Sen. Mark O. Hatfield Dies at Age 89

August 9th, 2011

Mark O. Hatfield, one of the last great Republican legislators, died August 7 in Portland Ore. Hatfield was best known for his early opposition to the Vietnam War in 1965 when he was governor of Oregon and his later strident opposition to the war as a U.S. Senator.

In 1970 he co-sponsored with Sen. George S. McGovern (D – S.D.) legislation in the U.S. Senate calling for the complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam. That legislation ultimately failed, but Hatfield gained a reputation as an independent-thinking Republican who was not afraid to confront the war policies of President Richard Nixon.

In his obituary in The New York Times, Adam Clymer reports that Hatfield was “a strong advocate of federal spending on medical research.” Clymer writes that Hatfield argued that money being spent on the military should be shifted to human needs.

 

 

Amazing Video

August 5th, 2011

Check out how this cephalopod (an octopus in this case) camouflages itself and then suddenly reveals itself:

Thanks to marine biologist Roger Hanlon and Science Friday producer Flora Lichtman for this video clip. The octopus does it by seeing the object that it wants to emulate and then — in less than a second — signaling its nerve cells to change color. Kind of like a super HDTV.

Close ties between medical societies and the drug and device industries

May 6th, 2011

Journalists Charles Ornstein and Tracy Weber detail the close ties between the Heart Rhythm Society and the medical device and drug industries in an investigative report published May 5 by ProPublica and USA Today.

“Nearly half the $16 million the heart society collected in 2010 came from makers of drugs, catheters and defibrillators used to control abnormal heart rhythms, the group’s website disclosed,” according to Ornstein and Weber.

Their report includes a sidebar about the the heart society’s failure to include in a patient tip sheet mention of risks associated with implanting devices that deliver shocks to convert abnormal heart rhythms to normal rhythms. The reporters also point out that the society’s information sheet fails to mention that “sicker and older patients were underrepresented in clinical trials of the devices,” according to cardiologists who reviewed the information sheet for ProPublica.

Ornstein and Weber report that officials of the Heart Rhythm Society say grants and other monies received from industry do not buy influence. The Heart Rhythm Society is one of 33 medical groups that Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) has queried concerning the financial backing that they receive from drug, medical device and insurance industries.

Rx for an ailing health care system

November 30th, 2010

Dr. Tim Johnson, the former medical editor for ABC News, has written a terrific e-book in which he diagnoses what ails the U.S. health care system and offers a prescription for fixing it.

In “The Truth About Getting Sick in America” (Hyperion, 2010), Johnson asks what he calls the “big question”:

“Why does the United States spend more than twice as much per person on health care as all other industrialized countries when, paradoxically, it is still the only one that doesn’t provide basic health insurance for all its citizens?”

To figure out the answer, he says Americans need to examine what he refers to as the “four C’s;” namely, health care that’s convenient, compassionate, cutting edge and cheap or “even better, cost-free.”

Johnson says the lack of a primary care doctor who takes charge of a patient’s care is one factor that drives costs out of control. He writes:

“Today, health care is saturated with specialists who often don’t communicate with one another, order tests that have already been done, and often prescribe medicines without knowing what else the patient is taking. That’s one reason 20 percent of Medicare patients consume 70 percent of Medicare dollars; complicated patients amplify the inefficiencies and wastefulness that result when there’s no one in charge.”

With more than half of the health care dollar going to hospital care and physician and clinical services, Johnson says we have to change “the way we pay our doctors and hospitals. Ultimately, I believe we must pay all doctors by salary.”

He says physician salaries should be adjusted for patient load, hours worked, length of training and other factors. He argues that a system in which doctors are reimbursed for procedures and not for cognitive skills and patient outcomes will never constrain costs nor deliver the best of care.

Johnson cites 2009 figures from the Medical Group Management Association that show family practice physicians, pediatricians and psychiatrists all earning between $175,000 and $200,000 a year (certainly what most Americans would consider a comfortable income). In contrast, specialty physicians who derive the bulk of their income from procedures pull down much more with gastroenterologists, orthopedic surgeons, radiologists and cardiologists all earning between $400,000 and $500,000 a year; cardiovascular surgeons earning $519,00 a year and neurosurgeons topping the list at $609,000 a year.

Johnson writes:

“I am not saying that all doctors should be paid the same without regard to specialty. I believe that doctors who perform complicated, tension-filled procedures requiring longer training should be paid more than physicians who work under less stressful situations and/or have shorter training. But the differences should be less than they are today.”

Johnson argues that physicians should still be well paid and that it’s reasonable that neurosurgeons make more than a half-million dollars a year. “Put bluntly, $600,000 for a neurosurgeon with twelve years’ training after college looks paltry compared to the million-dollar bonuses for Wall Street traders with only four years of college.” But he says putting doctors on salaries would eliminate “the inherent conflict of interest in our fee-for-service system, which provides a direct financial incentive to do more.”

And he adds that the same financial dynamics that push doctors to do unnecessary tests and procedures apply to hospitals as well: “The more they do, the more they make!” The solution… figure out a way to pay hospitals for what works and what’s really necessary.

Johnson also offers critiques of the pharmaceutical industry, insurers, the malpractice system, and those in the media who hype unproven procedures and dangerous treatments.

After laying out the problems, Johnson addresses a fear widely exploited by conservatives and the Tea Party movement… that government regulation will stifle medical innovations and limit personal freedoms. Johnson is clear that “there is no way to get costs and quality under control without a strong role for the federal government.” He acknowledges his disappointment that a single payer system (a type of Medicare for all) wasn’t enacted in the health insurance reform law. And he lays out the reasons why he thinks the 2010 health insurance legislation will ultimately fail.

His predictions for the health care system of the future may surprise you. Johnson writes that before we can truly reform the U.S. health care system, we’ll need political leadership and personal sacrifice.

In an era where negative politics and personal enrichment are the order of the day, Johnson’s vision of the future speaks to an America that many of us hope for but few expect.

Is coverage on the CBS Evening News for sale?

September 21st, 2010

In tonight’s CBS Evening News, anchor Katie Couric presented a story on the cost to society of Alzheimer’s disease. Immediately following the story CBS ran an ad for the Alzheimer’s Disease Association.

Was the story on the cost of Alzheimer’s the quid pro quo for the ad? What happened to the wall between editorial and advertising? Is story selection on the CBS Evening News for sale?

The juxtaposition of the story and the ad raise these questions. Perhaps the CBS Evening News can offer some answers.

BP Must Pay

May 30th, 2010

The blowout of the BP exploratory well in the Gulf of Mexico may be the biggest environmental disaster since the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident.

Eleven workers died on the Deepwater Horizon platform, and no one knows the ultimate cost to the environment and to the local economies of the Gulf states and the rest of the United States.

BP’s use of dispersants at the blowout site 5,000 feet below the surface of the ocean has kept much of the oil hidden from public view in deepwater plumes that scientists have only begun to map. The toxic brew of dispersants and oil threatens 600 species, including brown pelicans, sea turtles, dolphins and hundreds of species of fish and invertebrates.

More than 20 years after the Exxon Valdez spilled 11 million gallons of oil into Prince William Sound, the Alaskan fishery has not recovered. The herring fishery crashed in 1993, and despite claims to the contrary by Exxon, many biologists and fishermen attribute the loss of the fishery to the spill.

The BP blowout is dwarfing the Exxon Valdez in size. Using a very conservative figure from the U.S. Geological Survey of 504,000 gallons a day, the PBS Newshour is estimating that nearly 20 million gallons will have leaked as of today. One expert’s worst case scenario is that 160 million gallons have already leaked. Extrapolate the current rate to August 2010 when BP expects one or two new wells to help stem the flow, and the number of gallons leaked could reach anywhere from 60 to 500 million gallons. And there’s no guarantee that BP will ever completely stop the flow.

BP has a history of environmental crimes. In March 2005 an explosion at BP’s refinery in Texas City, Texas killed 15 workers and injured 170 others. According to Abraham Lustgarten at ProPublica, “investigators later determined that the company had ignored its own protocols” prior to the explosion. The company pleaded guilty to a federal environmental crime and paid a $50 million fine.

In 2006 more than 200,00 gallons of oil leaked in a company pipeline in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, at that time the largest spill ever on the North Slope. That spill led to an investigation that was halted by the Bush Administration despite the protest of Scott West, the special agent in charge for the EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division. Ultimately, BP’s Alaska subsidiary pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor violation of the Clean Water Act.

