Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Jason, You mention some very good points but neglect others as well as the interconnectness of them to our ability to have a practice and make a living. First, primarycare does not mean being a medical doctor, it means (definition varies between states) that one has the ability to see the patient without a doctor's referral. It can mean additional things as well. This should be a goal as we do not want to slip backwards and go back to a time when you needed to have a note to see you L Ac. Some states still have this outlandish requirement. Practitioners are few in these states and your economics is tied to someone else. Would you like that? I would not. As far as a profession we need to support ALL options for patients to receive care and us to make a living. This includes WC as well as insurance, medicare and federal employees coverage. If we want to have greater acceptance and economic ops we need to do this. I do not take insurance except for auto injuries but I stand behind this right for others. This is not a waste of time or resources but a beginning to a much larger future that includes us in a more accepted role. Our ability to have access to herbal sources is severely being undermined and may take litigation against the FDA as well as a large grassroots campaign with public support. I have often found it bizarre that so many of us simply think the FDA is doing its job with the support of sound science to protect the public by limiting our herbs. This would be a gross simplification and understatement of reality. It sounds good but is not true. With all that we have done to become legit and yet have fallen short of acceptance, we should be raising our collective eyebrows. There is a large group of power that does not want us or our methods to continue to grow. A great case in point here is a recent article in a DC magazine that reported huge friction from the FSU medical school about creating a DC program on campus. One would think that chiros are accepted and popular and this program should be welcomed with open arms. Think again. While on the surface these groups of medical practitioners might say one thing, they do the opposite. After all, who wants to support others who lessen your economic livelihood. Professors are willing to quit over this, go figure. CAM therapies have a long way to go on acceptance. As for the schools, if practitioners can not make a living and things become too difficult their collective rear is also exposed. We need to become a profession with integrity and more self-love with creating opportunities for our current and future grads. Otherwise, we can look forward to seeing the same decline as the chiros (34% declining enrollment over last 6 years, nationally). DC ops are fewer, school tuition is more, and economic failure is at 50%. Schools need to wake up to the reality that as ops go so goes their future. We have seen a huge closing of TCM programs (19) in the last few years. Some of these were well known and considered decent programs. So, where does this leave us. It is quite simple we need to be creative with our endeavors and make more ops. We can learn from the DC as this helped bring them more professional presence. Here is what I think we need to do: 1) Get more school involvement. Maybe ask them to become professional lobbies. 2) Make students members of the state and national associations. Take out memberships as a part of the student fees. They do this at DC college, so why can't we? 3) Get after our state and national associations, and legislators about FDA regulations as well as fighting for more acupuncture coverage. 4) Work toward getting more funding for NIH studies to be performed by L Ac. 5) Encourage a more progressive practically-based medical curriculum that better covers western sciences, anthro, econ, business, etc. I wish to digress here in that our programs seem to be missing the boat by not providing this info that can better help their grads to succeed in practice. How many of you know what a business plan is or how to file a medical claim form? While insurance coverage and herbs are very important so are these points and many others. We need to have a multi-modal approach to these problems. We also need to be patient and agree to work for the betterment of the profession and not just our own individual wants. We all want to have success. We can all achieve this, but only by working together and making changes. Later Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > " " > > > Gua lou shi HELD? FDA >Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:06:35 -0700 > >Personally I have little interest in politics and most of the previous >discussions surrounding the LHC et al. But in my simplified mind I see >really only two issues and all that rants about what 'we should have done' >etc are moot. > > > >1) Insurance coverage > >2) The ability to import (and prescribe herbs) - But mainly IMPORT > > > >As far as insurance coverage goes, I could also care less. Sure it would >be >nice, but there will always be people that pay, out of pocket, for GOOD >medical services. The key is GOOD. Most insurance clinics I have seen >(or >heard of), give mediocre, at best, service. If one's ability to heal is >good, people will hear and come. Job security rests in one's personal >efficacy, period. This is much more comforting than relying on politics. >I >see no end in our ability to practice acupuncture. > > > >On the other hand, herbs may be another issue. I just heard that the FDA >is >holding all gua lou shi powders (maybe all trichs). With the Vioxx et al >news, our herbs will be a prime target. Providing safety assurance is >almost impossible. I feel all energy, albeit school standards, research, >political agendas, et al, should be geared towards assuring the entrance of >Chinese herbs into our country and of course our ability to use them. It >seems according to Roger's writings, using herbs medicinally is not really >a >threat. According to Roger there is no issue unless trying to 'prescribe' >herbs under certain state's acupuncture licensing. That is fine. > > > >Hence, unless I am missing something, the schools are not going to save us. >They are in it for the money. Research is not going to prove safety >issues. >Therefore, what should we do to guarantee importing and our rights to use >these herbs. I am unsure what happened with the ban xia deal, but it seems >that practitioners are still allowed to use this in bulk. Are we in danger >of losing this right? If herbs are classified as medicinals it seems we >are >screwed. > >Granted, I have not read all of Todd's BLOGs on his political rants et al, >and if one of them or previous msg.'s addresses such concerns please point >me in that direction. > > > >Finally how the public views us, or even medical doctors, should only seem >relevant if it affects our right to practice. I think all this talk about >us being equal to MD's or we deserve this or that, is ludicrous, and should >be dropped. It is EGO. Primary care should not be the goal. We are not >qualified. I think it would be worthwhile to assess how much public opinion >influences these FDA decisions. Then what influences public opinion? >Media? >What other factors should be addressed? Although I do think schools should >run a tighter ship, do we really think that this is an issue that actually >influences public opinion, FDA's decisions, or the public's perception of >herb safety? I am unsure. IT seems, as sad as it sounds, we have enough >of >a paper tiger all ready built up. comments??? > > > > > >-Jason > > > > > > > > > > > >tel: > > <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> Add >me >to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a signature >like this? > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 > > mike Bowser [naturaldoc1] > Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:37 AM > > RE: Gua lou shi HELD? FDA > > > Jason, > You mention some very good points but neglect others as well as the > interconnectness of them to our ability to have a practice and make a > living. First, primarycare does not mean being a medical doctor, it means > (definition varies between states) that one has the ability to see the > patient without a doctor's referral. It can mean additional things as > well. > This should be a goal as we do not want to slip backwards and go back to > a > time when you needed to have a note to see you L Ac. Some states still > have > this outlandish requirement. Practitioners are few in these states and > your > economics is tied to someone else. Would you like that? I would not. [Jason] Yes, I agree... But I did not equate primary care with not needing a doctor's referral... > > As far as a profession we need to support ALL options for patients to > receive care and us to make a living. This includes WC as well as > insurance, medicare and federal employees coverage. If we want to have > greater acceptance and economic ops we need to do this. I do not take > insurance except for auto injuries but I stand behind this right for > others. > This is not a waste of time or resources but a beginning to a much > larger > future that includes us in a more accepted role. [Jason] I also agree, but I personally could care less. The main thing for me is that if we can't get herbs in the country then none of that matters... > > Our ability to have access to herbal sources is severely being undermined > and may take litigation against the FDA as well as a large grassroots > campaign with public support. I have often found it bizarre that so many > of > us simply think the FDA is doing its job with the support of sound science > to protect the public by limiting our herbs. [Jason] Ok... here are some thoughts... [bTW - I just heard that jinyinhua is being held...] Are Chinese herbs any different than Western Herbs? Why are the western herbs not being scrutinized the same way? It seems that if we actually pulled the Western Herbs / World into this battle then we would have much more fire power. The supplement companies would have to get involved and 'our' lobbying power would increase ten fold. (if not more.) Also consider, i.e., that fact that Texas just legalized medical marijuana. This 'herb' has obvious long-term dangers, and even an herb like black cohosh that has been shown to cause cancer in Mice. If Safety is purely the issue, then why single out Chinese Herbs? Obviously, with the marijuana, the risks and benefits are assessed and it was made legal... Why are Chinese different? Furthermore, why not just come from the stance that all Chinese Herbs are potentially dangerous, and then... so what... Many of the herb's properties work because they are slightly toxic or irritants to the body... Is it a surprise that long-term excessive use of many of these would cause illness? Are we trying to claim that what we prescribe has zero potential for long-term harm? Comments? Todd? Roger? Others? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 Jason, I agree with your analysis below. There are a lot of organizations that see the biggest threat to herb users as being the interruption of international trade in herbs. The BIG octopus in all of this is Codex Alimentarius, of which the FDA and various European drug agencies are merely acting as the tentacles. One of the first people to call attention to this problem, many years ago, is John Hammell - he is a very strong-minded individual, and many people in the early days called him a conspiracy theorist and a paranoid. But he has turned out to be largely correct. It might be appropriate to review some of his writings: http://www.iahf.com/ International Advocates for Health Freedom Currently, there is a group (I forget the name of the organization) in Europe that is legally challenging EU provisions that would remove vitamins and supplements from stores by the end of 2005. Does anyone know the name of this org? - Whoever they are, they deserve support right now - both financially and publicity-wise. John can be a crusty individual to deal with, but I respect his tenaciousness. He has been like a bulldog, latching on without letting go. Sometimes his righteous anger offends people, but sometimes we need warrior types to get us out of a difficult situation. The New Age bliss bunnies tend to shrink away when the going gets tough. Also, see my own review of the strategies that Codex is using to disrupt international trade in herbs: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-2.html#t-ito Another strategy being used by the Codex agents is to deceive various professional groups, like the TCM herbalists, that if they lobby for special exemptions, that they will be left alone. (That was the purpose of the highly legalistic and confusing language regarding the classification of Chinese herbs as medicines, foods, food supplements, and/or traditional medicinals ???, etc.) The classic divide-and-conquer strategy. We will most likely ***NOT*** be spared, unless this issue is attacked head-on, worldwide. Codex is the ultimate international tactic in long list of more limited tactics used by the pharmaceutical industry to consolidate power: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/review/2003-2.html Orwellian schemes for maximizing health-care industry profits - How these endanger the practice of herbal medicine The good news is that many organizations worldwide have coordinated their efforts to defeat Codex. The National Health Freedom Coalition people have coordinated their efforts with Hammell, and are at the forefront of the effort in this country: http://www.nationalhealthfreedom.org/ ---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 > Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:06:35 -0700 > " " >Gua lou shi HELD? FDA > >Personally I have little interest in politics and most of the previous >discussions surrounding the LHC et al. But in my simplified mind I see >really only two issues and all that rants about what 'we should have done' >etc are moot. > > > >1) Insurance coverage > >2) The ability to import (and prescribe herbs) - But mainly IMPORT > > > >As far as insurance coverage goes, I could also care less. Sure it would be >nice, but there will always be people that pay, out of pocket, for GOOD >medical services. The key is GOOD. Most insurance clinics I have seen (or >heard of), give mediocre, at best, service. If one's ability to heal is >good, people will hear and come. Job security rests in one's personal >efficacy, period. This is much more comforting than relying on politics. I >see no end in our ability to practice acupuncture. > > > >On the other hand, herbs may be another issue. I just heard that the FDA is >holding all gua lou shi powders (maybe all trichs). With the Vioxx et al >news, our herbs will be a prime target. Providing safety assurance is >almost impossible. I feel all energy, albeit school standards, research, >political agendas, et al, should be geared towards assuring the entrance of >Chinese herbs into our country and of course our ability to use them. It >seems according to Roger's writings, using herbs medicinally is not really a >threat. According to Roger there is no issue unless trying to 'prescribe' >herbs under certain state's acupuncture licensing. That is fine. > > > >Hence, unless I am missing something, the schools are not going to save us. >They are in it for the money. Research is not going to prove safety issues. >Therefore, what should we do to guarantee importing and our rights to use >these herbs. I am unsure what happened with the ban xia deal, but it seems >that practitioners are still allowed to use this in bulk. Are we in danger >of losing this right? If herbs are classified as medicinals it seems we are >screwed. > >Granted, I have not read all of Todd's BLOGs on his political rants et al, >and if one of them or previous msg.'s addresses such concerns please point >me in that direction. > > > >Finally how the public views us, or even medical doctors, should only seem >relevant if it affects our right to practice. I think all this talk about >us being equal to MD's or we deserve this or that, is ludicrous, and should >be dropped. It is EGO. Primary care should not be the goal. We are not >qualified. I think it would be worthwhile to assess how much public opinion >influences these FDA decisions. Then what influences public opinion? Media? >What other factors should be addressed? Although I do think schools should >run a tighter ship, do we really think that this is an issue that actually >influences public opinion, FDA's decisions, or the public's perception of >herb safety? I am unsure. IT seems, as sad as it sounds, we have enough of >a paper tiger all ready built up. comments??? > > >-Jason > > ---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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 Its politics and politics is nausea. I was heavy in Chicago politics for ten years. I went to 3 California Acupuncture schools - Five Branches, San Francisco and Oakland. I completed a separate 3 year tutorial program. I complained loudly about shortcomings. Ma Huang is not a drug it is a herb it is illegal. Rentamine, Rynatuss, Tuss Tan (ephedrine) are drugs and still freely available OTC We strengthen our profession by successfully treating Parkinson's (et al). By herbs and acupuncture. No western mumble jumble. No insurance forms. No government. No research grants Just by doing it. We all help this process by our thoughts and ideas. and by sharing Ed Kasper LAc. Licensed Acupuncturist & Herbalist Acupuncture is a jab well done 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.