Sanjay Gupta? For Surgeon General?

CNN and others are reporting:

Obama asks CNN's Sanjay Gupta to be next surgeon general

The popular television personality, a practicing neurosurgeon, reportedly would be provided a broader portfolio to make wellness, fitness and healthcare reform a top priority.

Reporting from Washington and New York -- President-elect Barack Obama has asked Dr. Sanjay Gupta to be the next U.S. surgeon general, looking to a popular television personality to help provide a public face for his healthcare agenda.

Best known as a health and medicine correspondent for CNN and CBS, Gupta, 39, is a practicing neurosurgeon in Atlanta and a member of the faculty at the Emory University School of Medicine.

The surgeon general oversees some 6,000 officers in the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service. Officers work as physicians, nurses, dentists and other health professionals in various federal agencies -- including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Coast Guard and the Bureau of Prisons.

Past surgeons general have wielded the most influence, however, by using the bully pulpit to focus attention on major health issues. And Gupta would come to the post with an unparalleled public profile and background as a communicator.

Sanjay Gupta? Oh, please Mr Obama, no! Great smile.....popular on-air personality.....but not Surgeon General!

A little about me. I am a RN (class of '76) and have been an avid reader of medical topics for several years. Over the past few years, because of my own increasing age as well as some of the articles and research I've looked at, I have become a proponent of many non-conventional treatments and practices. The areas I am especially interested in are diet and nutrition, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes and other diseases of carbohydrate metabolism. I am a low carb advocate even tho I still struggle with weight and other health issues. I am also an advocate of an interactive doctor patient relationship. I believe all should investigate any disease, condition, prescription etc on their own and doctors should encourage this rather than look at it as questioning their authority. I believe strongly that we are pushing medications to excess, often without even attempting other means of treatment. I believe that many of the non-conventional treatments are viewed as a threat to doctors, nutritionists, and others and are attacked rather than looked into with an open mind.

So.....regarding Dr Gupta......I guess it all depends on what you want for a Surgeon General. If you are looking for a person that will be little more than a spokesperson for the AMA, AHA, ADA et all....if you are looking for someone to try to block real health care reform.....if you are looking for a puppet that doesn't do his (or her) own research, but instead depends on talking points provided by pharmaceutical companies....OK, he's the perfect choice.

But, if you want a Surgeon General is someone that will oversee not only the Public Health Service, but also promote truly healthy lifestyle changes...not what is being promoted today, but changes that really will make a difference....well, I'd say keep looking.

There are so many things that are pushed onto the public that have little or no scientific background. Much of the research that is done is poorly done and many times the results are misinterpreted. I would like to see a Surgeon General that looks at all the the policies and practices and study each issue and check out the research himself. Not just read the summaries, but look at the data and make his own interpretations. Of course I'd want this person to do this with an open mind, not just looking to verify his/her beliefs.

Currently much of the "current wisdom" in the medical industry is based on faulty or non-existent research. You cannot conclude anything from observational (or co-hort) studies, you can only form a hypothesis. You cannot promote a practice based on tradition....or beliefs that have since been proven wrong. You cannot continue to push policy and practices on people where the data just isn't there.

The American Heart Association (AHA) has sold out to Big Pharma and various food manufacturers. Allowing the AHA seal of approval on foods that do nothing to promote heath. Allowing Big Pharma to repeatedly conduct "education" seminars that are little more than sales pitches. Ignoring evidence that many of their practices are at least useless and in some cases dangerous. The American Medical Association too.....either they are complicit with manufacturers and drug companies or they just do their own research.....but they are continuously promoting practices and policies that are not based in science.

And the American Diabetic Association? Well they promote a diet based on the very thing that diabetics have trouble handling! Despite studies done to show more effective treatment, treatment that minimizes complications as well as the need for medications, they continue to promote the same treatments that they have for decades. They repeatedly cite "research". Poorly done, misinterpreted research maybe...but not well designed, well executed studies that show results they don't want to see.

The whole medical establishment repeatedly promotes a diet that is based on processed food!! Think of it.....the largest part of the food pyramid is grains. With few exceptions, grains must be processed in order for them to be edible for humans. So....we base our diet on a processed food? And! At the same time, we should limit protein and fat to very small portions. Even tho we likely evolved on large quantities of fats and proteins with minimal (and mostly seasonal) fruits and vegetables and virtually no grains, the diet that is promoted today pushes limiting naturally occurring fats and protein and encourages processed foods.

