Rand Paul makes up his own Board Certification in Opthalmology

[nyker96]

I guess Ren is even more libertarian than a regular libertarian, he even make up his personal board certification. great libertarian move. but I wonder why he would even bother creating his own board, just say he's a non-board certified eye surgeon is enough. Like many poster points out there are many non board certified doctors out there.

 

[LegendKiller]

I guess Ren is even more libertarian than a regular libertarian, he even make up his personal board certification. great libertarian move. but I wonder why he would even bother creating his own board, just say he's a non-board certified eye surgeon is enough. Like many poster points out there are many non board certified doctors out there.

This is why libertarians are actually closet anarchists.

"Board Certification" is an industry term, not a federally regulated one. The "free market" put it in place. Yet you still think it's bad. Why? Because you and Paul are anarchists.

If you want to be one, fine, but label yourself correctly for proper identification and voting.

Whats worse is that he lied about it and you actually like that.

 

[bamacre]

"Board Certification" is an industry term, not a federally regulated one. The "free market" put it in place. Yet you still think it's bad.

No one is saying the idea is bad. You're not just twisting the story here, you're twisting the comments on it.

Why? Because you and Paul are anarchists.

That's just a lie, and you know it. It could be argued that both are more constitutionalists than libertarian. Calling them anarchists is such a stretch, it's, well, a lie.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Amazing (and sad) how many people support this behavior. Sad really.

 

[Craig234]

Bingo!

As a CPA I'm subject to these kind of state-based rules.

Over the years (been a CPA for about 30 years) it's become increasingly obvious 'money' is the real objective.

They (state boards) now mandate which continuing ed courses qualify for certification. It's amazing how much more these now cost and in many cases the quality of the courses is no better, and in some cases worse, than it was before the state board began mandating who could offer 'state certified' courses.

It's a freakin racquet.

I'm not a 'Paulite' and don't see what this has to do with him being a politician anyway. Would be more interesting if he claimed to invent the internet, be a Vietnam combat vet, or was found in bed with a dead woman or young boy etc.

Fern

It's very important - he was dishonest, claiming a credential he doesn't have.

It'd be fine if he wanted to raise the issue and say he disagrees with the system.

But it's not fine for him to just put 'board certified' that sounds good, while it was not 'board certified' which means AMA-approved, and be silent on the 'issue'.

The incredible amounts of intellectual dishonesty by what seems to bt a cult to defend him on this is clear.

As for Fern, if he's alluding to Gore claiming to 'invent the internet', or to Kerry fasely claiming to be a Vietnam conbat vet, then Fern is lying.

 

[Craig234]

I guess Ren is even more libertarian than a regular libertarian, he even make up his personal board certification. great libertarian move. but I wonder why he would even bother creating his own board, just say he's a non-board certified eye surgeon is enough. Like many poster points out there are many non board certified doctors out there.

This had nothing to do with 'Libertarian', he took the title that 'sounded good' and was a lie.

That says something about his character - just as his weally evasions about his position to let the private sector have 'whites only' establishments showed his oily character.

He's a worm trying to get elected while hiding under a rock, but getting exposed bit by bit.

The question is how long it will take for the Libertarians desparate for a 'pure leader' to recognize he's not it, and stop blindly defending him.

 

[Gardener]

If he disagrees with the existing board, why not just not get certified and leave it at that? Why start his own board so he can claim that he's board certified?

Because he spent 10 seconds too long in the birth canal.

 

[Patranus]

If he disagrees with the existing board, why not just not get certified and leave it at that? Why start his own board so he can claim that he's board certified?

How many times has he been sued for malpractice?

Is it above average, below average, or average?

 

[Thump553]

How many times has he been sued for malpractice?

Is it above average, below average, or average?

The number of times a doctor is sued for malpractice is irrelevant (except to the insurer and doctor), the number of times he/she is found liable is relevant. Also, certain high risk specialities attract more malpractice suits. It's a safe bet to say the average OB/GYN has far more malpractice claims than the average eye doctor.

I strongly doubt either accrediting agency (the real one or Paul's dummy one) even asks about malpractice claims in their accreditation process.

 

[werepossum]

I'm sure Dr. Paul's board is far better than the AMA bullshit. The AMA is a parasite on society.

I definitely agree with those that made the comments which pointed out there is no one definite board. Competition is good. Anyone who thinks the AMA's board and only the AMA's board can be legitimate is a dumbfuck.

I agree that competition is good, but I've seen nothing that indicates any desire to truly compete and offer an equivalent service. Instead I see what appears to be a scam, inventing a board which does nothing in order to claim "board certification" without having to invest time and money into continuing education. If Dr. Paul's beef with the existing board is as he says, the lack of continuing education requirements on older doctors, then one would expect his board to have continuing education requirements on all doctors rather than on none.