Given BP’s track record and the huge and continuing environmental and economic damage caused by the Gulf blowout, the federal government cannot trust BP to fulfill the claim that it made in a full-page ad in today’s New York Times to “make this right.”

The federal government should immediately request that BP put a minimum of $200 billion in an escrow account to pay for claims that the federal government, not BP, considers “legitimate.”

If BP refuses to provide the government with these funds, the government should seize BP’s assets and sell them to the highest bidder that has a decent environmental safety record.

The money won’t bring back the dead workers, the fisheries, the dead birds, the devastated ecosystems or the livelihoods of thousands of Gulf residents, but it will cause other oil companies to weigh environmental risks more carefully before they drill thousands of feet below the surface of the ocean.

BP & Craig Venter

May 20th, 2010

What do BP and Dr. Craig Venter have in common?

BP is one of several investors in Synthetic Genomics, whose co-founder, chairman and CEO, J. Craig Venter, announced today that his company had engineered a synthetic cell.

Venter described the synthetic cell as “the first self-replicating species we’ve had on this planet whose parent is a computer.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/science/21cell.html

The results of Venter et al’s research appeared today in the journal Science.

Investors like BP and others hope that synthetic cells can be encoded to produce microorganisms that could perform a variety of functions.

“The approach we have developed should be applicable to the synthesis and transplantation of more novel genomes as genome design progresses,” Venter et al. wrote.

Some scientists say Venter did not create a new life form. What he and his fellow researchers accomplished was to replace the bacterium’s genetic code with a very similar code that they had synthesized in the lab and then inserted that code into the cytoplasm of a related bacterial cell.

You can debate whether or not Venter et al. created a new life form, but clearly they altered a life form that now has the potential to multiply on its own.

Imagine if this synthesized bacterium or another escapes from the lab and starts replicating. What if the bacterium is resistant to all known antibiotics? What if the bacterium combines with known pathogenic bacteria to create a superbacterium?

These scenarios raise the question of whether unforeseen benefits of this technology are worth the potential risks to the planet. Do we really need new man-made life forms?

As the BP disaster has illustrated in the past month, our technology has outstripped our ability to control its unintended effects. Before scientists unleash a new life form, isn’t it just common sense to examine whether this latest technology is worth the potential damage it can cause?

As a species, we humans are overloading our atmosphere with greenhouse gases and polluting our oceans. The last thing we need is to unleash a new life form on the planet without even knowing its potential for harm.

My new book: “The New York Times Reader: Health & Medicine”

March 29th, 2010

My new book, “The New York Times Reader: Health & Medicine,” has just been published by CQ Press. The book is both a how-to manual for aspiring medical and health reporters and a compendium of more than 50 stories from The New York Times. Also included are condensed interviews with Times reporters Lawrence K. Altman, Benedict Carey, Gardiner Harris, Gina Kolata and Tara Parker-Pope and a foreword by Barbara Strauch, health editor of The Times.

I’ve divided the book into three sections on news, features and commentaries with 15 chapters covering investigative reporting, news analysis, narratives, profiles, perspective stories, essays and blogs, among others. For more on the book, go to:

http://www.cqpress.com/product/NYT-Health.html

The book is also available on Amazon.

Other books in the CQ Press Times College series include New York Times Readers on Arts & Culture, Sports, Business & Economics, and Science & Technology, the latter written by S. Holly Stocking.

TV Docs Blur Journalistic Boundaries in Haiti

January 21st, 2010

Since the earthquake in Haiti, television network news -– including ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN –- have featured their physician reporters in heavily promoted pieces. The reports raise questions about the role of physician reporters in covering disasters.

  • What’s the first duty of the physician reporter? To care for the injured or to report?
  • Can you do both? Can you do both well?
  • When does self-promotion get in the way of reporting?
  • Are shots and sound bites of injured Haitians being exploited for commercial purposes?
  • Are physician reporters requesting and getting consent of those whom they feature on camera?
  • Can a patient who is being treated by a physician journalist ever say “no” to being profiled when the reporter is the one providing care?
  • Are physician reporters and their production crews getting in the way of delivering care?
  • What about the journalist’s main job, namely, to tell the story without becoming the story?

