Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 It is interesting that such a post is made. A convenient partial definition of the word concept of consensus. Dictionary definition clearly says UNANIMITY -> UNANIMOUS. Unanimity of what? Obviously that's in the hands of whomever is manipulating. That's playing games. There is a well known saying not directed at anyone in particular. FIGURES LIE AND LIARS FIGURE! Richard I get concerned when it appears that we are ignorant of facts and appear to create our own reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 M I know........ its the other way around. Stop twisting numbers and meanings. Exactly right......the political agenda of some are pushing through an FPD the way they want it.....over bloated and exorbitant. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc Read and weep because this is the TRUTH! Anything short of this is a manipulation. Which is what is going on. Merriam-Webster Dictionary Results: consensus 1 results for: consensus Main Entry: consensus kun-!sen(t)-sus Pronunciation: \ kən-ˈsen(t)-səs \ Function: noun Etymology: Latin, from consentire 1843 Results 1 a. 1 ageneral agreement : _unanimity_ (http://www.referencecenter.com/ref/redir?src=dictionary & requestId=a1a5c0047990a\ df9 & userQuery=consensus & clicke dItemURN=dictionary/unanimity?invocationType=dictionary.main & moduleId=Dictio naryMain & clickedItemDescription=DictionaryMain) - the ∼ of their opinion, based on reports…from the border - John Herseyb. bthe judgment arrived at by most of those concerned - the ∼ was to go ahead 2. 2group solidarity in sentiment and belief Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary copyright © 2009 by Merriam-Webster, incorporated In a message dated 5/3/2010 12:12:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: R, Not so. I posted the entire listing from that sight and reviewed others that also mention this as general agreement, which has also been supported by ACAOM's numbers. We might want to stop twisting words for an agenda and look at why people are for or against this issue and how to make this a better profession. It does not serve us well when some political agenda simply wants to stop all progress on this issue at all cost. Slash and burn politics leaves many casualties. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Attorneys are a naive way to go. Lobbyists are usually also attorneys. Grass roots is the way to go. But then again the AOM profession is apathetic. Richard Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > Lonny, > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > of the hierarchy? Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 M And you misrepresent mine. On ACAOM's website there exists an undated (with a generic date of February 2010) notice posted with no PROOF of anything. Just a statement. Where's that PROOF? Furthermore...until it's unraveled as to what happened to BOTH Dort Bigg and the Assistant ED Lori Schroeder this should ALL come to a standstill. ACAOM has a lot to answer. Show the PROOF of that process along with documents and meeting minutes and which school owners on the board voted for the FPD..... before we even discuss Jessica's proof. On this we can agree.....ALL of it MEANS NOTHING. This is not the first time ACAOM has been in such question. In 2004 there was another imbroglio. And from what I understand from Harvey Kaltsas there was yet another one back in 1995. Yes...you are right...the schools who are represented on such a Board are speaking for the FPD and who know little about how it affects the profession other than self interests in charging big bucks. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc Ap LAc In a message dated 5/3/2010 2:02:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: R You misrepresent my position. I saw some nice photos of Jessica and some paper, nothing more. As one that has been through legal battles, I think we can agree that this means nothing. It is not even a photo of actual signatures. I mean no disrespect but where is the proof? I do share some concern about how Mr. Biggs has left but, at this point, it is meaningless speculation. I hope we learn of this as well. The FPD is not being crammed down anyone's throats, there is even discussion of keeping the master as entry but allowing, those that want, to get a FPD instead. I think this is acceptable. There is no discussion of changing state laws either. Failure to allow the FPD only puts us on a path where those that know little about a doctorate and what it represents, are making decisions for the entire profession. Talk about inappropriate. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 M This has been discussed many times before and unnecessary to repeat which apparently you like to do. No need to beat the dead horse. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc In a message dated 5/3/2010 1:39:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: R, I do not think that the medical, PT or any other health care profession seeks votes from the public, which it serves, prior to making many of the changes they make. I think it is an implied directive that changes you make should look out for the best interest of the patients we serve. BTW, I fail to see how an increase in education, both clinical and theoretical, will harm the public. I would think it would improve our ability to diagnose and treat patient, thereby, improving efficacy. The issue of education lies at the middle of this issue and yet what is enough hours? Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine Revolution Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 Re: Another play Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > Lonny, > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > of the hierarchy? Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Those with the greatest skills often are not the best leaders. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Traditional Medicine > don83407 > Mon, 3 May 2010 09:58:45 -0500 > RE: Re: Another play > > > I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. > > > > Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > > > > Chinese Medicine > Revolution > Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 > Re: Another play > Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > > > Lonny, > > > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > > of the hierarchy? > > Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Let's SEE the proof of CONSENSUS before judging anything else. In a message dated 5/3/2010 3:05:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: Often convenient to deny things we do not want to hear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Donhow do you define 'efficacy' and what is its precise relationship to one's capacity for enlightened leadership and guidance for the profession?Daniel --- On Mon, 5/3/10, Donald Snow <don83407 wrote: Donald Snow <don83407 RE: Re: Another play " TCM group " <Chinese Traditional Medicine > Received: Monday, May 3, 2010, 2:58 PM I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine Revolution Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 Re: Another play Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > Lonny, > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > of the hierarchy? Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 M I never claimed that Mr Bigg or ACAOM was into any wrong doing. That's the difference between us. I don't trust blindly. I want to see PROOF from all including these so called national orgs. And neither should you be speculating that FPD is done deal and that all the PROOF has been received.. We go back to the source of the computation...which is ACAOM and let's SEE the PROOF. WHY do you want to except their word BLINDLY? It is of course unreasonable to calculate every patient into the figures. It is interesting to see that after 40 years NOW there is this school-cottage-industry PUSH for FPD. This profession should have been brought through the regionally accredited 2 year colleges and then moved up from there to 4 yr regionally accredited colleges for entry level degree. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc In a message dated 5/3/2010 3:18:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: I would give much more credibility to an organization that posts its results anytime over an individual with a nice photo. I am unsure as to how you would expect someone to win this kind of argument in a court of law, without actual proof. The same can be stated for your issue with Mr. Bigg. If you have proof of wrong-doing then great, let's all see it. If not, then we should not be speculating upon it. All I have been asking for, is to show us the proof of wrongdoing so all of us can have an open and informed discussion. I was referring to individuals with a political agenda that seek to prevent the FPD at all costs. From one that has completed an actual doctorate, I can agree with Don, it provided a much deeper educational experience. Legislating one does not even come close. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 And until such time as I SEE all the PROOF and ACAOM answers all the questions........my position remains the same and won't change. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc In a message dated 5/3/2010 3:19:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: At this point in time, I find the ACAOM position solid. If things change, I will re-evaluate it then. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Chinese Medicine acudoc11 Mon, 3 May 2010 15:08:07 -0400 Re: TCM - Re: Another play Let's SEE the proof of CONSENSUS before judging anything else. In a message dated 5/3/2010 3:05:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: Often convenient to deny things we do not want to hear. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] _______________ The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:W L:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] --- Subscribe to the free online journal for TCM at Times http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com Help build the world's largest online encyclopedia for Chinese medicine and acupuncture, click, http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/wiki/CMTpedia To change your email delivery settings, click, and adjust accordingly. Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside the group requires prior permission from the author. Please consider the environment and only print this message if absolutely necessary. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Don, From an online dictionary. Consensus:noun,plural-sus·es. 1.majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month. 