Dr. Mandy Krauthamer Conducts ER Surgery on Her Initial Claim of Distortion

Below, I posted on the fact that the Executive Director of the Doctors for America admitted in a blog post that she distorted the truth. Since then she has changed her story and her blog. Now, she is distorting her original claim of distortion

Here is her original post, which as of this afternoon is the cached version that Google has. The red is my highlighting:

I was on MSNBC! My national TV debut….
In response the new NEJM article about physician support for a public plan….I landed myself a spot on MSNBC opposite Dr. Todd Williamson, head of the Georgia Medical Society. I was playing the part of “in favor of a public option”, while he played the part of “against a public option”. Not my favorite debate to have. You will see in the clip that I try to broaden the discussion to the larger comprehensive reform effort that is underway. Plus, what you don’t see in the clip I embedded here…is that the segment was tee’d up with the “data” that 61% of of physicians support a public option.

First, a few words about the NEJM study….I don’t see anywhere in the study that 60+% of physicians support a public option. I see 60% support a mix of public and private (but the public option that they are referring to could mean medicare and medicaid or even VA care…and not necessarily a NEW public option.) So, while I quote the study for our advantage….it doesn’t give me clear guidance about what physicians really support.

Do physicians support a public option? The truth is I don’t know. I do know that at Doctors for America, we surveyed our membership about a public option and of the 3,000+ that responded 97% were in favor. Clearly a biased sample….but illustrative that there are physicians who feel VERY passionately about the public option.

Second, the incredible focus on the public option is frankly distracting from many many many other important provisions in the legislation that are working their way through Congress. Some I have written about here on the blog, some I mentioned in the interview, many more that never get talked about.

So, that’s it. A sober recap of my first TV appearance. I think my zinger about Georgia, Wellpoint and lack of competition was a winner! Next time I’ll try to smile!

Posted in Uncategorized.

By Dr. Mandy Krauthamer – September 17, 2009

Watch the full clip here. By the end of the interview she is clearly using the data to support her case. Yet, as she originally posted, at the time she made the point on television she didn't believe the data supported such a case. Let's be clear about this, she wrote:

I don’t see anywhere in the study that 60+% of physicians support a public option...So, while I quote the study for our advantage….it doesn’t give me clear guidance about what physicians really support.

Do physicians support a public option? The truth is I don’t know

Bottom line, on national television, she distorted her then beliefs.

At my post, she has now left this convoluted comment:

While you are correct about my initial misgivings about the NEJM study, my statement on MSNBC was accurate. My updated blog post shows that my initial interpretation of the study was incorrect.

I am happy that Dr. Wagle wrote in and further explained the survey choices that were given to respondents and thus alleviating my initial concern about the study.

The choices given to the respondents were, which of the following three option would you most strongly support to expand health insurance coverage in the US:
1) providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans [called "Public and Private Options"] --61%
2) providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage,without creating a new public plan [called "Private options only"]--29%
3) eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare [ called "public option only"] --10%

So, it is very fair to say 61% support a public option as was stated on MSNBC.

So although she did not believe what she said when she said it on MSNBC, she now tells us that, viola!, the truth actually turns out to be what she distorted.

In reality, she was correct in her first comment on her blog, when she wrote:

the public option that they are referring to could mean medicare and medicaid or even VA care…and not necessarily a NEW public option

Since the study questions provided by DFA member Dr. Nick Wagle are confusing to say the least. What does "a public option (like Medicare)" mean? Is this an attempt to keep the current system, with Medicare, or a NEW Obama type public option? Krauthamer was right when she raised the confusion around the question, since it is confusing and she knew it. Wagle's contribution seems to do nothing but confirm that it is a poorly constructed question.

Meanwhile back in the Emergency Room, Krauthamer has performed major surgery on her original post. She calls it an "Update" when she comments here at EPJ, but leaves know indication at all on her post of the mastectomy she has done to her original claim of willing distortion. So what does a distortion of an original claim of distortion look like? Here is what her post-surgery post looks like:

Krauthamer – September 18, 2009


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was on MSNBC! My national TV debut….
In response the new NEJM article about physician support for a public plan….I landed myself a spot on MSNBC opposite Dr. Todd Williamson, head of the Georgia Medical Society. I was playing the part of “in favor of a public option”, while he played the part of “against a public option”. Not my favorite debate to have. You will see in the clip that I try to broaden the discussion to the larger comprehensive reform effort that is underway. Plus, what you don’t see in the clip I embedded here…is that the segment was tee’d up with the “data” that 61% of of physicians support a public option.

First, a few words about the NEJM study….I originally thought that the data
mushed together “public and private option”….Dr. Nick Wagle pointed out that I had misinterpreted the conclusions.

He wrote:

“The choices given to the respondents were, which of the following three option would you most strongly support to expand health insurance coverage in the US:

1) providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans [called "Public and Private Options"]
2) providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage,without creating a new public plan [called "Private options only"]
3) eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare [ called "public option only"]


In none of these three options would the existing public structure be affected — it’s only the way in which one would EXPAND coverage.
So I think it is very fair to say 62% support a public option.”

So, I think the NEJM gives us a clear understanding that in fact physicians do support a public option. I also know that at Doctors for America, we surveyed our membership about a public option and of the 3,000+ that responded 97% were in favor. Clearly a biased sample….but illustrative that there are physicians who feel VERY passionately about the public option.

Second, the incredible focus on the public option is frankly distracting from many many many other important provisions in the legislation that are working their way through Congress. Some I have written about here on the blog, some I mentioned in the interview, many more that never get talked about.

So, that’s it. I think my zinger about Georgia, Wellpoint and lack of competition was a winner! Next time I’ll try to smile!


By Dr. Mandy Krauthamer – September 17, 2009