Mainstream Medicine and the Oprah Factor

A recent cover story in a struggling news magazine, under the title "Crazy Talk:" accuses Oprah Winfrey of spreading "dubious advice" in a wide range of health issues from menopause and hormone replacement therapy to autism, cancer, aging, and weight loss. The tone of the article was the same tiresome blend of gotcha journalism and selective fact-reporting that fills tabloid coffers.

The story failed to gain traction for obvious reasons. Oprah has aired innumerable shows on health, of which the controversial ones are a tiny minority. Her intention to improve women's lives on all fronts is so obvious as to be almost above criticism. The credibility for women's well-being and welfare she has earned day after day over the past two decades will not be undone with a story that cherry-picks the guests who can be made easy targets of ridicule by the medical establishment. And the fact that she has celebrity guests who have causes and crusades in the area of health, such as Jenny McCarthy or Suzanne Somers, is not the same as Oprah herself endorsing what they say.

The criticism the medical establishment is directing at Oprah through this article only exposes their own frustration in having squandered their credibility with the public. They hope that if they can successfully attack the Oprah's immense credibility, then they can magically get some of that credibility back for themselves. However, if people still trusted the health care industry to act in their best interest the way they did decades ago, then it would be unnecessary to brand Oprah for "crazy talk" simply because she occasionally provides a forum for ideas outside of mainstream medicine.

The medical profession is burdened with a host of problems that Oprah addresses with more candor and force than the AMA. She promotes wellness and prevention, two areas that drastically need improvement. She brings up creative solutions to problems that medical science is baffled by, such as the healing response itself and the role of subjectivity in patient response. These are issues that few M.D.s are willing to explore, yet she has done so for decades.

Instead, we got a response from an oncologist in Canada repeating the establishment position: alternative treatments of cancer are bogus, subjectivity has no place in science, "soul talk" about illness is rubbish. This is exactly the kind of dismissive arrogance that drives millions of people away from conventional doctors. Every illness has a subjective component -- after all, to be sick is to change your moods and emotions, and severe illness causes one to examine primal issues like life and death and the meaning of existence. Do these subjective changes affect healing? Obviously they do, or we wouldn't have the placebo effect, which comes into play at least 30% of the time in illness.

Scientific medicine by and large ignores wellness, prevention, and alternative medicine in general. On a daily basis doctors don't deal in these things; few take courses in medical school centered on them. That's why a massive movement has arisen driven by patients themselves. Oprah serves as a public outlet for a conversation that needs to be ongoing. As long as official medicine, backed by huge pharmaceutical companies, denies the existence of the problem, much less alternative solutions, the movement will remain patient-centered and the attitude toward alternative medicine will be one of unfounded disdain, suspicion, and ignorance on the part of physicians.

Denial also plays a huge part in this story. Mainstream medicine continues to downplay the enormous drawbacks of a health-care system that is addicted to drugs and surgery as the two constant drumbeats of treatment. This lopsided emphasis has created dilemmas that official medicine hasn't remotely solved:

* In Seattle a recent study of 638 patients with chronic lower back pain were given either some sort of acupuncture or standard treatment with anti-inflammatory drugs and massage. On average, the acupuncture patients received twice as much benefit as those on standard treatment. The kicker is that some of the patients received fake acupuncture -- they were pricked superficially with toothpicks -- and received the same relief.

* Iatrogenic disease, roughly defined as illness that results as a complication from a doctor's care, leads to between 230,000 to 284,000 deaths every year, making it the third leading cause of fatality in the country.

* A survey of 1,249 health care professionals found that 81% had taken dietary supplements like vitamins and minerals. This, despite the fact that mainstream doctors frequently tell their patients that the only benefit of such supplements is "expensive urine."

* Two of the most frequently performed surgeries, heart bypass grafts and balloon angioplasty, became fashionable without serious testing (the government approves drugs but not surgical procedures). They continue to be used in the face of perennial findings that neither procedure increases life expectancy. Besides relieving symptoms, which of course can be very troubling to the patient, both procedures carry serious risks. (The most recent finding showed that diabetics with stable heart disease do not survive longer if given heart surgery.)

* In the past, such common procedures as hysterectomies and radical mastectomies were widely performed without testing their efficacy. Not until European results revealed that lumpectomies were often just as effective did American surgeons question the staunch support of mastectomies. One might also consider that surgeons were very slow to perform cosmetic breast replacement for women who faced devastating psychological fallout from their mastectomies -- a typical neglect of any patient's subjective response to illness.

