The screws begin to tighten

[colagal]

One of the provision of the latest bill says: "The bill would also prohibit doctors from being paid by dispensaries to write recommendations and would mandate that doctors recommending medical marijuana not have any restrictions on their medical licenses."

Read more: Colorado Senate committee backs tighter rules on medical marijuana - The Denver Post

The screw-ees in this case are the patients who got their recommendations from visiting a dispensary rather than their other "bona fide" doctor relationships. When it comes to the annual license renewal, I would imagine that many of these patients will have difficulty getting their renewal with the referring doctor. Recourse? Black market? Develop bona fide relationship? Another ballot initiative? LEO are probably starting to lick their chops....

colagal Reviewed by colagal on 01-28-2010. The screws begin to tighten One of the provision of the latest bill says: "The bill would also prohibit doctors from being paid by dispensaries to write recommendations and would mandate that doctors recommending medical marijuana not have any restrictions on their medical licenses." Read more: Colorado Senate committee backs tighter rules on medical marijuana - The Denver Post The screw-ees in this case are the patients who got their recommendations from visiting a dispensary rather than their other "bona fide" Rating: 5

[the image reaper]

good post ... another example of how the rapid proliferation of 'get rich quick' dispensaries, are going to DOOM medical marijuana ... watch and see :smokin:

[COzigzag]

I looked up the meaning of "redacting" but I'm not sure how if fits with this context?

Redacting:

1. To draw up or frame (a proclamation, for example).
2. To make ready for publication; edit or revise.

I hope it means our names/personal information will be edited OUT!

THE PHYSICIAN SHALL MAINTAIN A SEPARATE RECORD-KEEPING
SYSTEM FOR ALL PATIENTS FOR WHOM THE PHYSICIAN HAS RECOMMENDED
THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA, AND, PURSUANT TO AN INVESTIGATION
INITIATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12-36-118, C.R.S., THE PHYSICIAN SHALL PRODUCE SUCH MEDICAL RECORDS TO THE COLORADO STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS AFTER REDACTING ANY PATIENT OR PRIMARY CAREGIVER IDENTIFYING INFORMATION.[/COLOR][/COLOR]

[palerider7777]

One of the provision of the latest bill says: "The bill would also prohibit doctors from being paid by dispensaries to write recommendations and would mandate that doctors recommending medical marijuana not have any restrictions on their medical licenses."

Read more: Colorado Senate committee backs tighter rules on medical marijuana - The Denver Post

The screw-ees in this case are the patients who got their recommendations from visiting a dispensary rather than their other "bona fide" doctor relationships. When it comes to the annual license renewal, I would imagine that many of these patients will have difficulty getting their renewal with the referring doctor. Recourse? Black market? Develop bona fide relationship? Another ballot initiative? LEO are probably starting to lick their chops....

yup all those peeps that thought the grass was greener on the other side of this are about to be kicking themselfs in the ass.most of which are the same ones that really are not sick or hurt in any way all the peeps that came in under the radar just to get high will now be left out in the cold again.

the same ones that bitch and moan about prices and this shop does this and that shop lied about this.all these shops only sell bunk and on and on these peeps are about to find out how good they really had it.cause come next renewal they will not be getting another card.i guess they like having to go to the street and go back to shady deals.getting ripped off every other sale as the dealer sees fit.

[palerider7777]

good post ... another example of how the rapid proliferation of 'get rich quick' dispensaries, are going to DOOM medical marijuana ... watch and see :smokin:

you need to add to that all the whiners and cry babies too.they are doing anything but to help the cause..but im sure you don't see it that way.

i know if i was gov and i heard abunch of crying going on about something i wanted control over.it would be easy for me to swoop in with a "plan"to fix things.when all i really wanted was all the control.

see i guess some people don't agree. but i myself believe if 1 wants to partake in an adult manner and is of age.they should have every right.not just select people that think they are above someone else.

also the corrupt gov has no biz being involved in any way.

[colagal]

I looked up the meaning of "redacting" but I'm not sure how if fits with this context?

Redacting:

1. To draw up or frame (a proclamation, for example).
2. To make ready for publication; edit or revise.

I hope it means our names/personal information will be edited OUT!

THE PHYSICIAN SHALL MAINTAIN A SEPARATE RECORD-KEEPING
SYSTEM FOR ALL PATIENTS FOR WHOM THE PHYSICIAN HAS RECOMMENDED
THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA, AND, PURSUANT TO AN INVESTIGATION
INITIATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12-36-118, C.R.S., THE PHYSICIAN SHALL PRODUCE SUCH MEDICAL RECORDS TO THE COLORADO STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS AFTER REDACTING ANY PATIENT OR PRIMARY CAREGIVER IDENTIFYING INFORMATION.[/COLOR][/COLOR]

Yes, I believe you are correct in assuming that identifying (any information that identifies) patient or primary caregiver are removed (redacted) in the event of a BME investigation. At least, that is how I read it...

[palerider7777]

Yes, I believe you are correct in assuming that identifying (any information that identifies) patient or primary caregiver are removed (redacted) in the event of a BME investigation. At least, that is how I read it...

why would they need to do this? so would this confuse leo even more? how would they know if your a caregiver or not?

[COzigzag]

Yes, I believe you are correct in assuming that identifying (any information that identifies) patient or primary caregiver are removed (redacted) in the event of a BME investigation. At least, that is how I read it...

What would be the point in even requiring the physician to maintain separate records and turning those records over if the personal information is redacted?

Are they covering their butts on HIPAA by doing this? Take out the patient/caregiver name but leave the medical information so they can scrutinize how the physician is determining if medical marijuana may help a patient.

[colagal]

why would they need to do this? so would this confuse leo even more? how would they know if your a caregiver or not?

I don't think LEO would get involved in a BME investigation. LEO, if they have cause, can access the registry to verify if a patient is a patient (not sure if they have access to the entire patient form that would state who the caregiver is), but not physician records. Hopefully, the caregiver has documents indicating as much if LEO asks. Is that what you are asking?

What would be the point in even requiring the physician to maintain separate records and turning those records over if the personal information is redacted?

Are they covering their butts on HIPAA by doing this? Take out the patient/caregiver name but leave the medical information so they can scrutinize how the physician is determining if medical marijuana may help a patient.

The Board's investigation determines if the physician is practicing safely and in accordance to generally accepted standards, whatever generally accepted standards mean. I am thinking that these pending investigations may lead to a more definitive recommending procedure, i.e., narrowing down the definitions of what a debilitating condition is...in which case they don't need the patient/caregiver information to make their findings.

There is more to this bill than meets the eye... but, I could be unduly paranoid.

[copobo]

which ones are in favor of this legislation?

they should be boycotted.