more on the AMA and Section 2706

[Guest guest]

from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public (again)...

 

C Simpson, DC

Beaverton, OR

 

Policy

Proposed resolution urges stepped-up campaign to maintain discrimination against other professionsAMA Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination Toward Licensed Integrative Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of Healthcare Reform Bill

The ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare overhaul, the Patient Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in 2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs, massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and optometrists, but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the language in the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates in June 2010 is available here.

[Guest guest]

F.Y.I., my personal email on this to Kitzhaber and his

staff….Vern Saboe

From: vsaboe

[mailto:vsaboe@...]

Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 11:30 AM

' Kitzhaber'

Subject: FW: more on the AMA and Section 2706

and staff,

We certainly hope this sort of thing will fall on your deaf ears

that you will not support such hurtful nonsense. What the AMA and

the sub-specialty groups are suggesting is so inappropriate and not in the best

interest of consumers/Oregonians who must have the freedom to treat with a

chiropractic or naturopathic physician if they choose.

Cheers,

Vern Saboe DC, DACAN, FICC, DABFP, FACO

Oregon Chiropractic Association

541-231-4528 Cell

From:

[mailto: ] On Behalf Of

A. Simpson

Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:26 AM

Subject: more on the AMA and Section 2706

from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the

public (again)...

C Simpson, DC

Beaverton, OR

Policy

Proposed

resolution urges stepped-up campaign to maintain discrimination against other

professions

AMA Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination

Toward Licensed Integrative Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of

Healthcare Reform Bill

The ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination

in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare

overhaul, the Patient

Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing

its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to

initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots

levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in

2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope

of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is

healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs,

massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could

open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US

residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies

are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and

optometrists, but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the

language in the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates

in June 2010 is available

here.

No virus

found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2910 - Release Date: 06/02/10

09:57:00

[Guest guest]

Perhaps not all of the concerns posed by

the AMA are wrong? There are many who purport skill and knowledge but are far

from it. Those who are ‘Certified’ are not necessarily licensed or

monitored or have malpractice coverage. Just because we may be the target of

some of this doesn’t mean we should hop in the sack with others who lack

of professionalism. For those who share our concerns but who also undergo

critical self analysis - I say let them and only them, be our allies.

s. fuchs dc

From:

[mailto: ] On Behalf Of A. Simpson

Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010

10:26 AM

Subject: more on

the AMA and Section 2706

from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public

(again)...

C Simpson, DC

Beaverton,

OR

Policy

Proposed

resolution urges stepped-up campaign to maintain discrimination against other

professions

AMA Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination

Toward Licensed Integrative Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of

Healthcare Reform Bill

The ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination

in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare

overhaul, the Patient

Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing

its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to

initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots

levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in

2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope

of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is

healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs,

massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could

open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US

residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies

are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and

optometrists, but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the

language in the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates

in June 2010 is available

here.

[Guest guest]

Well said Sharron however,

Don’t lose sight of the reality that though the AMA (20%

of the MDs only are members) uses “public safety” as their over

arching concern as per the “Non-Discrimination Provision” medical

mistakes and adverse events (drugs & surgery) constitute the 4th

leading cause of death in this country hence they live in a very, very large “glass

house!”

Cheers,

Vern Saboe

From:

[mailto: ] On Behalf Of Sharron

Fuchs

Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 12:58 PM

Subject: RE: more on the AMA and Section 2706

Perhaps not

all of the concerns posed by the AMA are wrong? There are many who purport

skill and knowledge but are far from it. Those who are ‘Certified’

are not necessarily licensed or monitored or have malpractice coverage. Just

because we may be the target of some of this doesn’t mean we should hop

in the sack with others who lack of professionalism. For those who share our

concerns but who also undergo critical self analysis - I say let them and only

them, be our allies.

s. fuchs dc

From:

[mailto: ] On Behalf Of A. Simpson

Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:26 AM

Subject: more on the AMA and Section 2706

from

Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public (again)...

