Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by FatPhil on Monday July 22 2019, @01:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the dietetics-dianetics,-what's-the-difference dept.

The judge noted that the "health coach" was free to offer pro bono advice.

A federal court on Wednesday rejected claims by an unlicensed "health coach" that the unqualified health advice she provided to paying clients was protected speech under the First Amendment.

In rejecting her claim, the court affirmed that states do indeed have the right to require that anyone charging for health and medical services - in this case, dietetics and nutrition advice - be qualified and licensed. (State laws governing who can offer personalized nutrition services vary considerably, however.)

Heather Del Castillo, a "holistic health coach" based in Florida, brought the case in October of 2017 shortly after she was busted in an undercover investigation by the state health department. At the time, Del Castillo was running a health-coaching business called Constitution Nutrition, which offered a personalized, six-month health and dietary program. The program involved 13 in-home consulting sessions, 12 of which cost $95 each.

Under a Florida state law called the Dietetics and Nutrition Practice Act (DNPA), anyone offering such services needs to be qualified and licensed to protect against bogus advice that could cause significant harms. Those qualifications include having a bachelor's or graduate degree in a relevant field, such as nutrition, from an accredited institution; having at least 900 hours of education or experience approved by the state's Board of Medicine; and passing the state's licensing exam.

Del Castillo had completed none of those things. Her only credential for providing health services was a certificate from an unaccredited, for-profit online school called the Institution for Integrative Nutrition. Otherwise, she had a bachelor's degree in geography and a master's in education. [...]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 22 2019, @11:33PM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 22 2019, @11:33PM (#870130) Journal

    On the other hand, what if the medical advice was valid?

    I don't know the answer, I'm not qualified in medicine (see what I did here?)

    But the question does bring in focus the 'role of trust in human society', something that is so everyday-life rarely anyone consider as a general topic (as opposed to issues in specific circumstances).

    Can you imagine what the liberty to scam others in the name of free-speech does to the trust?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2