Re: Physical Therapists and What They Want?

[Guest guest]

Vern: I think it is very bad in almost every respect. I am sure I don't need to go into what is wrong with the ideas. We need to come out strongly against this.

Ann Goldeen, Astoria

"Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

Vern,

Seems to me that they only have a masters level education and therefore should

not be able to use the term Doctor simply due to lack of the education. The

other issue around " first contact and eliminating the need for referral " the

concern here for me is again education. It's my understanding that is an area

lacking in their masters level education. I thought they merely treated after a

diagnosis was made by a Doctor.

??

Judith Allan

Lake Oswego

" Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

>

>Dear Colleagues;

>

>I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy

Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed

bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current

Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell

her?? Here is what they want;

>

>1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical

physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

naturopaths.

>

>2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a

" business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

" physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

>

>3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral

from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>

>4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low

amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

>

>So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these

requests??

>

>Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in

January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per

these requests?

>

>Thank you for your time and consideration,

>

>Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

>Lobbyist

>Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

Hi Ann,

It was a very loaded question I just wanted to see my colleagues reactions, suggestions, comments.

Vern

"Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

Tell them that when they can show 8 years and $100,000 in medical school costs as well as a cirruculum involving neuroanatomy, differential diagnosis and dissection, we might help them....assuming we get consensus amongst ourselves toward that support.

Sunny

Sunny Kierstyn, RN DC Fibromyalgia Care Center of Oregon 2677 Willakenzie Road, 7C

Eugene, Oregon, 97401

541- 344- 0509; Fx; 541- 344- 0955

From: "Vern Saboe" <vsaboe@...><Oregondcs >,"aca chiro list" <aca-members@...>Subject: "Physical Therapists and What They Want?"Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!

[Guest guest]

Defeat.

We need to be like Washington and claim the manipulation as Chiropractic only. It is absolute horse manure that we have been pooh-poohed for so many years and now the MD's and he PT's want to jump on board. The DO's of course have always manipulated.

The PT's should not be allowed to use the term Doctor in that they are not described as such under DHHS at a federal level such as DC's.

Physiotherapy is within our scope and the arrogance of this lobbyist and Assn to even suggest this is beyond "out of control".

You need to kick some serious booty.

Dr B

"Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.2/472 - Release Date: 10/11/2006

[Guest guest]

Vern,

Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the energy and

passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed out they

lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop the term PT

from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have extensive training in PT

and often we perform rehab work far more effectively that the Physical therapist

folks.

In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with everything you've

got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

Dr. Schneider

PDX

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>

Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

>Dear Colleagues;

>

>I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy

Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed

bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current

Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell

her?? Here is what they want;

>

>1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical

physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

naturopaths.

>

>2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a

" business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

" physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

>

>3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral

from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>

>4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low

amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

>

>So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these

requests??

>

>Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in

January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per

these requests?

>

>Thank you for your time and consideration,

>

>Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

>Lobbyist

>Chiropractic Association of Oregon

>

[Guest guest]

Just curious.....does anyone have an outline of the education a physical

therapist undertakes to get their degree?

Rod , DC

Tillamook

Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

> Vern,

> Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the energy and

passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed out

they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop

the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have

extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more

effectively that the Physical therapist folks.

>

> In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with everything

you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

>

> Dr. Schneider

> PDX

>

>

>

>

> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

> From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>

> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

>

> >Dear Colleagues;

> >

> >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical

Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple

a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in

changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I

think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

> >

> >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical

physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

naturopaths.

> >

> >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or

a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

" physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

> >

> >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a

referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

> >

> >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity

low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments

etc.).

> >

> >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these

requests??

> >

> >Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in

January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as

per these requests?

> >

> >Thank you for your time and consideration,

> >

> >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

> >Lobbyist

> >Chiropractic Association of Oregon

> >

>

>

> OregonDCs rules:

> 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to

foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve

members will be tolerated.

> 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

> 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.

However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his

or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

>

[Guest guest]

I agree with Rod that this would be a great place to start. I was thinking

of something along the lines of the " Physician Comparison " by Glen Gumaer,

BS, DC published in the early 90's. This documents the hours of training

between DC's, MD's and DO's. Very informative. Made me feel real smart.

