Yesterday, I was in a store which had his magazine by the checkout and one of the headlines on the magazine was something like “Healthy Pizza Pasta Burgers!” The cover photo had Oz sitting in a kitchen with a burger in his hand, pretending to be about to eat it, and I noticed that they’d photoshopped the burger into the picture.
I do not follow Dr. Oz nor do I know much about this story, but can’t the American Medical Association and other prominent medical bodies of knowledge speak out if there have been violations of codes of ethics? If so, I would think they could quickly remove this celebrity Doctor from popularity…
I do not follow Dr. Oz nor do I know much about this story, but can't the American Medical Association and other prominent medical bodies of knowledge speak out if there have been violations of codes of ethics? If so, I would think they could quickly remove this celebrity Doctor from popularity...The AMA is not a governing body, its only a professional organization. It does not have the authority to remove his license or even his board certification if he is certified. They could make an announcement that they disagree with his approach to medicine but there are two problems with that. First the the public has a negative image of the AMA as a very self serving organization so if they came out with any criticism of Dr Oz that might only enhance Oz's image. Secondly the AMA IS a very self serving organization and as such they don;t want to get into a skirmish that would tarnish their reputation. They probably see this as a squabble between physicians that physicians should work out themselves. I hate to admit this in a public forum like this but I also post on a physician only forum and there have been several threads about Oz over there that I have been very active in. I am saddened and shocked to say that about a third of the doctors posting don't understand why the rest of us are upset with Oz. Some of them think this is a lot of sour grapes from the rest of us who they believe are jealous of Oz's success and some of them buy his nonsense about being open minded and trying all possible treatments. This from a group that should be well versed in the scientific method and rationale thinking. I have said this before. There are some physicians who enter the field of medicine because they love science and they want to use it to help people and then their are others who have their own motivations for going into medicine and only study science begrudgingly because its a requirement to get the degree. This debate is creating a clear dividing line between those two groups of physicians. The AMA will never put themselves in a position of choosing between the two because they don't want to alienate any dues paying members ( I am not one by the way. They alienated me a long time ago)
I do not follow Dr. Oz nor do I know much about this story, but can't the American Medical Association and other prominent medical bodies of knowledge speak out if there have been violations of codes of ethics? If so, I would think they could quickly remove this celebrity Doctor from popularity...You would think, wouldn't you. Yet it doesn't happen. Lois
I do not follow Dr. Oz nor do I know much about this story, but can't the American Medical Association and other prominent medical bodies of knowledge speak out if there have been violations of codes of ethics? If so, I would think they could quickly remove this celebrity Doctor from popularity...The AMA is not a governing body, its only a professional organization. It does not have the authority to remove his license or even his board certification if he is certified. They could make an announcement that they disagree with his approach to medicine but there are two problems with that. First the the public has a negative image of the AMA as a very self serving organization so if they came out with any criticism of Dr Oz that might only enhance Oz's image. Secondly the AMA IS a very self serving organization and as such they don;t want to get into a skirmish that would tarnish their reputation. They probably see this as a squabble between physicians that physicians should work out themselves. I hate to admit this in a public forum like this but I also post on a physician only forum and there have been several threads about Oz over there that I have been very active in. I am saddened and shocked to say that about a third of the doctors posting don't understand why the rest of us are upset with Oz. Some of them think this is a lot of sour grapes from the rest of us who they believe are jealous of Oz's success and some of them buy his nonsense about being open minded and trying all possible treatments. This from a group that should be well versed in the scientific method and rationale thinking. I have said this before. There are some physicians who enter the field of medicine because they love science and they want to use it to help people and then their are others who have their own motivations for going into medicine and only study science begrudgingly because its a requirement to get the degree. This debate is creating a clear dividing line between those two groups of physicians. The AMA will never put themselves in a position of choosing between the two because they don't want to alienate any dues paying members ( I am not one by the way. They alienated me a long time ago) Maybe it's time for a science based medical association for all of those alienated and sensible doctors. Lois
That’s a great blog, but this is actually the affiliated membership organization: Society for Science-Based Medicine]
That's a great blog, but this is actually the affiliated membership organization: Society for Science-Based Medicine]Maybe medical licensing boards should be involved. I, for one, am not comfortable knowing that medical doctors can go off in any weird direction they please with nothing to rein them in. It seems that even lawyers are more restrained than medical doctors. Lois
You mean like this one?]Like which one, CT? Lois
You mean like this one?]Like which one, CT? LoisThe one at the link.
