Guest guest Posted May 21, 2005 Report Share Posted May 21, 2005 The May 3 additions to SB233 read in part: Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize an acupuncturist to diagnose any physical or mental disorder pursuant to Sections 2038 and 2052. This was proposed by the CMA. That is public knowledge. But actually it is the content that means something, not who proposes it. There is no shortage of potential beneficiaries if it came to shutting us down. Request for language that limited diagnosis to certain conditions was made by Senator Figueroa in a private meeting with reps from a few organizations. If you have any further question of the veracity of my assertions, I suggest you first identify yourself (full name and affiliation) This is a public list. Next, skepticsm is lame, but to your credit it is better than the non-reaction of a few thousand sheep who will contine to be lead around by chiropractors, insurance reps, and narrow-minded educators until it is too late, and then they will throw the i-ching and pose ill-informed questions to the wrong people. READ my essays. If you find some point that is debatable, come back with some sensible discussion. Beyond that , you should simply concur and start working toward resolution that is mutually beneficial. Unless of course you are actually one of the opposition. I already stated that the attack is not about to readily go away; nor am I going to divulge what counter-measures I know are feasible. Whoever has been teaching students that they can't diagnose should be strung up. It makes no difference what state you are in - if you are practicing acupuncture or herbs, you MUST EVALUATE. And if you don't, that is clearly a public safety violation, and you are asking to be shut down. Joe Reid http://www.jreidomd.blogspot.com Chinese Medicine , " Tymothy " < jellyphish@f...> wrote: > jreidomd, > Is there evidence for this? > " The latest (May 3) addition to SB233 came straight from the CMA. " I > went through Figueroa's lobby list and she received very little from the > CMA, why would she make such a huge deal with so little cash? > > Also, where is this information? > " Sen Figueroa indicated just a few days ago she also wanted specific > examples of scope that diagnostic authority could then be limited to. " > > Certainly a case could be made that there are actors at play here who > are not easily seen, but i would see their hands in the mix before > simple assumption, there is the tendency in my experience to do that > when against seeming authorities and i chose not to do that here until > the information presents itself. > > Regards, Tymothy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2005 Report Share Posted May 21, 2005 Skepticism is never lame. Questioning authority, especially arrogant authority that insists one must simply be quiet and concur with undivulged counter-measures as the only solution, is always a good idea. Kim Blankenship, L.Ac. (not the opposition) jreidomd <jreidomd wrote: The May 3 additions to SB233 read in part: Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize an acupuncturist to diagnose any physical or mental disorder pursuant to Sections 2038 and 2052. This was proposed by the CMA. That is public knowledge. But actually it is the content that means something, not who proposes it. There is no shortage of potential beneficiaries if it came to shutting us down. Request for language that limited diagnosis to certain conditions was made by Senator Figueroa in a private meeting with reps from a few organizations. If you have any further question of the veracity of my assertions, I suggest you first identify yourself (full name and affiliation) This is a public list. Next, skepticsm is lame, but to your credit it is better than the non-reaction of a few thousand sheep who will contine to be lead around by chiropractors, insurance reps, and narrow-minded educators until it is too late, and then they will throw the i-ching and pose ill-informed questions to the wrong people. READ my essays. If you find some point that is debatable, come back with some sensible discussion. Beyond that , you should simply concur and start working toward resolution that is mutually beneficial. Unless of course you are actually one of the opposition. I already stated that the attack is not about to readily go away; nor am I going to divulge what counter-measures I know are feasible. Whoever has been teaching students that they can't diagnose should be strung up. It makes no difference what state you are in - if you are practicing acupuncture or herbs, you MUST EVALUATE. And if you don't, that is clearly a public safety violation, and you are asking to be shut down. Joe Reid http://www.jreidomd.blogspot.com Chinese Medicine , " Tymothy " < jellyphish@f...> wrote: > jreidomd, > Is there evidence for this? > " The latest (May 3) addition to SB233 came straight from the CMA. " I > went through Figueroa's lobby list and she received very little from the > CMA, why would she make such a huge deal with so little cash? > > Also, where is this information? > " Sen Figueroa indicated just a few days ago she also wanted specific > examples of scope that diagnostic authority could then be limited to. " > > Certainly a case could be made that there are actors at play here who > are not easily seen, but i would see their hands in the mix before > simple assumption, there is the tendency in my experience to do that > when against seeming authorities and i chose not to do that here until > the information presents itself. > > Regards, Tymothy http://babel.altavista.com/ and adjust accordingly. If you are a TCM academic and wish to discuss TCM with other academics, click on this link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2005 Report Share Posted May 22, 2005 >>>In response to Tymothy S., and Kim B., and others<<< Given that I started doing laser and needle acupuncture under an MD at a spinal cord injury clinic in 1983, I would say that I have a little more experience than you. And yes, I think that gives me a right to suggest that people read my previous material, and evidence