Please Mr Obama, look into some others for this position. Look
for someone that is more free-thinking. Someone who does his/her own
research and looks at the data and design of studies before forming an
opinion. Someone that is willing, if necessary, to take on the "big
guys" (ADA, AHA, AMA, Big Pharma, etc) and question or correct policies
and procedures that are ineffective or even dangerous.

For further reading, I highly recommend:
Good Calories Bad Calories by Gary Taubes (or any article written by Mr Taubes)
Blood Sugar 101 by Jenny Ruhl
Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution by Dr Richard K bernstein
Weston A Price Foundation: Know Your Fats
The Great Cholesterol Con: The Truth About What Really Causes Heart Disease and How to Avoid It by Dr. Malcolm Kendrick

Our poor children!

I don't even know what to say about this!

For the first time, an influential doctors group is recommending that some children as young as 8 be given cholesterol-fighting drugs to ward off future heart problems.

Mind you, there is little if any evidence that cholesterol medications prevent heart disease!

It is the strongest guidance ever given on the issue by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which released its new guidelines Monday. The academy also recommends low-fat milk for 1-year-olds and wider cholesterol testing.

Dr. Stephen Daniels, of the academy's nutrition committee, says the new advice is based on mounting evidence showing that damage leading to heart disease, the nation's leading killer, begins early in life.

It also stems from recent research showing that cholesterol-fighting drugs are generally safe for children, Daniels said.

Wow...."generally safe"? Really? Many adults that have been damaged (or died) from statins may disagree. Can we at least have a citation for the "recent research"??

Several of these drugs are approved for use in children and data show that increasing numbers are using them.

Oh well.....if more kids are using them, then I guess it's ok for most kids?

"If we are more aggressive about this in childhood, I think we can have an impact on what happens later in life ... and avoid some of these heart attacks and strokes in adulthood," Daniels said. He has worked as a consultant to Abbott Laboratories and Merck & Co., but not on matters involving their cholesterol drugs.

Drug treatment would generally be targeted for kids at least 8 years old who have too much LDL, the "bad" cholesterol, along with other risky conditions, including obesity and high blood pressure.

For overweight children with too little HDL, the "good" cholesterol, the first course of action should be weight loss, more physical activity and nutritional counseling, the academy says.

Pediatricians should routinely check the cholesterol of children with a family history of inherited cholesterol disease or with parents or grandparents who developed heart disease at an early age, the recommendations say. Screening also is advised for kids whose family history isn't known and those who are overweight, obese or have other heart disease risk factors.

Screening is recommended sometime after age 2 but no later than age 10, at routine checkups.

We've been SOOOOOO successful with adults, now we have to work on the kids!

Read more here and for the New york Times article click here. (Registration required for NYT article.

We have GOT to get some sensible people in charge!

"You drink the Kool-Aid"

Ex-Drug Sales Rep Tells All

To sell their drugs, pharmaceutical companies hire former cheerleaders and ex-models to wine and dine doctors, exaggerate the drug's benefits and underplay their side-effects, a former sales rep told a Congressional committee this morning

Shahram Ahari, who spent two years selling Prozac and Zypraxa for Eli Lily, told a Senate Aging Committee chaired by Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wisc., that his job involved "rewarding physicians with gifts and attention for their allegiance to your product and company despite what may be ethically appropriate."

Ahari claims that drug companies like hiring former cheerleaders and ex-models, as well as former athletes and members of the military, many of whom have no background in science.

"On my first day of sales class, among 21 trainees and two instructors, I was the only one with any level of college-level science education," Ahari told ABCNews.com on Tuesday.

During their five-week training class, Ahari claims that instructors teach sales tactics, including how to exceed spending limits for important clients, being generous with free samples to leverage sales, using friendships and personal gifts to foster a "quid pro quo" relationship, and how to exploit sexual tension.

"The nature of this business is gift-giving," says Ahari. He claims that he's heard stories about sales reps helping to pay the cost of a doctor's swimming pool and another doctor who was routinely taken to a nightclub where a hostess was paid to keep him company.

Drug reps develop a positive view of their drug and a negative view of the competitors, according to Ahari. "You drink the Kool-Aid. We were taught to minimize the side effects and how to use conversational ploys to minimize it or to change the topic.

According to Ahari, the benefits could be lucrative for sales reps, who tended to earn more than researchers. On top of a base salary for starting reps of $50,000, "there were four quarterly bonuses, an annual bonus, stock options, a car, 401K, great health benefits, and a $60,000 expense account."

Read the rest here.

Preaching to the choir, I know....but maybe it will bring about some changes!