Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drug Formulary topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board backs exclusionary drug formulary for naturopathic doctors
Summary
The California Board of Naturopathic Medicine voted 5-0 to endorse an "exclusionary" naturopathic drug formulary that would list classes of medications naturopathic doctors may not prescribe independently and direct staff to include the committee's recommendation in a report to the Legislature.
The California Board of Naturopathic Medicine voted unanimously on Nov. 19 to adopt an exclusionary drug formulary recommendation that would specify classes of medications naturopathic doctors should not prescribe independently and forward that recommendation to the Legislature.
The proposal, developed by the board's drug formulary advisory committee, is structured as an "exclusionary" formulary: practitioners would be authorized to prescribe broadly except for particular drug classes the committee recommends excluding. "We have during this time created an exclusionary drug formulary as a possible legislative consideration," Dr. Mina Yun, a committee member, told the board during the committee update.
Rebecca, board staff, told members the legal mandate for the committee is in state law and that the committee's work must be documented and reported to the Legislature. "The legislative authority under Business and Professions Code 3627' the legislature directed the board to establish a naturopathic formulary advisory committee," she said, describing the required committee composition and reporting duties.
The committee listed categories it recommended excluding from independent naturopathic prescribing, including chemotherapeutic agents; controlled substances in schedules I and II; certain psychiatric medications (antipsychotics and mood stabilizers); select cardiovascular agents such as some antiarrhythmics and IV vasodilators; general anesthetics and neuromuscular blockers; and other high-risk drug classes. Committee members said the list reflects those medicines that, in their view, carry increased clinical risk and should remain subject to medical oversight.
Board members debated a handful of specifics during the discussion, including whether mood stabilizers were appropriately excluded. Dr. Mina Yun explained the rationale: the panel identified mood stabilizers as medicines that typically require specialized psychiatric care or have higher risks and contraindications. The committee clarified that benzodiazepines were not placed in the exclusion list.
Dr. Dara Thompson moved adoption of the committee recommendation; Dr. Vera Singleton seconded. A roll-call vote recorded five "yes" votes and the motion passed. The board did not adopt statutory text; rather, members approved forwarding the committee's exclusionary formulary as a recommendation and directed staff to prepare the formal report for submission to the Legislature. The Legislature will decide whether to act on the recommendation or pursue statutory changes and whether a bill author or other follow-up is required.
Next steps: staff will draft the formal report documenting the committee's education review, membership and rationale and submit it to the Legislature. Any statutory changes or an author for legislation would be addressed after the Legislature reviews the submitted report.
