- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:56 pm to LATigerdoc
What do you mean no way?
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:57 pm to Da Hammer
A lot don't even treat disease
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:58 pm to LATigerdoc
quote:
Some just do glasses
Of course no on requires them to do surgical procedures. If an Optometrist were to Perdue surgical procedures they would have to take additional courses and pass a written examination. Many don't want to however many do.
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:58 pm to LATigerdoc
Who teaches evolving edge scope optometry if the people who taught them had a narrower scope?
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:59 pm to Da Hammer
The public usually goes about their business. Where do you think you will hear about this? Fox News?
How would patients with negative outcomes have a voice? I've seen optometrists patch the wrong eye for amblyopia and blind a kid. Why are they treating amblyopia? Sure, now that one patient knows not to let an optometrist treat amblyopia, but where else would they go with that information?
The problem with having a little information is you think you are way more capable then you are
It's not just about negative outcomes. It's about unneccesaary waste. Optoms ordering optos imaging, OCTs, visual fields, even IVFAs on all kinds of people. Because they followed a retina specialist around for 4 weeks makes them qualified to interpret IVFAs? They can't even act on that information.
It's all waste. And it's all about profit for optoms
How would patients with negative outcomes have a voice? I've seen optometrists patch the wrong eye for amblyopia and blind a kid. Why are they treating amblyopia? Sure, now that one patient knows not to let an optometrist treat amblyopia, but where else would they go with that information?
The problem with having a little information is you think you are way more capable then you are
It's not just about negative outcomes. It's about unneccesaary waste. Optoms ordering optos imaging, OCTs, visual fields, even IVFAs on all kinds of people. Because they followed a retina specialist around for 4 weeks makes them qualified to interpret IVFAs? They can't even act on that information.
It's all waste. And it's all about profit for optoms
This post was edited on 5/25/16 at 12:00 am
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:59 pm to Da Hammer
One test to be a surgeon?
We take like 45
We take like 45
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:59 pm to LATigerdoc
quote:
A lot don't even treat disease
You are gravely mistaken on this. You can't get a license in Louisiana without holding a license to treat disease anymore.
Posted on 5/24/16 at 11:59 pm to LATigerdoc
quote:
Post #2000 gets an NP white coat
This.
Posted on 5/25/16 at 12:01 am to WaWaWeeWa
And on that note, how would you know of opposition to this bill if it weren't for the OT and all you wonderful people
Posted on 5/25/16 at 12:01 am to LATigerdoc
quote:
Who teaches evolving edge scope optometry if the people who taught them had a narrower scope?
MDs actually along with some ODs. Remember Oklahoma has been doing this for 30 years.
Posted on 5/25/16 at 12:01 am to LATigerdoc
quote:
Post # 2000 gets an NP white coat
This did make me lol, however I couldn't care less if they wore a white coat and called themselves doctor each morning in the mirror and patients for that matter. The Nps put on their white coat at the hospital and take it off when a pt threatens to sue. Listen-NPs are amazing at what they do bc of what they learned after graduation not during their schooling. It's a nursing degree. It's incredibly arrogant to think that eta: you can graduate and practice medicine, while medical school (which requirements of entry and completion have been explained many times) STILL require at least a three year apprenticeship, aka residency, to be a board certified physician. Some argue that it should be more. I agree that doctors have done this to themselves and hopefully this is a wakeup call. However, there is no argument for how this will save money for the patient only for the NP to take more of what the physician trained them on. If this passes it will really handicap the training of future of NPs. In Connecticut I see NPs come out of school deer in headlights and they are making decisions for patients. Scary as shite and hard for me to sleep. Reform how physicians oversee their NPs, do not let a nurse call an MI reflux.
This post was edited on 5/25/16 at 12:27 am
Posted on 5/25/16 at 12:03 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
It's not just about negative outcomes. It's about unneccesaary waste. Optoms ordering optos imaging, OCTs, visual fields, even IVFAs on all kinds of people. Because they followed a retina specialist around for 4 weeks makes them qualified to interpret IVFAs? They can't even act on that information.
This just in most of this ODs have been doing for over 30 years in Louisiana.
I will never say any profession is perfect but show me that Ophthalmologists are?
Posted on 5/25/16 at 12:05 am to LATigerdoc
I am in Baton Rouge fairly regularly so would still be pretty up to date minus some bull.
Posted on 5/25/16 at 12:06 am to LATigerdoc
No but give me a break fundus photos, visual field, OCT. That has been within scope of practice for quite some time.
To say it hasn't would be very misinformed.
To say it hasn't would be very misinformed.
Popular
Back to top


0


