Skip to main content

Has Coronavirus Infected our Politics?


Have you heard enough about Coronavirus yet?   If not, feel free to tune in to the Coronavirus News Network, also known as CNN.

I have zero medical experience in virology and public health, so read no further if you are looking for a Whistleblower travel advisory or if it’s safe to pet Scruffy if he develops a fever.

I’m also not here to gripe about our nation’s response to this incipient pandemic.   Although we have a first class team in place now, even they admit that they stumbled initially.  I'm more interested in making progress than in racking up debate points.

My observation is that there is no issue or event that is immune to politicization, a reality that depresses me.  We all agree that prior to the virus’s emergence from China, we were already rabidly hyper-polarized and hyper-partisan in the zero sum game that now defines our political landscape.  I won’t add to this sentence so as not to waste readers’ time in reading what we all know and agree on. 

On many issues we should expect differing views from our two main political parties that are philosophically distinct.  For example, changing income tax rates, border issues, health care policy, funding our defense department, trade policy are examples that will give rise to spirited policy debates. This is as it should be.  During normal times, meaning decades ago, these differences would be debated and a solution forged by resorting to the diabolical technique called compromise. 
But, or so I had thought, some issues should hover above this chaos in the rarefied region of the stratosphere where reasonableness prevails.   

Illustration of Coronovirus
Is it Democrat or Republican?

To offer an absurd hypothetical, if a lawmaker offers a bill declaring cancer to be evil, would this pass unanimously?  It seems non-controversial, but who knows?  Perhaps, the opposing party might be suspicious of the motive, or fear that this is the entry point to the slippery slope that will lead to Medicare for All.   Or, the opposition will agree to vote for the bill only in exchange for votes on some unrelated issue.  We all know how this works.

I have hear many pundits and partisans in recent days who can’t resist taking political shots at their adversaries when they are questioned about Coronavirus issues.  These crass responses give this gastroenterologist heartburn.   Let them save their partisan venom for an appropriate issue.  Coronavirus is a potential global health crisis and, as a medical professional, I assure you that it is non-partisan.  It will infect anyone.  So, when a salivating political hack is asked about it, he should be telling us how he intends to help rather than angling for a cheap political dividend.

I wonder how my patients might react if I queried them about their political leanings as they were about to be sedated before undergoing a procedure.  



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe

Should Doctors Wear White Coats?

Many professions can be easily identified by their uniforms or state of dress. Consider how easy it is for us to identify a policeman, a judge, a baseball player, a housekeeper, a chef, or a soldier.  There must be a reason why so many professions require a uniform.  Presumably, it is to create team spirit among colleagues and to communicate a message to the clientele.  It certainly doesn’t enhance professional performance.  For instance, do we think if a judge ditches the robe and is wearing jeans and a T-shirt, that he or she cannot issue sage rulings?  If members of a baseball team showed up dressed in comfortable street clothes, would they commit more errors or achieve fewer hits?  The medical profession for most of its existence has had its own uniform.   Male doctors donned a shirt and tie and all doctors wore the iconic white coat.   The stated reason was that this created an aura of professionalism that inspired confidence in patients and their families.   Indeed, even today

Electronic Medical Records vs Physicians: Not a Fair Fight!

Each work day, I enter the chamber of horrors also known as the electronic medical record (EMR).  I’ve endured several versions of this torture over the years, monstrosities that were designed more to appeal to the needs of billers and coders than physicians. Make sense? I will admit that my current EMR, called Epic, is more physician-friendly than prior competitors, but it remains a formidable adversary.  And it’s not a fair fight.  You might be a great chess player, but odds are that you will not vanquish a computer adversary armed with artificial intelligence. I have a competitive advantage over many other physician contestants in the battle of Man vs Machine.   I can type well and can do so while maintaining eye contact with the patient.   You must think I am a magician or a savant.   While this may be true, the birth of my advanced digital skills started decades ago.   (As an aside, digital competence is essential for gastroenterologists.) During college, I worked as a secretary