2.general agreement or concord; harmony. If we look at the above definition of the word, it appears to me that ACAOM has been able to show support for the FPD. At present time, no one appears to acknowledge where the various Asian groups land on this issue. If we recall that Dr. Morris mentioned that one meeting in CA had about 600, that were reported to be in favor of the FPD, how can we continue to act in ignorance of this fact? Some here want us to think that only those that were trained in the states matter and foreign trained matter little. There are a lot of Asians practicing in CA and their numbers go way beyond those few that signed a petition against the FPD. I get concerned when it appears that we are ignorant of facts and appear to create our own reality. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Traditional Medicine > don83407 > Sat, 1 May 2010 12:37:15 -0500 > RE: Re: Another play > > > This thread is not about changing the rules. And if you look up the definition of consensus you will really be confused. This thread is about who changes them. I don't want any rules changed, I just want a scope of practice that allows me to be paid for what I do for the patient's good. There are some that don't think it is about the patient's good, but about staying " pure " as of 200 or 2000 years ago. And then those folks think they should, of course, be the one's who judge what is right or wrong, and the patient be damned. > > > > I can't agree with line of reasoning. So I put out a simple question. Who in our profession is qualified to judge what you and I do? > > > > As far as a FPD. I think people should have a choice. If I don't agree with it, what gives me the right to deprive you of it? I chose to sacrifice much time, effort, and money to go back and get the DAOM. Why. To many that degree, or any higher degree means nothing. Mostly, I suspect, because they don't have it nor do they want to sacrifice time and money to get it. > > > > Just my two cents and opinion. > > > > Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > > > > Chinese Medicine > acudoc11 > Sat, 1 May 2010 13:24:49 -0400 > Re: Re: Another play > > > > > > Don > > The AOM field can of course change the process or definition.... but > that's not what consensus means. > So change the rules....fine. No problem there. Just make sure to tell all > the stakeholders that the rules have been changed and that any changes in > requirements will be determined on 51% of those who respond or a quorum. > > Who has decided up until now? > > Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc > > > In a message dated 5/1/2010 1:20:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > don83407 writes: > > Consensus should be the majority who actually care to vote. It can be a > quorum or a simple majority of 51%. Who decides? > > Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 R, Not so. I posted the entire listing from that sight and reviewed others that also mention this as general agreement, which has also been supported by ACAOM's numbers. We might want to stop twisting words for an agenda and look at why people are for or against this issue and how to make this a better profession. It does not serve us well when some political agenda simply wants to stop all progress on this issue at all cost. Slash and burn politics leaves many casualties. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Chinese Medicine acudoc11 Mon, 3 May 2010 12:07:28 -0400 Re: Re: Another play It is interesting that such a post is made. A convenient partial definition of the word concept of consensus. Dictionary definition clearly says UNANIMITY -> UNANIMOUS. Unanimity of what? Obviously that's in the hands of whomever is manipulating. That's playing games. There is a well known saying not directed at anyone in particular. FIGURES LIE AND LIARS FIGURE! Richard I get concerned when it appears that we are ignorant of facts and appear to create our own reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Would you want someone who never sees patients, has no practice to speak of, and when one sees patients they are not good at making the patients better? I don't want someone leading this profession that has never had a successful practice and doesn't know how to have a successful practice. How you define a successful practice is another question altogether. Some might mean 30 patients a week or 100. This is another question. But someone that has a say in the legislation/laws, scope of practice, education, etc., these law affect practitioners; the word practitioner mean one who practices AOM. Sincerely, Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine daniel.schulman Mon, 3 May 2010 08:25:58 -0700 RE: Re: Another play Donhow do you define 'efficacy' and what is its precise relationship to one's capacity for enlightened leadership and guidance for the profession?Daniel --- On Mon, 5/3/10, Donald Snow <don83407 wrote: Donald Snow <don83407 RE: Re: Another play " TCM group " <Chinese Traditional Medicine > Received: Monday, May 3, 2010, 2:58 PM I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine Revolution Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 Re: Another play Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > Lonny, > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > of the hierarchy? Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 There you go again making accusations while ignoring the FACTS. I have done more for the profession than I see you have. So why don't you Do something constructive? Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc In a message dated 5/3/2010 4:10:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: Now maybe a better question is what are you going to do other then complain? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 General agreement is what is means and what it appears we have. We cannot force practitioners to respond nor pretend that refusal to respond equals an anti-position. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Traditional Medicine > don83407 > Sat, 1 May 2010 12:20:37 -0500 > RE: Re: Another play > > > Consensus should be the majority who actually care to vote. It can be a quorum or a simple majority of 51%. Who decides? > > > > Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > > > _______________ The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en\ -US:WM_HMP:042010_3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Unfortunately, that is a very true statement. But those " politicians " among us are not the way to go either. These are the ones that take the profession anywhere but where we want it to go. This is a hard question. One cannot say only those senior ones should govern, that's not right either. Just because one has been around a long time doesn't mean that they should be in the top of the hierachy via entitlement. This is something we are going to have to figure out. But there are those that will " tell " you how it will be. And I for one won't be " told " that's how it's going to be, not if you want support, anyway. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Traditional Medicine naturaldoc1 Mon, 3 May 2010 15:07:58 +0000 RE: Re: Another play Those with the greatest skills often are not the best leaders. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Traditional Medicine > don83407 > Mon, 3 May 2010 09:58:45 -0500 > RE: Re: Another play > > > I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. > > > > Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > > > > Chinese Medicine > Revolution > Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 > Re: Another play > Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > > > Lonny, > > > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > > of the hierarchy? > > Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 " As to yapping - are you a proponent of an even more over bloated and exorbitant FPD over the already over bloated and exorbitant FPM? " Why do you assume this is the only choice? Where is it written that the FPD will be this way? Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc _______________ The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en\ -US:WM_HMP:042010_3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 We also suffer from a lack of education, when it comes to matters of organization, politics, education, etc. We need others to help us to conduct ourselves in a normal way. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc _______________ The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount & ocid=PID28326::\ T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 AMEN!!! Rev. Dr. Reenah McGill Licensed Acupuncturist !!FREE!! email on Pain Relief signup NOW reply to this email 323.668.0278 land ph - 323.668.2206 fax - 818-378-9882 cell visit http://WWW.healingenergycenter.com or http://www.acuneuro.com or http://www.mcgillpainclinic.com --- On Mon, 5/3/10, Donald Snow <don83407 wrote: Donald Snow <don83407 RE: Re: Another play " TCM group " <Chinese Traditional Medicine > Monday, May 3, 2010, 9:29 AM Unfortunately, that is a very true statement. But those " politicians " among us are not the way to go either. These are the ones that take the profession anywhere but where we want it to go. This is a hard question. One cannot say only those senior ones should govern, that's not right either. Just because one has been around a long time doesn't mean that they should be in the top of the hierachy via entitlement. This is something we are going to have to figure out. But there are those that will " tell " you how it will be. And I for one won't be " told " that's how it's going to be, not if you want support, anyway. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Traditional Medicine naturaldoc1 Mon, 3 May 2010 15:07:58 +0000 RE: Re: Another play Those with the greatest skills often are not the best leaders. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Traditional Medicine > don83407 > Mon, 3 May 2010 09:58:45 -0500 > RE: Re: Another play > > > I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. > > > > Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > > > > Chinese Medicine > Revolution > Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 > Re: Another play > Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > > > Lonny, > > > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > > of the hierarchy? > > Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 That's sort of the problem as I see it. Most of our current leaders are embedded in the " school-cottage industry. " This in itself does not make them a bad choice. But it doesn't necessarily make them a good choice either. What really matters is that a person also have the time to get involved. That can take real sacrifice since most of these positions are non-pay. Or am I wrong there? Donald J. Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine acudoc11 Mon, 3 May 2010 11:05:54 -0400 Re: Re: Another play In either case .......none of this has developed in over 40 years. So until such time as the elders and those who are not in the school-cottage-industry and accreditation businesses GET involved the profession will continue to have a huge slant in the direction of special interests. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc In a message dated 5/3/2010 10:58:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, don83407 writes: I think seniority can play a part, but only a part. I believe that those who have sacrificed time, money, and effort for further higher education also have much to contribute. Seniority does not automatically mean efficacy. Higher education also does not automatically mean efficacy. There are many parameters and attributes to consider when choosing those who should make up the heirarchy. I know many practitioners in both AOM and martial art with many years of clinical or martial experience with low level skills. Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine Revolution Mon, 3 May 2010 14:13:57 +0000 Re: Another play Chinese Medicine , Anne Biris <lotuskarma wrote: > > Lonny, > > I completely agree with you. How do we choose who is to be at the top > of the hierarchy? Lonny: We don't choose whose on top. We acknowledge who is on top Natural hierarchy is a reality. People with the most clinical experience who have demonstrated the most integrity and care for the profession are on top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 Yes but are we willing to get guidance on our decisions and how best to achieve them? If we are not, then it still is a broken system and a problem no matter who you put at the helm. We need attorneys to help us with our poor legislation, which much should never have been passed as it stands. Look at many states that require you pay continual membership for an entrance exam. The issue is that most of the profession is not engaged as they prefer to live in the past, 2000 years ago and not be aware of legislative efforts. We tend to want to avoid being doctors, which is why we remain a cottage industry. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc > Chinese Traditional Medicine > don83407 > Mon, 3 May 2010 11:34:16 -0500 > RE: Re: Another play > > > That's sort of the problem as I see it. Most of our current leaders are embedded in the " school-cottage industry. " This in itself does not make them a bad choice. But it doesn't necessarily make them a good choice either. What really matters is that a person also have the time to get involved. That can take real sacrifice since most of these positions are non-pay. Or am I wrong there? > > > > Donald J. Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. > _______________ The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en\ -US:WM_HMP:042010_3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 We do not want attorney running our organizations, but attorneys are simply tools. We do want to use them as lobbyists and I would want them employed or contracted by our organizations. We have to have attorneys for without them we would have trouble. I am only a small business, but even I have a full time attorney working with me who is also my business manager. He has good counsel and is my right hand. If I have trouble. He helps and having attorneys available give your organization some credibility. As far as grass roots. Unfortunately all we have to do is take a look at our profession. We have no grass roots as most of us do not want to get involved. They want others to get involved, but they themselves want no part of it. That is the nature of human beings, I think. My two cents Don Snow, DAOM, MPH, L.Ac. Chinese Medicine acudoc11 Mon, 3 May 2010 12:57:36 -0400 Re: Re: Another play Attorneys are a naive way to go. Lobbyists are usually also attorneys. Grass roots is the way to go. But then again the AOM profession is apathetic. Richard Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 3, 2010 R, so which FPD is over-bloated and exorbitant as we have none in operation or even proposed? Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Chinese Medicine acudoc11 Mon, 3 May 2010 12:37:01 -0400 Re: Re: Another play M I know........ its the other way around. Stop twisting numbers and meanings. Exactly right......the political agenda of some are pushing through an FPD the way they want it.....over bloated and exorbitant. Richard A Freiberg OMD DAc AP LAc Read and weep because this is the TRUTH! Anything short of this is a manipulation. Which is what is going on. Merriam-Webster Dictionary Results: consensus 1 results for: consensus Main Entry: consensus kun-!sen(t)-sus Pronunciation: \ kən-ˈsen(t)-səs \ Function: noun Etymology: Latin, from consentire 1843 Results 1 a. 1 ageneral agreement : _unanimity_ (http://www.referencecenter.com/ref/redir?src=dictionary & requestId=a1a5c0047990a\ df9 & userQuery=consensus & clicke dItemURN=dictionary/unanimity?invocationType=dictionary.main & moduleId=Dictio naryMain & clickedItemDescription=DictionaryMain) - the ∼ of their opinion, based on reports…from the border - John Herseyb. bthe judgment arrived at by most of those concerned - the ∼ was to go ahead 2. 2group solidarity in sentiment and belief Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary copyright © 2009 by Merriam-Webster, incorporated In a message dated 5/3/2010 12:12:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, naturaldoc1 writes: R, Not so. I posted the entire listing from that sight and reviewed others that also mention this as general agreement, which has also been supported by ACAOM's numbers. We might want to stop twisting words for an agenda and look at why people are for or against this issue and how to make this a better profession. It does not serve us well when some political agenda simply wants to stop all progress on this issue at all cost. Slash and burn politics leaves many casualties. Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
