Essential Wellness' Registration Bill Discussion Thread

The Essential Wellness sent an E-Bomb in early April 2008 calling to stage a protest against the Minn. Registration Bill.
In the aftermath, the publication posted comments from both opponents and supporters of the Bill: http://esswellness.com/2008naturopathicdocbill.aspx
I am hoping that by posting these materials here, in blog format, the discussion will further develop.

Minnesota Naturopathic Doctor Registration Bill Debate

Current MN House version of bill

Essential Wellness newspaper honors all of the viewpoints it has received about the Naturopathic Doctor registration bill. Below I’ve compiled the “letters to the editor” with their varying opinions.

Essential Wellness assumes the position of information disseminator only. Through the years, it has been our experience that there is value in every facet of an issue and we hope to do this topic justice so folks can make up their own minds when all the facts have been uncovered. Emotional issues such as this means a nerve has been hit in the natural healthcare industry.

EW considers its role as one of information/education disseminator about healing, natural healthcare, and spirituality in the Upper Midwest. EW has chosen to be the “forum” for discussion and does not stand with one side or the other, just as it does not publish the personal political preferences of its publishers, nor their choices about prolife/prochoice, or other matters.

Lynn and Dee LaFroth, publishers of Essential Wellness newspaper

Matthew Wood, a former columnist for EW, comments: As many readers and activists know, I was involved in the "Health Freedom" bill which we got through several years ago. At that time I was concerned that the passage of a naturopathic physician's licensing bill would be used by the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice to go after unlicensed persons not covered by this bill. I know of one CAM provider who was warned by a friendly MD in a hospital in western Minnesota that there were plans to go after him after the naturopathic licensure bill passed. Our concerns were not baseless. Now, however, with our rights well established it is a different time and place and Minnesotans have to consider whether they would benefit from registration of naturopathic doctors, a first step towards licensure.

There are several issues involved in the Naturopathic Physician's Registration Bill. First is the preservation of the older "Health Freedom Act." This appears to be preserved in the new bill, though one has to watch bills down to the wire in the legislative process to make sure nothing is altered at the last minute. Opposition to the bill based on concern about this should be satisfied by keeping a careful watch as the bill goes through legislative review and voting. It would be ironic if the state were to outlaw, for example, herbalism when we now have an herbal program at Minneapolis Community Technical College. The existing bill allows occupations to grow and develop, which enriches Minnesotans and allows the state to be a step ahead in education and health care.

The second consideration revolves around the problem of different educational schemes in naturopathy, namely the four year, licensing track and the traditional, non-licensing track. This is really a turf battle between two different views of the profession, and as I am not a naturopath, I will remain neutral on this. I do believe Minnesotans could benefit from having licensed primary caregivers who were trained in holistic health. Four year naturopathic physicians fit this description. However, I am concerned that, as they strengthen their professional standing, they have weakened the holistic side of their education. I am concerned by the amount of allopathic medicine that is described under this statute.

Third, I am concerned for the loss of rights suffered by traditional naturopaths who have been in practice ten, twenty, and nearly thirty years. At the same time, I see no virtue in traditional naturopaths keeping the word 'doctor' when they really are not practicing on the same level as a physician. As I say, however, I will remain neutral on this topic.

Matthew Wood MSc (Herbal Medicine), Registered Herbalist (AHG)

Viewpoints SUPPORTING

Dear Lynn,

Thank you so much for providing a forum for discussing the 2008 Minnesota Naturopathic Doctor Registration Bill at the Essential Wellness web page.
As I wrote earlier, the bill is published online. I really appreciate Matthew Wood's comments
as I recognize that he made the effort to read the bill. I hope the opponents of our bill follow
his example and read it. And Mr. Wood is also correct that the bill language changes
as it moves through the legislature, and one must be vigilant to check for changes.
The bill is not written in obscure legalese language designed to confuse and obfuscate the issue.
Please, I implore everyone to open their eyes and read it.
One absolutely does not need to be a lawyer to understand it, it is clear to me to me and I am not even a native speaker of English.
If there is something in the bill that troubles you, then in good conscience you must speak up
against the words that offend you. But to object to it out of ignorance is unexcusable and disingenuous.
Please do what any responsible citizen must. Become informed!

