Lots of fluff, nothing new:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tory/National/
Lots of fluff, nothing new:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tory/National/
This is old news. Same stuff, different flavour.
can someone phone the association and get an update? Shouldn't there be fines accumulating still?
The latest update in a nutshell...the Attorney General is the government body that has legal authority to close the remaining GG stores, collect the fines and put Bergez in a cell with Bubba.Originally Posted by mike.elmes
When the AG was pressed to proceed and asked why this hasn't yet happened, they informed the COO and OOA that it would be the responsibility of the College of Opticians to fight and prosecute further and obviously at our expense. I'm sure our legal reserve fund is on fumes by now.
Can you believe it??? Our own government condoning the act of profiting from illegal business activities, supporting tax evasion and illegal dispensing of a controlled act?
This is exactly what it is and there is no positive spin that can be put on this.
Thanks Mr. Harper and Mr. McGuinty, I'm so glad to see my legitimate tax dollars hard at work.:hammer:
http://www.ontario-opticians.com/Pub...Oct%202009.pdf
Last edited by eyemanflying; 10-29-2009 at 05:30 AM.
,,
Last edited by Refractingoptician.com; 10-29-2009 at 04:43 PM.
Could you be more specific? Which companies for which equipment?
,,
Another change of heart???
refracting optician, was this a way of bumping this thread or do you have something to add?
No change of heart . But maybe it is time you figured it out yourselves .
Oh, we figured it out a long time ago.
I think it is Eyelogic. One of the past presidents of the OAC, Donald Smith, sits on its board of directors along with its Calgary ophthalmologist inventor, Dr. Dyer. Mr. Smith was on the Eyelogic board even while he was president of the OAC.
http://investing.businessweek.com/re...asp?ric=EYEa.V
http://infoventure.tsx.com/TSXVentur...14&HC_FLAG1=on
This year the company has become involved in a lawsuit - allegedly a Ponzi scheme involving real estate.
Great Glasses uses Eyelogic and tried to use this fact as part of his defense that the act of refraction had been remotely delegated from Dr. Dyer.
"Later, Bergez submitted that the inventor of the Eyelogic machine, an Alberta doctor, was effectively prescribing eyewear each time the machine printed out" from:
http://www.lawtimesnews.com/20061229954/Headline-News/Optician-appealing-record-$1-million-contempt-fine
I was also told that a previous president of the Ontario Opticians Association was a principal in Eyelogic. Of course, having a vested interest in a company is never a motivating factor nor a conflict of interest.
Ryan Hoult, the CFO of Eyelogic, is the son of Dr. Susan Cooper, a past president of the College of Optometrists and director of the IOBP program at UW for foreign eye doctors to obtain licensure in Canada.
Is this a good thing since the Eyelogic refracting system is the cornerstone in the opticians' lobby for stand alone refraction?
Well I am not sure just what your point is ? If I remember right :
(1) Wasn't it an ophthalmologist that developed the system ? The biggest market for the system is to sell it to opticians if refraction was ever approved .
(2) Optometrists have certainly profited from the system by accepting fees for a fax back system of approving the RX and legitimizing the refraction data even though there is no proper doctor / patient relationship .
(3) The College of Optometry has had no qualms about violating the Charter of Rights and trying to prohibit Freedom of Association , so it is not surprising that there would be other conflicts.
Are you saying that optometrists & ophthalmologists are doing something wrong by profiting from developing & marketing equipment to their only market (opticians ) and profiting on the backs of opticians as they also sue them for using the machine s they were just sold ?
Is it really an opticians lobby ? I am not so sure . Isn't it more likely that the lobby originates from the Bigger O's and the equipment manufacturer ? Follow the path of the cash flow.
From an OEM stand point it makes sense to hire a "insider" in my opinion.
Last edited by Refractingoptician.com; 01-30-2010 at 04:36 AM.
Likely could be it's own thread, but this discussion left off mentioning opticians on the Eyelogic board.
From a recent ad, they seem to be trying to hire optometrists likely as the delegating authority to legalize opticians refracting, and responsible for covering a number of stores:
Eyelogic Systems Inc. is a leading provider of advanced eye care systems
and solutions. We help people see clearly. Our business is expanding to
provide fully managed eye exam centres. We’re currently searching for licensedOPTOMETRISTS in the Greater Toronto Area to travel to various locations to provide superior patient care. Tremendous earning potential with a guaranteed minimum. No investment. No overhead. We provide work locations, equipment, administration, and support. Forward your c.v. via fax 403-264-9740 or email
The only OD's who would associate themselves with this company would be ones who do not realize or do not care about the implications (and the money of course). And they may be subject to liability issues as well if glasses are dispensed upon an optician's refraction without them seeing the patient first.
And they might just be setting up practices where the tech/optician does the refraction, and the OD does a health exam.... at least thats what I hope their thing is about...
And I wouldn't worry about them finding enough OD's.. the GTA is full of disgruntled OD's looking for anything better then they're doing now.
Why are optometrists disgruntled ?
Many of my friends are unimpressed with the general atmosphere of the practices they work in: staff issues, issues with senior doctor, fee structure, quality and availability of equipment (far too many practices in the GTA do not have proper visual field units), scheduling, etc.
Forgive my ignorance , but would it not make sense then to purchase an optometrist's parctise or an optician's practise and just be self employed ?
If you know of any for sale... let me know! Very few are.
You are in Chicago ? My circle probably doesn't extend into that area . There are opportunities in old established opticians who have a large patient base, that could use an optometric influence.
There was a practice for sale in the north-end of Scarborough for about 3 years but found no buyer. The office eventually closed as the OD moved on to another opportunity.
Would it be smart to buy/open a private optometry practice in the GTA under the current practice environment?
Last edited by AnotherOD; 03-13-2010 at 03:52 PM.
Can you set your own exam fees ?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks