obama
Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 08:00:00 AM PDT
|
|
This week, the public option in healthcare reform is back on the table, and suddenly senator (with a small s) joe lieberman, in the dem caucus, decides he's going to filibuster any bill (block it from going to a vote) that has a public option in it. The health insurance company stocks shooting up after this announcement, and Rachel Maddow digs in about this with Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake.
As always, a pleasure to see both of these brilliant women talk this out. And yes...
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 345 words in story)
|
|
Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:00:00 AM PDT
|
|
Last week I joined about twenty five other physicians and healthcare advocates at New Mexico State Senator Dede Feldman's house to watch President Obama's address on healthcare reform to the joint sessions of Congress.
A television station crew was present at Senator Feldman's house, to capture our thoughts after the speech. There was a resounding sense of support for Obama's speech and for his healthcare proposals (including unanimous support for the public option piece).
Now, the speech was nothing less than historic on several levels...
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 745 words in story)
|
|
Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 20:09:03 PM PDT
|
President Obama's reframing the debate and addressing corruption at the level of the federal legislative and executive branches. This has everything to do with the health of America and the health of Americans.
"And I also find it ironic that some of those who rail most loudly against this bill because of earmarks, actually inserted earmarks of their own, and will tout them in their own states and their own districts. These practices hit a peak in the middle of this decade, when the number of earmarks had ballooned to more than 16,000 and played a part in a series of corruption cases...
In 2007, the new democratic leadership in congress began to address these abuses by a series of reforms, that i was proud to have helped write. We eliminated anonymous earmarks and created new measures of transparency in the process so Americans could better follow how their tax dollars are being spent. Any earmark for a for-profit private company should be subject to the same bidding requirements as other federal contracts...
Rewarding of earmarks to private companies is the single most corrupting element of this practice, as witnessed by some of the indictments and convictions that we've already seen."
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Jan 13, 2009 at 23:55:19 PM PST
|
|
Two hours after hearing about Obama tapping Dr Sanjay Gupta as Surgeon General, I wrote some initial thoughts on Sanjay Gupta for Surgeon General. Below are some more thoughts that might better clarify why many people have some issues about Dr Gupta.
In my previous post, I quoted the website of the Surgeon General's office for the job's description. Since that post, Dr Val Jones conducted an excellent and timely interview with Dr Richard Carmona, a physician who served in the position of Surgeon General from 2002-2006 (and disagreed strongly with the Bush administration on many issues). You can listen to the interview or read the transcript. An excerpt:
Dr. Val: What does the Surgeon General do on a daily basis?
Dr. Carmona: The Surgeon General is the commander of the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, which consists of thousands of officers in hundreds of locations around the world working anonymously to keep our nation and our world safe. The Surgeon General interfaces on a daily basis with the NIH, CDC, SAMHSA, HRSA, and all of the federally related health agencies as well as global health organizations like the World Health Organization, Pan American Health Association, and the American Public Health Association. The Surgeon General provides in-depth analysis of health policy for every cabinet minister, including the Interior, Commerce, and Homeland Security. It's a very visible, credible, and iconic position.
I won't belabor this point, but Dr Gupta is a well respected neurosurgeon but still a neurosurgeon (not a public health or primary care physician) and has one year's experience working as a White House Fellow with then First Lady Hillary Clinton on healthcare issues. Previous surgeons general have essentially been those with years of experience in the public health corps or in the field of evidence-based public health.
Dr. Val: What should Americans expect of their Surgeon General?
Dr. Carmona: The Surgeon General of the United States needs to remain a non-partisan physician. He or she should always communicate the honest, scientific truth to the American public so that they can make informed decisions about improving their health. Often, that scientific information is not the same as the policy that the President or Congress come out with, because policy is a very complicated process.
The Surgeon General has the largest medical practice in the nation (300 million), and when he or she issues reports, they actually change behavior in our country and the world. The Surgeon General is the true, honest broker of the best science for the people, offered in an a-political fashion. He or she is a patient advocate at the very highest level of government, and is expected to address the most complex health problems that face our nation. There is no more important or influential office that an American physician can hold.
Dr Carmona brings up some important points here. The Surgeon General MUST be apolitical, and must have the ability to go against the President or Congress in favor of the honest, evidence-based findings on public health issues. Dr C Everett Koop and Dr Jocelyn Elders stand out as surgeons general who accomplished these things, whether controversial at the time or not. Which brings me to qualifications and causes for concern. Many people share the following concerns about Dr Sanjay Gupta:
Concern #1: Numerous visible conflicts of interest, tarnishing Dr Gupta's credibility.
This is huge. Dr. Gupta has no lack of conflicts of interest. As said so well by Gary Schwitzer, Professor of Journalism and Mass Communication and blogger at Schwitzer Health News Blog, "Usually where there's smoke, there's fire".
(Click on "There's More" for the remainder of the post)
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 1390 words in story)
|
|
Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 14:35:26 PM PST
|
|
And when I say "shiny" I mean "shiny".
Dr Gupta is by all means qualified as a journalist and a neurosurgeon to be a surgeon general, but what does it really mean to be surgeon general? From the website of the Office of the Surgeon General:
The Office of the Surgeon General, under the direction of the Surgeon General, oversees the operations of the 6,000-member Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service and provides support for the Surgeon General in the accomplishment of his other duties. The Office is part of the Office of Public Health and Science in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The Surgeon General serves as America's chief health educator by providing Americans the best scientific information available on how to improve their health and reduce the risk of illness and injury.