I agree that WaPo is a rag doing politically motivated hit pieces (investing in gold while telling people to invest in gold used to be called walking the walk as well as talking the talk) but it has presented a very poor picture of Dr. Paul's ethics, not just an accusation but some documentation as well. If this is not true then it is incumbent on Dr. Paul to correct the record and preserve his reputation, else reasonable people are going to believe the hit piece. As with Rachael Maddow, the mere fact that someone is out to ruin you politically doesn't necessarily make them wrong. He needs to either show how his board is legitimate, or make his board legitimate (with the understanding that this would prove it was not legitimate before), or reject board certification out of hand. As things stand it appears that he has created a paper entity for his own material gain - in other words, a scam. Sadly this doesn't disqualify a politician, but it makes it abundantly clear that he is in the lower half of politicians ethically. The mere fact that Perknose and I agree on this should be an indication of how clear cut this is, or should be.

 

[bamacre]

I agree that competition is good, but I've seen nothing that indicates any desire to truly compete and offer an equivalent service.

Have you looked? Have you searched for others who have problems or concerns with the ABO? Have you looked into the requirements for being certified by the NBO? Have you considered that the opposite of your assertions may be true? That the ABO is the one corrupt, and that the NBO was created to compete with it as a result? Or are we all to assume that the AMA and the ABO are Mother Teresa?

What is pathetic here is that so many see these headlines and have no comprehension of the reality of the situation. I bravely glanced at the comments under HuffPo's relating article, and I see such drivel as "he's not even a real doctor," "I wonder how many people he's blinded."

 

[Anarchist420]

I'd love to see if the blind partisan hacks in this thread would get their important medical care from a doc who gets credentialed by a fake board.

If one medical board is fake, then they all have to be fake.

 

[Lemon law]

If one medical board is fake, then they all have to be fake.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bullshit, bullshit, and nothing but bullshit Anarchrist420!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[werepossum]

Have you looked? Have you searched for others who have problems or concerns with the ABO? Have you looked into the requirements for being certified by the NBO? Have you considered that the opposite of your assertions may be true? That the ABO is the one corrupt, and that the NBO was created to compete with it as a result? Or are we all to assume that the AMA and the ABO are Mother Teresa?

What is pathetic here is that so many see these headlines and have no comprehension of the reality of the situation. I bravely glanced at the comments under HuffPo's relating article, and I see such drivel as "he's not even a real doctor," "I wonder how many people he's blinded."

Sorry, let me clarify. I have seen nothing on the part of Dr. Paul that indicates any desire to truly compete and offer an equivalent service, as opposed to creating a scam board for his own use. I have no problem believing that the AMA and the ABO have problems and that many ophthalmologists (among others) might be looking for an alternative certification entity. And I have no problem with Dr. Paul heading up that alternative certification entity. However - the ABO provides a service to doctors, to patients, to hospitals, and to insurance companies. It provides doctors a way to show some commitment to continuing education, to being up on the latest techniques, and some small protection against unfounded law suits. And it likewise provides patients, hospitals and insurance companies with a way to quickly tell which doctors are keeping up with such new techniques versus which ones are merely coasting. I can go to the ABO web site and see for myself what are the requirements for certification. I can see that the ABO is recognized by the AMA and ABMS as qualified to certify specialists in its field. I can see who runs it.

Now from what I have seen, the NBO offers none of this. It has no web site. I cannot see who recognizes it, who runs it, or what (if any) requirements it might have for certification. It looks like a scam organization, providing a service only to its members whilst providing only the illusion of a service to patients, hospitals and insurance companies. I recognize that this might not be true, but - if one runs an accreditation or certification service behind closed doors, then one has the responsibility to show others that it is not a scam. Transparency is particularly important in politics, as politicians can do great good but also great harm. If Dr. Paul has actually created an honest, competing certification entity then he should be loudly proclaiming its virtues and showing proof, not hiding behind his staff. If as it appears he has established a paper entity to rubber stamp certification, and he honestly expected the liberal media would not dig into this, then he is neither honest enough nor smart enough to be a leader.

 

[bamacre]

I recognize that this might not be true

Ahh, I see. You just make assumptions until someone slams the truth in your face.

 

[werepossum]

Ahh, I see. You just make assumptions until someone slams the truth in your face.

Wrong. I make assumptions until someone removes the truth from hiding.

 

[LegendKiller]

No one is saying the idea is bad. You're not just twisting the story here, you're twisting the comments on it.



That's just a lie, and you know it. It could be argued that both are more constitutionalists than libertarian. Calling them anarchists is such a stretch, it's, well, a lie.

It's not a lie. Libertopians are anarchists.

Ohhh, and your gold thing is bullshit. In a "free market" pumping and dumping shit may be ideal, but in the real world, it's called a scam. It's what rich people do against those who are not rich. It's those with capital taking advantage of those who do not.

That is what Paul is doing. He is pumping gold by raising the specter of a gold backed currency and then buying gold.

Gotta love the "free market" eh?

 

[bamacre]

It's not a lie. Libertopians are anarchists.

