Hi MHI Board members,

I like to suggest that we resolve the question of Experts within MHI, thus we can redefine the requirements of the title, which is an advantage and an incentive for engagement in ongoing education!

My proposal is that a Master Practitioner can get the title of Expert in a certain field when they prove to have collected a certain amount of points (250?) for ongoing education, which are given for
*attended courses (META-Health or other, chosen by candidate)
*attended META-Health conventions
*attended or given webinars
*documentation of case studies
*peer-review and comparison of case studies
*own research using books, scientific articles, studies, forum communication etc

which result in a thesis of 50+ pages on a theme related to META-Health and in MHI webinars given for the community. These webinars would include opportunity to discuss the topic and to peer-review the thesis.

With Deborah we already follow that line, she will give an education module and live webinar on the hypothyroid theme this month.
I'm sure also other candidates will like this format, which is not training-based but experience- and engagement-based.
It also helps MHI to grow the common knowledge, and to keep members in engagement and communication.

The point system and ways to accredit need to be defined and established. 

The text in the certificate may look like this:

"META-Health International
hereby recognizes that
(name)
has qualified by extensive ongoing education
as well as by research in the field of
(theme)
META-Health International CIC hereby confer upon the holder of this certificate the title of a
Expert Master Practitioner
with all the rights and privileges ensuing therefrom.
In witness thereof, the following have affixed their signature hereto. 
...Board signatures... "

Your input please!

Best,
Kora