In the interest of making this bill as easily accessible as possible I am copying its most recent House version from https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H1724.1.html&session=ls85
in its entirety:

The Bill is posted elsewhere on this Blog and is removed from this post

Regards,

Igor Vilensky

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Lynn LaFroth wrote:
Igor,
THANK YOU. Tomorrow you'll receive another eblast with THE MANY MANY "letters to the editor" I've received...viewpoints from many angles. Look for your letter below to be included. Appreciate your efforts to educate. Lynn
Lynn LaFroth
www.esswellness.com/livingwellnorthwoods.aspx
----- Original Message -----
From: Igor Vilensky
To: wellness@centurytel.net ; ivilensky@gmail.com ; Leslie Vilensky, N.D.
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 4:00 PM
Subject: Naturopathic Doctor Registration in Minnesota

Dear Publisher of Essential Wellness!

I am sending you this message to register my strongest
support for the Minnesota legislative effort to register
naturopathic physicians.
Naturopathic physicians dedicate their careers to providing
highest quality medical care to our public.
They must graduate from accredited naturopathic medical schools, recognized by the United
States Department of Education, and pass National Board Exams to earn their
Naturopathic Doctor Diplomas.
Their training includes science-based curriculum similar to that followed in
regular United States medical schools, as well as extensive classroom training and clinical
practice in modalities of holistic health care approaches. These approaches
emphasize preventative care and patient's lifestyle evaluation.
Mastering biomedical sciences allows these practitioners to excel in integrative care, being able
to provide medical care alongside the patient's regular physician.
The Registration Bill, Senate File 1520 and House File 1724, would allow the
naturopathic physicians to advance their profession in Minnesota through being able to
order simple medical tests, something beyond their current scope of practice, and to acquire malpractice
insurance.
The proposed Bill has no intention to limit the practice of any health care providers, neither M.D.s,
chiropractors, or anybody covered by the existing complementary and alternative bill 146A,
which protects all unlicensed and unregistered practitioners of naturopathy, homeopathy,
etc... .
The so-called "Health Freedom" opponents of the Registration Effort have again mounted campaigns
of disinformation.
Their attorneys have been contacting individual health care
practitioners, such as homeopaths, falsely claiming that the bill would make it illegal for
them to practice.
At the State Capital, the method has been to stall the process, by complaining that naturopathic
physicians are not open to discussion, claim support for the licensure/registration
conditional on 'clarifying' the bill language, creating amendments to change this language,
and after having these demands met, turning around and bombarding the legislators with calls
and emails opposing the bill, and repeating their falsehoods at the public hearings and meetings with
legislators.
This process is repeated with every single committee hearing, again and again.
Clearly there is never any intention to allow for naturopathic physicians'
recognition, just politically savvy efforts to create maximum havoc.
These organized efforts to derail the recognition of the naturopathic physicians'
profession by creating the atmosphere of fear and chaos have been successfully repeated year
after year.
Now the time has come to put an end to this idiocy.
The public of our great state deserves the best care available from the naturopathic physicians.
Down with the regime of fear and lies!

Respectfully,

Igor Vilensky

Disclosure: husband of Leslie Hunstad-Vilensky, N.D.

B. Lebowski:
To all you, under-trained, under-skilled, mail-order diploma holders like; Bruce Boraas, (big fraud calling yourself a doctor for a long time now huh?), Katie Murphy (ear-candling, give me a break), and Kathryn Berg (just plain ignorant if you think Diane Miller would help that which she opposes):

The bill is not about you, get it. You have your own bill 146A to protect you.

If you weren't so clueless, you would take a look at states that already license ND's and realize the benefits to the CAM health consumers. Remember them??

You're all so busy worrying about your own wallets, and the freak-show you call "healing", you've forgotten about the actual patients who support registration.

The real ND's in Minnesota have been trying for more than 10 years to get the licensing they are entitled to, only to be hampered every step of the way by out-of state attorneys being paid by out-of-state, mail order "schools" (forcing them to hire a lobbyist if they want a chance in hell!).

Follow the money and you'll find a bunch of insecure, "health-freedom" hacks, feeling very threatened for no good reason.

Get a real education or get out of the way. —Bunny Lebowski

Leslie Vilensky adds to earlier comments: Thank you for publishing my response to the message you sent out yesterday calling for the public protest against our legislation.
I am concerned that my response has been reformatted for publication and now mis-states attribution of language. The entire quote I include from the protest message is:
"""1. This bill claims (and I quote) "the therapeutic use of the physical agents of air, water, heat, cold, sound, light, and electromagnetic non-ionizing radiation and the physical modalities of electrotherapy, diathermy, ultraviolet light, hydrotherapy, massage, stretching, colon hydrotherapy, frequency specific microcurrent, electrical muscle stimulation, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and therapeutic exercise" to be their domain - just to name a few !! Imagine that! AIR and WATER their healing agents - SOUND and LIGHT their healing agents!! Are you not concerned? ""
This is not how my letter reads and I really feel it is important for clarity's sake that this be corrected.
Lastly, I am glad to know that you are planning on publishing an in-depth article on this issue.
If you have any questions re: the concern I have with my letter or if I can help provide furtherclarification on our legislation, please let me know.
Sincerely, Leslie Vilensky, N.D.President, Minnesota Association of Naturopathic Physicians
www.mnanp.org
Minnesota Valley Naturopathic Clinic7
02 Columbus Avenue South, New Prague, MN 56071
(952)758-5988 www.mnnaturopath.googlepages.com

Leslie Vilensky said: Today, April 7, 2008, you sent out a mass email marshaling opposition to protest the proposed legislation to register naturopathic doctors in Minnesota. I wonder if you had the opportunity to review this bill prior to sending this message? The bill language is available for public review at the Minnesota Legislation and Bill Status webpage as Bill Number 1724 in the House and Bill Number 1520 in the Senate: http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/legis.asp
The message you sent claims that naturopathic doctors aim to usurp certain modalities of care to exclude other practitioners. Here is a direct quote from that message: 1. This bill claims (and I quote) "the therapeutic use of the physical agents of air, water, heat, cold, sound, light, and electromagnetic nonionizing radiation and the physical modalities of electrotherapy, diathermy, ultraviolet light, hydrotherapy, massage, stretching, colon hydrotherapy, frequency specific microcurrent, electrical muscle stimulation, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and therapeutic exercise" to be their domain - just to name a few !!
Imagine that! AIR and WATER their healing agents - SOUND and LIGHT their healing agents!! Are you not concerned? Below is the actual language from House File 1724 (line numbers included): 5.10 Subd. 3. Other health care practitioners. Nothing in this chapter may be construed 5.11to prohibit or to restrict: 5.12 (1) the practice of a profession by individuals who are licensed, certified, or 5.13registered under other laws of this state and are performing services within their authorized 5.14scope of practice or unlicensed complementary and alternative health care under chapter 5.15146A; 6.8 (10) persons not registered by this chapter from the use of individual modalities 6.9which comprise the practice of naturopathic medicine, such as the use of nutritional 6.10supplements, herbs, foods, homeopathic preparations, and physical forces such as heat, 6.11cold, water, touch, and light.
Language in Senate File 1520 is virtually identical. Upon examining the proposed bill language, the claims of the Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project that our bill would make illegal practice of natural care by traditional naturopaths, homeopaths, herbalists, etc. are shown to be without merit. Many of our clients read your publication, and some were confused by your message. Please help to clarify the situation through balanced reporting.
Sincerely Yours, Leslie Vilensky, N.D. President, Minnesota Association of Naturopathic Physicians www.mnanp.org Minnesota Valley Naturopathic Clinic 702 Columbus Avenue South, New Prague, MN 56071 (952)758-5988 www.mnnaturopath.googlepages.com

Jeff Friesen writes: I am a freelance writer in St. Cloud and I am so mad at what the opponents of this bill have done that I am working on a newspaper article to be submitted locally and to the Strib in the TC. I will attach a draft copy, but in essence I think that the opponents have missed the boat and are fighting the wrong fight.
In email and phone conversations I have asked several board members [as well as serial email forwarders - ahem - pet peeve alert] to clarify what exactly they are having problems with. In some emails they asked me to write in support of amendments and when I asked for the amendments so I could read them I was told that I couldn't have them because it was a mistake to advertise what they were doing.
What? They have emailed that those covered under 146A will be unable to order vitamins, or lose the ability to practice, or the latest which states that if the recipient doesn't oppose the bill that they will lose the ability to practice a therapy they use. And again they will not say which therapy.
The reality is that is you read the legislation that you will see a specific clause that states that anyone already covered under 146A will remain covered under that law with the exception of licensable, board certified, clinically trained ND's. I believe [and I am trying to find the evidence to support this belief] is that ND's who went to correspondence schools like Clayton, etc., who have no clinical training, who are not board certified, and who are not licensed are trying to make sure that they get the privileges of being a physician without having earned the rights and without having to observe the responsibilities which go with that license. I would be more than happy to discuss my ongoing research into the financial ties that the organizations who are pushing this have with out of state interests.
For me this comes down to an issue of accountability. To quote my state rep Larry Hosch who supports out bill, "Licensure brings professionalism and accountability to a profession and allows for a greater sense of public trust and confidence." From a pragmatic point of view and as someone who moved here from the west coast where ND's are licensed [and where natural medicine is flourishing], why would alternative practitioners oppose the licensing of someone who could legitimize both their profession and act as a liaison with mainstream medicine, not to mention being willing and able with a license to order tests, etc. for your patients and perhaps get large amounts of the therapies that they are practicing covered by insurance. It seems a no brainer to me. Attached is my draft copy.
Thank you for being willing to look at this issue with an unbiased eye. Yours, Jeff Friesen

Friesen DRAFT ARTICLE: Tell me, what would you do if you saw a big bully pick on someone else? Would you do something about it or would you just sit back and watch it happen? I have just witnessed this and I am choosing to stand up. I hope you will join me.
Today I saw the health and safety of Minnesotans jeopardized while simultaneously a group of dedicated physicians were besmirched by out of state interests with a financial ax to grind.
There walks among you people who have gone to medical school yet who cannot call themselves Doctors because the laws in Minnesota need to be updated. These people call themselves ND’s (Naturopathic Doctors) and they go to medical school, they are clinically trained and they are board certified and licensed in other states. They choose to work unlicensed in Minnesota because they think that Minnesotans deserve a choice. But here in Minnesota they can’t call themselves Doctors, they have to call themselves Naturopathic Practitioners.
You are asking yourself why you should care?
The problem with that is that there is another group of people who have gone to correspondence school, who have no clinical experience, who are not board certified, who can never be licensed in another state, and who think they should be able to call themselves by the same name. They want this privilege despite the fact that they haven’t earned it. They tend to refer to themselves as traditional naturopaths.
The problem is that under Minnesota law they, or anyone without qualifications, can call themselves an ND. If you want to work as a physician in Minnesota, then it’s as easy as placing an ad in the paper. I don’t know about you, but if I see a Doctor I want to know that they went to more than a correspondence school. My surgeon had damn well better have actually worked in a clinical setting and damn well have better been trained properly. They damn well better have a license and they damn well better be board certified. In short they better be who they say they are. I don’t want a correspondence surgeon cutting on me.
Here is the bullying part. I recently saw a law that was proposed in the State House (HF 1724 - stalled in committee) and in the Senate (SF 1520 - where a decision is pending) effectively killed, a law that would have allowed consumers to tell which Naturopath was which and what their qualifications were. It would have allowed medically qualified ND’s to be registered without changing the law, which traditional naturopaths operate under (known as 146A).
Opponents will tell you that they were only trying to support choice for Minnesotans and they are sending thousands of emails out asking Minnesotans to support health freedom, but what choice do you have if you can’t tell if your ND is qualified medically. They will tell you that the law would have destroyed their business, but they can’t point to a single example in any state of who that has that has happened to. In fact the law proposed by the MnANP, the professional organization that represents the medically trained ND’s, contained specific language that protected the correspondence school naturopaths.
They will still be covered under law 146A, the law that covers complementary and alternative care practitioners such as faith healers, massage therapists, and yes, un-licensable naturopaths. They will say that they will not be able to buy supplements if this law is passed. The few companies that provide physician only pharmaceutical grade supplements already require a medical license on file to purchase from them – correspondence school naturopaths already can’t order from those companies. And who can’t already purchase supplements? Have you ever looked around a grocery store?
Finally they will tell you that the MnANP (www.mnanp.org - check them out if you want to see a licensed, board certified, medically qualified ND) is nothing but a bunch of elites who want to limit your choices. They are not more elite than anyone else who has taken the time and dedication to become qualified. They went to a 4-year medical school just like your MD. They earned the privilege. Ask anyone who tells you that they are elite if they did the same. Medically Qualified ND’s are not any different than any other profession. Don’t you want to know that your accountant or lawyer or doctor or even plumber is qualified? I do.
It is almost criminal that a combination of fear and out of state money can kill a law designed to protect Minnesotans. And the only reason it isn’t is because our legislators decided not to pass a law that would create a registry for medically qualified Naturopaths so regular Minnesotans could know who they are seeing for their health. Feel safer now? I don’t.—Jeff Friesen, St. Cloud, MN

Becki Haviland says: Hi Lynn: I work as an assistant to Helen Healy, ND and manage her clinic. I'm hoping you will be publicly supportive of the bill to register the qualified ND's in Minnesota.
Personally, I can tell you that the average person seeking naturopathic care has no idea about the health freedom law in Minnesota and most assume naturopaths are licensed or held to some kind of standard. This is not true. Anyone in Minnesota can call themselves a naturopath and practice medicine.
From the standpoint of the consumer/patient, registration is necessary if there will ever be a hope of insurance coverage for this type of healthcare.
And, registration is necessary so the doctorate level trained N.D.s can practice medicine according to the full scope of their training.
The people practicing as "traditional naturopaths" that will not be eligible for registration will continue to be protected under Minnesota law. These people, who mean well I'm sure, are spreading bad information about HF1724 & SF1520 and are actually inhibiting freedom by their opposition to the bills.
Thank you for helping get the correct information to the public.
Becki Haviland
For Helen C. Healy, N.D. Wellspring Naturopathic Clinic, 905 Jefferson Ave., Suite 202, St. Paul, MN 55102 651-222-4111, www.helenhealynd.com Immediate Past President Minnesota Association of Naturopathic Physicians, www.mnanp.org

Michael Thomson says: I was just informed of the role your magazine has taken in opposing the Naturopathic Physicians Registration Bill going through the MN legislature, by forwarding a very misinforming email today (written by Katie Murphy). I would respectfully request that you send out another email to the same recipients to counter this ongoing smear campaign that the opposition to this bill has been engaged in. There exists nothing in this bill that would lessen anyone's right to do anything as a health care provider, as a "Naturopath" or otherwise. The legislature's own lawyers keep saying this. It would simply expand the rights of Naturopathic Doctors to do what they were trained to do; practice medicine as primary care physicians. Thank you for your consideration of this,—Michael Thomson

Debra McLaughlin continues:
Greetings,
As with all issues this is one side….is this your company’s official position? If so I am very disappointed.

It would be good to hear from the Naturopathic Physicians who have been working toward licensure in this state for decades. There may be issues with how the bill is written, but overall I support licensure…this would give Minnesota residents the option of having their primary care provided by naturopaths instead of limiting their scope of practice. It would require that to call oneself a Naturopathic Physician that you would need to go through the full schooling, including clinical training.

The primary reason that we don’t have ND’s in Minnesota is the in-fighting among alternative care provider groups. The AMA doesn’t even need to expend resources here since we fight among ourselves so effectively!

Instead of protesting, how about working with the naturopaths to be sure the bill is as well written as possible?

Warmly,
Debra McLaughlin, CST, Birth Doula
Northern Lights Wellness – Craniosacral Therapy
31 W Superior Street, Suite 503
Duluth, MN 55802
218-590-1891
More from McLaughlin: Thanks for the note.
It has been very sad to me that state chiropractic association, and various practitioners such as the author of e-mail, have continued to oppose licensure of Naturopathic Physicians in the state. The present legislation would only be a registry and is still a long way from licensing in our state.
Since we don’t have licensure in this state no one can legally represent themselves as a naturopathic doctor.
It would be great to have an article in your publications that explored this more fully. I would be happy to help you find resources if you decide to move forward.
Warmly,
Debra McLaughlin, CST, Birth Doula
Northern Lights Wellness – Craniosacral Therapy
31 W Superior Street, Suite 503, Duluth, MN 55802
218-590-1891

Igor Vilensky responds: I am sending you this message to register my strongest support for the Minnesota legislative effort to register naturopathic physicians. Naturopathic physicians dedicate their careers to providing highest quality medical care to our public. They must graduate from accredited naturopathic medical schools, recognized by the United States Department of Education, and pass National Board Exams to earn their Naturopathic Doctor Diplomas. Their training includes science-based curriculum similar to that followed in regular United States medical schools, as well as extensive classroom training and clinical practice in modalities of holistic health care approaches. These approaches emphasize preventative care and patient's lifestyle evaluation. Mastering biomedical sciences allows these practitioners to excel in integrative care, being able to provide medical care alongside the patient's regular physician. The Registration Bill, Senate File 1520 and House File 1724, would allow the naturopathic physicians to advance their profession in Minnesota through being able to order simple medical tests, something beyond their current scope of practice, and to acquire malpractice insurance. The proposed Bill has no intention to limit the practice of any health care providers, neither M.D.s, chiropractors, or anybody covered by the existing complementary and alternative bill 146A, which protects all unlicensed and unregistered practitioners of naturopathy, homeopathy, etc.... The so-called "Health Freedom" opponents of the Registration Effort have again mounted campaigns of disinformation. Their attorneys have been contacting individual health care practitioners, such as homeopaths, falsely claiming that the bill would make it illegal for them to practice. At the State Capital, the method has been to stall the process, by complaining that naturopathic physicians are not open to discussion, claim support for the licensure/registration conditional on 'clarifying' the bill language, creating amendments to change this language, and after having these demands met, turning around and bombarding the legislators with calls and emails opposing the bill, and repeating their falsehoods at the public hearings and meetings with legislators. This process is repeated with every single committee hearing, again and again. Clearly there is never any intention to allow for naturopathic physicians' recognition, just politically savvy efforts to create maximum havoc. These organized efforts to derail the recognition of the naturopathic physicians' profession by creating the atmosphere of fear and chaos have been successfully repeated year after year. Now the time has come to put an end to this idiocy. The public of our great state deserves the best care available from the naturopathic physicians. Down with the regime of fear and lies! Respectfully, Igor Vilensky, Disclosure: husband of Leslie Hunstad-Vilensky, N.D. Robin Thomson continues: Thanks for forwarding those e-mails, Lynn. I'm continually surprised by the amount of fear and vehement objection put out by people who should be our colleagues, not our enemies. Sorry you got wrapped up in it. Robin Thomson, N.D. Naturopathic Family Medicine, LLC Oak Ridge Centre, Suite 203, 4801 Highway 61, White Bear Lake, MN 55110 (651)653-0170 www.natfamilymed.com

Stephani Waldron-Trapp says: It would be much appreciated if you would send out another mass email to Minnesotans on the bill HF 1724/SF 1520. I am a Naturopathic Physician here in MN and support the bill, as it is not taking away anyone's right to practice. Thank you for putting the time in to learn of the bill and re-send out an email. We appreciate your support. Sincerely, Stephani Waldron-Trapp, N.D. Natural Family Medicine, LLC (612) 250-2804

Jeff Friesen continues: Lynn, I appreciated being in your newsletter and in presenting both sides of the story. My draft article was just that, a draft and will in no way resemble my final copy as there is already another direction I want to take it in, one that is less angry. I'm afraid that I am not one of those writers who can keep his emotions out of his work. Thanks for everything, Yours, Jeff Friesen PS. Here are my comments on some of the rest of the letter represented. With the exception of myself, I thought everyone on the support side was very lucid. And most of the people on the opposition side had some less than lucid and some very strange comments to make. Bruce Borass doesn't seem to know what he is saying. Obviously, because this is a bill of registration, this is not a licensing bill. Ahem. The so called traditional naturopaths, as he calls them, as far as I can tell have no interest in being primary care providers, wherein clinically trained ND's are interested and trained to be primary care providers. Of course they would prefer to practice within the scope that their education allows. Wouldn't you? And to correct a misconception Mr. Borass has, these so called new ND's are more trained than anyone who went to a correspondence school. Sorry Bruce, facts are facts. Your education, although good, is not comparable. And some of them have been in this state for decades. Hardly new. Katie Murphy seems to missing the fact that the MnANP approached everyone in crafting this bill. In it's formative stages everyone who wanted input was given input including the MD board, the Nurses board, the acupuncture board, the DC board [and yes they are OK with the bill as written as the MnANP addressed their concerns], etc. etc. etc. Who didn't want to talk about it ... I'll give you 3 guesses. Any confusion is being created by the vaguely threatening email pushes and phone calls being spread by the MNHLFP's and their lawyer/advisor Diane Miller. As for Lobbyists playing hardball tactics, I don't know what you are talking about but the MnANP has only one. I would hope that the lobbyist is working hard to get their point of view represented. That is, after all, their job. I guess next time they will need to contact you personally Katie. As for Diane Miller, Kathryn Berg mentions that Diane has offered to "help." I wonder what kind of help that would was? Do we know? The letter says the Ms. Miller is a nationally recognized expert on drafting health freedom legislation and that she would advise them at little or no cost. But why would she be doing pro bono work for a small group of, to quote her directly, "elite individuals." How could she afford to do that? Who is paying her? Who pays for her to fly all over the country lobbying for "health freedom?" What kind of freedom does alternative medicine have when they are encouraged to turn on each other? Who benefits? Is it Diane Miller or someone other interested party? What is her agenda? Health Freedom? Hardly. By encouraging alternative health people to turn on each other she is not promoting freedom, she is promoting fear. Maybe there is nothing to these questions, but shouldn't they be answered before we, to quote her again, "take my word for it." Frankly statements like that make me check the parking lot to see if my car is still there. Kathryn Berg says that if the MnANP had listened to Diane Miller then the entire health community would have been behind them. Does that mean that Diane Miller is orchestrating the current smear campaign of confusion, fear and untruth that is targeted at the MnANP? It seems likely that she is at least providing some direction. Doesn't it make more sense to actually read the legislation and make your own mind up? Why respond to emails that make vague and unsubstantiated threats and ask you to support amendments they refused to reveal or publish before springing them on a legislative committee? Doesn't it make sense to have a class of primary care physicians who understand herbs, homeopathy, chinese medicine, etc. and have sympathy for it. Aren't you tired of trying to talk to doctors about your patients and getting no sympathy or a complete lack of understanding of what you do? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to refer a patient for tests to someone who supports what you do? Isn't it time for a better way? The fact is that registration of any alternative practitioner will benefit all of alternative health people. If you don't believe me then go out to a state like Oregon where I used to live. Natural medicine in all its forms is flourishing there so much so that you can't swing a cat in a circle without bumping into a healer, doctor, shaman, L.Ac. herbalist, etc. In Minnesota you can walk a long mile to find any of that. I urge you all to ignore the fear mongering.—Jeff Friesen, St. Cloud, MN

Robin Thomson said: I just wanted to offer some food for thought regarding the naturopathic doctor legislation. The bill under consideration DOES NOT limit any practitioner from doing their job. The therapies listed in the bill can still be used by anyone practicing under the CAM law- a similar example is the registered nurse license which states that they can draw blood, while an MD's license also states that they can draw blood. One person's ability to do a task DOES NOT negate another's ability to do that same task. All natural health practitioners would still be able to practice under the CAM law.

I think it's a shame that there's so much misunderstanding between these two groups. We should be working together to promote natural healing for our clients, not fighting amongst ourselves.

Thank you!
Robin Thomson, ND

B. Lebowski said: Regarding those who oppose:

Oy gevalt, have they all gone fafakta?

At best, they are incoherent.
At worst, well, they need to be hooked up to their own "electro-dermal screening" contraptions to figure out what exactly would cause the brain function imbalances they exhibit. Parasites? Yeast? Toxic build-up requiring a long series of colonics?

Clearly they have not READ THE FREAKING BILLS!

B. Lebowski
Supporter of science-based natural medicine, and licensed practitioners.

Viewpoints OPPOSING


Bruce Boraas says: This is not a licensure bill. It is not written to support the continued practice of traditional naturopaths, who are as trained and experienced as these new graduates. If you think this bill will is a bill so that naturopaths can be a primary care provider, you've not read the bill. This bill just muddies the water as put forth.—A. Bruce Boraas ND.

Kathryn Z Berg said: Let’s get some clarity in the language of this bill. It started out as a licensure bill and it ended up as a registration bill because the legislators, on their own, pulled that language out in the very first committee hearing it had. The reason that there aren’t more ND’s has nothing to do with infighting, and more to do with the fact that the Minnesota Legislature won’t license them to do some of the same things that MD’s are licensed to do in the state—they are licensed to do some of those things in other states, thus they are more attractive. There also is NOT a school here, so it is less likely that people will settle in MN to practice. The current ND’s have benefited greatly from Statute 146A in Minnesota, the law which allows unlicensed therapists to practice in Minnesota—this makes it a very attractive place to practice for most non-licensed therapists. This bill was drafted and made law with the assistance of the Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project (MNHLFP). So they have been working together.
The Naturopaths keep mentioning that there is nothing that prevents anyone else practicing their own craft, yet they resist at every turn the MNHLFP’s attempts to assure that from happening. Early on, the managed to prevent testimony at some committee hearings. Only because Rep. Karen Clark, a backer of the bill, insisted that it receive a full hearing did that happen. Unfortunately for them, the hearing was so late into the legislative session, there wasn’t time to clear up some of the questions that were brought up in the committee. I was there, I heard the entire hearing on the bill. After the hearing, there were legislators who were pretty clear about getting things cleared up and making sure that it has a proper hearing so some of the problems can be corrected. Just prior to the hearing in Rep. Clark’s committee they even put some of their own language in the bill to try to reassure the rest of the natural care community. So they must agree that there are some potential problems with what is in there.
Unfortunately, they refused help when Diane Miller, JD, nationally recognized as the premiere expert on drafting Health Freedom legislation, suggested that they needed to tighten up the language. Why would they not want help from the best person in the country who was willing to help them for little to no cost to them? If they had been willing to listen, the entire natural health community would have been behind them supporting them. It is important that all consumers have access to the practitioners they wish to see and all practitioners be able to continue practicing under Stat 146A. A few extra words in a bill would not harm the naturopathic registration bill, but would help every one else—consumers and practitioners.

Kathryn Z Berg, MA, PCH
Classical Homeopath
PO Box 25003
Woodbury, MN 55125
651-748-1556
www.lotushomeopathy.com

Katie Murphy responds: I am not against Naturopathic Doctors registering their trade. I know that it will lead to license legislature. I am not desiring or attempting to stop the future. I am not happy about the wording of this bill. I am wondering why this is being pushed so hard through this session when there are so few people (other than the Naturopaths who desire this bill - and not all do) who know about this bill. I am told this is bill has been tried before. But if there is such confusion about it and concern about it then why can't those who want it so bad come forward in an open forum and discuss it with those who are concerned? Why are the Naturopaths who want this bill hiring professional lobbyists (I saw one today who rudely interrupted a conversation I was having with a Representative) to push this bill instead of trying to work more directly with their professional counterparts in the community? The fact is many are very concerned about the wording in their bill and don't like the hard push by their attempts. If so many are concerned then it is time to meet and discuss. THAT IS WHAT I AM PROTESTING. I am asking the House and Senate to STOP this mad rush and give us time to seriously review our concerns. If we have nothing to be concerned about then I will be the first to give hugs all around for a great job done.

In a 2nd email Katie continues: Again, I say - if there is nothing wrong with this bill and we are all safe then 1) why didn't the Naturopaths come forward in the beginning the explain what they wanted and how they wanted to protect everyone else's rights and function as part of our community for our support. and 2) why are their lobbyists playing "hardball" tactics for them. and 3) since many of us are just now hearing about this bill and are obviously concerned, then why not let it rest just a few more months and give us time to iron out our confusions and concerns. and 4) why does their "Scope of Practice" cover everything on earth and every therapy in the industry? Surely, their 4 years of education does not teach ALL they have listed. and 5) if they are listing such a universal wide "scope of practice" to provide ample opportunity y for themselves and their future, then WHY are they so opposed to any of us wanting to assure the same for ourselves, and 6) why in the world should we take their "word for it" that our rights are protected. After all, they are Naturopaths and not lawyers. Give us time to consult our own lawyers. I have many $$ at stake in this business. Again, I am not saying "no" to their desire to be "registered". I am staying STOP, SLOW DOWN, LISTEN TO US and let’s discuss this so we can work together instead of creating a lot more disharmony.
Katie Murphy, Healing Insights, Woodbury, MN