Got a stuffy nose and want your naturopath to prescribe a tincture of cayenne to clear you out? A growing reluctance by medical suppliers to supply naturopathic doctors in Alaska might put the kibosh on your capsicum.
C.W. Jasper, a naturopathic doctor for 30 years and a member of the Legislative Committee of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians, told the House Labor and Commerce Committee that, starting about a year ago, the state of Alaska Department of Professional Licensing began to advise medical and herbal remedy suppliers in the Lower 48 to refrain from selling naturopathic supplies to Alaska NDs.
He said he is confused by the sudden change in practice that he said went back at least 18 years.
“Patients in the state of Alaska ... are suffering as a result of this,” Jasper said.
Juneau’s Legislative Reps. Cathy Munoz and Beth Kerttula have sponsored a bill to clarify the rights of naturopaths in Alaska and hopefully ease the minds of U.S. medical suppliers. House Bill 266 would move language defining the types of remedies and medicines licensed naturopathic doctors can prescribe to their patients. Currently the definition of what is a drug as opposed to an herbal remedy is a regulation and not codified in statute.
“We want to simply take this regulation, that has been on the books for a number of years, and move this regulation into statute so that we can continue to do what we have done for the last 18 years,” Jasper said. “That will help [medical suppliers] to understand that it is indeed valid.”
Alaska is one of 16 states that license naturopathic doctors, Jasper said. Some states allow naturopaths to prescribe drugs and a few allow controlled substances, Jasper said. Alaska allows the use of herbal remedies.
In the 1980s Jasper said the state of Alaska agreed on regulations controlling naturopathic practices.
“We agreed to no prescription drugs as long as we could continue to use prescription medicine,” Jasper said.
Alaska has a definition describing the difference between a drug and medicine — the main difference being drugs are derived from a chemical process. Prohibited drugs include Valium, Albuterol and Lipitor. Naturopathic doctors are allowed to prescribe B12 shots, injectable vitamin C and capsicum tincture (cayenne pepper and alcohol), Jasper said.
“A drug was a chemical, man made, not natural medicine,” Jasper said. An herbal remedy is “derived from or is a concentrate of or is an extract of a plant, tree, root, moss, fungus, or other natural substance if the medicine is not a controlled substance,” according to Alaska regulations.
He said naturopathic doctors were left with two choices, sue or seek redress through legislation.
“We are here through necessity, the state of Alaska put us in this position,” Jasper said in an interview after the committee meeting. However, he said, the state has been helpful so far.
“We want to be able to continue using natural medicines even if they have a prescription status,” Jasper said. “We’re going to take it from a regulation which is disrespected into a statute which commands respect.”
Naturopathic Family Doctor Mary Minor said her practice is being affected by a lack of access to medicines.
“I have to say to my patient, ‘yes I know this is the only thing they works for you, but I’m sorry there is nothing I can do,’” Minor said.
“We don’t hold the suppliers at fault here,” they’ve been told their pharmacy license is a stake, she said.
The bill was held in the House Labor and Commerce Committee.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276 or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
Comments (28)
Add commentmedicine
An herbal remedy is “derived from or is a concentrate of or is an extract of a plant, tree, root, moss, fungus, or other natural substance if the medicine is not a controlled substance,” according to Alaska regulations.
So by that definition hashish and heroin would be considered medicines.
What are they having trouble
What are they having trouble getting?
Just wait. The FDA has been
Just wait. The FDA has been working to make vitamins accessible only with a prescription. Can't have those pesky people trating themselves. The medical/pharmaceutical industry can't make money off people treating themselves. As far as they are concerned, the only safe thing is to take a pharmaceutical pill with 50 side effects that are worse than the original malady.
Am I missing something?
What has changed to create this problem? The article says the state regulation defines the difference between a drug and medicine. And the NDs want that definition put into a regulation. How will that change their current problem? It sounds like state regulators are capriciously changing their interpretation of the wording. Why?
Faith healing, a multi-billion dollar industry not without risk
Though not surprised, I remain mildly embarrassed that Alaska is one of the few states to license practitioners of non-science based medical modalities.
Mike
Just snorted cayenne.
Now I really need some alcohol. Reckon I got it backwards. You have to be really drunk to snort pepper. Definitely loosens up the boogers.
huh?
This is absurd! What does pro-choice mean any more? Absolutely nothing! Pro-choice means that if the government says it ok then it is ok. Otherwise it is illegal. May God bless our government and keep it .... far away from us!
You're a classy guy ~Skirkz~!
'Nuff Said...
latitude, you're being alarmist...
you know that the federal classification of narcotics would trump any law regarding naturopathic meds, so calm down.
Who cares if someone wants to snort cayanne or put hot cups on their back? Again, as long as you aren't hurting anyone else, we live in an individual freedoms country, right? You don't have to agree with what other people do, and you are able to not choose those remedies if you don't believe in them. I say let them prescribe all the Jalapeno they want.
I'll have mine on nachos, thanks.
Latitude
You copied the part of the article - but did you READ it? Specifically this part; "if the medicine is not a controlled substance"? I do believe hashish and heroin are controlled substances......
Faith-based healing?
MikeDzubia, is not wanting to give my daughter antibiotics or pharmaceuticals for every bump, cut, cough, sneeze and rash what you consider faith-based healing? Is using a plant-based ointment for cuts or rashes so threatening to you? Not everyone holds western medicine on a pedestal.
@dglsmama: I think (hope)
@dglsmama: I think (hope) Mike is referring to homeopathy and reflexology, not herbalism and holistic medicine. Because the former two are definitely faith-based, but the latter two are not.
dglsmama, Exactly! Aloe Vera
dglsmama, Exactly! Aloe Vera for a cut is not "Faith-based healing" It not like we hold a ceremony with candles and incense to ask the spirit of the aloe to share its blessings upon us. We look at millenia of "clinical trails" that were successful and surmise that this product works. Modern medicine is much more "faith-based" in my opinion. Drs go to a seminar, where a pharma company rep feeds them lobster and tells them this product is great. They are told there have been extensive trials that have shown positive results. They are not told the Pharma co only did a handful of tests, skewed the tests to give the desired answers, suppressed any data that didn't support the desired result, pushed it through the FDA overview with a wink and a nod, a slide of bills under the table to the former Pharma co employee now working for the FDA, and its all good. They suppress or minimize all the side effects. But your right. Anything natural must be hokey because a witch doctor used it. Yep he used it and so did his predecessor for thousands of years, because it worked, otherwise they would have stopped using it!
Traditional medicine -
Traditional medicine - Millenia of healthy strong people with very little disease. Many practitioners even were not effected by the devastating plagues and such.
Modern medicine - Focused on wealth accumulation while their patients die of cancers, have neurologic problems, are obese, have heart problems, chronic illness is rampant.
Hmmmm. Just because its modern doesn't make it better...
@kpawsuh: to be fair, people
@kpawsuh: to be fair, people used to die earlier than they do today, and diagnosis was very unrefined (a physician in the 16th century couldn't tell the difference between a heart attack and a stroke, and a cancer could very well go undetected). Modern medicine works extremely well, but the problem is that people tend to think they can rely on curative, rather than preventative, measures.
Really PP?
Really PP? Tell that to the Hunza in the Himilayas: "The people of Hunza have lived in relative isolation high in the Himalaya Mountains for over 2,000 years, following a way of eating and thinking that has lengthened their lives and reduced their susceptibility to the diseases of civilized man. In this tiny country many Hunzas live to be over 100 year of age, physically healthy and mentally alert. Men in their 90’s play polo and volleyball and father children. These sturdy people often walk over a hundred miles a day, go barefoot in the snow or swim in icy water. The mortality rate of infants is very low, and death usually comes to the very aged in their sleep with no specific cause. The whole body just finally wears out. The secret of their healthy life is found in their simple and natural diet, vigorous outdoor life and freedom from mental worry....Food is scarce so everyone eats sparingly. However, no one ever starves. There is no tooth decay, cancer or respiratory disease in Hunza." "Nutrition: The Appetite of Man" PPNF
Munoz and Kerttula
Any bill that Munoz and Kerttula sponsored, should be carefully scrutinized before serious debate. Maybe an explanation from the Alaska Department of Professional Licensing as to why they are trying to restrict trade to Alaska's ND's. This sounds a bit overreaching for the Dept.
@kpawsuh: as far as I can
@kpawsuh: as far as I can tell, there are no official life expectancy statistics for the Hunza. The best source I can find is anecdotal evidence from 1938--not particularly compelling.
However, there IS evidence that eating less extends your life. In nematodes and rats, calorie restriction causes the body to go into "starvation mode," and maintains a lower metabolic rate. Nematode life expectancy goes up pretty dramatically--something like 50-100%. The change in rats isn't so dramatic, but is still considerable (something like 20%). As far as I know, this hasn't been studied in humans just yet, but it's pretty likely we can exhibit the same phenomenon. The idea is basically that because the mitochondria in your cells are producing less ATP, they also produce fewer free-radicals, which are by-products of cellular respiration, and free-radicals cause damage to your cells and are thought to be one of the main causes of aging.
Also, this speaks nothing of medicine. You're talking about a group of people with a healthy lifestyle. Living healthy is not incompatible with modern medicine, but it takes more than a piece of fruit to help you live through a heart attack.
"@kpawsuh: to be fair, people
"@kpawsuh: to be fair, people used to die earlier than they do today, and diagnosis was very unrefined " Seems these people live long healthy lives. How could that be without our great medical establishment? Traditional people die earlier without our great knowledge? Right? Isnt that what you just said?
@kpawsuh: even assuming that
@kpawsuh: even assuming that it IS true they live longer than the average, it is an aberration, not the norm. Clearly, the majority of people did live shorter lives in the past before the advent of modern medicine.
Even if you live a super healthy lifestyle, a stroke, heart attack, cancer, or other major disease will still kill you without medical attention. A healthy lifestyle merely reduces the incidence of these events.
You seem to be arguing from a zero-sum position where EITHER modern medicine OR traditional medicine/healthy lifestyles can be effective, but not both. And this is simply not true.
Where is your proof that the
Where is your proof that the majority lived shorter lives? What are you basing you arguement on? I provide proof that isnt always the case, and you refute with anecdote.
I would argue, based on my
I would argue, based on my readings, that it was with the introduction of refined white flour and sugar that our health began to deteriorate. This had nothing to do with a failing of traditional medicines, and we are not being saved by modern medicine.
It's common knowledge that
It's common knowledge that life expectancy has increased, but here's proof anyway...
http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Economics/Papers/2007/2007-14_paper.pdf
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/241864.stm
Of note is not life expectancy itself, which always includes infant mortality, but life expectancy at a given age (like 15), which more accurately reflects longevity.
There is no proof of declining life expectancy during the time in which refined flour and sugar were introduced. There may be proof of increasing morbidity, and perhaps because modern medicine was beginning to develop around that time, it may have offset the effects of white flour and sugar on mortality. That would be an interesting study.
The basic point is that modern medicine allows us to live through diseases and injuries that almost always killed in the past. Naturopathy is great--I practice herbalism myself--but it's not a replacement for emergency care. It is preventative care, for the most part.
ArTCLE
THe difference is that medicine form a medical DR treats symptoms not the disease Naturopaths treat the disease .
dglsmama, faith-based healing
I would say that faith-based healing is reasonably defined as any medical modality whose acceptance of efficacy is dependent upon the suspension of plausibility and evidence.
dglsmama, I'm curious now. Do you have something against the concept of faith?
Mike
MikeDziuba
Say What?????
MikeDziuba
Say What?????
Selling products
I'm not sure what the proposed law restricts, but I favor some oversight on Naturopathic practice. The Alaska Medical Board has no oversight for ND's, DC's, etc and there does not seem to be much self monitoring. The variation in practice with ND's is enormous and often very little evidence to support.
As far as prescribing herbals, nutriceuticals, etc goes; it seems to be unnecessary; these can be purchased over the counter. Why not recommend a product and give the person a list of sources where they can purchase it themselves. I personally have difficulty trusting a health provider's recommendation when I know they are directly profiting from their recommendation. I would wager that most ND's make a major portion of their income from selling products.
There is no way to get around some aspect of conflict of interest; such as a surgeon recommending surgery that they perform, but every effort should be made to avoid the appearance of profiteering. Trust is fundamental to a healing relationship.