Bush Administration Muzzled Surgeon General

tags: , , , ,

Bush and his cronies have been caught at their old tricks yet again! This time, they have been weakening or suppressing important public health reports written by Dr. Richard H. Carmona, who served as the nation's Surgeon General from 2002-2006. Not only was their behavior anti-science, but limiting one's freedom of speech is against the constitution.

"The surgeon general has to be independent if the surgeon general is going to have any credibility," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried," Dr. Richard H. Carmona told the congressional committee. "The job of surgeon general is to be the doctor of the nation -- not the doctor of a political party."

The administration, Dr. Carmona said, would not allow him to speak or issue reports about stem cells, emergency contraception, sex education, or prison, mental and global health issues. Top officials delayed for years and tried to "water down" a landmark report on secondhand smoke, he said. Released last year, the report concluded that even brief exposure to cigarette smoke could cause immediate harm. [NYTimes]

Carmona consulted with former Surgeons General C. Everett Koop and David Satcher, who served in the Reagan and Clinton administrations, respectively, and told the committee that they too had faced political interference -- particularly on morally charged issues such as sexuality or drug use. Their testimony demonstrated that political interference was "a systemic problem," but Carmona mentioned that Koop and Satcher told him they had never seen it rise to the levels he described.

Even more ridiculous, Carmona said he was ordered to mention President Bush three times on every page of his speeches. He also said he was asked to make speeches to support Republican political candidates and to attend political briefings. Worse, because the Special Olympics have longtime ties to a certain "prominent family" in politics, administration officials discouraged him from attending.

"I was specifically told by a senior person, 'Why would you want to help those people?' " Carmona said.

And now they are trying to replace Carmona with Dr. James W. Holsinger Jr., who revealed himself to be a rabid homophobe when he published a report in 1991 that concluded that homosexual sex was unnatural and unhealthy.

Is there nothing that the Bushies won't stoop to in order to force their repressive political and religious agendas down the American people's throats? For example, how morally bankrupt does someone have to be to prevent the Surgeon General from speaking at the Special Olympics? Since when have a president's whims been the legitimate basis for running an entire nation? How many more offenses do officials in this administration have to commit before someone is finally impeached?

The most enduring legacy of this administration will likely be the formation of a secret government that serves the repressive purposes of right wing politicians and their wealthy friends, ignoring the needs of the people.

Sources

NPR (quotes)

LATimes (quotes)

Tags

More like this

(RWOS=Republican War on Science) In case you haven't noticed (and why would you?), the USA is without a Surgeon General.  The old one, Dr. href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Carmona" rel="tag">Richard Carmona, unhired himself for unclear reasons last July, as href="http://…
I'd like to support someone who speaks out againstmuzzling of science by political hacks. Which is just what Bush's last Surgeon General, Richard Carmona did today at a congressional hearing. But frankly, it's a bit late. Many of us were quite critical of the "invisible Surgeon General," the person…
In an editorial in the October 12th issue of Science, former Assistant Surgeon General Fitzhugh Mullan highlights the challenges inherent in the position of Surgeon General. Mullan recounts a July hearing held by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which featured testimony from…
That quote from Henry Waxman can't possibly be a surprise, can it? Our former surgeon general, Richard Carmona, is speaking out against the anti-science policies of the Bush administration. For example, he said he wasn't allowed to make a speech at the Special Olympics because it was viewed as…

And of course, there is the gutting of science from the CDC, the stagnation of research funding at the NIH, the partisan FDA, and on and on and on. HHS just performed a PR stunt that crowed about pandemic flu preparation while exposing a total lack of preparedness planning or national coordination. Bush referred to pandemic flu preparedness yesterday as being all rosy - so much so that he gave it an "A", I kid you not.

Carmona also testified that he was prohibited from taking a leadership role in the Katrina recovery efforts - and he's a bona fide emergency management expert. Instead we get heckuvajob horse manager Brownie.

My dad went to med school with this guy and is known to my family as a darn fine doctor. It is a shame on the governments part to muzzel him like a rabid dog. His quote to the people about being for the people not fot a political party was a statement that I could not agree more with.

"Is there nothing that the Bushies won't stoop to"

Once such a statement would have drawn vituperative accusations of hyperbole, but lately we've noticed an uncomfortable silence from the wingnut gallery in the face of incontrovertible truth.

"who revealed himself to be a rabid homophobe when he published a report in 1991 that concluded that homosexual sex was unnatural and unhealthy."

Wow! So to not be a rabid homophobe you have to believe that homosexual sex is natural and healthy? Do you also have to think that it is better than heterosexual sex?

homosexual sex is natural and healthy -- if you are gay, that is. homosexual sex is found throughout the entire animal kingdom, so why should humans be any different than any other animal?

oh, and please let me know where i said that homosexual sex is "better than heterosexual sex". i can't seem to find that statement in my essay.

Here's his opening statement- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C43uqebvycY

As for homosexual sex, it's a fact that it is natural. There is no denying it.

"Homosexuality has been observed in more than 1,500 species, and the phenomenon has been well described for 500 of them," said Petter Bockman (from live science- http://tinyurl.com/yorsbv)

Of course, that doesn't mean anything. Rape is also natural. There is this myth that anything "natural" is good, but that's silly.

As for whether it is healthy- it's just like heterosexual sex. Both can be healthy, both can be bad for you. Depends how you do it, why you do it, when you do it, etc.

It is a shame that this former US Surgeon General wasn't outspoken when in office. He could have learnt a thing or two from this lady http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joycelyn_Elders about speaking out without fear or favour.

There does seem to be a lack of honesty endemic throughout all the western powers at the moment, people being threatened with loss of job/power etc if they contradict the politicians in power.

By Chris' Wills (not verified) on 11 Jul 2007 #permalink

From Carmona's five-point plan for the public health service:

Recognize and plan for the fact that tomorrow's best hope to achieve millennium goals, extinguish asymmetries, eradicate social injustices, and make the world [a] healthier, safer and more secure place may be the newer, softer force projection of health diplomacy via prospective ongoing sustainable missions globally.

If I were president and a member of my administration started gibbering like that, I wouldn't have him muzzled...I'd personally cram a sock down his throat.

As for homosexual sex being "healthy," you don't have to be a homophobe to recognize that HIV spread and became a worldwide problem largely through transmission in the gay community.

As for homosexual sex being "healthy," you don't have to be a homophobe to recognize that HIV spread and became a worldwide problem largely through transmission in the gay community.

That's utterly irrelevant. "homosexual sex" is neither inherently healthy nor inherently unhealthy.

Besides, if I understand correctly, more heterosexual people (Africa) have HIV than homosexual people. The reason why HIV is associated with homosexuals is because it just so happened ,by a random fluke, that it was first identified in the homosexual community in the united states.