However, I would suggest that you do more research about topics that reach beyond the scope of your realm before making hyperbolic statements.

SB 492, written by Sen. Hernandez and touted by my colleagues, is nothing more than an attempt to improve our ability to take care of our patients. In no way, shape or form will this bill “essentially [allow] optometrists to practice ophthalmology,” as you stated.

For those who are not aware, the only significant difference between a modern optometrist and ophthalmologist in California is that the M.D. performs intraocular surgeries (i.e. cataract or retinal surgery) and can administer intraocular injections of medicine into the eye. All recent graduates of optometry schools already “diagnose and treat any disease relating to the eye,” as you stated.

The purpose of SB 492 is not to turn optometrists into ophthalmologists. It is to remove restrictive language in the Business & Professions Code that limits our ability to prescribe certain medications (that we are already trained to administer) and allow us to perform in-office, minor surgical procedures (i.e. lesion removal).

So before you or your colleagues begin to worry that you will receive your “health care in a bowling alley,” read up on the bill first. Then, be glad that Sen. Hernandez is spearheading legislation that will improve health care to a burgeoning, government-insured population.

For more information regarding this subject, I would suggest returning to bridgetheprovidergap.com. This time, spend some time reading the information about how a lack of general physicians will complicate the implementation of the Health Exchanges.

If they detect your a tea party subversive or a generic CWD doomer or ripe caver your implanted health access chip in between your eyes will be shut off!