« PreviousContinue »
the vision care—of all of our people, and of people far beyond the confines of our country.
I hope that the members of this committee will report favorably on this proposed expansion of the student loan fund provided by Public Law 88–129. By doing so you will help insure a greater supply of future well trained optometrists, both men and women, from among whose numbers organizations such as ours will be able to secure the researchers who will make the optometric discoveries of tomorrow.
Thank you for the opportunity to present the foundation's views. In closing let me say that optometry is eager to meet its increasing challenges in the space space and to continue to provide the finest vision care in the world for our citizens. The loan funds now under consideration will go a long way to help to make that hope come true.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Are there any other witnesses that you have?
Dr. CHAPMAN. No, sir. There are no further witnesses from our association. I would like to suggest if any of you gentlemen have recorded questions which you would like to ask any of those who have previously testified, this might well be the time to do that, but I would—whatever procedure you follow will be all right with us.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. All right.
Mr. SCHENCK, Mr. Chairman, I have only one question and that is that I think Dr. Ewalt mentioned additional studies were being made on the matter of filters of one kind or another, and I wonder where and when, that study is going to be completed and where the information will be available.
Dr. CHAPMAN. Mr. Schenck, I do not-well, I will turn it over to Dr. Ewalt.
Dr. EWALT. I am not able to answer when they will be completed, but I will certainly make an effort to get the information for you from members of our profession serving on these committees, and so forth.
Mr. SCHENCK. Thank you so much.
Dr. CHAPMAN. It is at Indiana University, I think primarily, isn't that right, Gordon ?
Dr. HEATH. Yes, one of my colleagues, Dr. Merrill Allen at Indiana University is one of the country's leading researchers in the matter of driver's vision and visibility and illumination from vehicles. He is presently engaged in a study of filters and of foglights specifically.
Mr. SCHENCK. Well, recently there was some company-I do not recall now—who manufactured yellow colored lens for, I think, primarily trapshooters but who also felt that that was a valuable filter for fog. I know nothing about it.
Mr. Rogers of Florida. Any questions at all?
Mr. BROTZMAN. Permit me to proceed out of order, if these gentlement will indulge me one question. I have another hearing at 11:30. I just want to get one thing straightened out in my mind. I will direct this to any member of the panel, which I thought was a very effective one, I might say, but since we are talking about schools and education, will someone draw the line for me and define optometry, ophthalmology, I believe, and then there is another term, oculist. I do not quite have these things specifically in my mind as to which is which and which will be produced as a result of the education process assuming this particular measure is enacted into law by the Congress.
Dr. CHAPMAN. In answer to Mr. Brotzman's question, one which constantly comes up in these discussions, Congressman, because of the similarity of the names, it make it very difficult on the part of lay people to understand the differences. I wilĩ be pleased to try and do that for you in as basic terminology as I can, and you will have to understand that it is really more extensive than I am going to outline for you
An ophthalmologist is not an optometrist. An ophthalmologist is a medical practitioner who has in most instances taken additional training in the treatment of eye disease and the handling of eye surgery. He at the same time includes in his practice in most instances the handling of vision problems and the prescribing of glasses.
The optometrist is a nonmedical practitioner in the sense that we are not concerned with the treatment or the surgery or the use of medicine in the handling of our patients. We are specialists in vision. Our first major concern is to determine the health of the eye. If it is deemed that this eye is healthy, and by the way, 98 percent of these eyes which will be seen will be healthy eyes, the optometrist then proceeds to utilize the various methods and techniques and proceduers to make this pair of eyes a comfortable, efficient seeing pair of eyes.
In the course of that examination, if I discovered the need for surgical investigation, or further investigation from a pathological or from a health standpoint for treatment, then I immediately refer that patient to the proper physician for it, the proper medical practitioner.
The term oculist is not now—I want to say the right word hereit is not used nearly so much. The term is fast going out of vogue. It generally described back in its important day the medical practitioner who did
eye, ear, nose, and throat, and quite often he would call himself an oculist. He rarely, however, went beyond his normal medical training for specialized work in the eye particularly as treatment or surgical requirements might demand. He generally specialized by his own interests in this field in the area of eye examination, prescribing of glasses, et cetera.
