Resolution from Harris County to be presented to Texas Medical Association

Whereas, There are no data demonstrating that implementing MOL requirements beyond Texas’ prescribed CME requirements would provide enhanced quality of care to our patients; and

Whereas, As many as twenty-five (25) percent of all physicians currently practicing medicine in the U.S. have never been board certified and are thus actively excluded from entry into MOC programs, creating hardship if imposed; and Continue reading

Michigan State Medical Society House of Delegates approved resolutions against MOC/MOL

TITLE: Maintenance of Certification vs. CME and Lifelong Commitment to Learning

WHEREAS, The Michigan State Medical Society is actively engaged in advocacy to protect physicians from unnecessary regulatory and financial burdens in their practices, and

WHEREAS, The American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) has and continues to press legislation coupling insurance payments to active enrollment in “time limited” Board Certification and the associated Maintenance of Certification program in a nationwide fashion, imposing this upon the practice of medicine in Michigan, (1) and Continue reading

Doctors Take MOC to Court

The Association of American Physicians & Surgeons (AAPS) has filed suit today in federal court against the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) for restraining trade and causing a reduction in access by patients to their physicians. The ABMS has entered into agreements with 24 other corporations to impose enormous “recertification” burdens on physicians, which are not justified by any significant improvements in patient care.

CLICK HERE to read more about this case.

Iowa Medical Society Passes Resolution Opposing MOL

Resolved: That the Iowa Medical Society supports the continued lifelong learning by physicians and the improvement to quality of practice; opposes the institution of Maintenance of Licensure for those who are board-certified and/or maintaining relevant CME and peer-reviewed quality of practice and/or participating in Maintenance of Certification; and opposes further Maintenance of Licensure for all other physicians without sufficient supportive data demonstrating that the Maintenance of Licensure supports patient outcomes and improves quality of care.

Read more:

Take short survey on MOC OCC

AAPS ( is collecting information on the true costs of participating in MOC – maintenance of certification and OCC – Osteopathic continuous certification.

Specialty boards often downplay the costs of MOC, minimizing them by
referring only to the fee for taking the examination.

AAPS will be collecting and reporting on the hard numbers obtained from this survey. This information will be critical not only in opposing the mis-information distributed by specialty boards, but in supporting our AAPS lawsuit against the American Board of Medical Specialties.

But, we need your help and the help of physicians who are participating in MOC to tell us their actual costs.

If you are participating in MOC, please help us by taking the survey:

L.R. Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D., F.A.A.N.
Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
Lake View, NY

BRS debate at PENN on MOC, OCC & MOL

Be it resolved: “Maintenance of Certification requirements fail to improve the quality of medical care while placing unnecessary burdens on physicians.”

Benjamin Rush Society presents debate above on MOC, OCC, & MOL at University of Pennsylvania Saturday April 20, 2013 at 6:00pm

Board certification began as a means to assess the knowledge of physicians emerging from residency programs that varied in length of training, program requirements and quality. Since 1981 when ACGME assumed the task of accrediting residency programs, specialty training has become standardized and highly regulated. Certification exams continue as a voluntary test, a lifetime mark of achievement, similar to passing the bar for lawyers. In spite of multiple mechanisms for assessing physician competency (peer review, hospital privileging, state license boards, malpractice liability, etc.) certification is increasingly used as a requirement for hospital privileges, insurance and Medicare payment, and more recently attempts are being made to tie maintenance of certification to licensure. This push is occurring as the certification process is simultaneously requiring increasing amounts of physician time and expense –all without evidence of benefit for the costs. The American Boards of Medical Specialties have grown into multi-million dollar entities, closely entwined with government regulatory agencies, possessing near-monopoly control over certification. The CEOs earn $800,000 to $1.2 million dollar annual salaries. Re-certification costs individual physicians thousands of dollars, and many hours away from their patients, businesses and families –which also aggravates the problems of rising health care costs and physician shortages.

Physicians unanimously support life-long learning and excellence in medicine, but in these days of increasing concern over fraud, waste and unnecessary spending in healthcare, it’s time to take a closer look at the process and role of certification in assuring and improving quality. The standard of “evidence-based” is relevant not just for medical practice, for health care policy as well.

What’s the evidence for and against the new requirements for Maintenance of Certification and its connection to Maintenance of Licensure? In arranging for a pair of experts to argue the issues before an audience of medical students, faculty and community physicians, the Benjamin Rush Society promotes a rigorous examination and discussion of controversial issues.

Beth Haynes, MD
Executive Director, Benjamin Rush Society

“Committed to solving health care challenges through innovation, abundance and an inviolate doctor-patient relationship.”

Ohio Physicians Adopt Yet Another Resolution in Opposition to Mandatory MOC

In April 2013 the OSMA House of Delegates adopted:

RESOLVED, That the Ohio State Medical Association (OSMA) insists that lack of specialty board certification does not restrict the ability of the physician to practice medicine in Ohio.

In 2012, Ohio Physicians passed a resolution opposing maintenance of licensure which derailed attempts to impose onerous new MOL requirements on physicians.

Time for a physician Rx boycott of Walgreens

Walgreens now does primary care in stores by PA and NP mid level providers. This serves to further fragment patients’ medical care with pharmacy based PAs and NPs. They obviously don’t need our medical industry Rx anymore. It’s time for a mass doctor boycott of Walgreens. No more eRx or Rx refills for them. Tell patients that Walgreens and CVS/Caremark are the most expensive pharmacies in the US and provide discount alternatives.

Independent Physicians For Patient independence @IP4PI

Calling AMA on the Carpet

Dear AMA physician colleagues,

Perhaps you might spend a few moments with my “frontline” practice experience recollection below and share it with the AMA board of directors. I do not intend to sound accusatory and angry, however I am alarmed at the continuing destruction of independent individual practice of medicine.

First, the AMA goes along with the insurance industry bullying physicians for decades into forcing physicians to do insurance work all day. Second, the AMA lost the opportunity for any meaningful malpractice tort reform. Third, the AMA failed to prevent mid level providers NPs and PAs from doing physicians dx, tx and rx work. Walgreens Take Care clinics are currently providing full primary care in their pharmacies at the risk of conflict of interest and subjecting patients to risk. Fourth, the AMA supported Obamacare government Medicaid hospital complex takeover of private healthcare(FYI physicians make lousy subservient employees). Fifth, and most recently, Walgreens take care PA/NP clinics now does acute and chronic primary care. This is the last straw. AMA missed the opportunity to intervene in their NP/PA acute illness clinic establishment. Can the AMA please stand up and fight this?

Who’s side is the AMA on anyway? It is most certainly not on the side of the physician or the patient. Perhaps the side of the government or just its own monetary profit? It is more than sad. It is tragic and sickening. It is no wonder that 80%+ physicians are not members of the AMA. Can the AMA, once again, champion the Independent freemarket individual practice of medicine as it did prior to Medicare’s inception in 1965?

Best wishes for good health,
Craig M. Wax, DO
Family physician, Editorial Board of Medical Economics
Host of Your Health Matters
Rowan Radio 89.7 WGLS FM
Twitter @drcraigwax
Independent Physicians For Patient independence @IP4PI