* The benefit of lifestyle changes has been grossly underestimated and underused. Coronary heart disease, prostate cancer/breast cancer, diabetes, and obesity account for 75% of health care costs, yet the progression of these diseases may often be stopped or even reversed by making intensive lifestyle changes. The most recent findings show that such changes actually cause beneficial alterations at the genetic level, affecting up to 400 genes through such measures as improved diet, exercise, and meditation.

* Overall, this country's health care system is actually a "sick care" system. In 2006, $2.1 trillion were spent in the U.S. on medical care, 95% of which was spent to treat disease after it had already occurred.

We're just scratching the surface here. Yet even if these massive problems didn't exist, the Oprah affair raises the question of sins by omission. It's one thing for official medicine to decry alternative medicine and hurl accusations of quackery, not just at the non-M.D.s who work as health practitioners but at licensed, highly educated and qualified physicians who are creative enough to explore new avenues of treatment. Their own lack of curiosity and creative thinking is disturbing. Does the most brilliant researcher in the world know why cancer sometimes spontaneously disappears? Why a patient with obsessive-compulsive disorder or depression can respond equally well to talk therapy and drugs -- that is, why talk is as effective as chemicals in altering the brain? Or how the body's healing system is influenced by outside forces?

The answer is no. Which means that mysteries remain to be solved, and creative solutions have every chance of arising from unexpected quarters. Scientific medicine is leery of so-called anecdotal evidence, that is, individual stories of disease and cure. Their skepticism is rational and well-founded. We all agree that without impartial studies, the advance of knowledge becomes chaotic and untrustworthy. But Oprah is letting individuals tell their stories for other, positive reasons: to share their pain, to reach out to others in the same circumstance, to provide hope.

Official medicine falls short on these fronts far too often. It would be laughable if it weren't so sad that the typical TV ad for drugs paints glossy pictures of happy patients running through flowery meadows, ending with a list of every imaginable side effect, including death. The article sneers at the popular movement linking autism with childhood vaccination, yet current understanding looks at autism as a complex, multi-factorial condition in which some cases could be influenced by an outside factor like a vaccine. It's all too easy for medicine to disdain that possibility and cry foul against guests on Oprah's show, raising a smokescreen for the countless irresponsible prescriptions written, especially for elderly patients, by doctors every day.

One fears that all of these arguments will fall on deaf ears, because the schism between official and alternative medicine runs deep -- deep enough that the average physician doesn't bother even to skim the thousands of studies that bolster alternative claims. So let me offer a typical finding that comes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, among other official sources. It concerns the effect of child abuse and other adverse circumstances on later health. Is it "soul talk" to believe that a child raised around parents who abuse substances, who suffer from mental illness, or who outright abuse the child will suffer health risks later in life?

According to the CDC study, covering 15,000 HMO members in San Diego between 1995-97, the risk of contracting an autoimmune disease as an adult is increased from 70% to 100% if you happened to be abused as a child or grow up with adverse home conditions. This finding isn't isolated. Autoimmune diseases are one in which the body's immune system attacks the body itself. There are few known causes; it is baffling to grasp why the body's chief defender against illness should turn around and become the cause of illness. This study suggests a human connection rather than a biological one. Or rather, human distress leads to biological distress. Doctors don't officially believe that; millions of ordinary citizens do. Earlier studies had already correlated adverse childhood conditions with the risk of inflammatory conditions. In the little picture, a new finding has been added to the long list of mind-body links for illness and aging. In the bigger picture, the fact that we don't fully understand the mind-body connection, much less use it for healing in official medicine, comes into glaring relief.

What this tells me is that medicine needs Oprah and other patient advocates who are demanding that official medicine heal itself. To accuse them of lacking medial credibility is a red herring. Patients aren't supposed to know more than their physicians. The fact that they often do, at least insofar as alternative treatment goes, is both a sign of hope and cause for distress.

Comments

[mofmars333]

Newest discussion is here;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-karp/cracking-the-autism-riddl_b_219160.html

In hope that, "soon", these debates & discussions bring real truth to this matter out so all is settled.

Here's to wishing the best for all warriors on both sides, with the well being of our little ones at heart.

[mofmars333]

"Medical Journal studies are being written by Eli Lilly & Co. and then asked doctors to put their names on the articles.

What else have they lied to us about?

What other studies are ghostwritten by Eli Lilly?"

