RE: Ohio Dietetics Board Administrative Rule

[Guest guest]

On that note, being that I just moved back from Virginia, this is the news from that side of the country.

Just so you know what has happened there, a good victory, I have posted below

DCs Retain Right to Use Term “Physician”

The "definition of physician bill" that had been initiated by the Medical Society of Virginia and introduced by Delegate Harry R. Purkey was officially withdrawn on Monday evening.

HB 1938 proposed to require that no person other than those who have received a degree as a medical doctor or doctor of osteopathy could use the term "physician" in connection with his name or practice. On January 22nd, a subcommittee of the Health, Welfare and Institutions Committee voted to "lay the bill on the table" (measure defeated).

View VCA’s position paper on this issue

Thanks to everyone for your support and action. This is yet another example of how effective we can be when we work together!Bill Thesier, DCVCA Legislative Committee Chair

From: AboWoman@...Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:32:32 -0500Subject: Ohio Dietetics Board Administrative Rule

Doctors,

I'd like to clarify the enclosed post- see bottom of email. After contacting the Ohio state board, I wanted to explain what's going on in Ohio with respect to the practice of Nutrition for Chiropractors. Currently, the Dietetics Board has proposed an administrative rule 'AR'. This is not a senate or house bill. This is an administrative rule to govern one board. It hasn't had a public hearing yet. That puts it in early stages. Those of you who've participated in rule making already know this next explanation. Once proposed, an 'AR' must have public hearings. Most of our controversial 'ARs' take 3-6 hearings where the rule language is challenged, re-written and worked over for hours. When a proposed rule has the potential to change another profession's scope of practice, there must be solid evidence and rationale to do so. During my 4+ yrs on the board, I've seen this happen numerous times. For those who don't realize, we face this often. Many of our (for lack of a better word), leaders are on the front lines arguing, presenting facts and going before the legislature to this end. Yes we do need to be concerned about an administrative rule that could impact DC scope. If any of you ever hears about these things, it's excellent to bring it to our attention. And I thank Dr. Mathisen again for that. Although we try to link regularly, (State boards, FCLB, NBCE), sometimes we don't communicate every attack. I like to reason that this is because we've become accustomed to the routine and know what to do to educate the legislature. We know when to contact each other if the battles look like something we've never faced before. We (State boards, FCLB, NBCE) do meet regularly and that's when we review 'ARs' and public protection issues we're involved with. That's when we exchange ideas. We do email and phone call during the interim, however, we also have to run our practices so this work can get temporarily sidelined. This one was a good one for Dr. Mathisen to bring fwd. Dr. Van Merkle's proactive idea of creating a separate clinical nutrition board is currently being investigated by Chiropractic colleges, state boards and others in our profession. I'll keep you posted.

Minga Guerrero DC president, OBCE

CMATHDCjeffnet (DOT) org

Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:18 AM

Subject: SBN: Dietetics Board Rule Would End DC Nutrition Practice

Dr. Mathisen,The subject line of this email is the heading on the Jan 3, 2008 news release from the Ohio State Chiropractic Association (see copy of the message below). Read it (see below) and then I have a favor to ask you. Would you look at the attached forms and sign the intent to commit? Last September the ACA authorized individuals to take the steps necessary to form a new Chiropractic Board of Clinical Nutrition (CBCN) and will be voting in February on recognition of this Board. Currently, there is no Chiropractic specialty board in the discipline of nutrition to show everyone, from patients to politicians, DC’s are trained, specialized in and use nutrition in practice. Without a CHIROPRACTIC specialty board in nutrition none of us may be doing so in the years to come. As you can see by the Ohio legislation (and there have been and will be other states with the same fight) everyone now wants to control the right to practice nutrition. If it happens in Ohio, it can happen anywhere. Chiropractors really do need to have a ACA authorized official nutrition board. By the way, Jeff Ware DC, DABCI, a Dean now at Logan College, presented testimony in Ohio for us. He and a few other DABCI's and DACBN’s have signed the Commitment/Intent letter and I hope you will too. If you have a DACBN or DABCI or Master’s Degree, you will most likely have the one time opportunity to be grandfathered in without taking a test. I think this opportunity is available until November 2008. IF YOU DON’T HAVE A DACBN, DABCI or Master’s, it would help us all if you would sign the intent to commit and just check the box that says:

– ** I believe it is in the best interest of the Chiropractic profession to have a CHIROPRACTIC specialty board in the discipline of nutrition.

It doesn’t cost anything to sign the Intent to Commit form and there is no obligation to join but we do need some numbers to show interest so that ACA will move forward to help protect our rights to do nutrition.Download the Commitment FormDownload the Guidelines for Grandfathering Diplomates in the CBCNPlease copy, check appropriate lines and then fax to 940-565-6655 Sincerely, Dr. Van Merkle

Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year.

Climb to the top of the charts! Play the word scramble challenge with star power. Play now!