What is the procedure to contest Mehmet Oz's medical license.

[Dawson Leery]

After his advocacy allowing millions of school children to die, he should not have his license.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Find out what state he's licensed in (if he is) and submit a complaint

to that state's medical board.

Amazingly, he's on the faculty at Columbia University, and other doctors have been trying to get him fired. In April 2015, a group of ten physicians from prestigious institutions called for Columbia University to part ways with Oz, who was the vice chair of the Department of Surgery. More than 1,300 doctors signed a letter sent to the university. After reading this I'm surprised he has a license at all (evidently NY), let alone a job teaching surgery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmet_Oz

[jberryhill]

2. He has to break one of these rules

https://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/office-based_surgery/law/6530.htm

[Roland99]

3. Think it's covered....

1. Obtaining the license fraudulently;
2. Practicing the profession fraudulently or beyond its authorized
scope;
3. Practicing the profession with negligence on more than one
occasion;
4. Practicing the profession with gross negligence on a particular
occasion;
5. Practicing the profession with incompetence on more than one
occasion;
6. Practicing the profession with gross incompetence;

[jberryhill]

5. What makes you believe he obtained the license fraudulently?

or, really, any of those other things.

You know, it's been tried with more effort than anyone on DU is willing to put to it...

https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/case-dr-oz-ethics-evidence-and-does-professional-self-regulation-work/2017-02

Dr. Mehmet Oz is widely known not just as a successful media personality donning the title “America’s Doctor®,” but, we suggest, also as a physician visibly out of step with his profession. A recent, unsuccessful attempt to censure Dr. Oz raises the issue of whether the medical profession can effectively self-regulate at all. It also raises concern that the medical profession’s self-regulation might be selectively activated, perhaps only when the subject of professional censure has achieved a level of public visibility. We argue here that the medical profession must look at itself with a healthy dose of self-doubt about whether it has sufficient knowledge of or handle on the less visible Dr. “Ozes” quietly operating under the profession’s presumptive endorsement.

[Roland99]

7. Sad that quacks like that can go on unimpeded.

[SunSeeker]

4. Try calling the NY Medical Board.

Oz directs the Cardiovascular Institute and Complementary Medicine Program at New York-Presbyterian Hospital.

Oz has also been a professor at the Department of Surgery at Columbia University since 2001.

[jberryhill]

6. it's been tried before

Why Dr. Oz can say anything and keep his medical license

https://www.vox.com/2014/6/24/5838690/why-is-dr-oz-still-a-doctor

Enjoy.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. I'm a little surprised Columbia University keeps him around, but

tenured faculty members are almost as hard to get rid of as doctors who advocate for medical bullshit.

[jberryhill]

11. You are thinking of Dr. Phil, not Dr. Oz

Oz is a licensed medical doctor.

You have the wrong information.

[GWC58]

9. This guy sure comes up with some

straight up QUACKERY! A snake oil salesmen, nothing more!!

[TeamPooka]

10. Target his TV show's advertisers, the stations that carry the show and his TV distributor

[Igel]

12. How would millions of school children die?

Moreover, he was apparently discussing https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(20)30105-X/fulltext

It's worth reading. Once for understanding and evaluating their claim. And then perhaps a second time with a view of saying how wrong it is. It's impossible to do both at once--just badmouthing something while claiming to be open-minded and understand it aren't compatible. I don't know that I agree with it--and, in any event, in most places this has been decided based on what's best for the next 6 weeks. Avoiding possible future agony isn't worth the annoyance of present discomfort.

The strongest argument for school closures is limiting transmission--and while they address that, it turns out their arguments are weak. Mostly because the arguments for it are fairly incomplete. For instance, closing schools should block transmission--but it's noted that kids increase their out-of-school contacts. Where I live schools are closed--and the neighbors have their kids friends from their old neighborhood and from this neighborhood over. If one person in this neighborhood gets it and transfers it to one of their kids, the neighborhood's infected. Not quite the same risk as wearing masks in school, but I don't think either's been quantified.


Given current rates, by the way, for 1 million American school kids to die we'd expect something like at least 800 million dead American adults. (Of course, most of those would be 70+, so only 160 million or so dead from ages 18-55.)