Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
Excellent post Chris and right on the money .
Excellent post Chris and right on the money .
I have just heard that BC Optometrists have made a deal with the devil (Coastal Contacts) to receive a kickback from every box of contact lenses sold to one of their patients.
Sources please :)
I would be very eager to hear about those sources as well, please.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
Sorry, only a rumour floating around the industry at present. On reflection I should have looked for confirmation before posting.
professional optician is getting unfair competition ............................
Competition Bureau
competitionbureau.gc.ca
http://www.bureaudelaconcurrence.gc....g/h_02704.html
Health Portal
Health is a priority item for the Competition Bureau. Not only is the health sector vital to the well being of all Canadians, it is also an important part of the economy.
The Bureau’s work in the health sector is organized into three broad lines: encouraging and ensuring compliance with the Competition Act; advocacy focused on promoting government policies that will attain the benefits of competition in health-related markets; and outreach to health providers and consumers.
The Bureau is focusing its advocacy efforts on the generic drug industry and the self-regulated professions, while its enforcement activities are centred on combating health claims that victimize Canadians in the form of false or misleading representations, pyramid schemes, and deceptive marketing practices.
Health Fraud
Combating health fraud through enforcement and enhancing consumer information through outreach are a priority for the Bureau. Bogus weight-loss schemes, cure-all scams or products claiming amazing health effects are some of the many areas of health fraud targeted by the Bureau.
Health Fraud
Compliance and Enforcement
The Bureau is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Competition Act, the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act, the Textile Labelling Act and the Precious Metals Marking Act. Where appropriate, the Bureau has applied these Acts to the health sector, using a balance between compliance and enforcement.
Compliance and Enforcement
Advocacy
Through advocacy, the Bureau seeks to promote legislation, regulations and government policies that maximize the benefits from competition. The Bureau does not advocate for competition at the expense of other societal goals. Instead, the Bureau strives to ensure that these other goals are achieved in a manner that least restricts the benefits from competition.
Advocacy
Start sending in complaints to Ottawa and maybe we can get some action from that side.
The conventional and professional optician in BC is getting unfair competition from just about anybody who wants to, without any officially recognized profession, when selling prescription eye glasses as of May 1st, 2010.
This might also flow over into other provinces and create a market that is free of controlled precision required, that can only be provided by learned professionals and is a duty that should not be left to practice by optical laboratories and lens manufacturers.
You can not be a Barber or a ladies hairdresser without proper credentials anywere in this country, but the consumer should accept prescrition glasses that the person delivering to them has no training, credentials or knowdledge to check if the prescription has been made according to the prescrition.
Pharmacies are getting more and more under government control how they handle medical prescriptions and in the eyglass business it looks to go the other way.
We are going backwards to the optical stone age principles and no government should allow this.
Last edited by Chris Ryser; 04-10-2010 at 11:51 AM.
competitionbureau.gc.ca
Online Forms
This page contains forms needed for various requests relating to the Competition Bureau. If you cannot find the appropriate form, we invite you to contact our Information Centre at 1-800-348-5358.
- CA Identification Number (Textile Labelling Act) — Online Application
- Complaint Form
- Information Request Form
- Merger Review Consultation Forum for stakeholders
- Notifiable Transactions (mergers) — Forms (Short (s.16), Long (s.17)
- Subscribe to/Unsubscribe from the Competition Bureau Electronic Distribution List
- Update your CA Identification Number
http://www.bureaudelaconcurrence.gc....g/h_03167.html
What would be more interesting is who perpetrated this ridiculous rumour and if this rumour was intentionally created as part of some political spin to sway public opinion.
Great post, Chris Ryser. Thank you.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
Consider the benefits to all parties if contact lenses were dispensed in this manner.
The on-line retailer receives increased business from quality referrals.
The prescriber receives monetary benefits for the referrals and is able to monitor patient compliance.
The patient receives the quality of eye care necessary for safe contact lens wear.
Do you actually believe the rumour that OD's will receive kick-backs from Coastal, and that kick-backs will actually ensure quality eye care?
There is no Rx verification required; a person can self prescribe their own contacts without ever receiving an eye exam. At least in the US, the FDA requires the internet supplier to at least attempt that the patient has a valid Rx for the contacts.
Imagine if they attempted to do this with drug Rx's - maybe that's next.
How does BC government explain that ?
Cap.D-12
Dispensing Opticians Act
(c) the appointment and remuneration of teachers, examiners,
inspectors and such other persons as the board may employ, and
prescribing the duties of such persons;
(d) banking and finance and management of its property;
(e) entering into an agreement or agreements with any university,
school or college for such instructions, direction and lectures as may
be necessary for the purposes of this Act; and
(f) all other matters reasonably necessary for carrying out this Act.
