Guest guest Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 So what has the acupuncture profession gained by licensing, especially with regard to herbs? According to Bob Flaws at CHA last year, any new licensing laws that include herbs are doomed to fail. Only 16 states include herbs in their scope and there is no indication this will change. This creates an interesting dilemma. In those other 34 states, it is illegal for an acupuncturist to practice herbology. However, in those same 34 states, it is legal to practice herbology with no license at all. If that seems outrageous to you, you do not understand the actual reasoning behind licensing laws in the first place. Search our archive for much more on this topic. If it is already legal to practice herbology in these states w/o a license and it is also unlikely that it will ever be legal for acupuncturists to precribe herbs in these states, it is certainly a losing tactic for those who are primarily chinese herbalists to favor any barriers to entry like licensing laws or god forbid, a doctorate from an accredited school. If you want to practice herbology legally in much of the country, you will have to give up your acupuncture license or vice versa. It is interesting that so many hold onto their licenses and still break the law every time they prescribe herbs, yet the same few would never consider doing the opposite. See the irony. It seems the best tactic for those who really want to serve the public good through continued access to trained herbologists is to support Roger Wicke's international chinese herbology certification initiative. Support of initiatives to consolidate the licensed acupuncture profession will only result in further loss of privileges. It could be argued that if we had not drawn so much of a spotlight on ourselves in this insane quest to be physicians, we would not now be in the position where we could actually lose some aspects of our herbal prescribing scope. If that happens, some will have to consider whether they are better off with no license at all. The sunset review board has also made it clear that they recognize the right to practice herbology without a license in CA (a highly regulated big d Dem state). And they question why it should be in our scope at all. That latter question is a serious matter. In one scenario, it would essentially result in the severing of the profession as some have advocated. This would lead to licensed acupuncturists with fairly limited scopes of practice AND unlicensed chinese herbalists with a fairly wide scope (with the glaring exception of acupuncture). In fact, this is already the case in those 34 states with limited or no acupuncture scopes in which common law herbology is also legal. So for those who believe there is no way to separate the profession into its natural professions of herbology and acupuncture, I would say its already a fait accompli in most of the country. There is nothing stopping students from going to an accredited school, getting a diploma and sitting for the NCCAOM herbology boards and then finally practicing WITHOUT a license. If you only do herbs, why would your patient care if you have a license to do acupuncture unless those like you are the victim of a smear campaign by your state board (which is probably a RICO violation - ask the AMA about this in regard to chiros last century). While only those who graduate from accredited acupuncture schools can sit for the NCCAOM herb exam (which is another outrage), this at least does provide one legitimizing route for those who want to be herbalists in most of the US. Even without a license to do soemthing one does not do, the other sheepskins would carry some serious weight. You could still display your master's degree and NCCAOM certificate even without a license. And depending on where you went to school, you could heavily focus on herbs with little distraction from acupuncture studies. It occurs to me that the chinese community of herbalists here in CA as well as nationwide might be interested in learning more about this option. We don't have many chinese on CHA, the only place in the world where this topic is discussed so openly and at such length. And the chinese here in CA have been spearheading the drive to become doctors with dramatic expansions of scope. However many of these chinese do not practice acupuncture much or at all. They are also probably unaware that they are already protected by state law and common law to practice herbology. Now if you want title, status and right to milk the insurance companies, you'll need a license. But insurance will never cover herbs and despite the misleading story in Janurary's AT, coverage for acupuncture is currently worse than nothing with low fees and restrictions. Always remember that AT is owned by the insurance industry when reading its pages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Why is there so much focus given to unlicensed practice? Most of us know that anyone at present can use herbs. The key is at present but this does not guaratee any future. If we look at what the FDA is doing to limit this access we should start to worry. Licensure that spells out herbs adds another road block to big business elimination of us. The ephedrine alkaloid issue has opened up a pandora's box that could eliminate anyone from Chinese herbal access. The Republican dominated thought process is that we are in the way of complete monopolization of healthcare as they see it. The modern day party is out to eliminate options that focus on health promotion and favor those that are toxic and costly. People function less well if they are medicated and chronically ill, no dissention. I have mentioned previously that we need to fight for better ops, not less. We are doing the right thing by raising our educational standards and should have done so from the beginning. Money is what is creating these same issues for the chiro's as well. They are having less stature, scope of practice and less reimbursement. Maybe we need to work together with them to form a united front in CA. Regardless, we need a large public outcry of support for their right to choose. Later Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > " " < > > > what to do >Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:56:18 -0000 > > >So what has