Suffice to say I choose not to for reasons that are mine alone.I can back up what I say and I do not need any johnny come lately to tell a super moderator what, or what not is OK to post. In the words of Stan Freeburg.......Back off man,......You're too piercing.Originally Posted by hcjilson
with all due respect I am your most humble and o'bnt servant Harry Jilson
What is this... history being rewritten??
Contact lenses are pretty safe but when things go wrong they are pretty ugly. I am not trying to dish out the question as for proof as I imagine you are an educated fellow and a few keystrokes can give you the pretty, the bad and the ugly of contact lenses and even then you may only validate a study that you have personally done. No discussions here.
I worked for a large ophthalmology practice for 23 years and part of my duties included the specialty fits. So contact lenses is one thing that I have done many times. Ugly fits do exists and people do loose eyes and sight. Scarring is not forgiving. Admitted a tertiary office like that sees it all. Now that Im back to being self employed, eyeglasses have become my main bread and butter but I still tinker with contact lenses.
I understand that the public does not care about safety but fortunately our government does... thus for the existantce of the FDA and many other regulatory institutions. If Eyeglasses created harm our future would be brighter. If contact lenses did not create harm, the 1800 would have deregulated the need of a script to get them.
The business plan of opticianry is getting smaller and smaller by the minute...older people are getting cataracts sx sooner and the need of spectacles in that segment is decreasing. Younger adults buy their eyeglasses online until presbyopia hits and then they are back to us. So whats left is pediatrics and presbyopia as a niche for opticianry. Kids and presbyopes require eyeglasses and contact lenses to be professionally fitted. So whats else can opticianry have? What online opticals cannot expect is that we sit down and do nothing. I guarantee you that each one of independent opticians and optometrists are contemplating getting on board with online for our patients. Online still needs accurate PDs and seg heigh and patients do need adjustments, they simply will not be free for the outsiders. The business plan of online by B&M is coming soon and some say its already here by the big E, but the question is regulation and insurance coverage. Do not expect that our insurance dollars go to China or an obscure outfit.
CNG
"The Case For Un-Bundling". ECP Magazine March 2012
Well-written article. Pretty smart author, don't you think, CCat?
She has her moments.
Direct link: http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-bundling.asp
My guess would be that the ABO/NCLE does significantly less in receipts than the VC, 1/3 or less is my guess.
As for the VC, you would probably be surprised by some of the projects they work on and how they truly focus on floating all boats in the harbor, not just one company or just the big companies. While much of the dues they collect will come from the bigger corporations (lens, frame vendors, labs, retailers, sunglasses, accessories...), the independent ECP is an important part of the life blood. The Vision Expos would be awfully boring and a money loser if the ECPs were not attending and buying. Take a moment to interact with Jeff, Greg, Renee or others at VC to find out more about what they do for the industry. Kudos to them for supporting the optician forums.
I have no reason not to disagree with your comments on the staff. By all appearances, they are passionate and competent professionals. However, my point is the observation that the Board of the Vision Council is dominated by corporate officers from lens manufacturers, labs, and other vendors and not opticians, optomotrists, optomologists or other professionals dealing directly with patients. If you are a corporate executive, your fiduciary responsibility is to act in the best interests of your shareholders and in accordance with reasonable industry standards (i.e. protecting the public). Faced with taking action that could hurt business, these individuals will act in accordance with the interest of the company that signs their paycheck and for the shareholders which they serrve. Put another way, I see no reason why the practitioners that actually attend and support Vision Expo (and control a big piece of the $$$) should not be better represented on this board. The board reads as a list of a good ole boys network, not a true cross section of the stakeholders in the optical world. While I doubt these board members are even remotely involved in the day to day activity of the VC, I just bring up this point regarding the inherent conflict of interest that can occur in these situations.
However, being pragmatic and understanding that initiatives to drive change acrross the industry take money and staff support, it seems that the Vision Council sponsoring this is the best option and is better than not doing anything at all. In pointing out the info above, I am making the point that you need to move through this process with your eyes open. All things considered, I am hopefull that something good is going to come out of this summit.