R.S.P.E.I. 1974, Cap. D-12, s.5.
5.
(1) The registrar shall keep a register of all dispensing opticians,
showing their places of business or employment from time to time.
Register of
dispensing opticians
(2) When the registrar is satisfied that an applicant for registration is
entitled to be registered, he shall enter the name of the applicant in the
register and shall issue a certificate of registration to the applicant.
Certificate of
registration
(3) If an application for registration is refused by the registrar or an
entry is made in the register in error or by reason of misrepresentation,
the board may direct that the necessary entry, erasure or amendment be
made in the register and the registrar shall make the entry, erasure or
amendment. R.S.P.E.I. 1974, Cap. D-12, s.6.
Directions to
registrar
Qualifications for
6. Every applicant shall be registered as a dispensing optician if he
registration
(a) is eighteen years of age or over and is of good moral character;
(b) furnishes satisfactory evidence that he has2
(i) completed a course of study in a school of optical dispensing
approved under the regulations and has had practical training for
one year in Canada with a dispensing optician or optometrist,
(ii) completed at least three years training and experience in
optical dispensing, at least one of which was in Canada, under the
supervision of a legally qualified medical practitioner, dispensing
optician, optometrist, or a person who has equivalent
qualifications, and has completed a home study course as
prescribed by the regulations, or
(iii) in the opinion of the board, the qualifications and experience
are equivalent to that set forth in subclauses (i) and (ii) and has
had one years experience in Canada, under the supervision of a
legally qualified medical practitioner, dispensing optician,
optometrist, or a person who has equivalent qualifications;
(c) has passed the examinations of the board; and
(d) has paid the prescribed fee. R.S.P.E.I. 1974, Cap. D-12, s.7;
1987, c.6, s.3.
More details are emerging. Yes I believe that Clearly Contacts has a referral process, no I do not believe that it will actually ensure quality eye care. Stay tuned.
As the proposed new regulations are considered the details become more Clearly defined. There will also be a similar requirement in BC for a patient to confirm that contact lenses have been prescribed.
The government of BC is under pressure to reduce health care costs and has moved towards having the consumer take responsibility for their own health care needs. Consider the process that the Health Professions Council started in 2007 the Scope of Practice / Legislative Review of Recognized Health Professions http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/leg/hpc/.../termsref.html
BS... Optical/Optometry is not a major expenditure in health care, and its largely something consumers already pay for themselves.
Secondly, I don't think clearly contacts will be referring patient to our office when our prices are already lower than theirs.
Maybe this had something to do with it. Between April 20 and Dec. 10 2009 Coastal Contacts has donated a sum total of $10, 300 to the BC Liberal Party. Their only other donation was in 2005 for $7500.
Good old fashioned politics.
Received this from BC MPP
RE: Help stop changes to eye care regulations in BC
From:Dix.MLA, Adrian (Adrian.Dix.MLA@leg.bc.ca) Sent:April 9, 2010 7:51:39
Thank you for your e-mail letter regarding the BC Liberal government’s changes to regulations governing eye professionals in British Columbia. The changes were announced on March 16th, 2010 and will come into force on May 1, 2010. I appreciate your concerns about the BC Liberals commitment to eye health given the current government’s previous downgrading of MSP coverage for eye exams in 2002.
These changes raise a number of concerns. Health Minister Kevin Falcon has acknowledged that he is acting now to assist one company – Clearly Contacts Inc. - to continue to fill prescriptions for contact lenses without seeing a prescription over the Internet. This comes in the wake of an October 26th, 2009 BC Court of Appeal decision ordering Clearly Contacts to change its business model or seek legislative change.
The decision to remove restrictions “allowing people to order glasses or contacts online without having to give the seller a copy of their prescription, sight-test assessment or contact-lens specifications,” and the “removal of most of the restrictions that allow only opticians or optometrists, or workers supervised by them, to dispense glasses or contacts” give priority to the corporate interests of one company over the eye health of BC residents.
Such a decision in any event should only be made after consultation and consideration given that the evidence across jurisdictions supports the view that the dispensing of corrective lenses be done by eye care professionals.
For example, a study done by Dr. Fiona Stapleton (The Incidence of Contact Lens-Related Microbial Keratitis in Australia) found that patients who purchased their lenses over the Internet and did not have the benefit of professional advice and education had a 4.8 times greater risk of developing microbial keratitis.
Instead of careful review, Minister Falcon has proceeded without discussion, favouring a company that gave almost $10,000 to the BC Liberal Party in recent years. This political contribution was made at a time when these very issues were before the government. Such actions undermine confidence in the government’s commitment to health and provoke cynicism about the process undertaken to arrive at this decision.
