Dr. Steven Nissen: "The Michael Moore of the medical industry"

The Avandia-crusader has some enemies:

We had an endocrinologist in our office a few days ago . . . and his comment was that Dr. Nissen is “the Michael Moore of the medical industry.” Strong words. Mr. Moore is a crusader against the big and rich for the protection of the little guy (in his opinion). The problem is (in my opinion) that Mr. Moore does not always come to conclusions based on evidence, but starts with a conclusion and finds evidence to support this. This is precisely the danger of a meta-analysis of the sort that was done in this case.

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

  • The Independent Urologist

    Like most people out of training/med school, my belief–stronlgy held–was that of the superiority of the US heath care system and was taught that single payor, universal health was actually a commie–pinko plot. 7 years later and well into practice, my personal experience and via the observation of others have proven the exact opposite of this rhetoric. The majority of people–including physicians–whether they know it or not, would benefit from meaningful health care reform and a single payor, federally funded system. It’ll never happen, and aside from my rants on Kevin’s excellent forum, there is nothing I can do about it.
    Thanks for the platform, Kevin.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t know why you would be such an advocate indy since if the feds took over, high paying fields like urology would be the ones with the highest decrease in reimbursement. They can’t cut into primary care that much more after all.

  • Anonymous

    Quite frankly, I am entirely unimpressed by Nissen’s paper. And to be honest I find the Michael Moore comparison somewhat apt. The two large studies showed no significant change in risk; it came almost entirely from the pooled “small studies” and I find it unconvincing.

    What gets me about it is that the 2009 trial will end the debate on the subject, so it’s hardly as if the topic is being ignored and he needed to draw attention to it. All this paper did was draw attention to him while doing virtually nothing to actually answer the question of whether avandia is a cardiac risk.

Most Popular