You mean like this one?]Like which one, CT? LoisThe one at the link. I didn't see a link. The space was completely blank, at least as it came through on my iPad. I usually get links. Anyone else missing the link? Lois
Actually licensing is done by the States. The organizations such as the AMA, with physicians are given the power to make the rules. But there are typically sunset laws that periodically review licensing laws. Perhaps legislators should be encouraged to get involved as to whether physicians should be allowed to put woo and profit ahead of science based practice.
Actually licensing is done by the States. The organizations such as the AMA, with physicians are given the power to make the rules. But there are typically sunset laws that periodically review licensing laws. Perhaps legislators should be encouraged to get involved as to whether physicians should be allowed to put woo and profit ahead of science based practice.This is a very bad idea. Our legislators have not been the most scientifically literate individuals. I would certainly not give politicians the power to tell physicians what they can and can not say. If there are going to be guidelines, and I think there should be, they should be written by scientists and physicians. They should absolutely not be written by lawyers and lay people.
Actually licensing is done by the States. The organizations such as the AMA, with physicians are given the power to make the rules. But there are typically sunset laws that periodically review licensing laws. Perhaps legislators should be encouraged to get involved as to whether physicians should be allowed to put woo and profit ahead of science based practice.This is a very bad idea. Our legislators have not been the most scientifically literate individuals. I would certainly not give politicians the power to tell physicians what they can and can not say. If there are going to be guidelines, and I think there should be, they should be written by scientists and physicians. They should absolutely not be written by lawyers and lay people. That's what we have now and it's why we have such a mess in the medical community. It's also why we have Dr. Oz and other charlatans. Lois
Actually licensing is done by the States. The organizations such as the AMA, with physicians are given the power to make the rules. But there are typically sunset laws that periodically review licensing laws. Perhaps legislators should be encouraged to get involved as to whether physicians should be allowed to put woo and profit ahead of science based practice.This is a very bad idea. Our legislators have not been the most scientifically literate individuals. I would certainly not give politicians the power to tell physicians what they can and can not say. If there are going to be guidelines, and I think there should be, they should be written by scientists and physicians. They should absolutely not be written by lawyers and lay people. You mean like it is now? I am not suggesting that the AMA or a like organization be taken out of the rule making role. But they could get a nudge from legislators, re: ethical considerations, if the organization is failing, in this regard.
It looks like the AMA might be willing to take a stand on this. The American Medical Association is finally taking a stand on quacks like Dr. Oz - Vox
It looks like the AMA might be willing to take a stand on this. http://www.vox.com/2015/6/13/8773695/AMA-dr-ozIt's a step in the right direction, but the AMA has no teeth. The AMA could, however, issue public reprimands to doctors who act and speak unscientifically. But the AMA has proven itself to be a paper tiger. From the article: The same month, Oz responded to his critics by accusing them of having conflicts of interest and defending his civil liberties. "I know I have irritated some potential allies," he wrote in Time magazine. "No matter our disagreements, freedom of speech is the most fundamental right we have as Americans. We will not be silenced." No one is suggesting he be silenced, but the AMA also has a right to free speech and they should use it to reprimand irresponsible salesmen like "Dr." Oz. But will they actually do anything? Lois
As Lois already said this is a move in the right direction but the AMA has no legislative or disciplinary power. They are a professional organization not a licensing or governmental agency. There are also few details given since the guidelines have not been created yet. The devil is always in the details. The guidelines could be written so loosely as to be meaningless.
It will be interesting to see if the guidelines are meaningful and if any of the state licensing boards implement the recommendations.
Just trying to keep this thread on top or more accurately keeping the other thread from coming back to the top.
Just trying to keep the vaccine thread buried