Guest guest Posted March 18, 2005 Report Share Posted March 18, 2005 for those who may be confused on my various stances on licensing and training, here's the nutshell version 1. current entry level standards for acupuncture practice alone are probably already too high to just insure public safety. No one who got trained in only 1350 hours in 1975 has had any more mishaps than those with 3400 in 2005. And the almost ubiquitous use of low dose prepared medicines amongst those poorly trained in herbology prevents any mishap in that area, as well. I would support reduced entry level requirements for a license that solely allowed the practice of acupuncture and perhaps a limited prepared med pharmacopiae. 2. OTOH, such training is far from sufficient to prepare a student to safely treat complex internal med cases with full strength decoctions or even be prepared for many common cases. I thus support optional licensing of herbalists as one means to insure public safety. But if the state is going to stand behind someone's basic competency, they should have to prove it. And residency makes sense as a win-win way to accomplish this. 3. I also support the Healthcare freedom movement which represents the legal unlicensed practice of chinese herbology in every state, whether under common law or statute (as in CA). While it may seem disingenuous to on one hand support higher entry requirements for our profession while still supporting the existence of a parallel profession that has no entry level requirements. The reason is that CA's healthcare freedom act requires disclosure of one's training or lack thereof in a very explicit way. Thus no one is duped into thinking the government has approved the services they are receiving. Each party has freely entered into a contract. Licensing is paternalistic and as a result, those who will only utilize such services allow the government's judgment to substitute for their own. If that is the case, then the bar must be set high. But for those who are willing to do their homework and enter freely into contracts, there should be no bar at all. Licensing advocates don't like this solution, but the reason is clear. It does not allow for the creation of an elite professional class that controls the field and thus can manipulate huge profits from it. However from the perspective of social good, it seems this one time we could have our cake and eat it too. Those who demand government oversight get it and those who don't are free to live or die as they please. But if those who choose to risk life on their own experience a mishap as a result, it's too late to come crying to uncle sam and they should be held responsible for their choices. Chinese Herbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 I can see your logic about reducing education. On some level it makes sense. I guess we need to revisit the discussion on whether we are medical providers or not. How we see and advertise ourselves can make us vulnerable to litigation for practicing medicine without a license. I wish that our society was not so hung up on somantics. We all know that we provide care for people with medical conditions and that these people are seeking help with these. Some practitioners practice a wellness paradigm, I think most treat people with signs and symptoms of illness. I could be wrong. I find issue with licensing herbal practitioners yet the public can self-prescribe. I do not think this will ever fly unless our herbal medicines become FDA recognized drugs such as ephedra/pinellia and therefore prescribed by MD only. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > < > >cha > various stances >Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:39:14 -0800 > >for those who may be confused on my various stances on licensing and >training, here's the nutshell version > >1. current entry level standards for acupuncture practice alone are >probably already too high to just insure public safety. No one who got >trained in only 1350 hours in 1975 has had any more mishaps than those >with 3400 in 2005. And the almost ubiquitous use of low dose prepared >medicines amongst those poorly trained in herbology prevents any mishap >in that area, as well. I would support reduced entry level >requirements for a license that solely allowed the practice of >acupuncture and perhaps a limited prepared med pharmacopiae. > >2. OTOH, such training is far from sufficient to prepare a student to >safely treat complex internal med cases with full strength decoctions >or even be prepared for many common cases. I thus support optional >licensing of herbalists as one means to insure public safety. But if >the state is going to stand behind someone's basic competency, they >should have to prove it. And residency makes sense as a win-win way to >accomplish this. > >3. I also support the Healthcare freedom movement which represents the >legal unlicensed practice of chinese herbology in every state, whether >under common law or statute (as in CA). While it may seem disingenuous >to on one hand support higher entry requirements for our profession >while still supporting the existence of a parallel profession that has >no entry level requirements. The reason is that CA's healthcare >freedom act requires disclosure of one's training or lack thereof in a >very explicit way. Thus no one is duped into thinking the government >has approved the services they are receiving. Each party has freely >entered into a contract. Licensing is paternalistic and as a result, >those who will only utilize such services allow the government's >judgment to substitute for their own. If that is the case, then the >bar must be set high. But for those who are willing to do their >homework and enter freely into contracts, there should be no bar at >all. > >Licensing advocates don't like this solution, but the reason is clear. >It does not allow for the creation of an elite professional class that >controls the field and thus can manipulate huge profits from it. >However from the perspective of social good, it seems this one time we >could have our cake and eat it too. Those who demand government >oversight get it and those who don't are free to live or die as they >please. But if those who choose to risk life on their own experience a >mishap as a result, it's too late to come crying to uncle sam and they >should be held responsible for their choices. > > > >Chinese Herbs > > > > > > > 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.