I oppose this expansion of scope for the same reason I oppose it for physical therapy; inadequate training poses a risk to the public and undermines current regulation of acupuncturists.  

I've been a certified AT for 30 years and an acupuncturist for 24 years.  As an educator who teaches acupuncture students how to safely and effectively treat patients using acupuncture trigger point therapy ie Dry Needling, it takes far more hours of training and experience than currently exists for those interested in learning the technique.  Without standards of education and practical application under supervision, an invasive technique is being placed in the hands of providers unaware of current regulations and the risk to patients. 

The argument for adoption comparing the Western medicine approach to acupuncture (dry needling) vs Eastern medicine approach is an inaccurate assumption often propagated by the companies standing to profit from training PTs and ATs.  Contemporary acupuncture in a majority of accredited programs instructs students in both biomedical and eastern approaches.  In particular, I teach Acupuncture Integrative Pain Management for the last 20 years, which incorporates evidence-based research, biomedical approaches using acupuncture needles, and eastern medical theory combined.

My colleagues (physical therapist, athletic trainers, occupational therapist) who have completed graduate-level acupuncture degree programs agree with this assessment and hope consideration is made regarding opposing scope expansion.