Melvin H. Kirschner Disagrees on Dr. Schaller's Rebuke of the Old Dog AMA's Nutrition Position
I was quite amused to find an old article posted in about four top medical newspapers being "corrected" by someone that is simply silly and has no real experience with advanced nutrients. Study for two years FULL TIME or just close your mouth and let people who have actually done such an informal "fellowship" do the lifting.
The magnitude of ignorance in this post is quite amusing, particularly now that so many years have passed, and many nutrients previously mocked are now used currently, and that is without drug reps hawking them and no big pharmaceutical multinational workers bringing in samples.
This physician seems to feel the AMA should be defended. It is dead except for their manipulation in press conferences as silly lawyers quote them as the voice of medicine. Indeed, despite having immense access to medical students, interns, residents and fellows, the profound majority of physicians have fired the AMA for their anti-service to physicians. Simply, they are utterly useless and have undermined physicians for years. Obviously the plunging rejection of membership percentages speaks volumes, and except for their hold on millions in profits from some required publications, one wonders if they would really be very viable.
"Sell Skills, Not Supplements" Dr. Kirschner Says.
[First, this naive nutraceutical person thinks you get supplement skills by what? Reading a few junk nutrition books? Or ignorant summary articles always 5-20 years behind the research. Are you kidding?]
I am compelled to respond to Dr. James L. Schaller's guest editorial "AMA's Misguided Ethics" as nothing more than a line of self-serving nonsense (Feb. 1, 2000, p. 9).
[I am not served by my position so you are talking to yourself and I am defending the liberty of other physicians. Indeed, your position after ten years of increasing penetration of nutrients in many areas of medicine shows you were the one spouting nonsense, Melvin. I do not sell nutrients as you accuse me of doing as if it were arson. I personally refer people to wholesale companies with supplements typically as pure as your synthetic drugs but with 1/100th the cost, less deaths, less drug class action suits, less FDA new black box drug warnings and less FDA recalls after approved use of the drugs. You see, I am not another physician AMA masochist that has helped destroy medicine, as you seem to want to do, by adding another thousand hours of self funded education for free. We are seeing the loss of top minds entering medicine and an emerging shortage of physicians that will only continue. And all studies show your "knife and synthetic pill only" medical approach is rejected by Americans. So if you want to exit the 1970's and learn what patients often know more about than physicians like you, and actually read on the misc. hundreds of supplements increasingly entering all medical specialties, certainly not with the help of Big Pharma controlled research journals and CME conferences, please join the next decade of broader medical options.
Dr. Schaller represented himself as a consultant to several manufacturers of nutritional supplements.
[Sure and also published in the Journal of the American Medical Association on a nutrient topic that appears to have had more submitted appeal letters than any article up until that time, and purity research published for Medscape under the editorial over site of the past JAMA editor, and many other studies on purity, safety, potency and sources with pharmaceutical purity without unwanted agents. In the years right after that set of widely published guest editorials and my solicited reply to ignorant hostile disagreements, a number of purity and potency labs emerged and it became highly damaging to any company to not have profoundly high quality products. Is it also a bad thing to learn more on a topic which we were given trivial training in our education?]
He argued for the physician's right to sell and profit from nutritional products.
[Is English a struggle? What I argued is that reaching an advanced level in nutraceutical medicine knowledge is similar to a fellowship with immense time mastering this massive area with articles you could not read from PubMed in five life times. So you feel this service should be for free? I think you should take emergency calls of your own patients for free, and not send them to an emergency room or have a stranger cover for you. That should be for free. And since the AMA supports me on this, I expect you to obey this week].
As a member of the National Council for Reliable Health Information,
[I was not aware they were titans in nutritional science in any capacity]
I am well aware of several pyramid schemes that arrange for doctors to sell so-called "nutritional products and supplements" in their office.
[This is basic English and you put it in quotes, so you do not know first grade nutritional vocabulary? Pyramid marketing does not assume a sociopathic "scheme." Learn a little business when doing pre-med or get an MBA on this topic?]
The manufacturers often make claims for efficacy that have no proof by honest scientific research.
[True. And yet vast numbers of hundreds of agents have proven and clear benefits of use if you read hundreds and hundreds of hours. Why did the FDA have to be sued repeatedly to allow a health claim to be made for folic acid use in pregnancy? That was not done by your "National Council" or the AMA, but by a nutritional company that is usually about 10 years ahead on medicine related prevention and right at least 85% —as opposed to surgery or synthetic patented drugs with 50 side effects each and fatalities at times when used for "skilled" "prevention." Dear Melvin, I was not defending idiot supplement companies any more than idiots who operate on the wrong leg or oppose pain care to allow people to be pain-free enough to work and be pain-free enough to prevent suicides].
They get away with this because federal law puts them beyond the reach of Food and Drug Administration review.
[What? The FDA is quite vigorous at raiding top nutrient experts who are 15-20 years ahead of their time, and test bottles of many supplements for purity and potency and ingredients. But they seem far more concerned with defending the use of patentable drugs with immense side effects over bio-identical agents that are often safer, because the FDA, at times, is the tool of drug companies and immense numbers of deaths and massive human damage has been caused by their approval and poor ability to get inside the scams of corrupt data that has killed massive numbers of people. They have a tough job. And please, Melvin, do not try to compare nutritional supplement deaths with massive surgery deaths or synthetic drug deaths and damage. Most Americans use supplements and often know 20x what you know about them, and most physicians have no idea their drugs create nutrient depletions and dropped hormones and increase death. But you knew that and have books on that—right? Few AMA physicians do].
Dr. Schaller was correct when he said that the American Medical Association wants to preserve the professionalism of medicine.
[If I said that I must have made a very serious typing error. Most mature veteran physicians completely reject the AMA as having any role in their careers or setting standards for anything. It is a dinosaur organization].
I agree that doctors should be responsible for their own integrity and professionalism,...
...but sometimes guidelines help.
[Many articles and top elite practicing physicians find guidelines are often wrong and clearly ignorant. Guidelines are dated the day they are published and the AMA has been accused of a number of lapses in ethics, including the way they make money with such a terrible percentage of practicing physician members. The notion they have the ethical sophistication to erect morality and ethics to anyone is a sign of poor college level understanding of the foundation and process of ethics, and the practice of having a group of older physicians from a minority medical guild set ethic rules has been tried in the past, as if they were magically endowed with elite ethic making skills. In the past decades this has resulted in poor to catastrophic results, i.e., the idea older seasoned physicians know how to make ethical codes. They are just another tired bunch of narrowly trained science people that have about as much knowledge of ethical theory as a newt. What grounds give them any Papal power?]
Just as the physician should not write a prescription if he doesn't believe it will be helpful to the patient, he should not sell a product that has not been clearly proven to be beneficial.
[I agree. And if someone is too lazy or simply understandably busy to read 50 books and 1500-2500 papers on the topic of advanced nutraceutical medicine please stop talking, writing and get out of the way. Because I am quite sure no groups of useless "meeting addicts" associated with the AMA has done this work. So they should just be quiet. And if they want people with an area of expertise to work for free in the treatment of asthma, IBS, gallstones or pneumonia that is certainly their silly right. But let us be clear. Part of knowing good nutrition is finding good companies with top standardization of active agents, often from countries in which they have drug level purity testing and USP levels of quality, and I wonder what % of physicians knows that first grade fact. And so your suggestion is that this area of serious import in medicine should be provided as a free lunch? Then I would suggest you treat people for a month for free, since the idea that fees should be limited to what the AMA says is arbitrary—"skills and knowledge"--assumes massive ignorance surrounding this entire topic, and is par for the course with the AMA. So you are actually saying nutrition is not to be part of the knowledge skills we offer in this coming generation when this country has already decided they are going to ignore you more and more if you do not start learning what you are talking about in this area. Do you even recall that massive numbers of nutritional chemicals are the only way the human's infinitely complex biochemistry works? Nutrients are the foundation of life functioning. And the idea that current diets supply fully optimal nutrients is comical for reasons based on research and my own advanced testing not worth mentioning].
I agree with the AMA that the sale of health and nutritional products in physicians' offices undermines medicine.
[What? Speed medical appointments, dated reading and knowledge, medical errors, time dealing with junk malpractice cases, dealing with new highly expensive medications, dealing with insurance games, trying to pay for massive overhead staff and equipment, and 20 other things are immensely more serious than having quality products on hand. But they must be quality or the physician is a fool and it is like passing out significantly expired pill samples].
We must be educators, and the only things we should sell are our skills and knowledge.
[It is funny that hospitals, physicians, national pharmacies, the AMA's books and virtually all aspects of health care try to get as much retail payment as possible, and a very small amount of supplement income really are hardly worth the pain of having an inventory is worth the AMA's time. They are attacking parking tickets while serial killers walk along near the meter maid. They need to get "a life" and start helping physicians with an intensity I have never seen and expect to never see].
[One final point you would not know, unless you and most smart physicians really understood some critical issues with medicine and nutrients, is that a delay in giving them to a patient can cause a wide number of medical problems. For example, any drug that can harm the liver can be helped with a cheap bottle of NAC which is part of the two top phases of liver detoxification and makes the liver healer, glutathione. And any antibiotic given without saccharomyces boulardii, increases the risk of dangerous clostridium difficile infection, as good probiotic bacteria are killed by antibiotics, which you certainly know can cause severe intestinal damage infection. I have never had any patient under my care get C. Diff. because they all take a couple quality probiotics at wholesale that crowd out clostridium difficile or both bind and proliferate along the profoundly long intestinal track. Did you know that perhaps 99% of probiotics do not have the special ability to deeply bind the gut wall and proliferate? See the Journal of Clinical Nutrition April 2001-I believe it was published in that issue, but we had discovered the same thing years earlier. If you think these two samples of over 100 such practical things are found in a few books, you would be markedly wrong].
Melvin H. Kirschner, M.D. solo practice
[Rethink this highly prejudiced position Dr. Kirschner, so with each passing decade you do not sound more obsolete].