You see that term very rarely now. It still exists in some spots but not very often.
There is one other that you did not mention which is important in this whole scheme and really with the exclusion of the oculist term, now, you come to three, and the third is the optician, and his name is so similar, too, that it is also confusing. And I think the easiest way to remember his performance is to think of him in terms of a pharamacist in the sense that he can take a prescription from an ophthalmologist or an optometrist and fabricate a pair of glasses from it, but he is not trained or licensed or equipped to examine the human eye at all. You may take your prescription there and have it filled; your prescription from the ophthalmologist or optometrist.
Is that helpful to you?
STATEMENT OF JOSEPH P. ADAMS, REPRESENTING THE
INTERNATIONAL CHIROPRACTORS ASSOCIATION
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. At this time, then, there being no questions, thank you very much for an excellent presentation.
Mr. AdaMs. My name is Joseph P. Adams. I am the Washington representative of the International Chiropractors Association, and I would like to request permission to file a statement.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. That will be permitted, and without objection it will be made a part of the record at that point. (The material referred to follows:)
WASHINGTON, D.C., June 2, 1964. Hon. PAUL G. ROGERS, Subcommittee of Public Health and Safety, Interstate and Foreign Commerce
Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. ROGERS ; It was a pleasure and a privilege to attend the hearing conducted by you and the Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety of the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee on Tuesday, May 26, on H.R. 8546, a bill to include optometry students in H.R. 12 under the student loan sections.
You authorized me to submit a statement on behalf of the International Chiropractors Association and the statement follows:
Chairman Rogers and distinguished members of the Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety, I am privileged to present this statement on behalf of the International Chiropractors Association of 741 Brady Street, Davenport, Iowa. My position with the association is that of Washington, D.C. counsel. The International Chiropractors Association is active and represents member chiropractors in all States of the Union. It is dedicated to the public welfare and to the promotion and preservation of high professional standards. It maintains that all citizens are entitled to freedom of choice of doctor for their personal health care.
There are compelling reasons why the science of chiropractic should be included in any consideration of H.R. 8546, by amendment. Chiropractic today is the second largest healing profession in the United States, and has earned, and deserves your consideration for its inclusion in legislation now the subject of this committee's study. Research and development in the chiropractic colleges of this country will probably afford the greatest dollar's worth of value purchasable in the entire health field today while at the same time increasing the output of doctors whose training will be made possible by the student loan section of the act.
To refuse chiropractors inclusion in this amendment is to prohibit thousands of young people the right to attend a college of their choice, but most of all it will deny the public the right to choose their own doctor because the present school system finds it difficult to meet attrition rate through its graduating classes alone. This is a worthy cause and it for our own citizens and our own young people. Help the chiropractic colleges help themselves by including them in this bill.
CLEVELAND CHIROPRACTIC COLLEGE
President, C. S. Cleveland, Jr., B.S., D.C., Ph. C. “Every effort should be exerted to assure the inclusion of chiropractic in any consideration of the Health Professions Education Assistance Act of 1963 by appropriate amendment.
“The enrollment of Cleveland Chiropractic College, Kansas City, Mo., is growing, and we need more classrooms, more laboratories, and more equipment and facilities.
“Most all States are crying for more chiropractors. Many States such as Nebraska, Colorado, West Virginia, and many others are even subsidizing new graduates as an inducement to get them to come to their States.
“Our profession is losing many fine young men because they do not have the necessary funds to put themselves through chiropractic college without help.”
It is respectfully called to the attention of the committee that in the case of President Cleveland, he expressly urges the inclusion of chiropractic students in the loan fund sections of the legislation under consideration.
PALMER COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTIC
President, David D. Palmer, B.S., D.C., Ph. C., LL.D. "It has been the experience of the Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, Iowa, that our enrollments increased tremendously immediately after World War II, and immediately created a need for increased classroom facilities. Since that expanded enrollment, the students who matriculated under the GI bill has lessened but chiropractic student enrollments are still increasing. There now exists a need in chiropracitc colleges for financial assistance for increasing classroom and laboratory facilities, and there is definite need for the availability of scholarships and tuition loan assistance to many worthy students with good scholastic aptitude.
"During the past 2 years, we have experienced requests from acceptable matriculants for student scholarships in excess of $100,000.
“We have been delayed for lack of funds in research program which would be most advantageous to the needs of the general public, but have been unable to adequately supply research grants to undertake studies in the following
“1. Improved analytical and spinal diagnostic instruments;
"3. Approved spinal adjustment procedures. “We have had innumerable students, the past year, desperately in need of tuition assistance in order to permit them to continue uninterrupted in their professional studies.
"The Palmer College of Chiropractic would be most grateful for much needed Federal assistance in these areas of student loans to chiropractic students."
These comments, though brief, are directly from the field of present-day experience in the field of chiropractic education and these college heads are the best qualified representatives of their profession to submit testimony before the distinguished committee.
Chiropractic is a licensed profession in 47 States of the Union. Chiropractic is generally recognized not only by National and State Governments, but also by independent insurance companies, unions, industry, and the public. Some industries now have staff doctors of chiropractic and many routinely refer injured employees to chiropractors. Management labor contracts provide for chiropractic care. Workmen's compensation laws in most States provide for chiropractic care. The public is utilizing services of doctors of chiropractic in an ever-increasing volume.
In conclusion then, the International Chiropractors Association heartily recommends the passage of H.R. 8546, a bill to include optometry students under the student loan sections of H.R. 12, and further to amend the bill to include chiropractic students.
The opportunity to present this statement as part of your formal hearing is appreciated. Respectfully submitted.
JOSEPH P. ADAMS,
Washington, D.C., Counsel, International Chiropractors Association.
STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL Q. PETERSON, ASSOCIATE CHIEF FOR
OPERATIONS, BUREAU OF STATE SERVICES, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Now we would like for Dr. Paul Q. Peterson, Associate Chief of Operations for the Bureau of State Services, Public Health Service, to come forward and testify. Glad to have you with us, Dr. Peterson.
. Dr. PETERSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have no prepared statement. I am here to testify and answer any questions that members of the committee might wish to ask with reference to the report that was submitted by the Secretary in his letter to the chairman of the committee.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I believe your report is unfavorable.
Dr. PETERSON. Yes, sir. The report of the Department is unfavorable.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Now, let me ask you this. What is the need for students as far as the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is concerned, the need for optometrists?
Dr. PETERSON. The Department and the Public Health Service have recognized that in optometry, as well as in other health professions, we do have serious manpower problems.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. What is the extent of it? I am going to be very brief if we can because we do not have much time.
Dr. PETERSON. I am unable to give you specific data which would indicate the extent of the shortage insofar as optometrists are concerned. The Optometry Association indicates that they feel they need 1 optometrist per 7,000 population whereas it has been testified this morning their present ratio is 1 to 11,000. The Public Health Service has no evidence in this area. We have not done studies on this subject.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I thought you gave this committee an unfavorable report.
Dr. PETERSON. The unfavorable report was with reference to the need for loans to students and, as was pointed out by the Secretary in his letter, on the basis of present costs of instruction, the present student body within the various schools, the availability of student loans under the National Defense Education Act and their present utilization, it was our feeling that the problem, so far as loans were concerned, was adequately met under existing authorities.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Chairman, may I just interject a question there?
Now, I take it that the Secretary feels that there are ample funds under the National Defense Education Act for this purpose.
Dr. PETERSON. That is correct.
Mr. SCHENCK. And that his unfavorable report is based largely upon the assumption that he does not have at his disposal sufficient loan funds to meet the additional loans to the students covered by H.R. 8546.
Dr. PETERSON. That is correct. It was his feeling that the funds under the student loan provisions of the National Defense Education