California Citizens for Health Freedom

Review of Our Struggle for Health Freedom

2007 has been a very exciting, productive and challenging year.  We are taking this opportunity to wish All supporters of medical freedom a healthy, happy and successful New Year.

A Review of Original California Citizens for Health Goals

Goal #1 Change state law that limits physicians to only practice conventional medicine.  Our bill, SB-1691, to make it legal for physicians to practice safe/effective alternative medicine was signed into law in September of 2004 and became effective January 1, 2005. One of the steps toward this was getting a previous bill passed that mandated the Medical Board (MB) to establish a Committee on Alternative Medicine.  We then convinced the committee and MB to sponsor SB-1691. It basically says that the MB cannot initiate disciplinary action against a physician solely on the basis of his/her practicing alternative medicine, but does require an extremely detailed and precise informed consent to comply SB-1691 became B & P Code 2234.1.

Goal #2 Change state law that makes it a crime for physicians to offer safe/effective alternative treatment of cancer.  We have introduced bills on this in the past and they were defeated in committee, which is typical of getting a radical change in a law.  In 2004 our bill, AB-2392, carried by Assembly Member Ray Haynes, was killed in the Assembly Health Committee, but in October Senator Liz Figueroa promised to carry our bill in 2005.  Four years ago, in preparation for getting a bill passed, we requested that a major study be done by the Senate Office of Research on Alternative Treatments of Cancer and have a special hearing by Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee, which is chaired by Senator Figueroa.  In 2005 she sponsored the bill, SB-583, as a two year bill. It virtually swept the Senate. However due to opposition by medical board, political pressure that led to firing of consultants who did the study on alternative treatment of cancer so that it was negative, and untruthful information given to Assembly Members by CMA (Oncologists) the bill was defeated in the Assembly.

Goal#3 Licensing of clinically trained Naturopathic Doctors.  We introduced the bill for licensing three times. In 2003 the naturopathic doctors obtained sponsorship of a licensing bill by the Chair of the Senate who was the most powerful legislator. We did extensive advocacy on behalf of the Naturopathic Association the bill passed in 2003 and naturopathic doctors began licensing by January 1, 2005.

OTHER LEGISLATIVE ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Decriminalize of Unlicensed Health Practitioners.   In 2002 we worked very hard to help gain passage of the companion bill, SB-577 to the ND licensing, which made it legal (no longer ‘practicing medicine without a license’) for the unlicensed health practitioners and health advisors to practice.  All of the unlicensed naturopathic practitioners (NP’s), health food consultants/nutritionists, and all other unlicensed alternative practitioners are covered by this law.

Protected the right of Certified Nutritionists to practice .  
CC4HF helped the certified nutritionists form their state chapter. We also have, several times, blocked or amended bills by the Registered Dietitians (RD) that would have made it illegal for nutritionists (or anyone else other than an RD to give advice on diet and health).

Assisted the Licensed Midwives to Practice. Licensed Midwives (LM’s) are highly trained and fully licensed by the MB to provide homebirth services for expectedly normal births. The current law, into which the OB-Gyn lobbyists were successful in inserting a poison clause, requires LM’s to have “practicing OB physician supervision” for each client/case. However, since the licensing act became law the handful of open-minded and sympathetic OB’s have each been threatened with ‘no hospital privileges’ (for their own patients) and a permanent stoppage of all malpractice insurance. It is not surprising that OB’s, both those rare few who support LM’s and those who view them as dangerous economic competitors, refuse to supervise LM cases. We succeed in having the medical board not enforce this law. We also assisted in passage of a bill requiring the medical board to have a standing licensed midwife committee. It was formed in 2006.

Change state law on ‘silver’ amalgam and get mercury fillings banned. 
We helped get AB-999 passed in 2003. For the first time those on Denti-Cal (state funded dental services to the poor) are supposed to have fully (and accurately) informed choice of restorative filling materials. CC4HF was party to the court proceedings which obtained the ruling requiring dentists in California to post Prop. 65 warnings.

Ban the addition of industrial toxic waste (fluoride) into drinking water.
As yet, we have been unable to get any legislator to touch this health issue yet, but we expend a lot of time and energy in laying the educational and contact groundwork toward accomplishing this in the future.  

Have an established presence in the Capitol representing citizens’ rights to natural medicine and on health issues. We have testified before committees and worked with legislative staff and are recognized as the “voice of citizens” on any health issue we bring to their attention. They know and trust us.

Establish positive working relationships with government agencies, trade and citizen organizations.  CC4HF is respected and recognized by the Medical Board as the only voice of citizens and we are welcomed into discussions by the California Medical Association.  The Department of Consumer Affairs has received and acted upon our research. CC4HF is a voting member of the Congress of California Seniors.  CC4HF works in concert with Citizens for Dental Choice/Toxic Teeth coalition and periodically assists in educational and organization of anti-fluoridation grass-roots groups. We have had a long association with several organizations that advocate for legalization of alternative cancer treatments in California.  We welcome being a part of and assist in forming various coalitions for specific health related issues. 

Added in defeat of bill that would have very negative impact on the Health Food Industry. We meet with the chair of the assembly committee and gave him information that added in killing this bill.

Codex (a Federal issue)
Our original involvement in the Health Medical Freedom movement was over the issue of the proposed federal regulations by the FDA that would have severely limited citizens’ rights and access to natural nutritional products. They would have come under the drug definitions and standards which would have eliminated nearly all such product availability. And, as planned, it would have left citizens wholly dependent upon big-Pharma’s dangerous and expensive products.  

    As the Coordinator of the California Chapter of the National Citizens for Health, I did my part to help win the political struggle for the passage of a new federal law (DSHEA) to protect the right of citizens’ access to natural health and food supplements.  That was a five year struggle and in passage of DSHEA it was felt that a new organization -California Citizens for Health Freedom needed to be formed to work on the very negative laws in California

     Now, a new national threat of loss of access to natural nutritional products appears to be coming from the proposed regulations of the Codex Alimentarius Commission that will become part of harmonized international trade agreements (GATT, CAFTA, NAFTA) and be enforced by WTO.  The Codex meeting agendas have been dominated by the German pharmaceutical industry.    

Unequal Discipline of Physicians. 
Even with the new MB reform laws and some favorable members on the MB it appears that physicians who are in private practice (solo) are still being targeted for discipline while physicians affiliated with large medical corporations (hospitals/clinics and HMOs) do not receive the same level of discipline. The role of deciding who is targeted and what level of discipline seems appropriate is basically left up to the MB Enforcement staff (investigators, supervisors and the AG’s attorneys who are on contract to the MB).

     There were two elements which we believe may be contributing to what is happening. First, COST RECOVERY, the amount of money generated from the penalties levied and assessment of the cost of investigation and prosecution, was the source of Enforcement salaries and created a huge conflict of interest. This onerous provision, which we documented as a serious conflict of interest to the legislature and the Enforcement Monitor, has been removed as part of the enforcement reform package by Senator Figueroa.

We supported the bill that required the Medical Board have a major review of it's operation and policies by an independent Enforcement Monitor. We provided information to Julie De Angelo, the Enforcement Monitor, on change in the policy of the Medical Board that we felt necessary. Her report took three years to complete and her recommended changes will be put into law.