Further, the BC Liberal government is failing to follow its legislative decisions in making these changes. In 2008, the BC Legislature passed Bill 25, the Health Professions Amendment Act. The Act created Advisory Panels under the Health Professions Review Board to review issues of scope of practice. The idea was to provide an independent review of professional issues to guide ministerial action.
In response to my questions, then Minister George Abbott stated that the issues of scope of practice between optometrists and opticians would be an ideal subject for such a panel (http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th4th/h80526p.htm#12906 ). As Opposition Health critic, I agreed with that approach.
Ignoring this proposal from his predecessor and the process created by a bill his own government proposed and the BC Legislature unanimously adopted, Minister Falcon has decided to act without consultation to make a series of scope of practice changes. This doesn’t make sense. Instead, the government could have followed its own policy and referred these changes to an advisory panel prior to implementation.
Rest assured we will raise our concerns about the government’s decisions during the legislative session. Thank you again for your e-mail.
Adrian Dix, MLA
Opposition Health Critic
I received the same letter, very enlightening. Actually it's the only passionate response I've received to date and I've contacted everyone on the BC and Ontario legislative assembly. I haven't even gotten a response from our associations or colleges yet.Received this from BC MPP
RE: Help stop changes to eye care regulations in BC
From:
Thank you for your e-mail letter regarding the BC Liberal government’s changes to regulations governing eye professionals in British Columbia. The changes were announced on March 16th, 2010 and will come into force on May 1, 2010. I appreciate your concerns about the BC Liberals commitment to eye health given the current government’s previous downgrading of MSP coverage for eye exams in 2002.
These changes raise a number of concerns. Health Minister Kevin Falcon has acknowledged that he is acting now to assist one company – Clearly Contacts Inc. - to continue to fill prescriptions for contact lenses without seeing a prescription over the Internet. This comes in the wake of an October 26th, 2009 BC Court of Appeal decision ordering Clearly Contacts to change its business model or seek legislative change.
The decision to remove restrictions “allowing people to order glasses or contacts online without having to give the seller a copy of their prescription, sight-test assessment or contact-lens specifications,” and the “removal of most of the restrictions that allow only opticians or optometrists, or workers supervised by them, to dispense glasses or contacts” give priority to the corporate interests of one company over the eye health of BC residents.
Such a decision in any event should only be made after consultation and consideration given that the evidence across jurisdictions supports the view that the dispensing of corrective lenses be done by eye care professionals.
For example, a study done by Dr. Fiona Stapleton (The Incidence of Contact Lens-Related Microbial Keratitis in Australia) found that patients who purchased their lenses over the Internet and did not have the benefit of professional advice and education had a 4.8 times greater risk of developing microbial keratitis.
Instead of careful review, Minister Falcon has proceeded without discussion, favouring a company that gave almost $10,000 to the BC Liberal Party in recent years. This political contribution was made at a time when these very issues were before the government. Such actions undermine confidence in the government’s commitment to health and provoke cynicism about the process undertaken to arrive at this decision.
Further, the BC Liberal government is failing to follow its legislative decisions in making these changes. In 2008, the BC Legislature passed Bill 25, the Health Professions Amendment Act. The Act created Advisory Panels under the Health Professions Review Board to review issues of scope of practice. The idea was to provide an independent review of professional issues to guide ministerial action.
In response to my questions, then Minister George Abbott stated that the issues of scope of practice between optometrists and opticians would be an ideal subject for such a panel (http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th4th/h80526p.htm#12906 ). As Opposition Health critic, I agreed with that approach.
Ignoring this proposal from his predecessor and the process created by a bill his own government proposed and the BC Legislature unanimously adopted, Minister Falcon has decided to act without consultation to make a series of scope of practice changes. This doesn’t make sense. Instead, the government could have followed its own policy and referred these changes to an advisory panel prior to implementation.
Rest assured we will raise our concerns about the government’s decisions during the legislative session. Thank you again for your e-mail.
Adrian Dix, MLA
Opposition Health Critic
Is this the same person who is saying the moon is made of green cheese?
Incredible. Just ~2 weeks left.
Can anyone see this being stopped?
Doesn't look good :(
[;
Last edited by Refractingoptician.com; 10-23-2010 at 03:11 PM.
the University of Waterloo School of Optometry has sent this letter today to BC government officials.
http://www.opto.ca/media/docs/en/opt...20Services.pdf
Good letter. I don't think Falcon has anywhere to stand with his position.
Sure he does...he can do whatever he wants...and there isnt anything you can do about it.....Unless you can demonstrate how his position can cost his party significant votes,or cost it financially,...he likely wont care.
As far as Falcon is concerned ,its a done deal.
What are optometrists doing these days when patients ask for their base curve or contact lens rx? Are you obliging?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks