MD Whistleblower

Usually, we doctors give you advice.   In this case, I’d like readers to offer an opinion on an issue that patients and I face regularly. First, let’s acknowledge the huge reservoir of frustration and anger directed against insurance companies concerning their coverage decisions.   I have willingly entered this arena to wage battles for patients.   Despite my vigorous prosecutions of these contests, the outcomes have been variable.   Indeed, these competitions are not for the causal physician participant.   The doctor must have the mettle, determination, skill and endurance of a Navy SEAL if there is to be any prospect of success. Some of my prior duels against Big Pharma and Big Insurance are chronicled in the Pharmaceutical Quality category on this blog.   Considering many insurance company coverage actions and decisions, it is understandable that patients do not believe that these companies prioritize the health of their members.   Although it is understandable to demonize t

Let me test my readers to gauge how skillful you have become in choosing wisely in the Byzantine medical universe.  You develop abdominal pain and, although you are not a trained medical professional, you fear that you have appendicitis.  There are two surgeons available and you want to engage in due diligence to ascertain which physician should be granted access to your abdomen.   A quick internet search uncovers the following data. Surgeon A:  Twenty patients had proven appendicitis.  This surgeon operated on all of the patients.  No case of appendicitis was missed.  Surgeon B: Twenty patients had proven appendicitis.  This surgeon chose to operate on 18 patients.  Two cases of appendicitis were missed.   Before reading on, think to yourself which surgeon would you choose? While this is not a trick question, I wonder how many readers were entrapped to select Surgeon A.  Who wouldn’t choose a surgeon with a 100% track record?  I wouldn’t.  I’d place my belly under the

Advertisers are masters at knowing how certain words and phrases will affect us.  Consider some of the seemingly innocent words and phrases below and how they have an emotional impact. IRS Big Tech Police officers Corporate profits Millennials Congress The Nursing Profession. Over time we have been conditioned to experience emotional responses to various phrases and labels.   For instance, there is nothing intrinsically evil in businesses earning money since this is an expected and desirable outcome.   Yet, ask us to react to the term corporate profits and I suspect that most of our reactions would trend negatively.   It’s unlikely that a political candidate would proclaim in an ad or a speech that he or she wants to be a Champion of Corporate Profits! Private Equity certainly merits inclusion in the above list.   Most folks have an unfavorable opinion of PE even if they don’t fully understand this business model.   And some of the actions committed by PE justify sus

As a gastroenterologist (GI), I am regarded by primary care physicians and other medical professional as having special expertise in digestive diseases.  Indeed, I have highly specialized training in digestive maladies and function.  I regard myself as a GI generalist, that is a practitioner who treats the full array of digestive conditions.  Over the past decades, I have treated patients with diseases of the small and large bowel, stomach, and esophagus issues and pancreatic liver and gallbladder disorders.  And I have had a full endoscopy practice – the tools of the GI trade.  One of the appeals of being a GI Gen is that I see a wide and diverse span of medical conditions.  In a single week, I may address heartburn and ulcers. Crohn’s disease, hepatitis, bowel changes, internal bleeding, nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, and hemorrhoids.  I enjoy the variety.   GI Generalists Cover a Lot of Ground! During most of my career, I seldom referred patients to other gastroenterologists

I am a gastroenterologist.  Like most medical specialists, most of the patients I see are referred to me by other medical professionals.  In this role, I am serving as a consultant.  Similarly, when a specialist is asked to see a hospitalized patient by the attending physician, the requested doctor will be serving in a consultant role. Consultants are recruited when the medical team or an individual practitioner feels that additional knowledge and experience is necessary.   Consider three hypothetical scenarios. A patient has not responded to a standard course of antibiotics.   The attending physician asks an infectious disease physician to make recommendations. A primary care physician is uncertain if the abnormal chest x-ray is heart failure or pneumonia.   The doctor calls in a cardiologist to assist. A patient with colitis comes to an emergency room with worsening diarrhea after starting a new medicine.   The ER physician is uncertain if the patient’s diarrhea is a side-eff

Many of my patients are using medical or recreational marijuana to ease symptoms that do not respond well to conventional medical treatments. I understand this.  I have already opined on this blog that I believe that the medical evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of medical marijuana is rather thin, very different from the strict standards that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relies upon in assessing prescription drugs and medical devices.  Moreover, here in Ohio and elsewhere, our legislature is deeply involved in determining which medical conditions are eligible for medical marijuana treatment, a role that I believe should be handled exclusively by medical professionals and appropriate federal government agencies, such as the FDA.  Politicians should leave this to the professionals. How can you argue otherwise? I am employed by Cleveland’s largest health care organization which has national and international reach.   The organization will not permit any caregiver t

When I was training to become a gastroenterologist decades ago, the heartburn drug Prilosec (omeprazole) was released in the United States.  I prescribed it then to patients who had been suffering from heartburn for most of their lives.  After just days of treatment, their heartburn disappeared.  These folks couldn’t even remember what it felt like to live without heartburn.  And suddenly, they were cured with one small pill daily.  Now I know that heartburn is not exactly cancer, but this experience very early in my career showed me the potential for a pharmaceutical agent to improve lives.   I still relay this vignette to patients. Pharma is not the enemy. Think of all of the institutions and professions that we and our politicians demonize -   lawyers, oil companies, congress, corporate America, Big Tech and the pharmaceutical industry.   Recently, Ivy League universities have been promoted to a top ten ranking on this coveted list.   On a granular level, even individuals routin