The Health Care Truth and Transparency Act of 2010’

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
P

ProRealDoc

Full Member
Verified Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
300
WASHINGTON, DC - As the United States prepares to add 32 million more patients to the health care system through health care reform, 11 of the leading medical societies in the country joined together today to publicly support the introduction of the Health Care Truth and Transparency Act of 2010.

The bill, introduced by Rep. John Sullivan (R-OK) and Rep. David Scott (D-GA), provides much needed clarification and resources to address patient confusion in the health care marketplace. The bill adds enhanced transparency requirements regarding the delivery of health care and additional resources to support existing federal regulations.

"The bill empowers patients," said Alexander A. Hannenberg, MD, president of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. "A properly informed patient will be better prepared to make health care decisions. As physician specialists providing care in highly complex environments such as the operating room and intensive care unit, we believe it is essential that patients clearly understand the training and qualifications of those at their bedside.

We welcome the introduction of the Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2010 and commend Representatives Sullivan and Scott for their leadership on this important and timely patient issue."
A nationwide survey conducted in 2008 confirmed that there is increasing patient confusion regarding the many types of health care providers – including physicians, technicians, nurses, physician assistants and other allied providers. The study further found that patients want accurate information about these providers.

"The truth and transparency act would significantly reduce patient confusion and safeguard the public by prohibiting the dangerous practice of some health care providers who use misleading terminology to misrepresent themselves or their qualifications," said David W. Parke II, MD, CEO of the American Academy of Ophthalmology. "Patients should be confident in their health care decisions without having to second-guess their providers' credentials."

Passage of the bill would make it unlawful for any health care professional to make deceptive statements or engage in any act that misleads patients whether it is in person, in advertisements or marketing efforts as to one's education, training, degree, licensure or clinical experience.

"As our nation embarks on the implementation of comprehensive health care reform, it is important for patients to have accurate information on those individuals providing their care. This legislation will take significant steps toward educating consumers on who is providing their health care, thus empowering patients to have a more proactive role in their health care," said Larry Wickless, D.O., president of the American Osteopathic Association.


About the Coalition
The following medical societies are a part of the coalition in support of the Health Care Truth and Transparency Act of 2010:


American Academy of Dermatology Association
American Academy of Ophthalmology
American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery
American Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
American College of Surgeons
American Osteopathic Association
American Psychiatric Association
American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association
American Society of Anesthesiologists
American Society of Plastic Surgeons
Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
I'm all for this bill and I really hope it passes.

I did a google search on it and I came up with this... http://www.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/ANAPoliticalPower/Federal/Issues/Healthcare.aspx

Position
ANA opposes the Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act as an unnecessary and dangerous imposition of trade restrictions on nursing practice.


Rationale
Decades of research have shown that APRNs provide cost-effective, high quality care. Multiple studies reveal that patients treated by APRNs have outcomes comparable to those who are treated by physicians, and that APRN care often results in higher patient satisfaction. While APRN practice differs from that of physicians, APRNs do - in fact – provide services equivalent to those of medical doctors and doctors of osteopathy.


What a shocker, the American Nursing Association opposes this bill.
 
ProRealDoc said:
WASHINGTON, DC - As the United States prepares to add 32 million more patients to the health care system through health care reform, 11 of the leading medical societies in the country joined together today to publicly support the introduction of the Health Care Truth and Transparency Act of 2010.

The bill, introduced by Rep. John Sullivan (R-OK) and Rep. David Scott (D-GA), provides much needed clarification and resources to address patient confusion in the health care marketplace. The bill adds enhanced transparency requirements regarding the delivery of health care and additional resources to support existing federal regulations.

“The bill empowers patients,” said Alexander A. Hannenberg, MD, president of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. “A properly informed patient will be better prepared to make health care decisions. As physician specialists providing care in highly complex environments such as the operating room and intensive care unit, we believe it is essential that patients clearly understand the training and qualifications of those at their bedside.

We welcome the introduction of the Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2010 and commend Representatives Sullivan and Scott for their leadership on this important and timely patient issue.”
A nationwide survey conducted in 2008 confirmed that there is increasing patient confusion regarding the many types of health care providers – including physicians, technicians, nurses, physician assistants and other allied providers. The study further found that patients want accurate information about these providers.

“The truth and transparency act would significantly reduce patient confusion and safeguard the public by prohibiting the dangerous practice of some health care providers who use misleading terminology to misrepresent themselves or their qualifications,” said David W. Parke II, MD, CEO of the American Academy of Ophthalmology. “Patients should be confident in their health care decisions without having to second-guess their providers’ credentials.”

Passage of the bill would make it unlawful for any health care professional to make deceptive statements or engage in any act that misleads patients whether it is in person, in advertisements or marketing efforts as to one’s education, training, degree, licensure or clinical experience.

“As our nation embarks on the implementation of comprehensive health care reform, it is important for patients to have accurate information on those individuals providing their care. This legislation will take significant steps toward educating consumers on who is providing their health care, thus empowering patients to have a more proactive role in their health care,” said Larry Wickless, D.O., president of the American Osteopathic Association.


About the Coalition
The following medical societies are a part of the coalition in support of the Health Care Truth and Transparency Act of 2010:


American Academy of Dermatology Association
American Academy of Ophthalmology
American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery
American Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
American College of Surgeons
American Osteopathic Association
American Psychiatric Association
American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association
American Society of Anesthesiologists
American Society of Plastic Surgeons
Click to expand...

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
"While APRN practice differs from that of physicians, APRNs do - in fact – provide services equivalent to those of medical doctors and doctors of osteopathy."


This is the exact hocus-pocus horsesh*t that requires a bill like the aforementioned. When nurses do anesthesia, it's not practicing medicine because it's nursing - but it's equivalent?

F*ck all that up and down.

dc
 
Last edited:
I wish that it would pass but I'm not hopeful. This should have been included in the Health Reform bill but obviously there was enough resistance from non-physician groups and lack of interest from lawmakers to include it.

These steps are more realistic and doable
-------------------------------------------------------------

1) At the local level, each hospital should pass policies prohibiting non-physicians from misrepresenting themselves in the clinical setting. This is what the "The Health Care Truth and Transparency Act" wants to accomplish at the national level. Doing this at the local level is heck of a lot easier to pass than trying to get Congress to act. See orangele's thread.

2) Educate your fellow colleagues about the political realities of medicine. Explain to them the encroachment of NP's. Medical students should start student interest groups called something like "Physicians for the Preservation of Medicine" or something like that where they can present to their classmates and future physicians the training differences between physicians vs NP's, the political activities by the NP's, and what the future of medicine will look like, ie, DNP's demanding to be equivalent to you, if you don't act now. I meet far too many med students, residents, and attendings who are clueless because there is no outlet for these discussions. If nurses get together and plot how to expand their scope, why aren't physicians getting together to plan their response?

3) Educate the public about the differences between the training of physicians and NP's. Educate the lawyers. Lawsuits are a huge deterrent to scope creep. Make it so risky and expensive for NP's to take over medicine that only the most fool-hardy would dare. Being a resident you see how easy it is to injure or kill someone with poor decision-making. When these non-physicians commit malpractice (something which I see all the time), inform the patients and encourage them to contact a lawyer. It just takes 1 untimely death or lawsuit for the policies of the entire hospital to change. Remember that hospitals are reactionary and highly CYA.

4) Encourage real outcome studies that compare physicians and non-physicians. You see NP's touting studies that claim no difference between them and physicians. We all know that these studies are flawed but the public and the lawmakers do not. Just based on experience, we all know that non-physicians have poorer clinical decision-making than physicians. Let's capture that information is a well-designed, highly powered study that forms the gold standard. Don't let NP's take over medicine because they put out poorly designed, biased studies and were able to lobby lawmakers based on them.
 
