TCM - TCM - TCM Praci tioner teaching western doctors - who are they?

[Guest guest]

Dear Mr. Richard Fryberg;

It related at least partially to ethics, if I remember correctly. It seems

there was no doctoral level education at the time, and while it may be feasible

for a state to provide a blanket licensure title, there are different ethical

qualities necessary for a board run non profit organization then for a for

profit one such as yours, so I am hoping you will give one soon, vying with the

NCCAOM for quality and ethical righteousness. Then there were other

considerations such as money, volunteer participation (funny I didn't see you

providing

either of those, given your seeming interest, but ah yes, your interests), and

others.

 

Uh oh. I see myself doing a point for point response to your diatribe, and

thus feeding into it and future ones of a similar nature. So, in my effort to

help your dysfunction and mine, I bid you adieu. Hope you make lots of money

with your " free " for profit organization.

 

By the way, I have no problem with fully trained, ethical MD's doing

acupuncture, as my statement you replied to with your Hunter Thompsonesque

accusations

says clearly.

 

David Molony

 

In a message dated 8/21/03 10:32:41 AM, acudoc11 writes:

 

 

> Dear Mr. David Malony

>

> We have known each other since 1998 when the AAOM's 'DOM-project' fiasco

> happened where the AAOM did NOT wind up supporting the highest level(s) of

> certification. That action was not very supportive for the advancement of

> the

> profession although no one ever heard the official AAOM reason for dumping

> an

> excellent but very expensive project that was 2 months away from being a

> reality.

>

> From it's inception all the way up until 2001 the NCCAOM, ALLOWED all these

> 'week-end' warriors with 100 hours of education to become Nationally Board

> Certified Diplomates in Acupuncture and these same docs put their

> certifications

> side by side all the legitimate trained APs and expect everyone to believe

> there is some equality.

>

> The AAOM by its actions in some sort of involvement seems to be primarily

> working with the AMAs (apparently monopolistic) wholly owned company called

> CPT

> regarding a critical issue of coding for AP/OM practitioners while barely

> and

> only recently and only very slightly supporting Alternative Link's ABC

> Codes.

> As you well remember, in 1998 in San Francisco, the AAOM board practicly

> through tomatoes at the President of Alternative Link when she presented the

> case

> for support. And up until recently when maybe there was no other way but to

> show

> some little support, the AAOM has been, behind the scenes, against the ABC

> Codes and correct me if I am wrong.....is also, behind the scenes, against

> the

> Federal Acupuncture Bill. Again.....not very supportive positions for the

> advancement of the profession.

>

> Of more recent vintage....the AAOM is flirting with very dangerous aspects

> of

> attempting to have acupuncture approved for Federal employees which

> logically

> and legally appears would ONLY bring business to exactly these kind of

> poorly

> trained docs and bring NO business to the real 'qualified acupuncturists'.

>

> Please EXPLAIN why the AAOM has NOT come out and fully supported the Hinchey

> Federal Acupuncture Bill HR1477 which would finally give FULL recognition to

> the real 'qualified acupuncturists' and actually knock down a peg or two or

> possibly not even federally recognize these poorly trained. This is where

> the

> REAL EFFECTIVE work takes place instead of just letting people 'know'.

>

> Is it that the AAOM does not support the well trained and best qualified

> acupuncturists who are it's members and give it money?

>

> 'We' (a very interesting word) need to do much more than just letting these

> docs 'know'. Please do tell the 'AP/OM world of qualified practitioners' (at

> least here) what the AAOM has done in the last ten years and is DOING TODAY,

> to

> stop these week-end warriors from becoming exactly what they are

> doing...which

> is taking over the profession???????

>

> An organization such as the AAOM which has been around since 1981 should

> have

> been able to accomplish much more and can still DO if it really wanted to.

>

> AOMNC was formed in March 2003 and a NEW national AP/OM coalition since

> there

> was obviously a dire need for it........ and has and is still growing in

> huge

> leaps and bounds on a national basis. AOMNC is truly behind ONLY the

> 'qualified acupuncturists' and NOT supportive of week-end warriors. AOMNC is

> 1000%

> behind the Federal Acupuncture Bill.

>

> It is ALSO interesting for the profession to take serious NOTE that NONE of

> the controlling organizations (AAOM, Alliance, NCCAOM, CCAOM, ACAOM) who

> call

> themselves 'steering' or 'visioning' task force, SUPPORT the Federal

> Acupuncture Bill. None of them suppoort the REAL... OMD degree. They support

> (because

> it's what their business are made up of) the funky Masters level and the new

> non-PhD doctoral research degrees. Seems that those in control DO NOT want

> the

> advancement of the profession and anti to their businesses.

>

> Verbal answers to this are meaningless and just rhetoric. Let the AP/OM

> profession see the FULL support in ACTION in the correct and only direction.

>

> Richard A. Freiberg, OMD, NMD

> Founder/Director AOMNC

> <A HREF= " www.aomnc.com " >www.aomnc.com</A>

>

In a message dated 8/21/2003 12:32:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> acuman1 writes:

>

> > I've found that the vast majority of docs that take short courses in any

> > aspect of OM end up referring, while there are certainly a number of

> > unethical

> > ones that will treat and screw up patients. It is my contention that we

> need

> > to

> > let docs know that they are being screwed as consumers when they take

> these

> > courses.

> > DAvid Molony

>

>

>

>