This week, the National Physician Alliance co-authored a new report, “Politics in the Exam Room: A Growing Threat.” The authors state that it “looks at state laws that intrude into exam rooms in the areas of toxic chemical exposures, women’s reproductive health, and gun violence prevention, jeopardizing the quality of medical care available to patients.”
These are not the kinds of issues all professional medical groups want to tackle, but it’s not unusual for this group to live in this arena.
The National Physicians Alliance holds its 10th anniversary conference in Washington, DC this coming weekend. The theme of the event is “Truth to Power: Alliance for the Public Good.”
This is not your standard professional medical organization.
Executive director Jean Silver-Isenstadt, MD, PhD, published an interesting historical wrap-up, “New Kid on the Block Turns Ten! The Brief, Remarkable History of the National Physicians Alliance.”
NPA was founded, she writes, “with a mission to create research and education programs that promote health and foster active engagement of physicians with their communities to achieve high-quality, affordable health care for all. The National Physicians Alliance offers a professional home to physicians across medical specialties who share a commitment to professional integrity and health justice.”
Looking forward, she projects: “We have a vision for the next ten years: sparking a transformation of the medical profession that returns us to the core value of serving patients.”
NPA asked me to serve on its Board of Directors primarily, I believe, because of how our project frequently writes about conflicts of interest in health care – a key concern of NPA. I agreed to serve on the Board so that I could learn, and so that I could share what our project has learned with NPA membership. It doesn’t change anything about what we do or how we do it on this project. Two other members of our editorial team are active in NPA: Drs. Susan Molchan and James Rickert, president of the Society for Patient Centered Orthopedic Surgery. Some others we’ve written about on this site in the past who are active with NPA include Rosemary Gibson (senior advisor for The Hastings Center), Dr. John Santa (medical adviser, Consumer Reports), and consumer advocate Kim Witczak.
With that background, here is my interview with Jean Silver-Isenstadt.
Other links:
Brief musical excerpts used in this podcast episode came from:
Thanks to Cristeta Boarini for editing this podcast.
You can now subscribe to the Health News Watchdog podcast on iTunes, or via the RSS feed for the podcasts: http://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:167780656/sounds.rss
Comments
We Welcome Comments. But please note: We will delete comments left by anyone who doesn’t leave an actual first and last name and an actual email address.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified facts, product pitches, or profanity. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. Comments should primarily discuss the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages about health and medicine. This is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science. Nor is it a forum to share your personal story about a disease or treatment -- your comment must relate to media messages about health care. If your comment doesn't adhere to these policies, we won't post it. Questions? Please see more on our comments policy.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.