Taurus, good post. I would add that, in addition to working through individual hospital committees, its important to pursue these matters through state legislatures as well. Also, these efforts are not mutually exclusive and should be made in parallel.

ANA response

The following section is rife with irony:

"The Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act is also inconsistent in its approach to the issue of false representation. The legislation fails to address the actions and representations of MDs and DOs that fall outside of their education, skills, and clinical training."
 
Taurus said:
2) Educate your fellow colleagues about the political realities of medicine. Explain to them the encroachment of NP's. Medical students should start student interest groups called something like "Physicians for the Preservation of Medicine" or something like that where they can present to their classmates and future physicians the training differences between physicians vs NP's, the political activities by the NP's, and what the future of medicine will look like, ie, DNP's demanding to be equivalent to you, if you don't act now. I meet far too many med students, residents, and attendings who are clueless because there is no outlet for these discussions. If nurses get together and plot how to expand their scope, why aren't physicians getting together to plan their response?
Click to expand...

I agree with pretty much everything you say, but I have to add a couple of thoughts. First, this type of thing will never fly at any medical school. It would have to be an entity free of any institution that teaches not only med students, but any other health program, be it nursing, or PAs or pharmDs, for that matter. Trying to start something like this would cause quite a **** storm. Both from students of those programs and the people that teach to those programs and hold those various degrees.

Additionally, the reason so many nurses get together and come up with these stupid ideas is that they work 36 or so hours a week vs. the 50+ that a large number of Drs do, not to mention union representatives (see: goons). Plenty more time to attend meetings, etc. It is apparent that for any significant response to these kinds of problems to occur, that docs are going to have to get their checkbook out and support other people (lawyers, pr folks, etc.) to do most of the work on this. Just a reality of time constraints. As a student, I have donated to the ASA and would donate to other groups if I felt there was one out there that truly worked for the benefit of both patients and docs- unlike the AANA, which works for nurses first as is clearly evidenced by their response to this bill.

Edit- back to the original post, I am glad to see that Wickless is on board with this. I have heard him speak and he seems to have his head in the right place regarding health care reform, even if the AOA as a group doesn't always do what I would agree with.
 
Last edited:
lushmd said:
ANA response

The following section is rife with irony:

"The Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act is also inconsistent in its approach to the issue of false representation. The legislation fails to address the actions and representations of MDs and DOs that fall outside of their education, skills, and clinical training."
Click to expand...

When was the last time a MD or DO claimed to be a nurse, I wonder...

And also from their response.

This bill would make it illegal for any licensed health care provider who is not a medical doctor (MD) or doctor of osteopathic medicine (DO) to make any statement or engage in any act that would lead patients or the public to believe that they have the same or equivalent education, skills, or training as an MD or DO.
Click to expand...

And what would be so wrong with this, you fools? You certainly don't have the same education if you aren't a MD or DO, and its highly debatable that most of your skills, or "training" are the same either.
 
IDBasco said:
I agree with pretty much everything you say, but I have to add a couple of thoughts. First, this type of thing will never fly at any medical school. It would have to be an entity free of any institution that teaches not only med students, but any other health program, be it nursing, or PAs or pharmDs, for that matter. Trying to start something like this would cause quite a **** storm. Both from students of those programs and the people that teach to those programs and hold those various degrees.
Click to expand...

Vaild points, ID. But don't let this keep you (read: medical students) from trying to educate yourselves/classmates. Without creating a new interest group, you could simply use your current "acceptable" interest groups to spread the good word. Add a "Political Action" section to your meeting minutes, or create an advocate position within the group as an officer responsible for providing updates about this stuff at every meeting. A big help would be collecting signatures and firing off letters to your representatives on state and national levels.

Stay active guys!

dc
 
I agree with bigdan...as a medical student I set up several lunch lectures as part of a student group to address these types of issues. Students weren't always initially interested, but they'll stick around for some free burritos or pizza. And afterwards, there were always several who would come up and ask more questions and want to get involved.

