Do you trust your doctor?
Traditionally, doctors and scientists in our society have held positions of respect and trust. We wouldn't think of questioning what they prescribed. Today though in our media savvy world, the medical community is under increasing scrutiny and the people’s trust can no longer be taken for granted. It also can be easily lost with just one mistake.
When you are sick or scared of getting sick, you want to be able to trust that your doctor will help get you the answers and treatments you need. Traditionally, doctors and scientists in our society have held positions of respect and trust. We wouldn't think of questioning what they prescribed. Today though in our media savvy world, the medical community is under increasing scrutiny and the people's trust can no longer be taken for granted. It also can be easily lost with just one mistake.
Dr. John Mandrola, a cardiologist, recently wrote about physician creditability on his website and for MedCityNews. He said, "Consider the few public doctors out there with millions of followers. The majority of the stuff they recommend is perfect: eat good food, exercise, be nice, and sleep. Check. No problem. Everyone is good with that until they shatter the sense with nonsense. One miracle cure or stupid supplement or financial conflict ruins everything."
He went on to point out that social media especially has made everyone more critical of and aware of potential BS. He said, "The next generation of people are not gifting experts/doctors respect on lore alone. The respected doctor or health organization of the future will be transparent, consistent and humble."
In his post, he referred in particular to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and their promotion of Tamiflu. In their Take 3 program for Influenza, the CDC recommends taking antivirals like Tamiflu if your doctor prescribes them. Dr. Tom Frieden, CDC director, has stated that by taking Tamiflu, Relenza or Rapivab, people could avoid "serious complications" and hospitalization.
The FDA though does not agree. Dr. Mandrola points to a report by Christie Aschwanden for FiveThirtyEight that states that the FDA only will allow a claim that the drugs may reduce symptoms. Why the difference in opinion you may ask? Well, journalist Jeanne Lenzer, who wrote about her investigation for the Health News Review, did some digging and found that the CDC might be financially benefitting from promoting the antivirals. She explained, "I spent almost two weeks researching the funding trail before my story was ready to go. What I found was deeply disturbing. Roche had provided a 'directed donation' to the CDC through the CDC Foundation for the Take 3 campaign. And there was more. Substantially more: I learned that the CDC Foundation provides an average of $6.3 million in industry funding annually to the CDC."
Dr. Mandrola is concerned that controversies like this stir mistrust in the public. He said, "If too many people think even scientists are lying to them, humanity is headed toward the lemmings' famous cliff."
"The reason I write on this matter is that the best part of being a doctor was having the public trust. It was cool that people thought of us as legit, altruistic, and honest. But this is a new world, an interconnected one, a one with information democracy. Blemishes are not going to be easily painted over," he added.
There certainly is a blemish on the CDC if they accepted money from Roche and then exaggerated the benefits of the antivirals to help promote the products.
As Dr. Mandrola said in his post, "Many good recommendations can be nullified by one bad one–especially if money is involved."
He believes that doctors and scientists need to realize that transparency in all their work is very important.