C

Simpson, DC

Beaverton,

OR

Policy

Proposed resolution urges stepped-up campaign to

maintain discrimination against other professions

AMA

Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination Toward Licensed Integrative

Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of Healthcare Reform Bill

The ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination

in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare

overhaul, the Patient

Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing

its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to

initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots

levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in

2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope

of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is

healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs,

massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could

open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US

residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies

are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and optometrists,

but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the language in

the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates in June

2010 is available

here.

No virus

found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2919 - Release Date: 06/05/10

06:25:00

[Guest guest]

They also treat a bizillion more people then we do. Let us clean our house first , understand what they deal with ,try to collaborate where we can and then and only then can we criticize. Remember those stats came from their own self analysis.s. fuchs dcSent from my iPhoneOn Jun 5, 2010, at 8:57 AM, "vsaboe" <vsaboe@...> wrote:Well said Sharron however, Don’t lose sight of the reality that though the AMA (20%of the MDs only are members) uses “public safety†as their overarching concern as per the “Non-Discrimination Provision†medicalmistakes and adverse events (drugs & surgery) constitute the 4thleading cause of death in this country hence they live in a very, very large “glasshouse!†Cheers, Vern Saboe From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of SharronFuchsSent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 12:58 PMSubject: RE: more on the AMA and Section 2706 Perhaps notall of the concerns posed by the AMA are wrong? There are many who purportskill and knowledge but are far from it. Those who are ‘Certified’are not necessarily licensed or monitored or have malpractice coverage. Justbecause we may be the target of some of this doesn’t mean we should hopin the sack with others who lack of professionalism. For those who share ourconcerns but who also undergo critical self analysis - I say let them and onlythem, be our allies. s. fuchs dcFrom: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of A. SimpsonSent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:26 AMSubject: more on the AMA and Section 2706 from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public (again)... CSimpson, DCBeaverton,OR PolicyProposed resolution urges stepped-up campaign tomaintain discrimination against other professionsAMASpecialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination Toward Licensed IntegrativePractitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of Healthcare Reform BillThe ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discriminationin Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcareoverhaul, the PatientProtection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushingits repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA toinitiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassrootslevels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scopeof Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 ishealthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs,massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, couldopen consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of USresidents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societiesare acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and optometrists,but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the language inthe proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates in June2010 is availablehere. No virusfound in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2919 - Release Date: 06/05/1006:25:00

[Guest guest]



Sharron

The AMA has discriminated against and denigrated our profeession and all other " alternative" health care professions with absolute ruthless narccisism since the early part of LAST century.

For you to admonish Vern and others with the regard to the outrage of the political stance that the AMA has taken shows a lack of understanding of the damage done to the public on an ongoing basis.

Please excuse me but I see this profession, on an ongoing and continuous basis, improving itself. We are constantly " cleaning" our house.... just ask the board members on this listserve or take the time to read the BackTalk issue released by same.

It is offensive to me, and many others, that the AMA would take this particular stance and it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with our cleaning our house. Criticizing that which has a low moral ground is what has made America great.

Danno

more on the AMA and Section 2706

from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public (again)...

C Simpson, DC

Beaverton, OR

Policy

Proposed resolution urges stepped-up campaign to maintain discrimination against other professions

AMA Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination Toward Licensed Integrative Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of Healthcare Reform BillThe ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare overhaul, the Patient Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in 2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs, massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and optometrists, but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the language in the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates in June 2010 is available here.

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2919 - Release Date: 06/05/10 06:25:00

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2917 - Release Date: 06/03/10 23:25:00

[Guest guest]

