The Price We Pay for Our Subservient Medical Societies Led by the AMA
A recent post-election publication (Nov. 13th) by the President of the American Medical Association (AMA), Dr. Susan R. Bailey, demonstrates how far it will go to seek favor from the incoming administration. As if out of the Biden campaign, “Never again can we allow anti-science bias and rhetoric to undermine our public health institutions and discredit the work of physicians, scientists and researchers.” But the reality is totally different; the science as how to address this virus is NOT settled. There are tens of thousands of scientists and physicians that have signed on to the Great Barrington Declaration stating that our approach has been all wrong. Antibody data, confirmed by the CDC, has demonstrated that the virus has affected ten times the confirmed numbers, making testing the general population and contact tracing a waste of time and resources. Our efforts instead should be focused on protecting the vulnerable in our population. Additionally, physicians’ work was never discredited.
Looking into the future, Dr. Bailey, wanted “A system that protects the patient-physician relationship from outside influence at all costs.” Yet at the same time, the AMA endorses the myriad of mind-numbing administrative tasks heaped on physicians by government and insurance companies that has destroyed the patient-physician relationship. She also wants, “A system that ensures that everyone has access to the affordable and meaningful coverage they need”. Also, hypocritical, as access is NOT the same as care (i.e., Medicaid) and no mention that our government programs Medicare/Medicaid are on the verge of insolvency.
With the AMA having hundreds of million dollars’ worth of investment funds, salaries for its executives in the millions, the selling to pharma and others of physician contact information for over a hundred million dollars, a lucrative monopoly on CPT code books for physician billing, a sycophant of federal policy for profit, how different is the present organization from its founding based on ideals in 1847 by Dr. Nathan Smith Davis Sr. M.D., LLD? Unfortunately, Dr. Davis (1817-1904) would not recognize his organization. He was a brilliant idealist who founded the AMA to bring better care to patients and vastly improve medical education. He laid the foundations for Northwestern University’s Medical and Law schools, created and was the first editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and wrote several major medical texts. He created an organization that was an INDEPENDENT voice for better patient care that sought its influence by meeting the healthcare needs of the public, NOT by amassing a fortune and playing political games.
Today’s AMA is not an honest physician voice for what is best for our patients, a tragedy leading to poor care at great cost.
John A. Goldman, MD
Yet what did AMA do during Covid-19? It told us it was inappropriate for frontline physicians to prescribe Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alone or in combination for therapy of early outpatient Covid-19 and combined with pharmacy organizations not to allow us to prescribe it. As physicians we can prescribe FDA approved therapy as we medically decide even when it is off label which contradicts their own AMA policy which allows physicians to perform off label prescribing if we fell it is appropriate and what they did is actually against AMA policy. I have used this combination chemotherapy of hydroxychloroquine, Zithromax, Vitamin D, Zinc and even aspirin with success in early Covid-19. This was included as part of a resolution to the AMA which also requested the the AMA to rescind these statements against attempting to block its use as inappropriate and rescind the collusion with pharmacist associations to not prescribe it. It was blocked politically – physicians afraid it would give AMA a bad name – ignoring their statement itself that gave the AMA a bad name. They submitted articles against it all of which were articles against HCQ for prevention which we agree it is not indicated and in hospital patients – again where we agree it is not indicated. They noted that patients could be harmed if they had problems obtaining it which occurred in about 6 % of patients presented at a paper at the national American College of Rheumatology meeting the week before the AMA meeting. Fortunately, the ½ life of hydroxychloroquine is 35 to 50 days and this would not be a major problem to delay the medication temporarily. Not only did they collude with pharmacists but also the American College of Physicians (ACP) who testified against it. I wonder if those ACP physicians knew they were thrown under the bus. It was politics over science and politics over policy. Even the full resolution and the comments on the forum where resolutions are discussed before the meeting have been removed from their website. So much for transparency. People are dying and yet they colluded with pharmacists to stop us from helping patients instead of standing with physicians who felt it was appropriate for off label use. Now we have to perform Prior Approval requests before we can prescribe it including my rheumatology patients with Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Sjogren’s etc. Even when I tried to post this problem on Medscape it was blocked! Even Medscape – how sad. No wonder only 22 % of physicians belong to the AMA. By god if you get early Covid-19 you will want this program which has been shown that when used in a composite, helps treat Covid-19, hospitalization and Death from Covid-19. People are dying and the AMA is preventing therapy to prevent death.
It’s why I won’t pay to be a member…they dont represent me or foster creative, critical thinking
Nice points all.
Bingo.
I just ripped up yet another mailing from the AMA…I don’t even open them anymore, I can recognize these wastes of paper as soon as I see the return address. It’s frigin’ hysterical how the outside of the envelope says there is a “Benefit statement enclosed,” when all it contains is them asking me for more money.