Ohhh, and your gold thing is bullshit. In a "free market" pumping and dumping shit may be ideal, but in the real world, it's called a scam. It's what rich people do against those who are not rich. It's those with capital taking advantage of those who do not.

That is what Paul is doing. He is pumping gold by raising the specter of a gold backed currency and then buying gold.

Gotta love the "free market" eh?

LMAO. You can't be serious.

 

[LegendKiller]

LMAO. You can't be serious.

Yes, quite.

You see, as somebody who operates in the "market", and somebody who has a professional designation (CFA charter), I have what's called "ethics". I don't make up my own designations and it is one that I do not misrepresent, unlike Rand Paul.

Furthermore, I have ethics to understand that investing in a stock while pushing the stock creates a conflict of interest, especially when he has the power on financial committees to push his ideals and fears about a gold currency, which would significantly increase the demand for gold.

Hell, you didn't even get that last part, so I wouldn't expect you to get anything else.

 

[shira]

You dont need to be board certified to practice medicine. In fact, Im convinced that specialty boards exist only to extract money from younger members. In Anesthesiology, if youre certified after 2000, you have to retake the exam every ten years and do special tests every 5. If youre one of the older members, then youre home free for your career.

Yes, but Mr. Paul claims to be board certified, and in fact he's not. Patients have a right to know the actual qualifications of those practicing medicine, and certainly would find it relevant if they discovered that their physician LIED about his certification.

 

[DaveSimmons]

From earlier in the thread -- looks a rubber-stamp fake board to me:

(It seems absurd for Paul supporters to try to claim otherwise. It's like Obama supporters trying to pretend he doesn't need his teleprompter.)

---
According to records with the Kentucky Secretary of State, the organization was first incorporated in Kentucky in 1999. On records in that office, Paul is listed as "owner/president" on some forms and "president" on others.

Asked what requirements the National Board of Ophthalmology has for recertifying doctors, Paul's wife, Kelley, who is listed on forms as the group's vice president, said: "I'm not involved in that. I'm not officially talking about that today.'"

After incorporating the board in 1999, Paul allowed it to be dissolved in 2000, when he didn't file required paperwork with the Kentucky secretary of state's office.

But he revived it in September 2005, just three months before his certification from the American Board of Ophthalmology was scheduled to lapse.
Quote:
The president and owner of this board? Paul. His wife is vice president of the group, and his father-in-law is listed as its secretary.
---

 

[LegendKiller]

From earlier in the thread -- looks a rubber-stamp fake board to me:

(It seems absurd for Paul supporters to try to claim otherwise. It's like Obama supporters trying to pretend he doesn't need his teleprompter.)

---
According to records with the Kentucky Secretary of State, the organization was first incorporated in Kentucky in 1999. On records in that office, Paul is listed as "owner/president" on some forms and "president" on others.

Asked what requirements the National Board of Ophthalmology has for recertifying doctors, Paul's wife, Kelley, who is listed on forms as the group's vice president, said: "I'm not involved in that. I'm not officially talking about that today.'"

After incorporating the board in 1999, Paul allowed it to be dissolved in 2000, when he didn't file required paperwork with the Kentucky secretary of state's office.

But he revived it in September 2005, just three months before his certification from the American Board of Ophthalmology was scheduled to lapse.
Quote:
The president and owner of this board? Paul. His wife is vice president of the group, and his father-in-law is listed as its secretary.
---

LOL. Thanks. Rubber stamp "board" indeed.

 

[bamacre]

Yes, quite.

You see, as somebody who operates in the "market", and somebody who has a professional designation (CFA charter), I have what's called "ethics". I don't make up my own designations and it is one that I do not misrepresent, unlike Rand Paul.

Furthermore, I have ethics to understand that investing in a stock while pushing the stock creates a conflict of interest, especially when he has the power on financial committees to push his ideals and fears about a gold currency, which would significantly increase the demand for gold.

Hell, you didn't even get that last part, so I wouldn't expect you to get anything else.

Just keep talking. You're fucking crazy.

 

[daishi5]

LOL, yeah. Ron Paul thinks we're really going to back to dollar to gold again. It has nothing to do with the central banks expanding the money supply at historical levels. Thanks for the laugh, LK.

Where do you get the idea that the money supply is expanding at historic levels?

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/hist/h6hist1.txt

A simple graph of these values over time makes it look like the recent past has seen the money supply stop growing at it's normal rate, and even contract a bit.

 

[Lemon law]

At the end of the day, its only the Kentucky electorate that will end up being the sole arbiters of this dubious certification issue regarding Rand Paul. I have to guess it will end up hurting Rand Paul at the ballot box, but in terms of Rand winning or losing the general election come November, its certainly not going to be the only factor on the minds of KY voters as they ponder voting for or against Rand.

But those certification issue might finally prompt action on the national level for requiring doctor certification from only legitimate certifying organizations, and as an easy truth in lending laws type of action, might clearly require a doctor to disclose if his/her certification is not recognized a legitimate. I personally think consumers have a right to know.