sufficient comprehension of those matters in their response, - before challenging me about why they can't find the information I'm relaying. In many fields of advanced learning a teacher will shoot you down or brush you off instantly if you are not at their level, or at least prepared. Nowadays I think this is less common because people realized they can sell more seminars by catering to the lowest common denominator. I'm not promoting seminars. My public outreach in the last 2 months amounts to a couple hundred hours of donated effort to saving the legal status of our profession here in California. Students and people from out of state (or country) will ultimately be affected by these issues, but can only have limited direct impact. My writing is targeted to certain people, and you may not be one of them. Likewise, serious legal strategy sometimes requires circumspection, particularly in a public forum. The incredible diversity within the field of Oriental Medicine (in this country alone) is a great strength that is part of what I'm fighting for. There are truly huge differences in culture, background, knowledge, skill, style and approach. At the same time it must be recognized that there are plenty of capable and intelligent people who (especially if English is their second language) are nonetheless at a severe disadvantage when it comes to specifics of legal verbiage. And that doesn't help in growing consensus, especially with prejudice, bias, inexperience, and ignorance coming from all directions. How about making a substantive contribution based on analysis of the real issues ? instead of finding reasons to cop out because you don't like my (admittedly) sometimes arrogant tone. If you carefully read my material you would be well underway to grasping the nature of the solutions I have proposed. As some of this crystallizes, I / we will need to formulate it in ways that can get across to all the people who aren't willing to invest similar energy towards understanding. Joe Reid May 22, 2005 http://www.jreidomd.blogspot.com Chinese Medicine , kim blankenship < kuangguiyu> wrote: > Skepticism is never lame. Questioning authority, especially arrogant authority that insists one must simply be quiet and concur with undivulged counter-measures as the only solution, is always a good idea. > > Kim Blankenship, L.Ac. > (not the opposition) > > jreidomd <jreidomd> wrote: > The May 3 additions to SB233 read in part: > Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize an acupuncturist to > diagnose any physical or mental disorder pursuant to Sections 2038 and > 2052. > This was proposed by the CMA. That is public knowledge. But actually it is > the content that means something, not who proposes it. There is no shortage > of potential beneficiaries if it came to shutting us down. > > Request for language that limited diagnosis to certain conditions was made > by Senator Figueroa in a private meeting with reps from a few organizations. > > If you have any further question of the veracity of my assertions, I suggest you > first identify yourself (full name and affiliation) This is a public list. > > Next, skepticsm is lame, but to your credit it is better than the non-reaction of > a few thousand sheep who will contine to be lead around by chiropractors, > insurance reps, and narrow-minded educators until it is too late, and then they > will throw the i-ching and pose ill-informed questions to the wrong people. > > READ my essays. If you find some point that is debatable, come back with > some sensible discussion. Beyond that ,(THAT MEANS AFTER) you should simply concur and start > working toward resolution that is mutually beneficial. Unless of course you > are actually one of the opposition. > > I already stated that the attack is not about to readily go away; nor am I going > to divulge what counter-measures I know are feasible. > > Whoever has been teaching students that they can't diagnose should be > strung up. It makes no difference what state you are in - if you are practicing > acupuncture or herbs, you MUST EVALUATE. And if you don't, that is clearly > a public safety violation, and you are asking to be shut down. > > Joe Reid > http://www.jreidomd.blogspot.com > > Chinese Medicine , " Tymothy " < > jellyphish@f...> wrote: > > jreidomd, > > Is there evidence for this? > > " The latest (May 3) addition to SB233 came straight from the CMA. " I > > went through Figueroa's lobby list and she received very little from the > > CMA, why would she make such a huge deal with so little cash? > > > > Also, where is this information? > > " Sen Figueroa indicated just a few days ago she also wanted specific > > examples of scope that diagnostic authority could then be limited to. " > > > > Certainly a case could be made that there are actors at play here who > > are not easily seen, but i would see their hands in the mix before > > simple assumption, there is the tendency in my experience to do that > > when against seeming authorities and i chose not to do that here until > > the information presents itself. > > > > Regards, Tymothy > http:// babel.altavista.com/ > > / group/ and adjust accordingly. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2005 Report Share Posted May 23, 2005 Joe - You said: >>>Given that I started doing laser and needle acupuncture under an MD at a spinal cord injury clinic in 1983, I would say that I have a little more experience than you.<<< That's very interesting considering that you know nothing about me or my level of experience. And your next statement: >>>And yes, I think that gives me a right to suggest that people read my previous material, and evidence sufficient comprehension of those matters in their response...<<< is indicative of the problem here. You seem to think you have the right to say anything when addressing this forum. This forum exists for a civil exchange of ideas and knowledge between peers, it is not intended as a platform for inflammatory pomposity and arrogance. Your half-hearted apology: >>>But thanks for a polite reminder to keep it toned down, even in response to inflammatory provocation on hotbutton issues.