House Bill 12-1060 Defeated

by Amy Porter on February 8, 2012

The House Agriculture Committee heard House Bill 12-1060 on Monday, February 6 and defeated it (read postponed indefinitely).

The bill was designed to license dietitians.  However, the text attempted to define the “Nutrition Scope of Practice.”  This was a grave concern to many practitioners who deal with nutrition.

As per an email I received (author not to be cited – see me if you want to know from who)

If this is truly a bill meant only for licensing dietitians, there is no reason for the bill to define the Nutrition Scope of Practice. Further, the Nutrition scope of practice is often indistinguishable from the Dietetics scope, so there is no guarantee with this amendment, that Nutritionists will not be violating the law. Once a state has licensure, because of how federal law is written, all nutrition practitioners in that state will be required to be licensed if they want their services covered by insurance. By licensing only dietitians, this will certainly put a financial squeeze on unlicensed practitioners as more insurance companies begin to cover nutrition. Unlicensed practitioners will be choked out of business. If CO legislators accept the CDA premise that licensing is necessary, then ALL affected parties must be at the table to define parameters. This amendment and law are unacceptable.

Thank you

Thank you to all who work to stop this bill by emailing and calling the committee.

Get Involved

This is the first of many bills we must pay attention to.  Many may not be in the best interest of the Alternative Health Community.

Whether to credentialize various groups (read health practitioners) on their individual modalities is not for discussion here.  It’s a bigger debate that we need to have throughout the state.  If you want to get involved, let me know and I’ll connect with the 2 legislative watch groups.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: