Ear candling (ear coning)

[BlooRat]

I don't want to open a big can of worms, but I'm really interested if people can briefly and concisely give their opinion on Ear Candling or Ear Coning. I've been asked to do it at a couple of my workplaces and have done so, but I'm not 100% convinced about whether I should be.

I'll probably only read about 10-15 posts, so try not to bombard me with responses, just after a quick, small survey of opinion.

Thanks again for your help,
Luke.

 

[MummyToBe-5th.April.2010]

Not that I want to overwhelm your reading capability but here are some links where this subject has been discussed:

http://www.massageplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=185&highlight=ear+cone

http://www.massageplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3276&highlight=ear+candling

http://www.massageplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2538&highlight=ear+candling

http://www.massageplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2541&highlight=ear+candling

http://www.massageplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7183&highlight=ear+candling

http://www.massageplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8987&highlight=ear+candling

Angie

 

[Cat_possum]

Don't know what your liability ins. covers, but the 2 used by most MTs in the US specifically will NOT cover ear candling, so I wouldn't consider doing it simply because of that.

I think it can do something beneficial for the ear. The visual evidence that some enthusiastic practitioners point to (melted wax, white powdery substance) has repeatedly been shown to be candle drippings/ash, so the candles obviously aren't drawing up big gobs of wax or visibly pulling up "infection," but when I have had it done (at home), my ears have felt better afterward. Not miraculously better, but a little better.

If I were paying for it, I would want to see that the practitioner had actually had some training. And why not use an otoscope too, to check for any visible changes?

 

[ReginaldQ]

I used to do it many years ago but stopped because I personally think that even though it may have some small positive effect it is an over-hyped gimmick.

 

[Mr Jim]

I did it at one point but stopped when hearing the horror stories. Plus it isn't in my scope of practice so for legal reasons, I don't do it.

 

[kate86]

Thankyou

Thanks everyone, and sorry about the repeat posting.

I understand about the scope of practice aspect, but when you get a job in a day spa you generally do whatever treatments they ask you to do, there's a bit of pressure there.

If there's a safety issue there, then I think thats a pretty good reason not to do it. Having read through the other threads relating to this modality - what does bother me is people using the term "quackery". I find this to be an intentionally inflammatory term, and inappropriate considering the therapists who do candling are generally either told to do it, or really believe that it can help.

Just my thoughts on the issue, I think I'll tell my employer to count me out.

 

[Doctrine Man]

If you are an employee of a spa, then the liabilities aren't really an issue. Were anything to happen, it would fall on the business and their insurance. Unless of course you signed some insane contract.

Someone posted a link to a German company that sells ear candles with a built in 'screen' to prevent candle wax from entering the ear canal. It must have been in one of those other threads. If I still ear candled, I would get those.

 

[Aamir Zaka Buttar]

If you are an employee of a spa, then the liabilities aren't really an issue. Were anything to happen, it would fall on the business and their insurance. Unless of course you signed some insane contract.

Professional liability IS an issue for an MT. We can be personally sued right along with the facility. That is why it is prudent to each carry professional liability insurance, and why most spas require that of each MT.

 

[Tiger Dude]

If you are an employee of a spa, then the liabilities aren't really an issue. Were anything to happen, it would fall on the business and their insurance.

I dunno - I would be hesitant to take that view. Not that anything's going to happen, really, but -- if a client feels they really need to sue over negligence/injury, I can't imagine that a lawyer would advise just choosing one party to sue. It seems that lawsuits often name more than one culpable party, such as an individual for directly causing harm AND a facility for failing to supervise the individual, etc.

Although, I can't imagine liability ins. would even be tappable for ear candling culpability, since both the ABMP and AMTA policies explicitly state that EC is not covered. Which I guess would mean that the practitioner ethically should make sure they are covered for EC mishaps by a separate policy - either of the spa, or some other policy they purchase themselves?

 

[Jay John]

I don't think the OP is an AMTA member, if I recall he isn't in the states. So I would think his insurance might be worded differently.

I worked at a spa and we did not need to have our own insurance because we were employee's and it is the companies responsiblity to insure for all situations. I also worked for a small massage practice as an employee... same situation. And they did have a suit filed against them to which they took care of, not the employee.

An example.... a spill on a restaurant floor not cleaned up properly. You fall, you sue. You sue the restaurant, not the negligent employee.

But I would not doubt that in some cases, the employee would get sued. This is the joy of the American legal system.

 

[ishes]

I worked at a spa and we did not need to have our own insurance because we were employee's and it is the companies responsiblity to insure for all situations. I also worked for a small massage practice as an employee... same situation. And they did have a suit filed against them to which they took care of, not the employee.

At our clinic, we require all of our employees to carry their own liability insurance in addition to the clinic carrying it's own insurance. Employees can be and are sued.

The reason they don't sue the restaurant employee is because most of them work for little better than minimum wage and don't have anything to be sued for. And....most of them are not "trained professionals." Most therapists have had to go through education and licensing requirements and therefore are held to a higher standard than restaurant workers.

Angie

Angie

 

[Fireball]

suing day spa therapists

lol! From what I've seen, restaurant workers here are far more likely to have a few dollars on them than the day spa employees. Mind you I've mostly been to snow/tropical resort based day spas.

Either way they're usually both broke - they might have an ipod or something I guess...have to just lock em up!