Fwd: CSOMA: Yee Bills Pass California Senate

[Guest guest]

 

 

 

> August 25, 2005:

>

> Today, the California State Senate voted to approve Assembly

> Speaker Pro Tempore Leeland Yee's acupuncture-related bills. These

> bill include:

>

> AB 1113, a bill that would authorize Licensed Acupuncturists to

> " diagnose within their scope of practice; "

> AIMS has been supportive of all four bills, but we continue to have

> significant concerns about the vague language contained in AB 1113.

> AIMS is concerned that this bill may expose the profession to an

> unfavorable reinterpretion of its scope of practice.

 

 

since this bill was written in response to the little hoover

commission report and the join legislative committee recommendations

and since both those reports said western medical diagnosis is

definitely outside our scope of practice, I think the implication

here is clear, however AIMS spins it (will they ever get anything

right?).

 

this bill was to put the LHC recommendations into law and protect the

continued existence of an independent acu profession. The intent of

the legislature in this act was to prohibit all use of western

diagnosis. this means that all professional activities that require

making a western diagnosis are illegal. You can still do physical

exam and take blood pressure, ask questions to identify western

diseases. Anyone can do these things. but the purpose is narrow.

Like a blood pressure machine in a store. It is to be able to make a

referral to a physician, if necessary. I think this law effectively

bans the ordering of lab tests that require medical dx, though it

could be years, if ever, before the labs stop taking the cash. There

will likely need to be consumer complaints before action is taken.

We'll see. Any other reading of this law may be logical, but just

like the rulings of the acu board that were sanctioned by LHC, the

true meaning of a law is the legislative intent, which is very clear

here. No judge in his right mind would consider the wording of this

law as a reaction to LHC could possibly mean anything other than what

I have written. However, I predict huge amount of money and time

will be spent fighting a losing battle on this matter. Get a clue,

everyone. No way, no how, is the CA legislature ever going to allow

us to legally make western medical diagnoses. There is nothing we

can say or do to change their minds and they are on unassailable

legal ground on this point. The state is under no obligation to give

anyone medical practice rights unless one can demonstrate a

scientifically proven need. good luck. once again, I strong advise

our politicos to fight battles they can win instead of wasting your

hard earned cash on endless folly.

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

 

I must have missed your legal education somewhere along the way. I

apologize as I thought that taking BP was a medical procedure and not

allowed under legal interpretation of a recent bill. Additionally, the idea

of ordering a simple lab test was also to refer to a qualified medical

authority if something should turn up in the test. A positive on a lab test

is not a diagnosis but a marker to encourage further investigation and a

referral.

 

I do not think most of us will order a lab test let alone try to determine a

WM diagnosis anyway. It seemed to me that the original argument was over

the ability to order such not that we wanted to make a full WM diagnosis but

for ability to refer.

 

How is a CBC any different from taking a BP or a ortho-neuro test? There is

no difference as none of these tell you why someone tested positive but that

they did.

 

Please keep you sarcasm about professional politics to yourself, at least

some organizations are doing something. What have you done lately?

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

 

> <

>

>cha

> Fwd: CSOMA: Yee Bills Pass California Senate

>Sat, 27 Aug 2005 10:15:40 -0700

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > August 25, 2005:

> >

> > Today, the California State Senate voted to approve Assembly

> > Speaker Pro Tempore Leeland Yee's acupuncture-related bills. These

> > bill include:

> >

> > AB 1113, a bill that would authorize Licensed Acupuncturists to

> > " diagnose within their scope of practice; "

> > AIMS has been supportive of all four bills, but we continue to have

> > significant concerns about the vague language contained in AB 1113.

> > AIMS is concerned that this bill may expose the profession to an

> > unfavorable reinterpretion of its scope of practice.

>

>

>since this bill was written in response to the little hoover

>commission report and the join legislative committee recommendations

>and since both those reports said western medical diagnosis is

>definitely outside our scope of practice, I think the implication

>here is clear, however AIMS spins it (will they ever get anything

>right?).

>

>this bill was to put the LHC recommendations into law and protect the

>continued existence of an independent acu profession. The intent of

>the legislature in this act was to prohibit all use of western

>diagnosis. this means that all professional activities that require

>making a western diagnosis are illegal. You can still do physical

>exam and take blood pressure, ask questions to identify western

>diseases. Anyone can do these things. but the purpose is narrow.

>Like a blood pressure machine in a store. It is to be able to make a

>referral to a physician, if necessary. I think this law effectively

>bans the ordering of lab tests that require medical dx, though it

>could be years, if ever, before the labs stop taking the cash. There

>will likely need to be consumer complaints before action is taken.

>We'll see. Any other reading of this law may be logical, but just

>like the rulings of the acu board that were sanctioned by LHC, the

>true meaning of a law is the legislative intent, which is very clear

>here. No judge in his right mind would consider the wording of this

>law as a reaction to LHC could possibly mean anything other than what

>I have written. However, I predict huge amount of money and time

>will be spent fighting a losing battle on this matter. Get a clue,

>everyone. No way, no how, is the CA legislature ever going to allow

>us to legally make western medical diagnoses. There is nothing we

>can say or do to change their minds and they are on unassailable

>legal ground on this point. The state is under no obligation to give

>anyone medical practice rights unless one can demonstrate a

>scientifically proven need. good luck. once again, I strong advise

>our politicos to fight battles they can win instead of wasting your

>hard earned cash on endless folly.

>

>

>

>Chinese Herbs

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

How is a CBC any different from taking a BP or a ortho-neuro test? There is

no difference as none of these tell you why someone tested positive but that

they did.

>>>>>

Mike

and beyond that, how does one practice safely without the ability to do testing.

The fact that currently me mostly see patients as their last resort, and

therefore most of the time fully diagnosed, should never give us comfort or

justify poor and limited education.Interestingly Dr. Dean Edel reads the law as

giving us diagnosis right and he is ranting against this all over the

airways.LHC has basically commented on the current state of education, it is up

to the profession to determine were we should go in the future. Mike i hope more

people in our profession will think like you and me.

 

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

Thanks for the compliment but as I see it we have a long way to go to get

back what we have lost in CA. I hope to start seeing improvement before I

return in the future.

 

The profession seems to be caught in a kind of time warp where those of the

past seem to be OK with less but continue to lobby for more educational

reqs. There would be no good reason to have all the WM hours and the school

limitations for out of staters if not to use this knowledge to understand a

patient's condition and refer out as necessary.

 

It seems like we are seeing a backlash and a push backward in time to

pre-licensing era (more neo-con agenda). This will also cause a loss of

connection to our colleagues in Asia as they will be much more qualified

than us and more interested in a more serious healthcare profession and look

to join the medical establishment. Think about it people before you simply

right all this off.

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

 

> " " <alonmarcus

>

>

>Re: Fwd: CSOMA: Yee Bills Pass California Senate

>Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:50:35 -0700

>

>How is a CBC any different from taking a BP or a ortho-neuro test? There

>is

>no difference as none of these tell you why someone tested positive but

>that

>they did.

> >>>>>

>Mike

>and beyond that, how does one practice safely without the ability to do

>testing. The fact that currently me mostly see patients as their last

>resort, and therefore most of the time fully diagnosed, should never give

>us comfort or justify poor and limited education.Interestingly Dr. Dean

>Edel reads the law as giving us diagnosis right and he is ranting against

>this all over the airways.LHC has basically commented on the current state

>of education, it is up to the profession to determine were we should go in

>the future. Mike i hope more people in our profession will think like you

>and me.

>

>

>

>

>

>Oakland, CA 94609

>

>

>