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aVvfe.v1k_VY

See this link also;

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25311725-5013871,00.html

Now that we have evidence on this matter, it very much exposes & connects to the fact that we can't trust past studies & reports pertainig to the link between vaccinations & autism.

[allopathy]

This is a classic example of what is known as “anomaly hunting,” and it is a big statistical and logical no-no.

You’re just providing us with an example in which the pharmaceutical industry did something bad. Then, you draw the conclusion that all your paranoid fantasies must be true. This is also confirmation bias. You are only looking for things that confirm your a priori belief.

How about the millions and millions of studies which were written by independent researchers and scientists?

[mofmars333]

Where there's smoke, there's fire.

[sarahsam]

Excellent point mofmars333. These are not "misstatements" or an example of a "rogue employee'". It is about a well financed, well planned, muti faceted and deliberate attempt to decieve and or destroy anyone that gets in the way. After I asked myself what kind of people do things like this the first thought I had was "what else have the lied to us about?"

http://www.naturalnews.com/026420_Merck_Vioxx_doctors.html

[antaeus]

I thought the point at issue was whether Oprah went too far at times in touting unfounded and possibly dangerous treatment. I like Oprah; I like Bill Maher a lot, too, but when he claimed on air that "flu shots cause Alzheimer's" and I later read that the source of that claim is a discredited doctor, I was very disappointed.

How is it the medical professions fault when Americans steeped in a culture of excess and indulgence present with the resultant conditions?

I feel sorry for folks who haven't discovered the amazing benefits of yoga, but I think it's unfair to foist too much responsibility onto doctors for our own bad choices.

[toocoldout]

Oprah always makes clear to mention that mainstream medicine disagrees with her guests or has not proven their theories so to check with your doctor. However mainstream medicine lacks the interest & funding do a lot of the studies that need to be done & so is very slow to change & very set in its ways.

[allopathy]

You’ve made baseless accusations on this thread twice by my count. Once, you’ve alleged racism against Oprah (though you couldn’t back it up) and now you claim that “mainstream medicine lacks the interest & funding do a lot of the studies that need to be done & so is very slow to change & very set in its ways.”

This is absolutely not true. There is tons of research concerning “Complimentary and Alternative Medicine.” The NIH even has a special division specifically setup to research it. In most cases, CAM works no better than placebo. That’s why your doctor is so “set in his ways,” He doesn’t want to get sued for malpractice for prescribing bunk treatment. “Mainstream Medicine” is far from “set in its ways.” Medicine is not dogma. It changes everyday based on new evidence. Perhaps you need to do a quick wikipedia search for "evidence-based medicine" and "scientific medicine." Then you'll understand why.

[mofmars333]

Please weigh in at these debates & discussions, too. Every voice counts, so be sure to have your say;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-karp/cracking-the-autism-riddl_b_213730.html?show_comment_id=25551416#comment_25551416

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/11/american-medical-associat_n_214132.html?show_comment_id=25598816#comment_25598816

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-schneider/oprah-backlash-in-newswee_b_211673.html?show_comment_id=25328099#postComment

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/top-us-panel-some-vaccine_b_211843.html?show_comment_id=25575425#comment_25575425

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-lovinger/should-a-former-playboy-m_b_206648.html?page=7&show_comment_id=24723352#comment_24723352

These links are closed for comments but hold a gold mine of information;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-carrey/the-judgment-on-vaccines_b_189777.html?page=8&show_comment_id=24045095#comment_24045095

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-patricia-fitzgerald/jenny-mccarthys-autism-cr_b_190486.html

Last but not least;

Jenny McCarthy Signs Deal With Oprah To Launch Talk Show

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/04/jenny-mccarthy-signs-deal_n_195529.html?show_comment_id=24366925#comment_24366925

[toocoldout]

I love the fact that Deepak Chopra backs up his claims with one study after another. Chopra has the dard medicine qualifications, but he also intelligent and open minded enough to think outside the box and provide citations to back himself up.

[NetDude]

The fact is the citations he provides in many cases about DO NOT support his claims.

He may be intelligent, but he is not open-minded.

"Scientific medicine by and large ignores wellness, prevention, and alternative medicine in general."
Absolute rubbish. MDs are taught prevention and nutrition in school. Just read some of the major organizations like the American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association and you will see their CENTRAL message is about prevention.

"In Seattle a recent study of 638 patients with chronic lower back pain were given either some sort of acupuncture or standard treatment with anti-inflammatory drugs and massage. On average, the acupuncture patients received twice as much benefit as those on standard treatment. The kicker is that some of the patients received fake acupuncture -- they were pricked superficially with toothpicks -- and received the same relief."
completely wrong. if you read this study, what this study shows is the acupuncture is no better than placebo.

I could go, but there is not enough space

[toocoldout]

Netdude, you're missing Deepak's brilliant point. He's not saying med schools don't teach about nutrition, it's alternative medicine he wants to see more focus on. And the very fact that there is a placebo effect shows the power of the mind body connection which many doctors consistently dismiss as woo and superstition.

[fetchezlavache]

Dr Chopra makes an entirely artificial distinction when he talks about OCD sufferers. He seems to be saying that we have the choice BETWEEN talk therapy and medication--I can assure you that both together are very effective. The therapy has helped me be more aware of my thoughts and behavior, but it doesn't help much with the seritonin reuptake factor, which is chemical as well as behavioral. The medication handles that nicely. After just trying to "gut out" OCD for most of my life, I now function much more calmly and effectively, thanks to my therapist and my meds.

[Taradiddles]

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=432

This is a link to an article that catagorizes the environmental impact of alternative medicines. Plants and animals are being driven to extinction because of the mythology of natural medicine.

As someone once said, there is a reason it is called "alternative" medicine. If it worked, it would be called Medicine.

[sarahsam]

Large sections of "alternative medicine" has been absorbed in to "medicine" over the years.
Much more would be but it can't be patented by a pharmacutical company so there's no interest.

Mythology of natural medicine? Is it unnatural medicine you endorse? Does "medicine" not use plants and animals to derive many of it's products? GET REAL!

[NetDude]

I suggest people should read this link to see how wrong this post is:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/06/oprah_and_chopra_sittin_in_a_tree.php

[cyjames1975]

The number one issue that Oprah really preaches with regard to health is to do your own research, be your own advocate, and listen to experts but don't substitute someone else's judgment for your own because it's your life and your body. That "someone else" could be a doctor, but it could also be Oprah herself or Deepak Chopra or anyone else. I think most people grasp this so I don't know why the mere presentation of alternative viewpoints for consideration is such a problem -- especially if it's in the context of having a discussion on the issues. People don't have to be right 100% of the time to be worth listening to. You listen and decide for yourself. I wish we could start putting forth the expectation that people will be and are capable of being discerning, and treat them accordingly.

[NetDude]

Anyone can have an opinion on a situation, its called freedom of speech. however, when that person who has many people believing her views, then that person needs restrain from allowing pseudo nonsense to be presented as "new treatments". they cannot cry fowl when they are pulled up for presenting such rubbish either

unfortunately, although most people like yourself can disseminate pseudo from real science, not everyone can.

[fetchezlavache]

Oprah deserves some praise for helping us to become more aware of our medical issues, just as she does in helping us be more aware of good novels. However, when we start seeing her as an expert in either field, we go astray.

[ChelseaC]

My doctor is mainstream, yet she perscribes bio-identical hormones instead of the Big Pharma synthetics--she said they work much better than the synthetics. Bio-identical hormones are more mainstream than one might think.
I appreciate Oprah shinning a light on women's hormone issues and nurtrition.I watch her show about 5 times per year--usually when Dr Oz is on. I like him too.

[NetDude]

there have not been proper scientific studies that assess the safety of bioidentical hormones. just because they are synthesized from plants, does not mean that they are safer than the "big pharma" equivalent.

in particular, the HRT version, although initially thought to be protective against heart disease and cancer turned out to be the opposite. This was found out through good scientific studies. There would be reason to think bioidenticals could have the same effects. Susam Somers who is a breast cancer survivor, should be cautious about taking these.

[Newcoaster]

Your doctor is misinformed. So called "bio identical" hormones, which are synthesized from plants, are no better than the ones synthesized from horse urine. And, they have never been tested scientifically comparing them with the standard hormones, so nobody actually knows if they work at all. The "saliva test" that is recommended by promotors to adjust their levels is unreliable and essentially meaningless. There is no evidence that individually adjusting doses is any better then giving a standard dose to every woman. The drugstores that do the compounding are in it for the profit to be made only, and they are also not reliable in their quality control
Bottom line...if you need to take HRT for severe menopausal symptoms, do it for no more than 5 years, and use a tried and tested version.
An MD who IS informed

[Promise]

Thank God for Oprah and Deepak Chopra, who have the courage to speak out against the medical establishment.

[toocoldout]

I agree. They're both wonderful.