<<< doesn't hold water. Looking back over some of the recent postings, I failed to discern anyone deliberately provoking you. However, some of the following statements you have written strike me as quite provocative: >>>Your ideas of alternative practitioners integrating with future med are laughable, and all you have to look at is the projects underway in which healthy lifestyle and humanistic aspects of alternative practitioners have been completely co-opted. At the same time you shirk from the real integration that I and others are ALREADY DOING, and campaign against it by virtue of your (I believe mis-or-partially informed) stance on the legislative concerns. I don't imagine you can be reformed, but your postition as an educator along with your pulpit here, makes you a dangerous person...<<< >>>READ my essays. If you find some point that is debatable, come back with some sensible discussion. Beyond that , you should simply concur and start working toward resolution that is mutually beneficial.<<< >>>You really have to be stupid to think...<<< >>>But more important to the cave dwellers who boast of cash only practice...<<< >>>Our profession is full of people who don't have English legal language savvy, apathetic sheep who don't understand that politics is a dreadful long-drawn- out affair that requires oversight and input throughout, and snakes whose agenda is really the triumph of institutions, insurance, or other licensed professions over the sustainability of acupuncture and oriental medicine. The reason you should believe me is I'm a frightfully correct visionary (including some of TV's first 3D motion graphics and predictive imagery), and because I've grown up with and around a lot of legal minds. And also because I tell it like it is and am protected enough to have nothing to lose.<<< The current situation in California is of serious concern, and I welcome valuable insight from those who are better informed than myself. But I have no use for this sort of rhetoric and bombast - it's hardly the sort of compelling discourse that would make me want to investigate your website and other essays. Perhaps this material would be best confined to a blog without the guidelines this forum possesses. Kim Blankenship, L.Ac. Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2005 Report Share Posted May 23, 2005 Kim, That's a very good point. So why not start listing the problems and engaging in some sort of mock solutions dialogue on them? I am game and maybe in this way we might contribute to educating ourselves on the issues as well as creating viable solutions. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac >kim blankenship <kuangguiyu >Chinese Medicine >Chinese Medicine >Re: Re: SB 233 >Mon, 23 May 2005 00:07:46 -0700 (PDT) > >Joe - > >You said: >>>Given that I started doing laser and needle acupuncture under >an MD at a >spinal cord injury clinic in 1983, I would say that I have a little more >experience than you.<<< > >That's very interesting considering that you know nothing about me or my >level of experience. And your next statement: > > >>>And yes, I think that gives me a right to suggest that >people read my previous material, and evidence sufficient comprehension of >those matters in their response...<<< > >is indicative of the problem here. You seem to think you have the right to >say anything when addressing this forum. This forum exists for a civil >exchange of ideas and knowledge between peers, it is not intended as a >platform for inflammatory pomposity and arrogance. Your half-hearted >apology: > > >>>But thanks for a polite reminder to keep it >toned down, even in response to inflammatory provocation on hotbutton >issues.<<< > >doesn't hold water. Looking back over some of the recent postings, I >failed to discern anyone deliberately provoking you. However, some of the >following statements you have written strike me as quite provocative: > > >>>Your ideas of alternative practitioners integrating with future med >are >laughable, and all you have to look at is the projects underway in which >healthy lifestyle and humanistic aspects of alternative practitioners have >been >completely co-opted. At the same time you shirk from the real integration >that >I and others are ALREADY DOING, and campaign against it by virtue of your >(I believe mis-or-partially informed) stance on the legislative concerns. >I don't imagine you can be reformed, but your postition as an educator >along >with your pulpit here, makes you a dangerous person...<<< > > >>>READ my essays. If you find some point that is debatable, come back >with >some sensible discussion. Beyond that , you should simply concur and start >working toward resolution that is mutually beneficial.<<< > > >>>You really >have to be stupid to think...<<< > > >>>But more important to the cave dwellers who boast of cash only >practice...<<< > > >>>Our profession is full of people who don't have English legal language >savvy, >apathetic sheep who don't understand that politics is a dreadful >long-drawn- >out affair that requires oversight and input throughout, and snakes whose >agenda is really the triumph of institutions, insurance, or other licensed >professions over the sustainability of acupuncture and oriental medicine. >The >reason you should believe me is I'm a frightfully correct visionary >(including >some of TV's first 3D motion graphics and predictive imagery), and because >I've grown up with and around a lot of legal minds. And also because I tell >it >like it is and am protected enough to have nothing to lose.<<< > > >The current situation in California is of serious concern, and I welcome >valuable insight from those who are better informed than myself. But I >have no use for this sort of rhetoric and bombast - it's hardly the sort of >compelling discourse that would make me want to investigate your website >and other essays. Perhaps this material would be best confined to a blog >without the guidelines this forum possesses. > >Kim Blankenship, L.Ac. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail > Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.