Lindekugel, DC

Concordia Chiropractic Center

5425 NE 33rd Ave

Portland OR 97211

503-287-2273

>From: " Rod " <rjacksondc@...>

>< >

>Subject: Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:21:53 -0700

>

>Just curious.....does anyone have an outline of the education a physical

>therapist undertakes to get their degree?

>

>Rod , DC

>Tillamook

> Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

>

>

> > Vern,

> > Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the energy

>and

>passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed out

>they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop

>the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have

>extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more

>effectively that the Physical therapist folks.

> >

> > In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with everything

>you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

> >

> > Dr. Schneider

> > PDX

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

> > From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>

> > Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

> >

> > >Dear Colleagues;

> > >

> > >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical

>Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law,

>simple

>a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in

>changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I

>think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

> > >

> > >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical

>physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

>naturopaths.

> > >

> > >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors)

>or

>a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

> " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

> > >

> > >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a

>referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

> > >

> > >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity

>low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments

>etc.).

> > >

> > >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to

>these

>requests??

> > >

> > >Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start

>in

>January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as

>per these requests?

> > >

> > >Thank you for your time and consideration,

> > >

> > >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

> > >Lobbyist

> > >Chiropractic Association of Oregon

> > >

> >

> >

> > OregonDCs rules:

> > 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to

>foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve

>members will be tolerated.

> > 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

> > 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.

>However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

>or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without

>his

>or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

> >

[Guest guest]

There seems to be some misunderstanding here. Physical Therapists aren't asking for a grandfathering of their title into that of a " Doctor " . What was once a bachelor's degree (BS or BPT) transitioned into a masters degree (MS or MPT) and now the entry level physical therapy degree is a Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) degree. They aren't asking for PT's with a masters degree to be called Doctor (that would be false) but they are seeking approval for their new " Doctors " of Physical Therapy to be able to use the title of " Doctor " in clinical practice as we do. Obviously they are shooting for the moon with these dreams and hoping to accomplish anything between what they have stated and where they are now. (Basically what I mean is that this new doctoral program is 8 years [4 graduate and 4 undergrad] and will include those classes that Sunny has mentioned.)

They want primary care status and the scope of all other professions without the training of other professions. This means they would now be diagnosing conditions (which to date they cannot do) and would not need referrals. Additionally, they want their own scope protected from all other providers. Without question their next request will be to prescribe pharmaceuticals. They are out to take over the world.

And they might just get it if the DC's and other professionals don't stand up and block this. Hands down, if they were successful, this would nearly eliminate the chiropractic profession. Our profession has for a few years now been very lazy about our positioning in the health care arena. We have sat back and allowed people to step all over us. Sure we have complained to eachother, but that is of little good. If we don't fight this and demand our advancement we may disappear altogether.

W. , D.C., M.D. Cascades East Family Practice

Oregon Health & Sciences University

On 10/13/06, Judith E. Allan, DC <jallan2@...> wrote:

Vern,Seems to me that they only have a masters level education and therefore should not be able to use the term Doctor simply due to lack of the education. The other issue around " first contact and eliminating the need for referral " the concern here for me is again education. It's my understanding that is an area lacking in their masters level education. I thought they merely treated after a diagnosis was made by a Doctor. ??Judith AllanLake Oswego " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

>>Dear Colleagues;>>I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

>>1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.>>2. Disallowance of other health care providers (

e.g.., chiropractors) or a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. " >>3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>>4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).>>So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

>>Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?>>Thank you for your time and consideration,

>>Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO>Lobbyist>Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

Of course this was a lobbyist jockeying for position with an intentional offensive position in order to garner our support . It was in your face - we will take physiotherapy away from you - if you don't help us with what we want.

If any one looked at the ND formulary that I posted the other day you would choke at what they can prescribe. How did that happen ? And they do all forms of manipulative therapy under their license - and it wouldn't surprise me to find out that DC's are on the school staff teaching them and perhaps PT's also how to do it.