[NetDude]

Its fine to speak out against aspects of the medical establishment and call for improvements. However, when what you speak out is pseudo nonsense and worse alternatives, then I wouldnt be praising those individuals.

[Newcoaster]

Which God?...I think they believe in different ones.
It doesn't take courage to speak out about the type of pseudo-scientific nonsense they both promote, it takes extreme arrogance. The arrogance of ignorance reigns supreme in Alt Med.

[tigerlyly]

I was totally with you until:

"The article sneers at the popular movement linking autism with childhood vaccination, yet current understanding looks at autism as a complex, multi-factorial condition in which some cases could be influenced by an outside factor like a vaccine. It's all too easy for medicine to disdain that possibility and cry foul against guests on Oprah's show, raising a smokescreen for the countless irresponsible prescriptions written, especially for elderly patients, by doctors every day."

While doctors may over prescribe this is an entirely different issue from vaccines. Not vaccinating your children puts them at serious risk and risks the health of the population as a whole. Additionally, research facilities all over the world have studied the link between autism and vaccines have not been able to find one.

[PharmDude]

Extremely good point. While there is no doubt that MDs overprescribe medications such as antibiotics (as a pharmacist I see it every day), vaccinations are not in question... at least to those who look at, and trust, the academic/scientific research, and the conclusions that have followed.

[sarahsam]

To say vaccinations are not is question is absolute NONSENSE!
"A major health official within the United States Government today endorsed more research into possible links between vaccination and autism, saying that such studies are "legitimate."
The official, Dr. Duane Alexander, Director of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), an NIH agency, said scientists must investigate susceptible subpopulations of children, including kids with mitochondrial disorders and those who have trouble metabolizing mercury."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/nih-agency-head-vaccine-a_b_170034.html

[mofmars333]

Join the debate & discussion on the matter;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-karp/cracking-the-autism-riddl_b_213730.html?show_comment_id=25551416#comment_25551416

[mofmars333]

Other important information to check out;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-schneider/oprah-backlash-in-newswee_b_211673.html?show_comment_id=25328099#postComment

[mofmars333]

Last but not least;

Here's good news concerning Oprah helping Jenny McCarthy get her own talk show. The discussion took a turn for the worse as you can see & is closed for comments but there's still good information there.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/04/jenny-mccarthy-signs-deal_n_195529.html?show_comment_id=24366925#comment_24366925

&

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-lovinger/should-a-former-playboy-m_b_206648.html?page=6&show_comment_id=24747637#comment_24747637

[AngieMom57]

I'm game for a Chopra & Oprah live interview, how awsome and uniting would that be right now with the world the way it is ;-) ...hold that thought and breath deeply...

[awibod]

I think that's a phenomenal idea. On a political note I wou7ld love to see Oprah have either Chomsky or Zinn to discuss the STate of the Union.

[Billy Hell]

When Oprah starts following her own advice and her weight stops fluctuating wildly as it does, she will have more credibility. Year by year her appearance changes drasticall­y...slimme­d down to being ballooned and then back again. Kinda like who or what is this woman really.

[XME]

As someone who has struggled with weight issues, I can honestly say that it's not easy if you are one of those people. Though her weight has fluctuated, there's little doubt that she has tries and struggles, and THAT gives her credibility...that is REAL. Makes her a lot more credible than the stick thin people who starve themselves. I wonder much more who they really are than I do of Oprah!

[Promise]

Well Oprah isn't perfect. Who is? She's human and still struggling with her own issues. That doesn't detract from the fact that she has done immeasurable good for the world in many ways, including bringing attention to medical problems that the medical establishment has ignored.

[sarahsam]

Apparently Oprah is a better news source than Newsweek.

BANKS VS HHS

"The Court found that Bailey would not have suffered
this delay but for the administration of the MMR vaccine, and that this chain of causation was not
too remote, but was rather a proximate sequence of cause and effect leading inexorably from
vaccination to Pervasive Developmental Delay. (PDD IS AN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER)

III. CONCLUSION
Therefore, in light of the foregoing, the Court rules in favor of entitlement in this matter. The
parties are to contact the Court as soon as practicable to schedule a status conference on the issue
of damages."
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Richard B. Abell
Special Master
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/Abell.BANKS.02-0738V.pdf

[janvoght]

great way to open the dialogue. preventative medicine makes much more sense as a place to start and focus on, rather than ignoring lifestyle issues, in favor of the almighty "operation" to fix what ales us.