george conklin

The AMA has always opposed universal health care and has been successful
in doing so. Look at what they did to Hillary Clinton. By lying about the
AMA's success, you think you can cover up its lobbying efforts in favor of
costs #1, results #37.

george conklin

The AMA is concerned with the structure of medicine, not with
reimbur*****ts. The issue is reimbur*****ts....the wrong approach. You
should be receiving a SALARY, not reinbur*****ts, and should be working for
a corporation like Wal-Mart or within the National Health Service.

peter h. proctor

Presumably, you mean Hillary's health care debacle in '94. What
really nailed the Dems was the gun thing, particularly the assault
weapons ban. Most people were only dimly aware of the details of
Hillary's plan. Hell, I'm a doc and I barely understood it.

Dr P

brianm@phat.pharm (brianms phat

From the AMA's web site:
<quote>
"The AMA adopted a policy in 1969 declaring that marijuana is 'a
dangerous drug and as such is a public health concern'," said AMA
Immediate Past President Richard F. Corlin, MD. "Although much has
changed in American culture and in medical research since we made that
statement 33 years ago, the AMA's view on marijuana use remains
exactly the same -- it is mind-altering, it can be addictive and it
can lead to destructive behavior."

Marijuana use has serious and far-reaching health consequences that go
far beyond the short-term high. It can cause mental health problems,
such as increased anxiety, panic attacks, depression and lung damage.
In addition, marijuana can lead to impaired judgement and, as a
result, risky behaviors such as dangerous driving, unprotected *** and
increased delinquent behavior.

"We need to send the message to our children that it is a drug with
serious consequences, and its use will not be tolerated," said Dr.
Corlin. "This new national campaign is a bold first step in that
direction, and the AMA and its member physicians are willing to do
whatever it takes to help spread this important message."
</quote>
-- http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/2403-6719.html

peter h. proctor

Utter and complete bullsh!t. The two types of
physicians are completely integrated, doing residencies at each
others institutions, sitting on the same medical boards, practicing
side-by-side. When my father had a heart attack, he was cared for
at a nominally- DO hospital by both DO's and MD's.

It is true that the DO's tend to be a little more holistic
than us MD's and a little more oriented to primary care. Also, an MD
Pain doc friend swears that OMT ( osteopathic manipulative threapy )
is often useful in intractable musculoskeletal pain and often refers
patients for it.

In fact, several years ago, California DO's were offered the
opportuity to exchange thier DO's for MD degrees. Many turned it
down.

Dr P

brianm@phat.pharm (brianms phat

I don't doubt any of this. Most institutions exist to serve their
members.

peter h. proctor

..
When evidence-based expert knowledge conflicts with
strongly-held personal belief, personal belief wins every time. The
exception being when you reallly need the services of the expert.
Then watch how fast the tune changes<G>...

BTW, this is a general case. A trueism in science is that
a new scientific theory doesn't win because of its merit, but
because the people opposing it eventually die out<G>...

Dr P

orac

Oh, please. It was far more than the AMA that did in Hillary & Bill's
health care plan, although no doubt it did play a part. But so did the
insurance companies. So did the pharmaceutical companies. And so did
Bill and Hillary's mis-steps and arrogance. It was definitely a
multifactorial failure, and I doubt the AMA was even the most important
reason the plan failed.


You claim that the AMA represents the economic interests of doctors.
Certainly it does to some extent. However, your assessment of its
ability to influence the government is completely out of tune with
anything resembling reality. Let's take a recent example of the AMA
trying to protect the economic interest of its members. Earlier this
year, Congress passed a Medicare appropriations bill that would have cut
Medicare reimbur*****ts to physicians by 4.4%, which was to be an
additional cut on top of a 5.4% cut that took effect on January 1, 2002.
(Odd that, if the AMA were as all-powerful when it comes to lobbying
Congress to protect the economic interests of its members as you
constantly complain that it is, Congress would have cut physician
reimbur*****ts by 5.4% last year--with the AMA unable to stop or reverse
the cut--and then follow up that cut with a serious consideration of an
additional 4.4% this year.) It took every bit of effort the AMA could
muster to prevent this second cut from taking place, and perhaps the
only reason it was modified to be less draconian is because supporters
were able to tack it on to the Medicare Prescription Drug and
Modernization Act of 2003, which is the bill that recently passed to
provide prescription drug coverage to seniors. If that bill hadn't been
in the pipeline, I'm betting physicians would have had little chance of
reversing that 4.4% cut.

So much for the all-encompassing political power of the AMA. They're a
toothless tiger and can't even effectively protect Medicare
reimbur*****ts--quite contrary to your picture of a hulking behemoth
that could, if it decided to, bend Congress to its will and make it pass
a universal health care bill. Your paranoid delusions that the AMA is
this all-powerful organization are just that--delusions.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

orac

Bullshit.

I've worked with a number of DO's from my residency until now and never
saw anything of the sort. The head of the Surgical ICU at one of the
hospitals we rotated at was a DO, and he was the one of the finest
critical care docs I've ever encountered, if not THE finest. The
associate director of the facility where I work is also a DO.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

orac

And George needs to provide citations to back up his earlier contention
that surgeons in the U.S. use only 10% of the amount of narcotics and
pain relievers in postop patients that European surgeons do. He has
ignored my repeated requests for him to back up his earlier assertion,
no doubt because he can't back it up.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"