LHC

[Guest guest]

Hi Alon -

 

The LHC report is a merely a set of recommendations. Everyone would do well

to read it because it can be used by any agency ... anywhere. In California

those agencies will be the legislators, acupuncture board and insurance

companies. Ultimately, any changes in legislation as a result of the LHC will be

subject to the legislative and lobbying processes.

 

There are many reasons to question the veracity of the document, especially

the glaring omission of any consideration of the current DAOM programs or the

ACAOM doctorate as a first professional degree. This demonstrates either a

political decision to ignore the climate of degree evolution or they just missed

it. Either way, the ability for anyone to use the document effectively in

legislative processes will be compromised.

 

Best -

 

Will

 

> Well looks like LAc in California will not be able to bill any insurance

> companies since a diagnosis is always needed to be covered.

> Alon

>

 

 

Will Morris, LAc., OMD, MSEd

Secretary AAOM

310-453-8300 phone

310-829-3838 fax

 

This message is a PRIVATE communication. This e-mail and any attachments may

be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended

recipient, please do not read, copy, or use it, and do not disclose it to

others.

Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this message with

the word delete in the subject column, and then delete it and any attachments

from your system. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

There are many reasons to question the veracity of the document, especially

the glaring omission of any consideration of the current DAOM programs or the

ACAOM doctorate as a first professional degree. This demonstrates either a

political decision to ignore the climate of degree evolution or they just missed

it. Either way, the ability for anyone to use the document effectively in

legislative processes will be compromised.

 

>>>>The main message I got from reading it is that if we do not bring up our

education to community standards, as I have been talking about for over 15

years, we will probably loose many of the gains we made, instead of increasing

our scope of practice and community standing

Alon

 

 

[Guest guest]

Todd I just re-read some of your conclusion about lhc recommendations. On the

one hand you state they support our independent profession and on the other hand

you admit that what this will lead to is jobs such as Kaiser jobs with the

demise of independent practice (or what you call profitable privet practice).

Lets look at Kaiser LAc. How independent are they. they cannot do any primary

care, They cannot make there own referrals. They cannot control the treatment

protocols i.e. they can not use herbs, they are limited in the amount of manual

med they can use etc (in short they can not practice OM). The can only treat

pain, they cannot control the frequency of visits and so on. If that is your

vision of an independent profession I guess we have very different views.

What I have been saying for years is that we cannot create our own world out

side the reality of medical practice and education in the US. As one that has

been involved in acupuncture at Kaiser from the beginning (even though I have

never taken a job at Kaiser, I was involved in setting of the first clinic in

northern ca and think this is a good example of what will happen to us as a

trade), I can tell you they never did have much real interest in OM and still do

not. It is only patient and marketing driven that have resulted in limited

acupuncture (not OM) serves. LAcs will never have the standing of a primary care

provider with independent medical decision standing at Kaiser or any other

western medical institution. True OM will not be a part of the system in our

lifetime, unless practiced by MD which is what they are trying to push.

We need to make a decision as a profession, do we see ourselves as medical

professionals or as medical technicians. If we want to work as medical

technicians than I do not even see the need for the 2300 hr training. What for?

For the schools to make money? One can learn to stick needles in a much shorter

program. If we want to be medical professionals that means to be excepted by the

general medical and populace as medical professionals, we need to first be

trained on par with community standards and that mean WM as well as in what we

try to promote as valid treatments. That is the only way we will be given money

for research needed. That is the only way we will have sufficiently educated

cohort to do the needed research, and that is the only way we can gain a true

professional standing in medical care. This red herring of learning Chinese has

nothing to do with these goals. And as I have stated in the past in china were

Chinese medicine is better understood than anywhere else in the world they

devote much more time in the study of WM than classical Chinese for example.

They understand what is needed to create a safe practitioner and if you look at

their priorities it is very clear. Third as I have said many time regarding

Chinese one only has to look at real life clinical outcome when one goes to

china (not the what is written in journals by people that have much to gain) and

than compare it to what one sees in clinics here at the schools and in privet

practices in both Chinese speaking and non Chinese speaking to put this red

herring in perspective). Safe practice is what the chines have looked at and

what made them design TCM programs as they do. Not some philosophical argument

we have on this list and in the west. And safety was support to be the lhc job.

I will say it again, what the lhc is saying is that we do not deserve and nor

should we ever be in the future (in effect blocking the normal development of

our profession as all other professions have done in the past including the

medical act of western medicine) a medical profession. They are basically trying

to use non confrontational language (as they see the legislative language even

though for example governor Brown clearly stated that he signed the law giving

us the right to order lab test etc clearly understanding it gives us the right

to make a diagnosis).

Basically this interpretation states that we are trying to be a medical

profession (as is defined by all medical professions, not medical trades in US)

and that we should not be considered nor should have never been considered as

such.

If we are pushed to the role they see us we will become a third rate vocation

(such as an x-ray tech or a dental assessment) as this is how they want to

define our role.

Are we going to just sit around and take this? Do people want to come out of

school with the dept they are currently coming out with and have the standing of

an x-ray tech with the empty promise of Kaiser jobs? How many posts for Kaiser

jobs have you seen recently?, how much information do you have about Kaiser

priorities and budgets? I do. First as I already said I was closely involved in

the beginning of acupuncture at Kaiser, my wife is the chief of OBGYN at Kaiser

and i have a lot of information of the future programs and discussions as well

as priorities. You will not have enough jobs for even one graduating pcom class.

What I would like to know is what are we doing about this report as a

profession? don't we have representatives of the state organizations on this

discussion list? where are they? I also think it is dangerous for us to have any public written support for

their conclusions. Look how they have already used statements from Barbara

Mitchell who has never had this profession best interest in mind, who does not

know nor never understood OM, or what is needed to practice and succeed in the

medical competitive market. Please think twice before you or anyone else writes

on these issues. There will be real consequences for any public statement.

Alon

 

 

[Guest guest]

, " Alon Marcus " <

alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

The can only treat pain, they cannot control the frequency of visits and so on.

If that is your vision of an independent profession I guess we have very

different views.

 

I believe you misunderstood me.

 

[Guest guest]

I have just heard that the person in charge of the LHC states that those that

intrepid the findings as stating that 1. we should not be able to diagnose. 2.

not be able to order tests etc. are mistaken. The LHC did not come to these

conclusions at all. He states that in order to consider these issues they need

much more testimony and research. I hope this is good news and that it gives us

another chance to establish a good scope of practice. I hope the LAcs in CA wake

up and identify those that are truly committed on working for the practitioners

of this state and than support them. It sounds like AIMS might be doing some

good things but i do not know them well enough to know. I question their

priorities as they are working trying to get us full QME rights in work comp

which i think is not an important issue. Do people on the list have more

information about which groups are doing what?