working out problems,

and exams that test ability to solve realistic clinical problems rather than

simplistic multiple choice tests.) I have better uses for these funds.

 

I don't require the permission of any American TCM organization or bureaucracy

to operate as a school of herbology, our graduates do not need anyone's

permission to practice as an herbalists, so why should I endorse a process that

seems to be more focused on professional turf battles than concern over quality

of care to the public? That you have chosen to label this process as an issue of

who gets to play in whose " sandbox " , suggests that you recognize that this is

the case. When people's health and lives are at stake, shouldn't we rise above

petty issues such as whose sandbox it really is? The public, by their

overwhelming support of Health Freedom Acts, suggests that they are losing

patience with health professions that quibble over such self-serving issues.

 

Until these accrediting agencies address, point for point, the criticisms I've

documented, they have no credibility in my book. Instead of " we are the status

quo, so what are you going to do about it? " , I would expect a more intelligent

answer. In the absence of such, isn't it fair to assume the 'emperor is wearing

no clothes'? An increasing number of people are murmuring such things both

publicly and privately, within and without the TCM professions.

 

An independent, international certification body for Chinese herbology (private,

consensual, non-mandatory), does not require the permission or approval of any

exising TCM organizations. My call for an international herbal certification is

based on my belief that American TCM accrediting organizations have lost their

credibility, just as many other American organizations have lost international

credibility. America has become incompetent in many areas, and its influence in

the world will only last as long as it can inflict its stupidity at the end of a

gun.

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

> Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:59:35 -0400

> Rory Kerr <rorykerr

>Re: Re: Fwd: [rmhinet] Codex, supplements, and threats to health

freedom

>

>On Jul 2, 2004, at 10:06 PM, wrote:

>

>> Roger has proposed an international herbal certification.Ý The

>> NCCAOM, our national

>> examination agency originally introduced their herbal certification

>> with a specific

>> statement that it would be available to even those who had not

>> completed an acupuncture

>> program in recognition of the independent profression of herbalism

>> that has existed in

>> china for thousands of years.Ý They have since reneged on this due to

>> political pressure

>> from those want to consolidate all power over this practice in the

>> profession of

>> acupuncture.Ý the same kind of folks who had the term " chinese herbal

>> medicine " reserved

>> only for acupuncturists in a recent law in CA.

>--

>

>

> " The same kind of folks. " Please...this type of ad hominem produces

>only heat, not light.

>

>Although I don't know who these folks are who you refer to, they

>probably have good reasons for their position. No doubt there are good

>arguments for both sides of the issue. However, Chinese medicine does

>not exist in a cultural vacuum, either here or in China, and in the end

>it IS a political decision who gets to do what. A great deal of effort

>has gone into setting up legitimating systems for acupuncture and

>oriental medicine in the context of health care in the USA, and there

>is no reason those who have made that effort should not have a big say

>in who gets to play in their sandbox.

>

>So, NCCAOM was probably right to concede to the pressure, at least for

>the time being until there are accredited TCM herbal training programs

>that meet the same standards as those accredited by ACAOM. It is not

>NCCAOM's job to evaluate and approve programs. They rely on independent

>accrediting agencies to do that, and accept applicants from approved

>institutions. On the other hand, NCCAOM is not tied to ACAOM, should

>some other legitimate accrediting agency appear. If the schools who

>offer herbal only training want in, then they have to the work of

>creating an equivalent system to ensure quality of training. Even if

>they claim their training is of higher quality, they should still have

>to subject themselves to independent evaluation, and to do that there

>has to be an agency to do it.

>

>As for use of the term " Chinese herbal medicine " , that should hardly be

>a concern for people who aren't licensed, as they cannot legally claim

>to be doing any sort of medicine anyway. They are free to use " Chinese

>herbology " , or something similar to that. With respect to those already

>licensed in other healthcare fields, such a law will help protect

>against exploitation, and should not prevent say, MD physicians, who

>use Chinese herbs, from doing what they want to do.

>

>Rory

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

Rory,

 

On Jul 3, 2004, at 11:59 AM, Rory Kerr wrote:

 

>

> " The same kind of folks. " Please...this type of ad hominem produces

> only heat, not light.

>

>

 

 

ad hominem is when an attack on a person's character or intelligence or

motivation is used to substitute for a debate on the merits of an

argument. calling something ad hominem that is not is just a way to

silence debate altogether. In this case, the two are not separate

issues. What motivates a group to want to control a term like chinese

herbal medicine. In fact, there were several other groups who could

have used the term if this rule had not been passed. That includes

naturopathic physicians and lay chinese herbalists (such as chinatown

herb shops all over the country). Nothing in the California health

freedom act restricted a layperson from using this term. Amongst

native chinese herb shop owners, the term chinese herbal medicine is

the most common one in use. Herbalism and herbology are not terms one

sees on these stores. This was a power play, pure and simple.

 

Same goes for the NCCAOM herb exam. States license medicine and none

of them set the SOLE criteria for any form of licensing as passage of

the NCCAOM herb exam. so no person who received this certificate

without going to an accredited TCM college would ever be a licensed

medical provider. So there is no increased threat to public safety by

allowing anyone who can demonstrate adequate training to sit for the

exam. In fact, since anyone can legally practice herbology in the US

if one chooses their words carefully, it actually increases public

safety to allow such persons to take a board exam that sets an accepted

standard of competency. For years, the NCCAOM allowed students from

unaccredited acupuncture schools to sit for boards and we are none the

worse for it.

 

How is it better to just have a bunch of uncertified people running

around practicing. Rather than regulating the public's right to access

healthcare, we should just set up certification mechanisms that provide

the public with necessary information to make critical judgments. Then

caveat emptor. Restricting who gets to sit for boards is also a

blatant power play. Again, passing the herb boards does not prove one

can fully practice OM as we have defined it in the US. But as Roger

has shown, this is not necessary to legally be an herbalist. An exam

could demonstrate one's competency in clinical thinking in chinese

herbology. However a state still won't license you to do anything.

but at least the public can differentiate you from those who cannot

pass the exams and thus may truly constitute a public threat. If the

lay herbalists won't go away, then doesn't it make sense to provide

some sort of public remedy. A lay herbalist can't have his license

revoked, but he can have his certification pulled for ethical or other

crimes. This does not prevent such a person from practicing, but does

prevent them from displaying the certificate. Right now the public has

no way to differentiate a competent herbalist from the rest. And the

public knows that many lay herbalists are just as skillful as those

with licenses. I know many of our colleagues who will even rely on an

unlicensed chinatown doc in a real difficult case or for their own

healthcare..

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX: