|
|
|
|
|
by rbarooah
5212 days ago
|
|
Mentioning witch-doctors, homeopaths and acupuncturists is a straw man. It seems to me that that private group of scientifically grounded medical practitioners who certified their members, but had different criteria from the state licensing system could be a very good thing. This alternate certification would need to prove its reputation just as the institutions that certify doctors have. It seems likely that there are ways to train and certify doctors that produce better professionals than the current ones. I doubt you're arguing that current state approved medical institutions cannot be improved upon. Why not allow alternatives to compete with them? |
|
Could be, perhaps. Now weigh that hypothetical scenario against what actually happened in history that led to the state medical boards being created.
> I doubt you're arguing that current state approved medical institutions cannot be improved upon. Why not allow alternatives to compete with them?
Because we tried that and it didn't work last time. It got so bad that self-proclaimed "doctors" set up self-proclaimed "medical schools" as a con, paid large sums of money for cadavers "no questions asked", and ended up getting people murdered.
Do you have some legitimate problem with your state's medical board? I'd suggest you take it up with your state legislator.
Besides, there are alternatives--some states have separate osteopathic boards that license D.O.'s rather than M.D.'s, yet licensed D.O.'s have the exact same privileges as any other doctor.