Consider the following pieces that appeared on network news since the quake:

Dr. Richard Besser helps a woman deliver her child amid the chaos in Haiti (01/18/2010)
http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=9591907
Gupta treats injured baby (01/14/2010)
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health/2010/01/14/sot.gupta.treating.baby.cnn
Dr. Nancy Snyderman describes the desperate struggle to save lives (01/19/2010)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34940404/

Lastly, consider a video clip showing CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric at the bedside of an orphaned 13-year-old Haitian boy (The Face of Haitian Tragedy):
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6108078n&tag=api

In the first piece Dr. RIchard Besser, ABC News medical editor and a pediatrician, assists a midwife in the birth of a child who he mistakenly thinks is presenting in a transverse position, perhaps requiring a Cesarean delivery.

By my count Besser used the first person “I” 11 times in the story. His apparent contribution to the mother’s care was that he aided her transfer to an Israeli field hospital. Did Besser ever ask the mother if she could be featured in the piece? We’re not told. And, in this situation would consent be voluntary when the only doctor apparently attending your birth is also a television reporter?

So, a story that Besser initially presents as an examination of the impact of the quake on pregnant women ends up being a story about an American TV doctor who assists a nurse midwife and then works his Blackberry to get consultations from obstetricians in the U.S. before riding with the pregnant woman in an ambulance to an Israeli field hospital.

The Gupta story begins with CNN’s chief medical correspondent walking down a street in Port-au-Prince following an unidentified young woman with a spiral notebook tucked into her hip pocket. That woman, presumably Gupta’s producer, leads him to a 15-day-old baby who, he says, has “some sort of head injury. They’re begging for a doctor.” After a short run Gupta finds a man, presumably the father, holding a baby whose mother has died in the quake.

Gupta does a standard neurologic exam and determines that the baby doesn’t have a skull fracture, but simply a cut on her scalp. With Gupta holding the baby and providing direction, his assistant rebandages the baby’s head wound. Gupta tells the father that the baby will need antibiotics. There’s no indication where or how the father is going to get the antibiotics, but Gupta assures him that the baby will be “OK.”

In contrast to the Besser piece, Gupta focuses on the patient rather than himself, and he does provide a neurologic exam and first aid. But four minutes of air time devoted to providing simple first aid? The story is overblown and sensationalized. It’s admirable that Gupta is providing medical care while on assignment, but does he need to report on the care he provides?

In “The Today Show” report featuring Dr. Nancy Snyderman, NBC’s chief medical editor, we meet Haitians needing amputations to remove crushed and infected limbs. In this story Snyderman wears two hats –- surgeon and reporter. She never makes clear what her actual medical duties are. Is she directing care of amputees? Is she assisting others? Or is she dropping in for short-term medical visits? We simply don’t know. We do know that Snyderman’s heart is in the right place, but the report sheds little light on the broader problems of medical care in a disaster zone.

In contrast, to see how a reporter who isn’t the focus of the story can report on the same problem of amputations in a much clearer and more comprehensive way, check out this story, also featured on MSNBC:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/34934435#34977592

The final piece featuring Katie Couric stands in contrast to those of the physician reporters. Rather than making herself the focus, Couric lends comfort to a young boy with a broken limb and a broken heart, having lost his mother and father in the quake. Couric takes a back seat to the story.

Physician reporters would do well to watch how a veteran news anchor recognizes that the story isn’t about the reporter. It’s about the people whose lives have been changed by the quake.

If you’re a physician reporter, what do you do if you find yourself in a disaster zone? First, if you’re a doctor, you help the sick and injured. As the situation permits, you report on the story being careful to not exploit those whom you treat. To be sure, it’s a tough balancing act. But judging from the examples above, there appears to be little effort on the part of physician reporters or network news management to keep professional boundaries intact.

Medical, science and environmental television reporting

December 9th, 2008

I’m pleased to announce that 23 videos produced by students and faculty in UNC’s medical and science journalism program are now available on the web in YouTube format. Go to the following site to see the complete listing:

http://www.jomc.unc.edu/graduate-studies-graduate-students/medical-science-journalism-tv-reporting

The six- to seven-minute reports cover topics from the threatened blue crab fishery to sexually transmitted infections to urban air pollution. If you like what you see, feel free to link to our videos.