I agree with the dissenting group opinion.  The regulations as presented are insufficient to prioritize patient safety and visual outcomes.   To achieve competence that a patient would expect of a provider managing a critical procedure with implications of saving (or damaging) sight, there should be only one standard of training and certification.  It should reflect the more academically stringent, highly supervised, and true-to-life methods that MDs employ in training residents and fellows.  Anything less is a disservice to our patients that trust us, and may not fully understand the differences in the training pipeline between MDs and ODs.  Adopt a higher standard - the MD way.