the acupuncture profession gained by licensing, especially >with regard to herbs? According to Bob Flaws at CHA last year, any >new licensing laws that include herbs are doomed to fail. Only 16 >states include herbs in their scope and there is no indication this >will change. This creates an interesting dilemma. In those other 34 >states, it is illegal for an acupuncturist to practice herbology. >However, in those same 34 states, it is legal to practice herbology >with no license at all. If that seems outrageous to you, you do not >understand the actual reasoning behind licensing laws in the first >place. Search our archive for much more on this topic. > >If it is already legal to practice herbology in these states w/o a >license and it is also unlikely that it will ever be legal for >acupuncturists to precribe herbs in these states, it is certainly a >losing tactic for those who are primarily chinese herbalists to favor >any barriers to entry like licensing laws or god forbid, a doctorate >from an accredited school. If you want to practice herbology legally >in much of the country, you will have to give up your acupuncture >license or vice versa. It is interesting that so many hold onto their >licenses and still break the law every time they prescribe herbs, yet >the same few would never consider doing the opposite. See the irony. > >It seems the best tactic for those who really want to serve the public >good through continued access to trained herbologists is to support >Roger Wicke's international chinese herbology certification >initiative. Support of initiatives to consolidate the licensed >acupuncture profession will only result in further loss of privileges. > It could be argued that if we had not drawn so much of a spotlight on >ourselves in this insane quest to be physicians, we would not now be >in the position where we could actually lose some aspects of our >herbal prescribing scope. If that happens, some will have to consider >whether they are better off with no license at all. The sunset review >board has also made it clear that they recognize the right to practice >herbology without a license in CA (a highly regulated big d Dem >state). And they question why it should be in our scope at all. > >That latter question is a serious matter. In one scenario, it would >essentially result in the severing of the profession as some have >advocated. This would lead to licensed acupuncturists with fairly >limited scopes of practice AND unlicensed chinese herbalists with a >fairly wide scope (with the glaring exception of acupuncture). In >fact, this is already the case in those 34 states with limited or no >acupuncture scopes in which common law herbology is also legal. So >for those who believe there is no way to separate the profession into >its natural professions of herbology and acupuncture, I would say its >already a fait accompli in most of the country. > >There is nothing stopping students from going to an accredited school, >getting a diploma and sitting for the NCCAOM herbology boards and then >finally practicing WITHOUT a license. If you only do herbs, why would >your patient care if you have a license to do acupuncture unless those >like you are the victim of a smear campaign by your state board (which >is probably a RICO violation - ask the AMA about this in regard to >chiros last century). While only those who graduate from accredited >acupuncture schools can sit for the NCCAOM herb exam (which is another >outrage), this at least does provide one legitimizing route for those >who want to be herbalists in most of the US. Even without a license >to do soemthing one does not do, the other sheepskins would carry some >serious weight. You could still display your master's degree and >NCCAOM certificate even without a license. And depending on where you >went to school, you could heavily focus on herbs with little >distraction from acupuncture studies. > >It occurs to me that the chinese community of herbalists here in CA as >well as nationwide might be interested in learning more about this >option. We don't have many chinese on CHA, the only place in the >world where this topic is discussed so openly and at such length. And >the chinese here in CA have been spearheading the drive to become >doctors with dramatic expansions of scope. However many of these >chinese do not practice acupuncture much or at all. They are also >probably unaware that they are already protected by state law and >common law to practice herbology. Now if you want title, status and >right to milk the insurance companies, you'll need a license. But >insurance will never cover herbs and despite the misleading story in >Janurary's AT, coverage for acupuncture is currently worse than >nothing with low fees and restrictions. Always remember that AT is >owned by the insurance industry when reading its pages. > >Todd > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 First. Ae the ND's, who just got licensed in the state and have herbs in the scope of their practice havig the same thing happen to them? Secondly. A big difference is that we import almost all of our herbs, so we need to get FDA approval of safety to gain access, while western herbalists do not, generally have that problem. It is my view that boards have the responsiblity to provide a relative sense of public safety towards the public regarding those they have control over via a license that can be revoked. If you wish to use herbs on the public as an acupuncturist they have the responsibility to make sure you have a capability to provide safe, and some say effective, use of those herbs. They have no say over anyone else who provides herbs to patients because they do not have any measure of control over their livlihoods via licensure. The goal of the board is not to make people get licensed to use herbs but to acertain tht those under their charge have a relative level of competence if they do do it. NCCAOM did a survey that showed a large percentage of acupuncturists use herbal medicine without any real education in herbal medicine. In California that is not a problem because everyone has a modicum of training that they can choose to use or not in thier practices. " But insurance will never cover herbs and despite the misleading story in Janurary's AT, coverage for acupuncture is currently worse than nothing with low fees and restrictions. " I get paid well here in PA by insurance. Perhaps that may change, but I suspect it is changing in all health fields. We are just the low man on the totem pole, partially due to our insistance on the avoidance of western medical education we need to be more independent. DAve In a message dated 12/24/04 7:19:36 PM, writes: > > > So what has the acupuncture profession gained by licensing, especially > with regard to herbs? According to Bob Flaws at CHA last year, any > new licensing laws that include herbs are doomed to fail. Only 16 > states include herbs in their scope and there is no indication this > will change. This creates an interesting dilemma. In those other 34 > states, it is illegal for an acupuncturist to practice herbology. > However, in those same 34 states, it is legal to practice herbology > with no license at all. If that seems outrageous to you, you do not > understand the actual reasoning behind licensing laws in the first > place. Search our archive for much more on this topic. > > If it is already legal to practice herbology in these states w/o a > license and it is also unlikely that it will ever be legal for > acupuncturists to precribe herbs in these states, it is certainly a > losing tactic for those who are primarily chinese herbalists to favor > any barriers to entry like licensing laws or god forbid, a doctorate > from an accredited school. If you want to practice herbology legally > in much of the country, you will have to give up your acupuncture > license or vice versa. It is interesting that so many hold onto their > licenses and still break the law every time they prescribe herbs, yet > the same few would never consider doing the opposite. See the irony. > > It seems the best tactic for those who really want to serve the public > good through continued access to trained herbologists is to support > Roger Wicke's international chinese herbology certification > initiative. Support of initiatives to consolidate the licensed > acupuncture profession will only result in further loss of privileges. > It could be argued that if we had not drawn so much of a spotlight on > ourselves in this insane quest to be physicians, we would not now be > in the position where we could actually lose some aspects of our > herbal prescribing scope. If that happens, some will have to consider > whether they are better off with no license at all. The sunset review > board has also made it clear that they recognize the right to practice > herbology without a license in CA (a highly regulated big d Dem > state). And they question why it should be in our scope at all. > > > That latter question is a serious matter. In one scenario, it would > essentially result in the severing of the profession as some have > advocated. This would lead to licensed acupuncturists with fairly > limited scopes of practice AND unlicensed chinese herbalists with a > fairly wide scope (with the glaring exception of acupuncture). In > fact, this is already the case in those 34 states with limited or no > acupuncture scopes in which common law herbology is also legal. So > for those who believe there is no way to separate the profession into > its natural professions of herbology and acupuncture, I would say its > already a fait accompli in most of the country. > > There is nothing stopping students from going to an accredited school, > getting a diploma and sitting for the NCCAOM herbology boards and then > finally practicing WITHOUT a license. If you only do herbs, why would > your patient care if you have a license to do acupuncture unless those > like you are the victim of a smear campaign by your state board (which > is probably a RICO violation - ask the AMA about this in regard to > chiros last century). While only those who graduate from accredited > acupuncture schools can sit for the NCCAOM herb exam (which is another > outrage), this at least does provide one legitimizing route for those > who want to be herbalists in most of the US. Even without a license > to do soemthing one does not do, the other sheepskins would carry some > serious weight. You could still display your master's degree and > NCCAOM certificate even without a license. And depending on where you > went to school, you could heavily focus on herbs with little > distraction from acupuncture studies. > > It occurs to me that the chinese community of herbalists here in CA as > well as nationwide might be interested in learning more about this > option. We don't have many chinese on CHA, the only place in the > world where this topic is discussed so openly and at such length. And > the chinese here in CA have been spearheading the drive to become > doctors with dramatic expansions of scope. However many of these > chinese do not practice acupuncture much or at all. They are also > probably unaware that they are already protected by state law and > common law to practice herbology. Now if you want title, status and > right to milk the insurance companies, you'll need a license. But > insurance will never cover herbs and despite the misleading story in > Janurary's AT, coverage for acupuncture is currently worse than > nothing with low fees and restrictions. Always remember that AT is > owned by the insurance industry when reading its pages. > > 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. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 It would be a good idea to compare licensure to the DC and ND as it seems that maybe the state is coming down a bit too hard on our licensure in CA. Later Mike W. Bowser, L Ac >acuman1 > > >Re: what to do >Sat, 25 Dec 2004 00:41:45 EST > >First. Ae the ND's, who just got licensed in the state and have herbs in >the >scope of their practice havig the same thing happen to them? > >Secondly. A big difference is that we import almost all of our herbs, so we >need to get FDA approval of safety to gain access, while western herbalists >do >not, generally have that problem. > >It is my view that boards have the responsiblity to provide a relative >sense >of public safety towards the public regarding those they have control over >via >a license that can be revoked. If you wish to use herbs on the public as an >acupuncturist they have the responsibility to make sure you have a >capability >to provide safe, and some say effective, use of those herbs. They have no >say >over anyone else who provides herbs to patients because they do not have >any >measure of control over their livlihoods via licensure. The goal of the >board is >not to make people get licensed to use herbs but to acertain tht those >under >their charge have a relative level of competence if they do do it. NCCAOM >did >a survey that showed a large percentage of acupuncturists use herbal >medicine >without any real education in herbal medicine. In California that is not a >problem because everyone has a modicum of training that they can choose to >use or >not in thier practices. > > " But >insurance will never cover herbs and despite the misleading story in >Janurary's AT, coverage for acupuncture is currently worse than >nothing with low fees and restrictions. " > >I get paid well here in PA by insurance. Perhaps that may change, but I >suspect it is changing in all health fields. We are just the low man on the >totem >pole, partially due to our insistance on the avoidance of western medical >education we need to be more independent. >DAve > >In a message dated 12/24/04 7:19:36 PM, >writes: > > > > > > > > So what has the acupuncture profession gained by licensing, especially > > with regard to herbs? According to Bob Flaws at CHA last year, any > > new licensing laws that include herbs are doomed to fail. Only 16 > > states include herbs in their scope and there is no indication this > > will change. This creates an interesting dilemma. In those other 34 > > states, it is illegal for an acupuncturist to practice herbology. > > However, in those same 34 states, it is legal to practice herbology > > with no license at all. If that seems outrageous to you, you do not > > understand the actual reasoning behind licensing laws in the first > > place. Search our archive for much more on this topic. > > > > If it is already legal to practice herbology in these states w/o a > > license and it is also unlikely that it will ever be legal for > > acupuncturists to precribe herbs in these states, it is certainly a > > losing tactic for those who are primarily chinese herbalists to favor > > any barriers to entry like licensing laws or god forbid, a doctorate > > from an accredited school. If you want to practice herbology legally > > in much of the country, you will have to give up your acupuncture > > license or vice versa. It is interesting that so many hold onto their > > licenses and still break the law every time they prescribe herbs, yet > > the same few would never consider doing the opposite. See the irony. > > > > It seems the best tactic for those who really want to serve the public > > good through continued access to trained herbologists is to support > > Roger Wicke's international chinese herbology certification > > initiative. Support of initiatives to consolidate the licensed > > acupuncture profession will only result in further loss of privileges. > > It could be argued that if we had not drawn so much of a spotlight on > > ourselves in this insane quest to be physicians, we would not now be > > in the position where we could actually lose some aspects of our > > herbal prescribing scope. If that happens, some will have to consider > > whether they are better off with no license at all. The sunset review > > board has also made it clear that they recognize the right to practice > > herbology without a license in CA (a highly regulated big d Dem > > state). And they question why it should be in our scope at all. > > > > > > That latter question is a serious matter. In one scenario, it would > > essentially result in the severing of the profession as some have > > advocated. This would lead to licensed acupuncturists with fairly > > limited scopes of practice AND unlicensed chinese herbalists with a > > fairly wide scope (with the glaring exception of acupuncture). In > > fact, this is already the case in those 34 states with limited or no > > acupuncture scopes in which common law herbology is also legal. So > > for those who believe there is no way to separate the profession into > > its natural professions of herbology and acupuncture, I would say its > > already a fait accompli in most of the country. > > > > There is nothing stopping students from going to an accredited school, > > getting a diploma and sitting for the NCCAOM herbology boards and then > > finally practicing WITHOUT a license. If you only do herbs, why would > > your patient care if you have a license to do acupuncture unless those > > like you are the victim of a smear campaign by your state board (which > > is probably a RICO violation - ask the AMA about this in regard to > > chiros last century). While only those who graduate from accredited > > acupuncture schools can sit for the NCCAOM herb exam (which is another > > outrage), this at least does provide one legitimizing route for those > > who want to be herbalists in most of the US. Even without a license > > to do soemthing one does not do, the other sheepskins would carry some > > serious weight. You could still display your master's degree and > > NCCAOM certificate even without a license. And depending on where you > > went to school, you could heavily focus on herbs with little > > distraction from acupuncture studies. > > > > It occurs to me that the chinese community of herbalists here in CA as > > well as nationwide might be interested in learning more about this > > option. We don't have many chinese on CHA, the only place in the > > world where this topic is discussed so openly and at such length. And > > the chinese here in CA have been spearheading the drive to become > > doctors with dramatic expansions of scope. However many of these > > chinese do not practice acupuncture much or at all. They are also > > probably unaware that they are already protected by state law and > > common law to practice herbology. Now if you want title, status and > > right to milk the insurance companies, you'll need a license. But > > insurance will never cover herbs and despite the misleading story in > > Janurary's AT, coverage for acupuncture is currently worse than > > nothing with low fees and restrictions. Always remember that AT is > > owned by the insurance industry when reading its pages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.