The world has changed. In the context of healthcare reform where are we? I would like our profession to be included in the health home concept. How can we do that? If we don't fit in are doomed to extinction ? We can't paint the medical profession with such a wide brush overall and also scoff because they have only 20% of their profession as members. What percentage of DCs belong to a trade association? 10%? or less? I am not so naieve to not know what this profession has suffered however even though we must watch our backs we still have to move forward and that is through research, publishing and critcal self analysis.s. fuchs dcSent from my iPhoneOn Jun 5, 2010, at 9:42 AM, " D Beebe, D.C." <daniel.beebe@...> wrote:Sharron The AMA has discriminated against and denigrated our profeession and all other " alternative" health care professions with absolute ruthless narccisism since the early part of LAST century. For you to admonish Vern and others with the regard to the outrage of the political stance that the AMA has taken shows a lack of understanding of the damage done to the public on an ongoing basis. Please excuse me but I see this profession, on an ongoing and continuous basis, improving itself. We are constantly " cleaning" our house.... just ask the board members on this listserve or take the time to read the BackTalk issue released by same. It is offensive to me, and many others, that the AMA would take this particular stance and it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with our cleaning our house. Criticizing that which has a low moral ground is what has made America great. Danno more on the AMA and Section 2706 from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public (again)...C Simpson, DCBeaverton, ORPolicyProposed resolution urges stepped-up campaign to maintain discrimination against other professionsAMA Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination Toward Licensed Integrative Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of Healthcare Reform BillThe ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare overhaul, the Patient Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in 2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs, massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and optometrists, but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the language in the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates in June 2010 is available here. No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2919 - Release Date: 06/05/10 06:25:00No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2917 - Release Date: 06/03/10 23:25:00

[Guest guest]

Sharron,

thanks for all these thoughtful posts that challenge us to critical thought. I don't look at these posts as criticisms or negative. I look at the tone of this information as good food for thought. Information that gets us thinking about how we might best move forward as a profession and within our own offices.

Minga

Re: more on the AMA and Section 2706

The world has changed. In the context of healthcare reform where are we? I would like our profession to be included in the health home concept. How can we do that? If we don't fit in are doomed to extinction ? We can't paint the medical profession with such a wide brush overall and also scoff because they have only 20% of their profession as members. What percentage of DCs belong to a trade association? 10%? or less? I am not so naieve to not know what this profession has suffered however even though we must watch our backs we still have to move forward and that is through research, publishing and critcal self analysis.

s. fuchs dc

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 5, 2010, at 9:42 AM, " D Beebe, D.C." <daniel.beebeverizon (DOT) net> wrote:

Sharron

The AMA has discriminated against and denigrated our profeession and all other " alternative" health care professions with absolute ruthless narccisism since the early part of LAST century.

For you to admonish Vern and others with the regard to the outrage of the political stance that the AMA has taken shows a lack of understanding of the damage done to the public on an ongoing basis.

Please excuse me but I see this profession, on an ongoing and continuous basis, improving itself. We are constantly " cleaning" our house.... just ask the board members on this listserve or take the time to read the BackTalk issue released by same.

It is offensive to me, and many others, that the AMA would take this particular stance and it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with our cleaning our house. Criticizing that which has a low moral ground is what has made America great.

Danno

more on the AMA and Section 2706

from Weeks' blog...the AMA is out there protecting the public (again)...

C Simpson, DC

Beaverton, OR

Policy

Proposed resolution urges stepped-up campaign to maintain discrimination against other professions

AMA Specialists Promote Repeal of Non-Discrimination Toward Licensed Integrative Practitioners, Others, in Section 2706 of Healthcare Reform Bill

The ink was hardly dry on the landmark Non-Discrimination in Health Care provision (Section 2706) of the Obama-Pelosi healthcare overhaul, the Patient Protection and Healthcare Affordability Act, and MD specialists are pushing its repeal. Anesthesiologists and ophthalmologists have asked the AMA to initiate a lobbying campaign at the executive, Congressional and grassroots levels so the Section 2706 of the 2010 law, scheduled to come into effect in 2014, never does. The request is framed as part of the AMA's ongoing Scope of Practice Partnership against other professions. Section 2706 is healthcare reform's most significant inclusiveness measure for DCs, NDs, LAcs, massage therapists and licensed midwives. Section 2706, if not repealed, could open consumer choice to these practitioners to tens of millions of US residents. In the name of patient protection, the two AMA specialty societies are acting against their direct competitors, nurse anesthetists and optometrists, but taking out integrative practitioners with them. A look at the language in the proposed resolution as it will go to the AMA House of Delegates in June 2010 is available here.

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2919 - Release Date: 06/05/10 06:25:00

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2917 - Release Date: 06/03/10 23:25:00