So, yes, qualified he is, Dr Sanjay Gupta. He does a lot of just that -- he's a journalist who does a lot of work on health information. But it's still a curious thing -- why Dr Gupta was chosen over other possible choices. Is it because he's one of the most recognizable doctors in America? I'd like to think Obama's not just trying to put together a celebrity cast. Is it because he's a health journalist and so has an innate ability of communicating important health news to the public? Is he really more qualified than other candidates for this post? Or is he even really qualified for what this job entails?
Back in March 2007, more than 1,000 physicians and medical students, including myself, saw Dr Sanjay Gupta speak as keynote speaker at our joint National Physicians Alliance and American Medical Student Association conferences. He gave quite a "shiny" presentation, with super fancy powerpoints and moving screens and lots of glitter, and his stories of health reporting and the war in Iraq were quite moving. At his young age of 37, he wowed us with our accomplishments (though I was hoping we wouldn't leave such inspiring conferences with a superhero mentality -- that only a few people can do the good work. I'm obviously a big fan of the concept that we're all heroes or have the potential to be -- just maybe not the shiniest, which I'm ok with).
However, a short time later, I saw Dr Gupta on television, and this is where my hesitation comes up about Dr Gupta as surgeon general. Gupta has very clear biases and conflicts of interest, as a top reporter for CNN. This is what makes his choice questionable, in my mind.
Right before Michael Moore was slated to be interviewed by CNN's Wolf Blitzer, about "Sicko", CNN ran a segment called "Reality Check" by Dr Gupta, on the myths and biases of the movie. It was truly disgraceful, in that this "reality check" was not well fact-checked and full of mistruths (some of which Gupta later apologized for). The following day, Michael Moore was interviewed by Blitzer, and he argued against all the "facts" that Gupta presented (both segments presented below):
That night Michael Moore also put his Truth Squad to work, publishing some refutations of Gupta's arguments.
Later, Dr Gupta discussed Michael Moore's arguments (and sounding so very well like a politician):
Michael Moore and Dr Sanjay Gupta later faced off on Larry King Live. Part 1 of the discussion:
And Part 2:
Back to the discussion of surgeon general. Clear conflicts of interest prevailed in Gupta's discussion of the health care system. As a journalist, I'm sure he would have fact-checked better -- if not nudged by CNN's advertisers interests. I'd like our top doc in the White House to be conflict-of-interest free, in the name of restoring integrity to our public health system.
On the optimistic side, I'm sure my hesitation about Dr Gupta could be assuaged. And there's wonderful potential for many positive developments and forward-thinking actions -- based on Dr Gupta's immense skills and the Obama administration's interests. So don't call me a curmudgeon (yet). I'm just sharing some history that I think deserves discussion given the circumstances (and thanks to the collective history and power of YouTube videos).
(of note, Gupta is taking a few days to decide, but it is anticipated that he will accept the offer to be the next surgeon general)
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Dec 23, 2008 at 23:13:20 PM PST
|
From yesterday's kff health policy report, reporting on a washington post-abcnews poll of 1000 americans about health care and the new administration:
Seventy-seven percent of adults believe that Obama should make major reforms to the health care system, compared with 20% who said he should not, the poll found. Of those supporting major reforms, 51% of adults believe that Obama should seek them immediately after he takes office, and 26% believe that he should wait until later in his presidency, according to the poll. Sixty-eight percent of adults believe that Obama will have the ability to make major reforms to the health care system, compared with 28% who believe that he will not have the ability, the poll found.
Lots of shoulds and wills here. What stands out is that the desire for status quo is being filed in the big red file named "trash". let's see if that desire transforms into something greater.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Dec 02, 2008 at 20:41:33 PM PST
|
|
I know, I know, this post comes almost a month too late. But better late than never. So, yeah, Yes We Did! (check out shephard fairey's beautiful Yes we Did sticker here)
Many of us put so much into the election, celebrated in the streets, and then dealt with a fair amount of exhaustion, burnout, and post-celebratory angst. Many of us had to pinch ourselves each day in the week ahead, to make sure we really were awake and Barack Obama really was the President Elect of the USA.
As we watch/involve ourselves in/hold accountable the new Obama administration, Cure This will continue the discussion around our core questions:
What does it mean to heal, individually or as a community? What is health justice? How is our health fiercely connected to the wellness of our neighborhoods? What do we prioritize in transforming our communities? How do we begin to dream again, especially when so many of our struggles revolve around reacting to the problems of the day, or around just surviving?
Because, as Naomi Klein has said, "This is our progressive movement. It's ours to lose." And ours to dream about and build together.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| About |
|
"Health is Dignity and Dignity is Resistance"
What is health justice? How are health & human rights fiercely connected to the wellness of our neighborhoods? How do we reframe policy debates? How do we continue dreaming and building instead of just reacting & surviving? And how do we support each other in our healing?
Cure This is an online space for storytelling, discussion, reflection and building around healing justice. Create an account to write a diary or comment. Questions or thoughts: lotusfeet [at] hotmail [dot] com
News: CureThis was part of an exhibit in Chicago: "Visual resistance in feminist health movements, 1969-2009" [link] |
|
| Support CureThis |
|
Donations will go to the costs of running the site, including monthly hosting and the web designer's volunteered services. Thanks gratefully.
|
|