FACT The ABO is in place already and can be accessed in every state.
FACT We need to start somewhere ,why not with the ABO
I believe that what we all really want is a MINMUM MANDITORY REQUIREMENT that has to be met BEFORE anyone can retail eyewear.
Dispensers need to be understand Basic optics and how they are used to correct vision. Dispensers need to be FAMILIAR with how lenses are manfuactured and their limitations. Dispensers need to be able to trouble shoot a persons eyewear vision and comfort issues and have the skill set to correct the problem. Dispensers do not have to be optical engineers,lab manufacturers or lens desingners. These are different from dispensers.
FACT establishing a MINIMUM requirement would protect the public from incompetence , thin out the hiring pool and move opticians to the level of other professionals. IT is a STARTING PLACE.
Comment?
The ABO had a very large embezzlement last year that revealed 2 things: they have a lot of money and they oversee it poorly.
The other problem is that the ABO competes with state licensure so they have no reason or incentive to support it. Regretfully the US Constitution gives states leeway in medical decisions so we cannot advance Opticianry unless we do it on a state by state basis.
The ABO also has an incentive to keep their test as "dumb" as possible to make it accessible, because its their largest source of revenue. They have no incentive to make the test harder.
To put this in perspective I had no optical experience, studied for a weekend, took the test and passed the first time.
Then it must have been a first-grade level test!
A test is a test. The important thing to determine is what the MINIMUM knowledge required to dispense eyewear to the public is. Some how get that minimum accepted by every state (renew liscence every year produces revenue incentive for states). Look at what the minimum knowlegde requirement for being able to drive 70mph down the highway is. Talk about chance of doing public harm! A MINIMUM is just a place to start and rally behind and can always raise the minimum with scope of practice...ie therapuetic OD
here's an interesting observation ... my pharmacist has never tried to upsell me into the more expensive branded drug when the generic will save me money and get the job done.. Hmmm professionalism .. looking out for the patients best interest...what a concept!
The NOCE is an extremely basic exam. Suggesting that it is sufficient as a measure of competency is foolishness. Further comparing someone with that simplistic credential to a Pharmacist (PharmD) is even more foolish.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
To be considered a professional by the public, it helps to have a professional attitude. People TRUST that we as "allied health care professionals" have their best interests at heart and are not just trynig to get as much money out of them that we can.
Comments?
Creating a legitimate competency exam for opticians is incredibly difficult, because the field itself is all over the place. No other profession has such an extreme range of performance from Master level to complete ignorance. When the majority of jurisdictions allow absolutely anyone to label oneself an optician, the NOCE becomes the minimum standard. And half of the people taking it still fail.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
Most people believe opticians have a B.S. When they find out otherwise, they are usually shocked.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
The incompetent pharmicist can cause catastrophic or fatal harm ...an incompetent optician ..not so much
It is okay to have a realistically minimum requirement that meets the potentual harm that can be caused. It is also okay for people to fail the test of that requirement as long as those who fail DO NOT GET TO PRACTICE IN THAT FIELD OF EXPERTISE. Requirement can increase with scope of practice.
That's why pharmacists go to school for six years and most opticians go to school for none.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
Have you done any research on this field or the purpose of this Summit, or are you determined to just keep throwing out random uninformed opinions?
The goal is to progress, not regress.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
Which state has the highest level of standards to become an optician and how would that compare to Ontario's ? Why not use the highest level as the goal ?
Posted earlier in the thread.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
Summit participants will join in a facilitated discussion using a strength-based strategic planning approach and build consensus about the best, most positive way for the community to advance the field of opticianry. Summit participants will identify opticianry’s strengths and opportunities, and use those to articulate a shared vision of the desired future for the profession. A plan will be developed to include innovative strategies (programs, services, or other offerings) to propel the profession forward. Recognizing that the summit is only the beginning of the journey, participants will decide how to engage the larger opticianry community beyond this event.
So tell me how it is that you believe continuing to use the NOCE (I will not call the exam by the name of the certifying organization) is an innovative strategy that advances the profession?
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks