The argument that PTs are untrained is inaccurate and denigrating.  As a physical therapist, I was required to graduate with a Doctorate of Physical Therapy. As with all of my colleagues, I received extensive training in anatomy, physiology, emergency care, biomechanics.  PTs are already allowed to perform invasive procedures using a needle with EMG and NCV studies.  In addition to this training in entry-level programs, we must have extensive additional training to be able to perform dry needling.  The idea of a PT taking a weekend course and then being able to dry needle ignores their extensive background education and their existing abilities to evaluate, diagnose, and treat a patient. The regulations proposed by the Virginia Board of Physical Therapy are sufficient to ensure public safety and should be fully enacted. 

There is extensive evidence that Dry Needling is a safe, evidence based, and effective treatment.  To my knowledge there are no reported cases of morbidity or mortality from dry needling performed by a trained Physical Therapist.

The evaluation and treatment used by a physical therapist is distinct from acupuncture.  Losing this unique ability would reduce the effectiveness of treatment in the allopathic and physical medicine communities. Trigger point dry needling is distinctly different from acupuncture as the treatment goal and method is different. It is specifically the use of a filiform needle to treat mechanical dysfunction and myofasical trigger points.  While both practices may use a similar implement or device, the clinical reasoning, technique, and goal of the treatment are different. Dry needling is not acupuncture. A judge and a carpenter both use a hammer/gavel but for distinctly different purposes.

For the sake of the patients treated by the medical community, in both cost and treatment efficacy, support PTs utilizing Dry Needling