Senate Bill 538 failed in the California Assembly on the last day of the legislative session, leaving naturopaths under physician supervision when prescribing drugs and without the greatly expanded scope of practice they sought. As originally drafted, "naturopathic doctors" would be able to order and interpret diagnostic studies, such as X-rays and mammograms, and prescribe drugs without physician supervision, including controlled substances. The bill would also allow naturopaths to use parenteral therapy, perform minor office procedures and biopsies, and added "cervical" to permitted routes of administration.
In addition to physician groups, the gigantic Kaiser Permanente health care system opposed the bill. The AARP supported the expansion, seeing it as a means of cost containment and "efficient delivery of optimal care." Yet, on its website, the AARP says patients and clinicians need the "best possible evidence about the effectiveness of medical interventions." The AARP needs to know that there is no good evidence that naturopathic care is "optimal," "efficient," or contains costs. In fact, seeing a naturopath is associated with substandard care, including failure to follow CDC vaccination guidelines and acquisition of vaccine-preventable disease.
The bill underwent major surgery during its two year trip through the legislature, surviving a near-death experience in an Assembly committee. After revival, it bounced back and forth between committee and second readings in the Assembly, only to finally expire on the Assembly floor. Along the way, interpretation of diagnostic studies, parenteral therapy, minor office procedures, biopsies and cervical administration were dropped, leaving prescribing privileges to fight over. At one point, physician supervision would be required for only one year, leaving naturopaths free to prescribe on their own after that. At another point, only Schedule V drugs were eliminated from supervision after one year. And so on.
Fortunately, on August 17, Britt Hermes came out with another one of her devastating critiques of naturopaths and their practices, this one directed specifically at SB 538 and published in Forbesas an "Editor's Pick." We can't know whether this dealt the fatal blow to the bill, but it certainly didn't help its chance of survival. And, to confirm what we already knew, we learned recently in an email from the Naturopathic Medicine Committee of the Osteopathic Medical Board of California that the organization responsible for testing naturopaths pretty much admits that their pharmacology education is inadequate.
California naturopaths are left with their current scope of practice, which requires physician supervision over any drug prescribing, including the development of a standardized procedure. For controlled substances, the supervising physician and naturopath must agree on specific drugs the naturopath can prescribe. If on Schedule III, there must be a patient-specific protocol in place.
Thank you for your donation.
Help SfSBM get some free money! Some generous SfSBM donors are already taking advantage of their employers' matching gift programs. Does your employer have a matching gift program? Over 65% of Fortune 500 companies do, along with many other employers. Through these programs, companies match employee gifts to non-profits like SfSBM, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt charitable organization. (FEIN: 46-3195402) Contact your employer's human resources department for more information.