And yes there is a PT doctorate program already in existence and there are many Dr. PT's out in the field now. When I asked my own PT about seeking PCP status and inability to diagnose he said they were trained to look for things like metastatic prostate cancer and refer appropriately.

sharron fuchs dc

From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Vern SaboeSent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:43 PMOregondcs ; aca chiro listSubject: "Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

Dr. Glen included a comparison against the

PT education from Pacific

University on his

study. It includes the curriculum of Chiro v. PT with a total class hours

of 3732 for DC and 1356 for PT. Glen if you still have that portion of

your study available, providing it would be great. I have it on hard copy

but not on-line.

Dan , DC

From:

[mailto: ] On Behalf Of Lindekugel

Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006

12:54 PM

rjacksondc@...;

Subject: Re:

" Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

I agree with Rod that this would be a great place to

start. I was thinking

of something along the lines of the " Physician Comparison " by Glen

Gumaer,

BS, DC published in the early 90's. This documents the hours of training

between DC's, MD's and DO's. Very informative. Made me feel real smart.

Lindekugel, DC

Concordia Chiropractic Center

5425 NE 33rd Ave

Portland OR

97211

503-287-2273

>From: " Rod " <rjacksondcearthlink (DOT) net>

>< >

>Subject: Re: " Physical Therapists and What They

Want? "

>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:21:53 -0700

>

>Just curious.....does anyone have an outline of the education a

physical

>therapist undertakes to get their degree?

>

>Rod , DC

>Tillamook

> Re: " Physical Therapists and What They

Want? "

>

>

> > Vern,

> > Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the

energy

>and

>passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed

out

>they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop

>the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have

>extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more

>effectively that the Physical therapist folks.

> >

> > In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with

everything

>you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

> >

> > Dr. Schneider

> > PDX

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

> > From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboecomcast (DOT) net>

> > Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

> >

> > >Dear Colleagues;

> > >

> > >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon

Physical

>Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law,

>simple

>a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in

>changing current Oregon

law: She is knew and wants to know what I

>think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

> > >

> > >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a

podiatrist, medical

>physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

>naturopaths.

> > >

> > >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g..,

chiropractors)

>or

>a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that

they provide

> " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

> > >

> > >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for

a

>referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

> > >

> > >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including

high velocity

>low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type

adjustments

>etc.).

> > >

> > >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral

to

>these

>requests??

> > >

> > >Oregon's

2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start

>in

>January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as

>per these requests?

> > >

> > >Thank you for your time and consideration,

> > >

> > >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

> > >Lobbyist

> > >Chiropractic Association of Oregon

> > >

> >

> >

> > OregonDCs rules:

> > 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is

to

>foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve

>members will be tolerated.

> > 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

> > 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.

>However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

>or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without

>his

>or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

> >

[Guest guest]

Yes, two young WSCC students one from Albany (me-home) and another who has

her Masters in PT/MPT going for her for her DC have done a wonderful job at

my request.

We are well prepare for next session.

VErn

Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

>

>

>> Vern,

>> Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the energy

>> and

> passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed

> out

> they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop

> the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have

> extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more

> effectively that the Physical therapist folks.

>>

>> In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with everything

> you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

>>

>> Dr. Schneider

>> PDX

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

>> From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>

>> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

>>

>> >Dear Colleagues;

>> >

>> >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical

> Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law,

> simple

> a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in

> changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I

> think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

>> >

>> >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical

> physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

> naturopaths.

>> >

>> >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors)

>> >or

> a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

> " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

>> >

>> >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a

> referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>> >

>> >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity

> low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments

> etc.).

>> >

>> >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to

>> >these

> requests??

>> >

>> >Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start

>> >in

> January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as

> per these requests?

>> >

>> >Thank you for your time and consideration,

>> >

>> >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

>> >Lobbyist

>> >Chiropractic Association of Oregon

>> >

>>

>>

>> OregonDCs rules:

>> 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to

> foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve

> members will be tolerated.

>> 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

>> 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.

> However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

> or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without

> his

> or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

>>

[Guest guest]

Got it, I have the original 1990 OCPA document Glen put together and these

two bright young WSCC students have just done the same comparing the core

curriculums of WSCC and the Masters and Doctor PT degree curriculums which

as you might have guessed are woefully inadequent in DDX.

Vern Saboe

Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

>>

>>

>> > Vern,

>> > Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the energy

>>and

>>passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed

>>out

>>they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop

>>the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have

>>extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more

>>effectively that the Physical therapist folks.

>> >

>> > In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with everything

>>you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

>> >

>> > Dr. Schneider

>> > PDX

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

>> > From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>

>> > Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

>> >

>> > >Dear Colleagues;

>> > >

>> > >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon

>> > >Physical

>>Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law,

>>simple

>>a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in

>>changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I

>>think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

>> > >

>> > >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical

>>physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or

>>naturopaths.

>> > >

>> > >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors)

>>or

>>a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

>> " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

>> > >

>> > >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a

>>referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>> > >

>> > >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high

>> > >velocity

>>low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments

>>etc.).

>> > >

>> > >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to

>>these

>>requests??

>> > >

>> > >Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start

>>in

>>January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as

>>per these requests?

>> > >

>> > >Thank you for your time and consideration,

>> > >

>> > >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

>> > >Lobbyist

>> > >Chiropractic Association of Oregon

>> > >

>> >

>> >

>> > OregonDCs rules:

>> > 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to

>>foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve

>>members will be tolerated.

>> > 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

>> > 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.

>>However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

>>or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without

>>his

>>or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

>> >

[Guest guest]

Be careful about this. I don't think comparing the course titles is an adequate way to compare the DC/PT curriculum. While for one reason or another chiropractic schools give their classes a title such as " Differential Diagnosis I " and " DiffDx II " they certainly don't do it that way in medical schools. In fact, differential diagnosis is a skill practiced by integrating basic science and clinical science (experience) topics. In chiropractic school we have to teach it as a didactic course because our clinical sciences don't provide a broad range of problems (ie we may never seen a pneumonia, urinary tract infection, or blood dyscrasia so we have to read about it). At least in medical school differential diagnostic skills are gained and DRILLED into you as you do your MS3 and MS4 years in the hospital. So it would be easy to look at a curriculum of a chiro school and say " wow, LACC students get WAY more differential diagnosis training that UCLA medical students " since they don't have a class called differential diagnosis as part of their curriculum. Physical therapy schools follow the medical model and may teach this throughout the curriculum of the DPT degree.

I don't know this for a fact but before we use direct comparison and look silly it would be a good idea to do some investigation in this matter.

In the study comparing DC education to MD education, the authors spent time reading ALL the course descriptions to really compare what was being leaned and taught in each class and clinical clerkship instead of just comparing course titles.

W. , D.C., M.D.

On 10/13/06, Vern Saboe <vsaboe@...> wrote:

Got it, I have the original 1990 OCPA document Glen put together and these two bright young WSCC students have just done the same comparing the core curriculums of WSCC and the Masters and Doctor PT degree curriculums which as you might have guessed are woefully inadequent in DDX.Vern Saboe Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? " >>>>>> > Vern,>> > Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the energy

>>and>>passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have pointed >>out>>they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that we drop>>the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We have

>>extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more>>effectively that the Physical therapist folks.>> >>> > In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with everything

>>you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).>> >>> > Dr. Schneider>> > PDX>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

>> > From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>>> > Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

>> >>> > >Dear Colleagues;>> > >>> > >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon >> > >Physical>>Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law,

>>simple>>a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in>>changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I>>think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

>> > >>> > >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist, medical>>physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or>>naturopaths.

>> > >>> > >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors)>>or>>a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that they provide

>> " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. " >> > >>> > >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a>>referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>> > >>> > >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high >> > >velocity>>low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments

>>etc.).>> > >>> > >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to>>these>>requests??>> > >>> > >Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start

>>in>>January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as>>per these requests?>> > >>> > >Thank you for your time and consideration,

>> > >>> > >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO>> > >Lobbyist>> > >Chiropractic Association of Oregon>> > >>> >>> >

>> > OregonDCs rules:>> > 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to>>foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve>>members will be tolerated.

>> > 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.>> > 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.>>However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

>>or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without>>his>>or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.>> >

[Guest guest]

I find it very amusing that these folks want what they have

traditionally shunned.

Personally, I believe that DCs & PTs (not all but some of both) can

find common ground and work together for the benefit of the patient.

However, in the end, the DC always will win out because we can really

do everything because of our education. Funny thing is that DCs are

really expanding the field of PT more than PTs are.

The PT lobbist is really living a dream and if a PT wants to do what

I do, they should go to CHIROPRACTIC college.

Do whatever it takes Vern.

BS-Kine (Physical Therapy undergraduate program

University of Colorado), DC, DABCO

>

> Yes, two young WSCC students one from Albany (me-home) and another

who has

> her Masters in PT/MPT going for her for her DC have done a

wonderful job at

> my request.

>

> We are well prepare for next session.

>

> VErn

> Re: " Physical Therapists and What They Want? "

> >

> >

> >> Vern,

> >> Tell the little lady that we will fight their bill with all the

energy

> >> and

> > passion at our disposal(which is considerable). As others have

pointed

> > out

> > they lack the training to be called doctors. And to suggest that

we drop

> > the term PT from our repertoir of treatments is ludicrous. We

have

> > extensive training in PT and often we perform rehab work far more

> > effectively that the Physical therapist folks.

> >>

> >> In short VErn, I think you have permission to fire away with

everything

> > you've got( and you've got plenty I'm sure).

> >>

> >> Dr. Schneider

> >> PDX

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------

> >> From: " Vern Saboe " <vsaboe@...>

> >> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:42:59 -0700

> >>

> >> >Dear Colleagues;

> >> >

> >> >I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon

Physical

> > Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon

statute/law,

> > simple

> > a proposed bill that would do the following if they are

successful in

> > changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I

> > think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

> >> >

> >> >1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist,

medical

> > physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist,

osteopath, or

> > naturopaths.

> >> >

> >> >2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g..,

chiropractors)

> >> >or

> > a " business entity " from implying directly or indirectly that

they provide

> > " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

> >> >

> >> >3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need

for a

> > referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

> >> >

> >> >4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high

velocity

> > low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type

adjustments

> > etc.).

> >> >

> >> >So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay

neutral to

> >> >these

> > requests??

> >> >

> >> >Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the

corner...it start

> >> >in

> > January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for

the PTs as

> > per these requests?

> >> >

> >> >Thank you for your time and consideration,

> >> >

> >> >Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

> >> >Lobbyist

> >> >Chiropractic Association of Oregon

> >> >

> >>

> >>

> >> OregonDCs rules:

> >> 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the

listserve is to

> > foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on

listserve

> > members will be tolerated.

> >> 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

> >> 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up

anywhere.

> > However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print,

forward,

> > or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member

without

> > his

> > or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

> >>

[Guest guest]

-RE:To be able to use the term " Doctor " .......

Ans:Sure, if they have received a doctorate from an accredited

institution and they passed a doctor-level exam with the state, why not.

-RE: Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g..,

chiropractors) or a " business entity " from implying directly or

indirectly that they provide " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

Ans: Absolutely not. We, IN FACT DO perform " therapy " at times, that

are indeed " physical " in nature. These are within our scope and should

be. So we must call it what it is. We should never call ourselves

" physical therapists " or " licensed physical therapists " however.

-RE:First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a

referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

Ans: Sure, why not, for the DPT ones at least.

-RE:To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high

velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type

adjustments etc.).

I dont mind them doing manipulation as long as they have ALOT of

schooling in it re. safety. Safety, is the only issue in my mind. It

is a relatively safe thing to do, let's face it. Unless you are a

freakin brute (which some chiro and D.O. folks are unfortunately...

).It has always been my belief and the belief of various experts in

healthcare that if DPTs got serious about manipulation, that it would

increase overall public and medical awareness and subsequently, the

overall utilization across all providers of " manip " would go way way

up. So instead of us providing 93% of the " manipulation " to 30 million

people, we might be providing 50-75% of the manip services to 60

million people per year or better yet, higher numbers...that is the

scenario that I think is most likely to happen so I am saying that

they would help us to perform our mission by joining in. I beleive the

amount of people who could significantly benefit from any type of

manipulation is probably the majority of the population currently in

USA. I just think we really screwed up when we turned adjustments into

" manipulation " in order to appease 3rd party payors.

It is absolutely essential that no PT or DPT should ever claim to be

performing a " chiropractic adjustment " and/or coding a 98941 etc is

grounds for chiro board action. A chiro adjustment should continue to

be for the correction of VSC-which is primarily a segmental movement

disorder with neuro-physiological effects according to the bulk of the

literature and does not necessarily have to be symptomatic nmor

secondary to some other condition (such as what the morons at medicare

say it is).

that

>

> Dear Colleagues;

>

> I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon

Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon

statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if

they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and

wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what

they want;

>

> 1. To be able to use the term " Doctor " just as a podiatrist,

medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist,

osteopath, or naturopaths.

>

> 2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g..,

chiropractors) or a " business entity " from implying directly or

indirectly that they provide " physical therapy, " or " physiotherapy. "

>

> 3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a

referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

>

> 4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high

velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type

adjustments etc.).

>

> So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to

these requests??

>

> Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it

start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist

for the PTs as per these requests?

>

> Thank you for your time and consideration,

>

> Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

> Lobbyist

> Chiropractic Association of Oregon

>

[Guest guest]

This is a sore subject for me. A few years ago at a professional meeting for my wife, I was verbally assulted by a PT. He spent 15 minutes complaining that chiropractors had no right to call themselves doctors since "we had no more education then a PT". I sat there politely (because of my wife), but after 15 minutes I "politely" stated my "ignorance" since I was unaware PTs had diagnosis courses in NMS, cardioresp, neuro, endocrinology, renal, or the hepatic systems. Or that they took clases in minor surgery, obstetrics, or proctology. I also was unaware of their many clases in radiology. Of coarse his response was "we did not take any of those classes" to each query. He did compare his 3 hours per week for 1 quarter of "non-hands on" gross anatomy to WSCC's 9 hours per week for 3 quarters of actual hands on disecction in gross and 1 quarter of spinal anatomy. Both classes had lecture on top of those lab hours At this point I "politely " remarked "maybe that's why your not a doctor and I am?"I may have been a jerk for embarrassing him in front of his colleagues, but... if PTs would like to be treated as doctors let them sweat 8th quarter exit exams.FIGHT this effort!Glenn Sykes, DCNewberg, OR "Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

So..... basically they want to become chiropractors with a swipe of the pen?

Dr. ph Medlin D.C.Spine Tree Chiropractic1627 NE Alberta St. #6Portland, OR 97211Ph: 503-788-6800c: 503-889-6204

"Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon

[Guest guest]

yeh....just like DOs became MDs in '65....they paid $65.00 and automatically became MDs. Wonder what they paid the AMA?

Sunny

Sunny Kierstyn, RN DC Fibromyalgia Care Center of Oregon 2677 Willakenzie Road, 7C

Eugene, Oregon, 97401

541- 344- 0509; Fx; 541- 344- 0955

From: "deadmed" <deadmed@...><Oregondcs >,"aca chiro list" <aca-members@...>,"Vern Saboe" <vsaboe@...>Subject: Re: "Physical Therapists and What They Want?"Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:25:34 -0700

So..... basically they want to become chiropractors with a swipe of the pen?

Dr. ph Medlin D.C.Spine Tree Chiropractic1627 NE Alberta St. #6Portland, OR 97211Ph: 503-788-6800c: 503-889-6204

"Physical Therapists and What They Want?"

Dear Colleagues;

I have just received from the lobbyist representing the Oregon Physical Therapy Association proposed changes they want in Oregon statute/law, simple a proposed bill that would do the following if they are successful in changing current Oregon law: She is knew and wants to know what I think...what shall I tell her?? Here is what they want;

1. To be able to use the term "Doctor" just as a podiatrist, medical physician, chiropractic physician, dentist, optometrist, osteopath, or naturopaths.

2. Disallowance of other health care providers (e.g.., chiropractors) or a "business entity" from implying directly or indirectly that they provide "physical therapy," or "physiotherapy."

3. First contact (direct access) rights, eliminating the need for a referral from a trained physician prior to treating the public...

4. To provide spinal adjustments/manipulations including high velocity low amplitude thrusting procedures (e.g.., diversified-type adjustments etc.).

So....what say you?? Should we support, defeat, or stay neutral to these requests??

Oregon's 2007 legislative session is just around the corner...it start in January...so again what would you have me tell the lobbyist for the PTs as per these requests?

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Vern Saboe, DC., DACAN., FICC., DABFP., FACO

Lobbyist

Chiropractic Association of Oregon Get today's hot entertainment gossip