But I agree, at my medical school it was no exception that virtually none of these topics were discussed by faculty or administration directly.
 
i think there are primary care organizations supporting this... or am i reading it wrong?

http://sullivan.house.gov/News/Docum...umentID=185431

American Medical Association
American Academy of Dermatology Association
American Academy of Family Physicians
American Academy of Ophthalmology
American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery
American Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
American College of Surgeons
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
American Osteopathic Association
American Psychiatric Association
American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association
American Society of Anesthesiologists
American Society of Plastic Surgeons </B>
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I like the way you highlight the AMA as a primary care organization. So true! :laugh:

Nhl135 said:
i think there are primary care organizations supporting this... or am i reading it wrong?

http://sullivan.house.gov/News/Docum...umentID=185431

American Medical Association
American Academy of Dermatology Association
American Academy of Family Physicians
American Academy of Ophthalmology
American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery
American Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
American College of Surgeons
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
American Osteopathic Association
American Psychiatric Association
American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association
American Society of Anesthesiologists
American Society of Plastic Surgeons </B>
Click to expand...
 
Will this "truth" and "transparency" extend to the actual involvement of the anesthesiologist? You know signing the chart and hmmmmm oh surfing the net bitching about CRNA's actually performing the anesthetic etc. etc. Probably not that would be a bit too much truth, hey?
 
icallbull said:
Will this "truth" and "transparency" extend to the actual involvement of the anesthesiologist? You know signing the chart and hmmmmm oh surfing the net bitching about CRNA's actually performing the anesthetic etc. etc. Probably not that would be a bit too much truth, hey?
Click to expand...
You're just jealous Nurse Bull.
Your supervising Anesthesiologists are part of the team, like it or not. That fact is not obscured, no lies anywhere. When something goes very wrong, I'm sure you will be quick to note that you are working under the supervision of the Attending Anesthesiologist. You'll probably add at the deposition that he/she spends most of the day surfing the web for a better job on gaswork.:rolleyes:
If you don't like your job, find another one. If you don't want to be supervised, go West young man and take your chances. We have a great working relationship with our CRNAs and they are well paid and happy shift workers. We do our own cases as well.:eek: Something tells me that we might have trouble attracting the best and the brightest CRNAs if they had to work 50+ hours a week, weekends, call, etc. They seem to like their 36 hr full time job.
 
Been indie ever since I left school, do you know what stuper, oh wait supervision means? For a CRNA it means you are only as good as the worst attending, if they cannot do blocks well neither can you ...that day so what you do them all day long, they cannot do sab or TEA neither can you..that day.
The best go solo the worst love the ACT being a factory worker turning the dial because some idiot said to. All of you bitch about CRNA's making poor decisions in you practices, that is because you have trained them NOT to make decisions you do the thinkin...no thanks there are just to many incompetent anesthesiologists out there.
 
Oh I guess from the stunning silence that the "truth" and "transparency" will NOT extend to pointing out your actual "involvement" you know signing the chart, along with sound advice like "give them oxygen" or of course "avoid tachycardia and hypertension" you know the things you complain about from those who clear patients for surgery, cause that sure is not 99.9% of you lounge lizards or stool sitters, had a difficult knee scope lately ROFL.
 
Taurus said:
I wish that it would pass but I'm not hopeful. This should have been included in the Health Reform bill but obviously there was enough resistance from non-physician groups and lack of interest from lawmakers to include it.

These steps are more realistic and doable
-------------------------------------------------------------

1) At the local level, each hospital should pass policies prohibiting non-physicians from misrepresenting themselves in the clinical setting. This is what the "The Health Care Truth and Transparency Act" wants to accomplish at the national level. Doing this at the local level is heck of a lot easier to pass than trying to get Congress to act. See orangele's thread.

2) Educate your fellow colleagues about the political realities of medicine. Explain to them the encroachment of NP's. Medical students should start student interest groups called something like "Physicians for the Preservation of Medicine" or something like that where they can present to their classmates and future physicians the training differences between physicians vs NP's, the political activities by the NP's, and what the future of medicine will look like, ie, DNP's demanding to be equivalent to you, if you don't act now. I meet far too many med students, residents, and attendings who are clueless because there is no outlet for these discussions. If nurses get together and plot how to expand their scope, why aren't physicians getting together to plan their response?

3) Educate the public about the differences between the training of physicians and NP's. Educate the lawyers. Lawsuits are a huge deterrent to scope creep. Make it so risky and expensive for NP's to take over medicine that only the most fool-hardy would dare. Being a resident you see how easy it is to injure or kill someone with poor decision-making. When these non-physicians commit malpractice (something which I see all the time), inform the patients and encourage them to contact a lawyer. It just takes 1 untimely death or lawsuit for the policies of the entire hospital to change. Remember that hospitals are reactionary and highly CYA.

4) Encourage real outcome studies that compare physicians and non-physicians. You see NP's touting studies that claim no difference between them and physicians. We all know that these studies are flawed but the public and the lawmakers do not. Just based on experience, we all know that non-physicians have poorer clinical decision-making than physicians. Let's capture that information is a well-designed, highly powered study that forms the gold standard. Don't let NP's take over medicine because they put out poorly designed, biased studies and were able to lobby lawmakers based on them.
Click to expand...
One stop shop for all your linky needs:

Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2010

- Reps. Sullivan and Scott Introduce Bipartisan Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act

- Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2010 [Physician Association Response]

- AMA Announces Support for Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act

- Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2010 [American Nurses Association Response]
 
Last edited:
icallbull said:
Been indie ever since I left school, do you know what stuper, oh wait supervision means? For a CRNA it means you are only as good as the worst attending, if they cannot do blocks well neither can you ...that day so what you do them all day long, they cannot do sab or TEA neither can you..that day.
The best go solo the worst love the ACT being a factory worker turning the dial because some idiot said to. All of you bitch about CRNA's making poor decisions in you practices, that is because you have trained them NOT to make decisions you do the thinkin...no thanks there are just to many incompetent anesthesiologists out there.
Click to expand...

Umm... dude. Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it seems that you need to chill out a little bit. What are you actually saying?

Have you had any significant exposure on common medical school terminology such as p53 mutations, von hippel lindau syndrome, or what it means to have cystic medial necrosis? It is tested on our 1st boards and it's Chinese to nearly all CRNA's.
Think about this: every physician who reads this post will hear a bell ring in their head with the above words. Our depth of study is beyond what is accomplished in crna school (based on time alone).
So chill, man. It's not a big deal. The team concept is cool. Do you know your position on the playing field?

What is your reaction minutes before your next case and your patient presents with Alcaptonuria or Homocysteinuria? Does it ring a bell? Or... Chinese?

:poke:
 
sevoflurane said:
Umm... dude. Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it seems that you need to chill out a little bit. What are you actually saying?

Have you had any significant exposure on common medical school terminology such as p53 mutations, von hippel lindau syndrome, or what it means to have cystic medial necrosis? It is tested on our 1st boards and it's Chinese to nearly all CRNA's.
Think about this: every physician who reads this post will hear a bell ring in their head with the above words. Our depth of study is beyond what is accomplished in crna school (based on time alone).
So chill, man. It's not a big deal. The team concept is cool. Do you know your position on the playing field?

What is your reaction minutes before your next case and your patient presents with Alcaptonuria or Homocysteinuria? Does it ring a bell? Or... Chinese?

:poke:
Click to expand...

Now he/she will look them up and post as if he/she has known about them all along.:laugh:
 
the response from the ANA is very scary...

the bill basically makes it illegal for nurses to misrespresent themselves as physicians, it doesn't say they can't say they have a 'doctorate', just that they can't present themselves as doctors who are equivalent with MD/ DO's...and they have a problem with that? so basically , underneath the BS - they want the ability and option to do that.

i mean, thats all that it comes down to. they can argue whatever they want, but there's no other reason to be against the bill. it won't impact their rights or practice scope, just their ability to fake out patients by introducing themselves as 'dr'. keep your fingers crossed this thing passes, if it doesnt, we've just seen a pretty disturbing preview of what advanced practice nurses are pushing for : practice equivalency, and the right to openly tell patients they are the same as us. how did we ever let it get this bad. :eek:
 
also, i love how nurses act like a patient doesn't care if they are getting their care from a nurse vs an MD/ DO - if i only had a dime for every time i heard the line that 'we care for the patient', or 'we have a holistic approach', or 'we treat the whole patient, and do everything the physician does as well ' blah blah blah.

people aren't stupid - i understand that most of the public won't want to get into the intricacies of this debate, but when it comes down to nurse vs. physician - i can guarantee the physician will be chosen every single time..

their propaganda machine is in full swing and we've got to do something about it. i think this act is the first step in the right direction. i know with healthcare costs and shortages it isn't feasible to always have a physician present for every little problem, but if we don't stand our ground, mark my words, dermatology DNP's & CRNA's aren't the end of it, we will start seeing surgery DNP's , radiology DNP's, and so forth..
 
Ask a patient if they want a medical doctor and surgeon (M.D) or Advanced Practice Nurse to take care of them. What do you think they will say?
 
I think everyone figured this out, but a little while ago I had written the AMA to ask why they did not outwardly support the bill. One of their state legislative attorneys who's been pretty responsive in the past responded confirming that the AMA did in fact sign on with this bill on May 13th. Here's the press release:

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/healthcare-truth-transparency.shtml

I think inclusion of the 2008 study in the wording of this bill will potentially help its passage.

One thing I was wondering about, though... I noticed on a thread over in the derm forum a link to this ridiculous place called Physician Skin, based in Arizona. It's a two-man cosmetic derm outfit run by a couple of "doctors of naturopathy." Note on the below URL they have the gall to refer to their degrees as "medical doctorates" and proceed to state that they completed residencies in various disciplines, including "minor surgery, IV treatments, and dermatology."

http://www.physicianskinarrowhead.com/bio.html

Is this kind of garbage affected at all by this bill? Or do these clowns circumvent such attempts at reigning in quackery because they're so far out in left field that they're like herbals and the FDA?

It's pathetic that an uninformed consumer could easily go to a place called PHYSICIAN Skin, see "Medical Doctorates" on the wall, and (not unreasonably) assume they're seeing an actual medical doctor. Jesus...
 
jackdaniels2010 said:
I think everyone figured this out, but a little while ago I had written the AMA to ask why they did not outwardly support the bill. One of their state legislative attorneys who's been pretty responsive in the past responded confirming that the AMA did in fact sign on with this bill on May 13th. Here's the press release:

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/healthcare-truth-transparency.shtml

I think inclusion of the 2008 study in the wording of this bill will potentially help its passage.

One thing I was wondering about, though... I noticed on a thread over in the derm forum a link to this ridiculous place called Physician Skin, based in Arizona. It's a two-man cosmetic derm outfit run by a couple of "doctors of naturopathy." Note on the below URL they have the gall to refer to their degrees as "medical doctorates" and proceed to state that they completed residencies in various disciplines, including "minor surgery, IV treatments, and dermatology."

http://www.physicianskinarrowhead.com/bio.html

Is this kind of garbage affected at all by this bill? Or do these clowns circumvent such attempts at reigning in quackery because they're so far out in left field that they're like herbals and the FDA?

It's pathetic that an uninformed consumer could easily go to a place called PHYSICIAN Skin, see "Medical Doctorates" on the wall, and (not unreasonably) assume they're seeing an actual medical doctor. Jesus...
Click to expand...

That arrowhead crap was disgusting. Those naturopaths repeatedly refer to themselves as physicians, discuss the awarding of their medical doctorate, and refer to their residency training. What a complete sham.....:thumbdown:

It's a shame patients get duped by this crap, and an even bigger shame that the medical community as a whole doesn't bring down the hammer on this crap.
 
Southpaw said:
That arrowhead crap was disgusting.
Click to expand...

:laugh: No kidding...what a joke.

I wonder if those two honestly believe in their product or if they're aware of their quackery.

I noticed one of them studied Medical Microbiology in undergrad; gee...no chance she was pre-allo at one point before her GPA started to slip?

Well, at least they both decided to only pursue "fellowships" in "minor surgery" and not...err...major surgery. :scared:
 
jackdaniels2010 said:
I think everyone figured this out, but a little while ago I had written the AMA to ask why they did not outwardly support the bill. One of their state legislative attorneys who's been pretty responsive in the past responded confirming that the AMA did in fact sign on with this bill on May 13th. Here's the press release:

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/healthcare-truth-transparency.shtml

I think inclusion of the 2008 study in the wording of this bill will potentially help its passage.
Click to expand...
Hey thanks for pointing this out.

In my previous post if you click on the link [Physician Association Response] you will see that the AMA was on board with this bill at the same time as everyone else. They just got sandwiched in the signature line. Take note that the AOA also supports this bill.

Sincerely,

American Academy of Dermatology Association
American Academy of Family Physicians
American Academy of Ophthalmology
American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery
American Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons
American College of Surgeons
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
American Medical Association
American Osteopathic Association
American Psychiatric Association
American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association
American Society of Anesthesiologists
American Society of Plastic Surgeons
Click to expand...
I think the 2008 survey that was mentioned in the press release is the same one that Winged Scapula received in her correspondence with the AMA Legal Counsel.
:idea:

Winged Scapula said:
Here's the latest from AMA Legal Counsel...

Dear Dr. Cox:

Your frustration is shared by many physicians, which is one of the reasons why – as you have heard – the AMA has begun a Truth in Advertising campaign to help states enact legislation that would require all health care professionals to truthfully disclose their level of education, training and licensure in all advertisements and communications. There also are other provisions to our model legislation to help increase clarity for patients – and we are working to enlist allies to assist states when they move on such TIA legislation.

To show the depth of public confusion, I have attached a survey we conducted in 2008. The DNP issue is just one piece, unfortunately.

I don’t mean to sound like a marketing guy (I’m a lawyer, after all), but the AMA does exist to advocate on these and other issues for all physicians because we understand that you spend your time on your patients and not on politics. My own internist, who I trust with my life, tells me that she reads journals, not AMA e-mails, but she’s glad there’s an AMA to fight for her. Sounds like the right choice to me!

I don’t know if you have made a decision whether to join this year, but please know that we’d really love to have you! Also, even if you decide not to join, I would love to be able to quote you for potential advocacy pieces re: the fact that patients do not know the differences btw M.D., D.N.P., P.A., Au.D. , N.D. , A.R.N.P., Psy.D., Sc.D., etc. I won’t use it without your permission.

Thank you again, and please do not hesitate to contact me if you need anything.

Daniel

View attachment 14660
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

J
Wage Transparency
Replies
25
Views
2K
JM11
J
Dr. Anonymouss
Attention financial enthusiasts: The Secure 2.0 Act
Replies
24
Views
1K
Dr. Anonymouss
Dr. Anonymouss
U
Take Care of Maya Trial
Replies
44
Views
5K
DocMcCoy
DocMcCoy
TheLoneWolf
Sick Profit: Investigating Private Equity’s Stealthy Takeover of Health Care Across Cities and Specialties
Replies
13
Views
1K
Dr. Rude
Dr. Rude
R
ACCM Critical Care Fellowships
Replies
0
Views
437
residentsnooze
R
Top